Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019-05-16 Council Agenda Packet
Thursday, May 16, 2019 1:30 PM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Paul Caprioglio Vice President - Miguel Angel Arias Councilmembers: Esmeralda Z. Soria, District 2 - Vacant, 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 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised The Fresno City Council welcomes you to City Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. The City of Fresno’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. The meeting room is physically accessible. If, as an attendee or participant at the meeting, you need additional accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, 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 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda and related staff reports are available at www.fresno.gov, as well as in the Office of the City Clerk. The Council meeting can be viewed live on Comcast Channel 96 and AT&T Channel 99 from 9:00 a.m. and is re-played beginning at 8:00 p.m.. The meeting can also be viewed online at https://fresno.legistar.com. PROCESS: For each matter considered by the Council there will first be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the involved individuals, if present. Testimony from those in attendance will then be taken. All testimony will be limited to three minutes per person. If you would like to speak fill out a Speaker Request Form available from the City Clerk’s Office and in the Council Chambers. The three lights on the podium next to the microphone will indicate the amount of time remaining for the speaker. The green light on the podium will be turned on when the speaker begins. The yellow light will come on with one minute remaining. The speaker should be completing the testimony by the time the red light comes on and tones sound, indicating that time has expired. A countdown of time remaining to speak is also displayed on the large screen behind the Council dais. No documents shall be accepted for Council review unless they are submitted to the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the Council Agenda item being heard. Following is a general schedule of items for Council consideration and action. The City Council may consider and act on an agenda item in any order it deems appropriate. Actual timed items may be heard later but not before the time set on agenda. Persons interested in an item listed on the agenda are advised to be present throughout the meeting to ensure their presence when the item is called. AGENDA ITEMS MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK (***) ARE SUBJECT TO MAYORAL VETO OR RECONSIDERATION Page 2 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised El Consejo de la Ciudad de Fresno da la bienvenida al City Council Chambers, ubicado en la Alcaldía (City Hall), do piso, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. El objetivo de la Ciudad de Fresno es cumplir con la Ley de Americanos con Discapacidades (ADA) en todo aspecto. La sala para juntas es físicamente accesible. Si usted, como asistente o participante de la junta, necesita acomodaciones adicionales coma intérpretes, lenguaje de señas, aparatos auditivos, o los servicios de un traductor, por favor comuníquese con la Oficina del Secretario Municipal llamando al (559) 621-7650 o al clerk@fresno.gov. Para asegurarse de la disponibilidad, se le recomienda llamar y hacer su petición por lo menos 48 horas antes de la junta. La agenda y los reportes de personal correspondientes están disponibles en el www.fresno.gov, o en la Oficina del Secretario Municipal. Las juntas del Municipio se pueden ver en el Canal 96 de Comcast y el Canal 99 de AT&T a las 9:00 a.m. y otra vez empezando a las 8:00 p.m. La junta también se puede ver en el internet en el https://fresno.legistar.com PROCESO: Por cada asunto que escuche el Consejo Municipal, habrá una presentación del personal seguida por una presentación de los individuos involucrados, si están presentes. El testimonio de los presentes se escuchará entonces. Todo testimonio se limitará a tres minutos por persona. Si usted desea hablar, Ilene la hoja para pedir hablar disponibles en la oficina del Secretario Municipal y en la Sala Consistorial. Las tres luces en el atril junto al micrófono indicarán cuanto tiempo le queda al orador. La luz verde en el atril se prenderá cuando el orador comience. La luz amarilia se prenderá cuando quede un minuto. El orador debería estar concluyendo su testimonio cuando la luz roja prenda y ci sonido indique que se acabo su tiempo. La cantidad del tiempo que queda también aparecerá en la pantalla grande atrás del Consejo Municipal. No se aceptarán documentos para que repase el Consejo Municipal a menos que se sometan al Secretario Municipal por lo menos 24 horas antes de que se escuche la Agenda del Consejo Municipal. Este es el horario general de temas para la consideración y acción del Consejo Municipal. El consejo Municipal pudiera considerar y tomar acción en un artículo de la Agenda en el orden que considere adecuado. Artículos con una hora fijada se pueden escuchar después de la hora indicada pero no antes de la hora indicada en la agenda. Se les recomienda a las personas que estén interesadas en un artículo de la agenda, que estén presentes durante toda la junta para asegurar su presencia Page 3 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised cuando se presente ese artículo. LOS ARTICULOS MARCADOS CON TRES ASTERISCOS (***) ESTAN SUJETOS A UN VETO POR PARTE DEL ALCALDE O UNA RECONSIDERACION Tso Fresno City Council tos txais koj rau City Council Chambers, nyob rau hauv City Hall, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. Lub hom phiaj ntawm nroog Fresno yuav ua kom tau txhua yam raw li txoj cai American with Disabilities Act (ADA) kom fwm txhua tus. Lub rooj sab laj txhua tus yuav tsum muaj feem koom kom tau, txawm yog cov tuaj koom, cov muaj feem rau lub rooj sab laj, yuav tsum kom muaj kev pab rau sawv daws xws li txhais lus, piav tes, tej twj mloog pob ntseg los yog ib tug txhais lus, thov hu rau Office of the City Clerk ntawm (559) 621-7650 los sis clerk@fresno.gov. Yuav kom paub tseeb tias npaj tau rau koj, koj yuav tsum tau hais ua ntej 48 xuab moos ntawm lub rooj sab laj. Daim ntawv kom tswj thiab tej ntaub ntawv cov ua dej num yuav coj los ceeb tshaj muaj nyob rau ntawm www.fresno.gov, los sis ntawm Office of the City Clerk. Council lub rooj sab laj saib pom rau hauv Comcast tshooj 96 thiab AT&T tshooj 99 thaum 9:00 teev sauv ntxoov thiab rov tso tawm thaum 8:00 teev tsaus ntuj. Lub rooj sab Iaj kuj saib tau online at https://fresno.legistar.com. TXUAS NTXIV: Txhua nqe laj txheej yuav tau pom zoo los ntawm cov council ua ntej thiab yuav tau muaj ib tug staff los cej luam dhau ntawd cov uas muaj feem cuam mam los cej luam ib tug zuj zus, yog tuaj nyob rau ntawd. Dhau ntawd yuav tso rau sawv daw los tawrn suab, ib leeg twg yuav los tawm suab tsuas pub peb(3) nas this xwb. Yog koj xav los tawm suab, mus sau rau daim ntawv (Speaker Request Form) muaj nyob rau hauv City Clerk's Office thiab nyob rau huav Council Chambers. muaj peb(3) lub teeb nyob rau ntawm lub podium uas puab rau ntawm lub (microphone) qhia tias tus neeg hais lus muaj sij haum ntev Ii cas xwb. Lub teeb ntsuab ntawm lub podium yuav cig thaum tus hais lus pib hais. Lub teeb daj yuav cig thaum tshuav ib(1) nas this. Tus hais lus yuav tsum hais kom tas rau thaum lub teeb liab cig thiab lub tswb nrov, qhia tias sij haum tas lawm. lb qhov ntxiv nyob rau saum daim (screen) loj loj dai rau tom cov council nrob qaurn yuav pom lub sij hawm dhia qis zuj zus los mus. Page 4 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Cov council yuav tsis txais ib yam ntaub ntawv los saib ntxiv tshwj tsis yog twb muab xa rau City Clerk 24 teev thiab muab tso rau hauv daim kom tswj ua ntej council yuav los mloog tej xwm txheej. Dhau ntawd yuav muab sij hawm rau cov council los soj ntsuam thiab ua tes dej num, Coy tswv zos (City Council) yuav los ntsuam xyuas thiab leg raws tej nqe hauv daim kom tswj yog pom tias yam twg yuav tsim nyog. Mam muab lub sij hawm los xyuas raws tej txheej txheem tom qab tiam si yuav tsis yog ua ntej raws Ii daim kom tswj tau teev tseg. Cov uas txaus siab rau tei laj txheej uas tau teev tseg rau hauv daim kom tswj, xav kom nyob kom dhau lub rooj sab laj kom thaum hu txog nws thiaj nyob rau ntawd YOG QHOV MUAJ PEB LUB HNUB QUB (***) NYOB RAU HAUV DAIM KOM TSWJ YUAV RAUG MAYORAL VETO LOS SIS ROV SOJ NTSUAM DUA Page 5 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 1:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Invocation by Father Joaquin Arriaga of Our Lady of Mount Carmel Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA APPROVE MINUTES Approval of minutes for May 1 and May 2, 2019.ID19-1394 Sponsors:City Clerk's Office CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS Proclamation of “Alan Hofmann Day”ID19-1543 Sponsors:Mayor's Office Proclamation of “Lyme Disease Awareness Month”ID19-1549 Sponsors:Council President Caprioglio Proclamation of “National Public Works Week”ID19-1625 Sponsors:City Manager's Office, Council President Caprioglio and Mayor's Office Proclamation of “Teen Pregnancy Prevention Month”ID19-1600 Sponsors:Councilmember Soria Proclamation of “Fresno Rainbow Pride Parade”ID19-1613 Sponsors:Councilmember Soria COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Page 6 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised All Consent Calendar items are considered to be routine and will be treated as one agenda item. The Consent Calendar will be enacted by one motion. Public comment on the Consent Calendar is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a Councilmember, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered as time allows. Actions pertaining to the Shaw Avenue Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (SR99 - SR41) (Council Districts 1, 2 and 4) 1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(c) (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2. RESOLUTION - To dispense with the competitive bidding requirements and authorize the Public Works Director to enter into a contract for the purchase of traffic signal adaptive modules for central processing unit, licenses, configuration, training, and warranty (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 3. Award a purchase contract in the amount of $338,100 to Trafficware Group Inc., for the purchase of Synchro Green modules for the 16 intersections for the Shaw Avenue ITS Traffic Signal Synchronization Project ID19-14531-A Sponsors:Public Works Department RESOLUTION - Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 6156 and accepting dedicated public uses offered therein except for dedications offered subject to City acceptance of developer installed required improvements - Northeast corner of North Millbrook Avenue and East Nees Avenue (Council District 6) ID19-16591-B Sponsors:Public Works Department Actions pertaining to Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Mandated Partner Memorandum of Understanding: 1. Approve the use of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Mandated Partner Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Template 2. Authorize the City Manager to sign all Mandated Partner MOUs as they complete negotiation and are presented to the City Manager’s Office ID19-16041-C Page 7 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Sponsors:City Manager's Office Approve the award of a purchase contract to Haaker Equipment Company Inc., of La Verne, California, for the purchase of one Vactor Jetter truck in the amount of $315,236 ID19-16291-D Sponsors:Department of Transportation Approve the award of a purchase contract to Atlantic Machinery, Inc., of Silver Springs, Maryland, for the purchase of one Ravo 5-i Series compact street sweeper in the amount of $256,238 ID19-16331-E Sponsors:Department of Transportation RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 ID19-16381-F Sponsors:Fire Department Actions pertaining to authorization to accept grant funds through Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program (Proposition 68): 1.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for new park development at Church/Orangewood (Council District 5) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 2.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for Quigley Park reconstruction (Council District 1) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 3.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for Radio Park improvements (Council District 7) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 4.Authorize execution of all application- related documents by the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Interim Director or designee ID19-16401-G Sponsors:Parks, After School and Recreation and Community Services Department Page 8 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Actions pertaining to construction of 850 linear feet of Water Main Installation for the Mono Street and H Street Downtown Water Main Enhancements project (Council District 3): 1.Adopt findings of Section 15282 (Other Statutory Exemptions) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC, Inc., in the amount of $322,718 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno ID19-16721-H Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Actions pertaining to Preparation of Workplans for Evaluation of the Existing Groundwater Monitoring Well Network and Arsenic and Manganese Assessment at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Council District 3 and Citywide): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 6, Section 15306 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Approve a consultant services agreement with Carollo Engineers, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $250,000 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to sign all documents on behalf of the City of Fresno ID19-16511-I Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Approve the Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Airport Permit and Agreement between City of Fresno and Uber Technologies, Inc., (Uber), for ground transportation services by computer application-based networks at Fresno Yosemite International Airport. (Council District 4) ID19-16541-J Sponsors:Airports Department Approve the Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Airport Permit and Agreement between City of Fresno and Lyft Inc., for ground transportation services by computer application-based networks at Fresno Yosemite International Airport. (Council District 4) ID19-16921-K Page 9 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Sponsors:Airports Department Approve override of Mayor’s veto of “Resolution - Assigning Office and Parking Space,” Resolution 2019-086 adopted by the City Council on April 25, 2019 (Requires 5 affirmative votes). ID19-16811-L Sponsors:Councilmember Chavez, Councilmember Soria and Vice President Arias Approve the appointments of Naindeep Singh, Nancy Gray, Debbie Darden, Jan Minami, Robert Fuentes, America Hernandez and Ivanka Saunders to the District 3 Plan Implementation Committee ID19-16821-M Sponsors:Vice President Arias Approve the appointments of Geraldine Wong and Robin Katich to the District 6 Plan Implementation Committee ID19-16841-N Sponsors:Councilmember Bredefeld Approve the appointment of Don Gross to the Fire and Police Retirement Board ID19-16851-O Sponsors:Mayor's Office Approve the following appointments to the Immigration Affairs Committee: 1.Nancy Key and Hugo Morales - District 1 2.Manuel Cunha and Deepak Ahluwalia - District 2 3.Naindeep Singh and America Hernandez - District 3 4.Jessica Smith Bobadilla and Maggie Thao - District 4 5.Samuel Molina and Evelyn Gonzalez - District 5 6.Guillermo Moreno and Elizabeth Heng - District 6 7.Thomas Hernandez and Margarita Rocha - District 7 8.Pao Yang - Mayor’s Office ID19-16861-P Sponsors:Councilmember Chavez RESOLUTION - Declaring “The Origin of Certain Place Names” by Marisol Baca the Official Poem of Fresno ID19-16891-Q Sponsors:Councilmember Esparza, Vice President Arias, Councilmember Soria and Mayor's Office Page 10 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Actions pertaining to a Veterans Memorial at City Hall: 1.Approve Agreement with Bell Memorials & Granite Works, Inc., in the amount of $83,854.46 for design, fabrication and installation services; and 2.Approve Agreement with WW2 Research Inc., in the amount of $15,000 for research services. Sponsor: Councilmember Bredefeld and Fresno Revitalization Corporation (FRC) ID19-16731-R CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 10:00 A.M. (CONTINUE TO 2:00 P.M.) 2. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS HEARING - To vacate a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Council District 2) ID19-1624 Sponsors:Public Works Department 2:00 P.M. CONTINUED HEARING - To vacate a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Council District 2) 1.***RESOLUTION - Ordering the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) ID19-1652 Sponsors:Public Works Department 2:10 P.M. SCHEDULED COMMUNICATION Appearance by Gidai Maaza and Cesar CasaMayor to discuss the Measure Cannabis Business tax and the need to define the regulations. ID19-1644 Appearance by Gonzalo Arambula to discuss the homelessID19-1661 3:00 P.M. Page 11 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Request for City partnership in development and filing of a $4.9 million dollar Prop 68 Parks Grant Application, and a $400,000 Cal Fire Grant Application. ID19-1671 Sponsors:Councilmember Chavez 5:00 P.M. (CONTINUE TO JUNE 13, 2019 AT 5:00 P.M.) HEARING to consider initiation of the Specific Plan of the West Area, pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres in the West Development Area of the Fresno General Plan, filed by the Development and Resource Management Department Director 1.RESOLUTION - Initiating the Specific Plan of the West Area Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles and the corresponding amendment of the General Plan, and repeal or amendment of the West Area Community Plan and Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres located in the West Development Area to allow for future adoption of the Specific Plan of the West Area pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Sections 15-5803-C and 15-4902-B. ID19-1656 Sponsors:Development and Resource Management Department 3. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Quinn Company of Fresno, California, for the purchase of four Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes in the amount of $560,544 ID19-16483-A Sponsors:Department of Transportation Actions pertaining to Sewer Improvements in the Vicinity of North First Street and East Dakota Avenue (Bid File 3635) (Council District 7): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $729,049. 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to ID19-16533-B Page 12 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Page 13 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Actions pertaining to the 2017 Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Grant and Transform Fresno Plan projects: 1.Approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (EOC) for Project 2 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno totaling $3,208,377.70 in TCC funding and Project 20 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno: EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives totaling $530,000 as a leverage only project; and 2.Approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with the City of Fresno Department of Public Works for Project 9 Mariposa Plaza totaling $3,859,000; and 3.***RESOLUTION - 40th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2018-157 appropriating $137,800 from the TCC Grant (Requires 5 affirmative votes) (Subject to Mayor’s veto). ID19-16703-C Sponsors:City Manager's Office 4. CITY COUNCIL Appoint a member and an alternate to the San Joaquin Valley Special City Selection Committee ID19-16634-A Sponsors:Council President Caprioglio Actions pertaining to non-transient motels: 1.BILL - (for introduction) adding Article 18 to Chapter 10 of the Fresno Municipal Code adopting a non-transient motel inspection program. 2.RESOLUTION--Initiating a Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Fresno to add section 15-2769 relating to non-transient residence requirements, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5803-a(1). ID19-16834-B Sponsors:Vice President Arias, Councilmember Esparza and Councilmember Soria RESOLUTION - Supporting Senate Bill 18 - Keep Californians Housed Act ID19-16914-C Page 14 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Sponsors:Councilmember Soria, Vice President Arias and Councilmember Esparza 5. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION - Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(2) 1. City of Fresno v. Garney Pacific Company dba Garney Construction Company ID19-16605-A Sponsors:City Attorney's Office CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PUBLIC SECURITY - Government Code Section 54957(a) 1.Discuss security of City Hall ID19-16875-B Sponsors:City Manager's Office 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 13, 2019 10:00 A.M. - TEFRA Hearing for the California Municipal Finance Authority to refinance bonds issued for the Terraces at San Joaquin June 13, 2019 10:05 A.M. - HEARING – Regarding amendment to the City of Fresno Master Fee Schedule to increase the existing citywide impact fee for fire facilities. Page 15 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised June 13, 2019 5:00 P.M. - CONTINUED HEARING to consider initiation of the Specific Plan of the West Area, pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres in the West Development Area of the Fresno General Plan, filed by the Development and Resource Management Department Director August 15, 2019 10:00 A.M. - Vacation of a portion of Elgin Avenue and James Avenue, between Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 (Council District 2). FY 2020 SCHEDULED BUDGET HEARINGS June 3, 2019 - 9:00 A.M. Mayor's Presentation, GF Overview, PARCS, Police Department, Fire Department June 6, 2019 - 9:00 A.M. Finance, Public Works Department, DARM, Convention Center, Department of Public Utilities June 10, 2019 - 10:00 A.M. (Or shortly thereafter) Airports Department, Information Services Department, Personnel Services Department, Transportation Department (FAX) June 11, 2019 - 9:00 A.M. City Attorney's Office, City Clerk's Office, GCP (Includes Retirement), City Council Offices, Mayor and City Manager's Office June 18, 2019 - 9:00 A.M. Vote on Motions June 20, 2019 - 9:00 A.M. (Budget hearing is part of the regular Council meeting) Vote on Budget June 27, 2019 - 9:00A.M. (Budget hearing is part of the regular Council meeting) (Reserved for Final Vote, if needed) UPCOMING EMPLOYEE CEREMONIES Page 16 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 16, 2019City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised July 24, 2019 (Wednesday) - Employee of the Summer Quarter October 23, 2019 (Wednesday) – Employee of the Fall Quarter November 20, 2019 (Wednesday) – Employee Service Awards 2019 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE MAY 23 - NO MEETING MAY 30 - NO MEETING JUNE 6 - NO MEETING JUNE 13 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JUNE 20 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JUNE 27 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING Page 17 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1394 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 SUBJECT Approval of minutes for May 1 and May 2, 2019. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Wednesday, May 1, 2019 2:00 PM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Paul Caprioglio Vice President - Miguel Angel Arias Councilmembers: Esmeralda Z. Soria, District 2 - Vacant, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Wilma Quan City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, MMC Meeting Minutes - Draft Special Meeting Notice May 1, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft The City Council met in special session in the Council Chamber, City Hall on the date and time written above 2:02 P.M. Roll Call President Paul Caprioglio Vice President Miguel Angel Arias Councilmember Esmeralda Z. Soria Councilmember Luis Chavez Councilmember Garry Bredefeld Councilmember Nelson Esparza Present:6 - ID19-1632 May 1, 2019 Special Meeting Notice - SIGNED ID19-1631 RESOLUTION - Initiating a Text Amendment to The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Fresno to Amend Chapter 15, Article 27, Section 15-2706 of The Fresno Municipal Code Relating to the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages for Offsite Consumption, and to Further Amend Section 15-2706 to be Titled “The Responsible Neighborhood Market Ordinance”, Pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-5803-A(1) The above item was introduced to Council by Council Vice President Arias, District 3, Lily Vang, Student at Sunnyside High School, Nicole Lee, Student at Roosevelt High School and business owner Andy Chhikara. Councilmember Bredefeld asked Council Vice President Arias if there will be new fees charged in the inspections to the businesses and asked if it will change in the future. Council Vice President Arias responded there will be no existing change to current operations, no requirement for new CUP and participation in business education and City inspection programs. Councilmember Chavez asked City Attorney Sloan how long the process will take once the initiating resolution was adopted. City Attorney Sloan stated it will take up to 6 to 8 months. Councilmember Chavez stated there will be a committee meeting with business owners, the youth, and the community to address their concerns regarding alcohol, tobacco, vaping, etc. He stated the most saturated areas are in Districts 1, 3, 5 and 7. Councilmember Esparza expressed his concerns with his district being the most saturated district and he is looking forward to working with the small business owners, the community and the youth. He is in favor of the new City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 2 May 1, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft provisions of the resolution. Upon call, the following members of the public addressed Council: Christina Garcia, Bob Bhaurla, Leila Gholamrezoei-Ehoo, Kirl Lopez-Schmidt, Ajit Gill, Janet Salcedo, Sukhbir, Antino Jaregul, Kern Chhikara and Bulwinder Singh. Councilmember Bredefeld spoke regarding the City of Fresno being known as the drunkest City. He stated it was not based on problems with businesses but due to DUIs. He said City Attorney's Office found 930 total violations at 204 businesses in a week and a half. He asked City Attorney what are the general fines of the violations. City Attorney Sloan responded. Councilmember Bredefeld expressed his frustrations and concerns with not having a pro-active solution to enforce the current laws and violations. He asked staff what Code Enforcement is doing, if they are enforcing the laws and how many citations have been done in the last month. He asked who can file a complaint and when does staff go out and cite the businesses. Director Clark responded. They do not proactively enforce the current laws, but if a complaint is made staff will go and inspect for violations. Councilmember Bredefeld asked if the department needs more Code Enforcement Officers to process the complaints and violations. City Manager Quan responded. Councilmember Chavez addressed Councilmember Bredefeld and stated they had conversations with American Petroleum and Convenience Association (APCA) who will develop a self-inspection program as the first layer of response. Council Vice President Arias agreed to bring forward an item to discuss Code Enforcement and he plans to meet with the business owners to develop a program. He will bring the program back to Council for approval along with any fines agreed upon. He stated if additional staffing is determined it will be brought before Council for discussion. Councilmember Bredefeld asked how many employees the City Attorney will need to investigate the violations. City Attorney Sloan responded. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 3 May 1, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Councilmember Soria thanked the youth and the community for all their hard work. She stated the City of Fresno needs to be more pro-active and explore initiating the resolution to enforce the current laws. She asked City Manager Quan to add reports of Code Enforcement violations as it relates to liquor stores in the FresGo App. City Manager Quan replied. City Manager Quan asked City Attorney Sloan about the conditions of the inspections that were done by the City Attorney's office. City Attorney Sloan responded. RESOLUTION 2019-090 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Resolution be adopted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez, Bredefeld and Esparza6 - ADJOURNMENT City Council adjourned at 3:25 P.M. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 4 May 1, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 5 Thursday, May 2, 2019 1:30 PM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Paul Caprioglio Vice President - Miguel Angel Arias Councilmembers: Esmeralda Z. Soria, District 2 - Vacant, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Wilma Quan City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, MMC Meeting Minutes - Draft Regular Meeting May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft The City Council met in regular session in the Council Chamber, City Hall on the date and time written above. 1:32 P.M. ROLL CALL President Paul Caprioglio Vice President Miguel Angel Arias Councilmember Esmeralda Z. Soria Councilmember Luis Chavez Councilmember Nelson Esparza Present:5 - Councilmember Garry BredefeldAbsent:1 - Invocation given by Deputy Police Chief Patrick Farmer, Fresno Police Department. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA City Clerk Spence announced the following changes to the agenda: Invocation was by Deputy Police Chief Patrick Farmer, Proclamation of the “10th Anniversary of CFDI Day” – Change title to read: “10th Anniversary of Access Plus Capital” and File ID19-1618 (3:30 P.M.) - CONTINUED HEARING to consider Conditional Use Permit Application Nos. P18-03222 and P18-03223, located on the northwest corner of North Cedar Avenue and East Tulare Street (Council District 7) was removed from the agenda – Applicant withdrew application. On motion of Councilmember Soria, seconded by Vice President Arias, the above item was adopted as amended. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez and Esparza5 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - APPROVE MINUTES ID19-1393 Approval of minutes for April 25, 2019. On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by Councilmember Chavez, that the above Action Item be approved. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 2 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez and Esparza5 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS ID19-1614 Proclamation of “Municipal Clerk’s Week” PRESENTED ID19-1219 Proclamation of “Vietnam Veterans Committee Members Day” PRESENTED ID19-1599 Proclamation of the “10th Anniversary of Access Plus Capital Day” PRESENTED ID19-1537 Proclamation of “Norman “JR” Norwood Jr. Day” PRESENTED ID19-1540 Proclamation of “Peace Officers Memorial Day” and May 12 through May 18, 2019 as “National Police Week” PRESENTED ID19-1280 Announcement of Marisol Baca as Fresno’s Poet Laureate PRESENTED ID19-1627 Proclamation of “Camp Kesem Day” PRESENTED COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS Council Vice President Arias asked Assistant City Manager Sumpter for an update on the fees being waived as part of the waiver program for the Public Safety Police Department facility fees and requested an updated on the Economic Development Director. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Soria left the meeting at 2:25 P.M. On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by Councilmember City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 3 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Chavez, the below CONSENT CALENDAR items were adopted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Chavez and Esparza4 - Absent:Soria and Bredefeld2 - 1-A ID19-1592 Authorize First Amendment to the November 9, 2017 Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Fresno and Fresno Building Healthy Communities regarding the BMX project at Mary Ella Brown Community Center Park approving project scope, timeline, and budget and authorizing an additional $135,140 for city-initiated project augmentation (District 3) 1-B ID19-1596 Actions pertaining to 10-Inch Sewer Main Installation in South Willow Avenue (Bid File 3651) (County of Fresno): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 3, Section 15303(d) (New Construction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a Construction Contract to Haydon Construction, Inc ., in the amount of $271,537 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno 1-C ID19-1616 ***RESOLUTION - Creating Roles and Responsibilities for the Citywide Records Management Program (Subject to Mayor’s veto) RESOLUTION 2019-091 ADOPTED 1-D ID19-1621 Actions pertaining to the Perrin Avenue and Liberty Hill Road Traffic Signal Modification - Bid File No. 3656 (Council District 6) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination, pursuant to Section 15301(c) of the CEQA guidelines. 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $207,309 to Sturgeon Electric, LLC., of Chino, CA. 2. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS 1:30 P.M.#1 CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 1:30 P.M.#2 ID19-1420 HEARING to Consider Acceptance of the Southern Blackstone Avenue Smart Mobility Strategy 1.ADOPT a finding that there is no possibility that acceptance of the Southern Blackstone Avenue Smart Mobility Strategy will have a significant effect on the environment and is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 4 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 2.RESOLUTION - Accepting the Southern Blackstone Avenue Smart Mobility Strategy. The item was called to order at 2:28 P.M. The above item was introduced to Council by Planner III Horton, DARM Department and Keith Bergthold, Executive Director of Fresno Metro Ministry. Upon call, the following members of the public addressed Council: John Trotter, Robert Turner, Celeste Martinez, Anne Goodman, Donald Uriquez, Abigail Smurr, Deiglis Wells, James Collins, Zach Antoyan, Fernando Elizondo, Anthony Molina, Gorado Navarro, Randy White, Marie Torres, Gene Richards, Ivan Paz, Sheila Hakimipour and Alejandro Solis. Councilmember Soria returned to the meeting at 2:58 P.M. Councilmember Esparza supports the item as presented and thanked the community for their input. Councilmember Soria supports the item and thanked the community and staff for their hard work and input. She expressed some of her concerns with the consideration of displacement of small business owners and would like to have a plan to find better placement for small businesses in the City of Fresno. She asked the Administration to figure out how to implement the plan and to include it in the next budget. She stated she would like the Administration to make it a priority. Assistant City Manager Schaad responded. Assistant City Manager Schaad spoke regarding funding the construction and stated it will not occur until next year for construction. Council Vice President Arias asked staff several technical questions regarding the current and proposed speed limit on Blackstone. He asked about the potential impact of pollution due to the reduced speed limits and if the whole Blackstone corridor will reduce its speed limit. He asked staff if the current scope covered the entire Blackstone and what the estimated cost would be to improve the Blackstone corridor. Planner III Horton responded. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 5 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Council Vice President Arias mentioned the City of Fresno is spending $130 Million on Veterans Blvd and asked the Administration to set aside money for this project, to include funding in the upcoming budget and to make it a priority. He asked Administration if any projects being developed in the corridor will honor any of the strategies or will the road be reconstructed. Assistant City Manager Sumpter responded. Councilmember Chavez asked Executive Director Bergthold of Fresno Metro Ministry how the project fits into the Better Blackstone overall. Executive Director Bergthold of Fresno Metro Ministry replied. Council President Caprioglio thanked everyone and supports the item. RESOLUTION 2019-092 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Esparza, seconded by Councilmember Soria, that the above Action Item be adopted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez and Esparza5 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - 10:00 A.M. (HEARING CONTINUED TO 1:35 P.M.) ID19-1583 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. 39 (Assessor’s Parcel Number 505-281-21) (east side of North Grantland Avenue between West Barstow and Roberts Avenue ) (Council District 2) 1.***RESOLUTION - Annexing Territory to Community Facilities District No. 9 and Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax (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 2018-2019 and Future Tax Years Within and Relating to Community Facilities District No. 9, Annexation No. 39 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) The above hearing was continued to 1:35 P.M. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 6 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft City Council recessed at 3:42 P.M. and returned from recess at 3:49 P.M. 1:35 P.M.#1 ID19-1615 CONTINUED 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. 39 (Assessor’s Parcel Number 505-281-21) (east side of North Grantland Avenue between West Barstow and Roberts Avenue) (Council District 2) 1.***RESOLUTION - Annexing Territory to Community Facilities District No. 9 and Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax (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 2018-2019 and Future Tax Years Within and Relating to Community Facilities District No. 9, Annexation No. 39 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) The item was called to order at 3:50 P.M. Councilmember Chavez left the meeting at 3:50 P.M. The above item was introduced to Council by Assistant Director Benelli, Public Works Department. Upon call, there was no public comment. RESOLUTION 2019-093 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2019-094 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2019-095 ADOPTED BILL 13 AND ORDINANCE 2019-013 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by Councilmember Esparza, that the above Action Item be adopted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria and Esparza4 - Absent:Chavez and Bredefeld2 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 7 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 1:35 P.M. #2 HEARING CONTINUED TO 3:30 P.M. ID19-1612 CONTINUED HEARING to consider Conditional Use Permit Application Nos. P18-03222 and P18-03223, located on the northwest corner of North Cedar Avenue and East Tulare Street (Council District 7) 1.ADOPT Environmental Assessment Nos. P18-03222 and P18- 03223 dated February 20, 2019, a determination that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through a Class 32 Categorical Exemption. 2.ADOPT findings pursuant to Government Code Section 65863(b) (2) that there is substantial evidence in the record that remaining sites identified in the Housing Element can accommodate the City of Fresno’s share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 3.APPROVE Conditional Use Permit Application No. P18-03222 requesting authorization to develop a 3,052-square-foot convenience store and service station with eight fueling positions, subject to compliance with the Conditions of Approval dated February 20, 2019. 4.DENY Conditional Use Permit Application No. P18-03223 requesting authorization to establish a State of California Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Type 20 (Package Store - sale of beer and wine for consumption off the premises where sold) license for the proposed convenience market. The above item was continued to 3:30 P.M. 3:30 P.M. ID19-1618 CONTINUED HEARING to consider Conditional Use Permit Application Nos. P18-03222 and P18-03223, located on the northwest corner of North Cedar Avenue and East Tulare Street (Council District 7) 1.ADOPT Environmental Assessment Nos. P18-03222 and P18- 03223 dated February 20, 2019, a determination that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through a Class 32 Categorical Exemption. 2.ADOPT findings pursuant to Government Code Section 65863(b) (2) that there is substantial evidence in the record that remaining sites identified in the Housing Element can accommodate the City of Fresno’s share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 3.APPROVE Conditional Use Permit Application No. P18-03222 requesting authorization to develop a 3,052-square-foot convenience store and service station with eight fueling positions, subject to City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 8 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft compliance with the Conditions of Approval dated February 20, 2019. 4.DENY Conditional Use Permit Application No. P18-03223 requesting authorization to establish a State of California Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Type 20 (Package Store - sale of beer and wine for consumption off the premises where sold) license for the proposed convenience market. The above item was removed from the agenda and withdrawn by the applicant. 3. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 3-A ID19-1555 ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the City of Fresno ’s (City) 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan; approving submission to the U .S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for application of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons With Aids/HIV (HOPWA) Program Funds; and providing for subrecipient agreements. (Subject to Mayor’s veto) The above item was introduced to Council by Administrative Manager Jenks, DARM Department. Councilmember Chavez returned to the meeting at 3:52 P.M. Councilmember Chavez recused himself from the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (EOC) portion of the item. Upon call, there was no public comment. Council Vice President Arias reminded the Council that they received a supplement in their agenda packets that outlines the recommendations and adjustments from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subcommittee. Council Vice President Arias motioned to approve the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission recommendations. Councilmember Soria seconded the motion. Motion PASSED 4-0 vote. Councilmember Chavez recused. Councilmember Bredefeld absent. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 9 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Council Vice President Arias motioned to approve the CDBG recommendations and the following recommended adjustments: He directed staff to allocate $500,000 to the Multigenerational Center in the 2020-2021 budget as well as to identify the resources to repair the Fink White Community Center roof so that the Boys and Girls Club can continue to operate. Council President Caprioglio seconded the motion. Councilmember Soria thanked the staff and the committee. She spoke regarding the capacity of the Division and expressed her concerns with having 5 vacancies. She stated she will not approve future consultant contracts for the Division until the vacancies are filled. She directed staff to bring forward an update on the next agenda to discuss how much training the new consultants have done or worked on the issues they were hired for. She asked what the plan was to fill the vacant authorized positions and stated she would like to hear from the consultants at the next meeting. She discussed the issues with affordable housing and stated she is concerned with the lack of capacity in the Division and the staff training the consultants. Director Clark responded. Assistant City Manager Schaad commented on the Multigenerational Center. He stated staff is figuring out how to accelerate the schedule and spend the money. He expressed his concern with not having it done in a timely fashion. His concerns with the $500,000 might create a risk in the project in scheduling and in cost. He stated that the CDBG money can only be used for eligible projects. Council President Caprioglio suggested looking into outsourcing and that the Multigenerational Center is his top priority. Assistant City Manager Schaad responded. RESOLUTION 2019-096 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by President Caprioglio, that the above Action Item be adopted as amended. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez and Esparza5 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 10 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 3-B ID19-1584 ***RESOLUTION - 39th Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2018-157 to appropriate $2,010,000 for Supplemental Refunds and Reimbursements to approved Developers in the Urban Growth Management and Development Impact Fee Programs (Requires 5 affirmative votes) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) The above item was introduced to Council by Assistant Director Benelli, Public Works Department. Upon call, there was no public comment. Council Vice President Arias requested that the staff report reflect who the City of Fresno is paying and for what services. RESOLUTION 2019-097 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Arias, seconded by Councilmember Soria, that the above Action Item be adopted. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Arias, Soria, Chavez and Esparza5 - Absent:Bredefeld1 - 4. CITY COUNCIL 4-A ID19-1620 Council Boards and Commissions Communications, Reports, Assignments and/or Appointments, Reappointments, Removals to /from City and non-City Boards and Commissions: 1.Association for the Beautification of Highway 99 - Soria, Arias 2. Budget Sub-Committee - Soria, Chavez, Caprioglio 3.Cannabis Ad Hoc Committee - Soria, Arias, Caprioglio 4.Council of Governments - Mayor Brand-Ex-Officio (Caprioglio) 5.Council Sub-committee on Homelessness - Chavez (Chair), Bredefeld, Arias 6.CDBG Sub-committee - (Pertaining to Housing and addressing the allocation of Funds) - Caprioglio, Soria, Arias 7.Code Enforcement Sub-Committee - Bredefeld, Caprioglio, Soria 8.Economic Development Corporation Serving Fresno County - Caprioglio-Ex-Officio, City Manager Wilma Quan and (Chavez - Alternate) 9.Enterprise and Construction Management Oversight Board - Chavez, Bredefeld-Alternate 10. Finance and Audit Committee - Bredefeld, Esparza-Chair, Vice City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 11 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Chair-Vacant 11. Fresno Area Workforce Investment Corporation - Soria 12.Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA) - Mayor Brand-Ex-Officio, (Caprioglio - Alternate) 13.Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board - Soria 14.Fresno County Zoo Authority - Mayor Brand-Ex-Officio, (Arias-Alternate) 15.Fresno Madera Area Agency on Aging Board - Chavez 16. Joint Powers Financing Authority - Mayor Brand, Soria, Caprioglio 17.League of California Cities (Annual Meeting) - Soria, Caprioglio - Alternate 18.Litigation Exposure Reduction Ad Hoc Committee -Caprioglio-Chair, Soria, Arias 19.North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) Joint Powers Authority - Mayor Brand (Michael Carbajal, Tim Orman - Alternates) 20. San Joaquin River Conservancy Board - Mayor Brand-Ex-Officio, (Bredefeld-Alternate) 21. School Liaison Sub-Committee - Esparza-Chair, Chavez, Arias 22. Sub- Committee on Transportation - Arias, Caprioglio, Soria 23. Upper Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management JPA - Vacant (Michael Carbajal and Chavez - Alternates) Upon call, there was no public comment. 1. Association for the Beautification of Highway 99: Council Vice President Arias was appointed to the committee. Councilmember Soria motioned to appoint Council Vice President Arias to the Association for the Beautification of Highway 99 committee. Council President Caprioglio seconded the motion. The motion PASSED 5-0 vote. 3. Cannabis Ad Hoc Committee: Council President Caprioglio and Council Vice President Arias were appointed to the committee. Councilmember Chavez motioned to appoint Council President Caprioglio and Council Vice President Arias to the Cannabis Ad Hoc Committee. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 12 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Councilmember Esparza seconded the motion. The motion PASSED 5-0 vote. 10. Finance and Audit Committee: Councilmember Esparza requested this committee be continued to a future meeting. 15. Fresno Madera Area Agency on Aging Board: Councilmember Chavez replaced Councilmember Esparza. Councilmember Esparza resigned from the Fresno Madera Area Agency on Aging Board due to scheduling conflict. Councilmember Esparza motioned to appoint Councilmember Chavez to the Fresno Madera Area Agency on Aging Board. Council President Caprioglio seconded the motion. The motion PASSED 5-0 vote. 17. League of California Cities (Annual Meeting): Councilmember Soria announced there were no vacant positions. The members on the committee are Councilmember Soria and Council President Caprioglio as the alternate. 18. Litigation Exposure Reduction Ad Hoc Committee: Council Vice President Arias and Councilmember Soria were appointed to the Ad Hoc committee. Council President Caprioglio appointed as the Chair. Councilmember Chavez motioned to appoint Council Vice President Arias and Councilmember Soria to the Litigation Exposure Reduction Ad Hoc Committee and appoint Council President Caprioglio as the Chair. Council President Caprioglio seconded the motion. The motion PASSED 5-0 vote. Council Vice President Arias requested that the Mayor attend more of the San Joaquin River Conservancy Boards and requested legal counsel to update him in Closed Session. Councilmember Esparza gave an update on his first School Liaison Sub-Committee meeting for District 7, District 5 and District 3. 5. CLOSED SESSION City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 13 May 2, 2019City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft PLEASE NOTE: UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR A SPECIFIC TIME AND MAY BE HEARD ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION Upon call, the following member of the public address Council: David Love ADJOURNMENT City Council adjourned at 4:33 P.M. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 14 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1543 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Proclamation of “Alan Hofmann Day” City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1549 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION May 16, 2019 Proclamation of “Lyme Disease Awareness Month” City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1625 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: SUBJECT Proclamation of “National Public Works Week” City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ FROM THE OFFICES OF MAYOR LEE BRAND, CITY MANAGER WILMA QUAN AND FRESNO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, National Public Works Week (NPWW) was instituted as a public education campaign by the American Public Works Association (APWA) in 1960, calling attention to the importance of the various services provided by public works in our community which are an integral part of our citizen’s everyday lives; and WHEREAS, public works infrastructure, facilities and services play a pivotal role in the health, safety and quality of life for the citizens of Fresno; and WHEREAS, public works infrastructure, facilities, and services could not be provided without the skill and dedication of public works professionals, including engineers and administrators, field staff and office staff representing the City of Fresno; and WHEREAS, public works professionals design, build, operate, maintain and protect the transportation systems and equipment, water supply infrastructure, sewage and refuse disposal systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities that are vital to the citizens of the City of Fresno. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we, Mayor Lee Brand and the Council Members of the City of Fresno, do hereby proclaim the week of May 19 -May 25, 2019, to be: “NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK”in the City of Fresno, calling upon citizens and civic organizations to recognize the contributions which the Departments of Public Works, Transportation and Public Utilities provide every day toward our comfort, and quality of life. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we here unto set our hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Fresno, California this 16th day of May, 2019. ____________________________________ _______________________________________ LEE BRAND, MAYOR PAUL CAPRIOGLIO,COUNCIL PRESIDENT ___________________________________ _______________________________________ ESMERALDA SORIA, DISTRICT 1 MIGUEL ARIAS, DISTRICT 3 ___________________________________________________________________________ LUIS CHAVEZ, DISTRICT 5 GARRY BREDEFELD, DISTRICT 6 __________________________________________________________________________ NELSON ESPARZA, DISTRICT 7 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1600 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION May 16, 2019 Proclamation of “Teen Pregnancy Prevention Month” City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ CITY OF FRESNO Office of Councilmember Esmeralda Soria __________________________________________ ESMERALDA SORIA, Councilmember, District 1 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ LEE BRAND, Honorable Mayor PAUL CAPRIOGLIO, Council President, District 4 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Council Vice-President, District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember, District 5 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember, District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember, District 7 “Teen Pregnancy Prevention and Awareness Month” WHEREAS, Teen pregnancy is a social determinant of health that crosses all racial, cultural and socio-economic lines, and teen parenthood has emotional, health, and financial consequences that impact teens, their families and society as a whole; and WHEREAS, Providing young people the education and resources to prevent unintended pregnancy remains urgent, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that the teen birth rate in the U.S. has declined, but remains the highest of the industrialized world, and the California teen birth rate has declined though rates in the San Joaquin Valley have remained the highest in the state; and WHEREAS, Young people are less likely to face pregnancy if they have certain protective factors, including: open communication with adults about contraception; supportive parents; and accurate knowledge about sexual health, pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and the option of abstinence; WHEREAS, For every dollar spent preventing unintended pregnancy, California saves an additional $7.09 in future medical and social services costs; and WHEREAS, Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Education Department’s diverse partnerships with non-profits, government and community members have played a significant role in reducing teen birth rates in the area by focusing on prevention through comprehensive sex education and access to quality affordable health care. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fresno Mayor and City Council does hereby proclaim the month of May 2019 to be: “Teen Pregnancy Prevention and Awareness Month” in the City of Fresno IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 16 th day of May 2019. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1613 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION May 16, 2019 Proclamation of “Fresno Rainbow Pride Parade” City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ CITY OF FRESNO Office of Councilmember Esmeralda Soria ___________________________________________ ESMERALDA SORIA, Councilmember, District 1 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ LEE BRAND, Honorable Mayor PAUL CAPRIOGLIO, Council President, District 4 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ MIGUEL ARIAS, Council Vice-President, District 3 LUIS CHAVEZ, Councilmember, District 5 _____________________________________________ __________________________________________ GARRY BREDEFELD, Councilmember, District 6 NELSON ESPARZA, Councilmember, District 7 Is hereby presented to: Community Link, Inc. WHEREAS, The 29th Annual Fresno Pride Parade will be held on Saturday, June 1, 2019. Pride originated as a result of the riots at Stonewall Inn in 1969; the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community desired better representation and a day to celebrate and recognize their own culture. Today lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans form an important part of our national tapestry and have contributed to every facet of our society; and WHEREAS, The 2019 Fresno Pride Festival invites people from all over the Central Valley to participate in the activities provided to educate and celebrate each other, and commemorate the rich diversity of our LGBTQIA+ community. This year’s theme is “Together We Pride,” to represent how through unity, our community has accomplished milestones; and WHEREAS, The City of Fresno recognizes that its entire population should have equal rights and will speak against any oppression and discrimination which diminishes the quality of life for any Fresno resident or visitor, including those in its lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community; and WHEREAS, It is our duty to advocate for all of those who experience a hardship as a result of discrimination and inequity. It is only through a community’s unity that we can overcome injustice towards all groups of people. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fresno Mayor and City Council does hereby proclaim June 1, 2019 to be: “Fresno Pride Parade & Festival Day” in the City of Fresno IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and affixed the seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 16th day of May 2019. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1453 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:ANDREW BENELLI, PE, Assistant Director / City Engineer Public Works Department JOHN STANBOULIAN, Public Works Manager Public Works Department, Traffic Operations Center SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the Shaw Avenue Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (SR99 - SR41) (Council Districts 1, 2 and 4) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(c)(Existing Facilities)of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.RESOLUTION -To dispense with the competitive bidding requirements and authorize the Public Works Director to enter into a contract for the purchase of traffic signal adaptive modules for central processing unit,licenses,configuration,training,and warranty (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 3. Award a purchase contract in the amount of $338,100 to Trafficware Group Inc., for the purchase of Synchro Green modules for the 16 intersections for the Shaw Avenue ITS Traffic Signal Synchronization Project RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Public Works Director to specify Trafficware Group,Inc.,for the purchase of Synchro Green Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT),under the sole-source competitive bidding exception,and award a contract in the amount of $338,100 to Trafficware Group Inc.,for the purchase Synchro Green modules for the 16 intersections included in the west Shaw Avenue ITS Traffic Signal Synchronization Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The West Shaw Avenue (from State Route 99 to State Route 41)ITS corridor currently operates with a static time-of-day synchronization only during peak travel times and requires a real time (24 City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1453 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-A a static time-of-day synchronization only during peak travel times and requires a real time (24 hours/day and 7 days/week)adaptive synchronization system identical to east Shaw Avenue corridor (SR41 -SR168).The west Shaw Avenue signalized intersections are interconnected with state-of- the-art ITS infrastructure and only require Trafficware Synchro Green ASCT modules for an efficient traffic adaptive coordination system,improving safety,operations,energy conservation,and effective capacity of the Shaw Avenue corridor. BACKGROUND Shaw Avenue is a major east-west corridor that provides access to the SR99,SR41,SR168,Fashion Fair Mall,Fresno State University,Save Mart Center,City of Clovis,and a multitude of businesses along the second busiest corridor in the City of Fresno.The West Shaw Avenue corridor (SR99 - SR41)currently operates with an Advanced Transportation Management System (ATMS)capable of only static time-of-day synchronization during peak travel times and requires an ATMS Adaptive Signal Control Technology System (ASCT)identical to east Shaw Avenue corridor (SR41 -SR168). The west Shaw Avenue (SR99 -SR41)signalized intersections are interconnected with state-of-the- art fiber optics communications,vehicle detection,cameras,advanced traffic signal controllers and only require Trafficware Synchro Green Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT)modules for an efficient traffic adaptive coordination system,improving safety,operations,energy conservation and effective capacity of the entire Shaw Avenue corridor while reducing emissions and improving overall quality of life. The West Shaw Avenue Synchro Green ASCT module licenses will be an addition to the Traffic Operations Center’s existing Synchro Green ASCT System which has been in operation since 2013 along east Shaw Avenue corridor.The east Shaw Avenue corridor travel time study indicates 23% improvements during the AM peak and 31% improvement during the PM peak. In 2012, the City’s Traffic Operations Center ASCT System was competitively bid as part of the east Shaw Avenue Intelligent Transportation System (SR41 - SR168) Project, Bid File 3192-11381. In 2013, The System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) for the deployment of Trafficware ATMS Synchro Green ASCT System was reviewed and approved by Caltrans and Federal Highway (FHWA). On June 18, 2018, Caltrans Cost Effectiveness/Public Interest Finding (Caltrans LAPM Exhibit 12-F PIF) was filed with Caltrans Local Assistance and FHWA’s Propriatary.PIF@dot.ca.gov <mailto:Propriatary.PIF@dot.ca.gov> web site for the sole source procurement Trafficware Synchro Green ASCT modules for ITS Herndon Avenue and west Shaw Ave, citing the addition of Trafficware Synchro Green ASCT modules are essential for synchronization with the existing City’s System, safe interoperability, and cost effectiveness. The Trafficware Synchro Green module is manufactured, distributed, configured, and maintained only by Trafficware Group Inc. The Trafficware ATMS Synchro Green ASCT module includes traffic signal controller central processing unit boards (2070-1C CPU), intersection licenses, configuration, training, and a five-year warranty. The Trafficware price list for South Carolina DOT, Local Governments, 2013, was used to assess the Trafficware quote for the City of Fresno. The 2018 Synchro Green quoted prices for City of Fresno are 14.8% higher as compared with 2013 prices which accounts for a 2.8% annual price inflator if a similar California state-wide contract were negotiated today. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1453 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-A Staff recommends Council award a sole-source contract to Trafficware Group Inc., in the amount of $338,100 and authorize the Public Works Director or Purchasing Manager to sign and execute the purchase order on behalf of the City of Fresno. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and has determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c)(existing facilities),which exempts the repair,maintenance,or minor alteration of existing structures or facilities,including existing streets,sidewalk and gutters,with no further expansion of existing use. Furthermore,staff has determined that none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented based on conditions of the federal funding for the project. FISCAL IMPACT The project will have no impact to the General Fund.The Shaw ITS Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (SR41 -SR99)(Council Districts 1,2 and 4)has an overall cost of $450,000 and is funded by a Federal grant from the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ),with Proposition 111 Gas Tax as the local match.Of the overall budget of the project,$338,100 will be used for the sole-source purchase order. Attachments: Resolution Sole Source Memorandum City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1659 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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 JONATHAN BARTEL, Supervising Engineering Technician Public Works Department, Engineering Division SUBJECT RESOLUTION -Approving the Final Map of Tract No.6156 and accepting dedicated public uses offered therein except for dedications offered subject to City acceptance of developer installed required improvements -Northeast corner of North Millbrook Avenue and East Nees Avenue (Council District 6) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Final Map of Tract No.6156 and accepting the dedicated public uses offered therein,to authorize the Public Works Director or his designee to execute the subdivision agreement on behalf of the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Subdivider,Millbrook &Nees,LLC,a California Limited Liability Company,(Darius Assemi, President),has filed for approval,the Final Map of Tract No.6156,for a 1-lot subdivision for condominium purposes,located on the Northeast corner of North Millbrook Avenue and East Nees Avenue on 41.28 acres. BACKGROUND The Fresno City Planning Commission on December 7,2016 approved Vesting Tentative Map No. 6156 (Tentative Map)for a 1-lot subdivision for condominium purposes on 41.28 acres.The Tentative Map was approved consistent with the Fresno General Plan to comply with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act.The Final Map is technically correct and conforms to the approved Tentative Map,the Subdivision Map Act and the Fresno Municipal Code.The provisions of Section City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1659 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-B Tentative Map,the Subdivision Map Act and the Fresno Municipal Code.The provisions of Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act require a final map that is in substantial compliance with the approved tentative map to be approved by the City Council. The Subdivider has satisfied all other conditions of approval by executing the Subdivision Agreement for Tract No.6156,submitted securities in the total amount of $326,000.00 to guarantee the completion and acceptance of the public improvements and $163,000.00 for a payment security and has paid the miscellaneous and development impact fees due as a condition of approval for the Final Map in the amount of $200.00.Covenants have been executed to defer the formulation of the condominium plan,DCC&R and homeowners’association for condominium purposes.The City Attorney’s Office has approved all documents as to form and the Risk Management Division has approved all security bonds and insurance certificates. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15268(b)(3),approval of final subdivision maps is a ministerial action and is exempt from the requirements of CEQA. 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 The Final Map is located in Council District 6.There will be no impact to the City’s General Fund. Approval by the Council will result in timely deliverance of the review and processing of the Final Map as is reasonably expected by the Subdivider.Prudent financial management is demonstrated by the expeditious completion of this Final Map inasmuch as the Subdivider has paid the City a fee for the processing of this Final Map and that fee is,in turn,funding the respective operations of the Public Works Department. Attachment 1 - Resolution Attachment 2 - Final Map of Tract No. 6156 City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1604 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-C REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:BLAKE KONCZAL, Executive Director Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board BY:WILMA QUAN, City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Mandated Partner Memorandum of Understanding: 1. Approve the use of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Mandated Partner Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Template 2. Authorize the City Manager to sign all Mandated Partner MOUs as they complete negotiation and are presented to the City Manager’s Office RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the City Council approve the use of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)Mandated Partner Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)template,and authorize the City Manager or designee to sign all Mandated Partner MOUs as they complete negotiation and are presented to the City Manager’s office EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The recommended action allows the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board (FRWDB)to negotiate MOUs with each of the mandated partners,as required by the WIOA.These MOUs are required to be in place no later than July 1, 2019. The United States Congress passed the WIOA (the “Act”),as an enhancement to the previous Workforce Investment Act.The Act was signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 22, 2014,and the law took effect on July 1,2015.The WIOA mandates that certain Federal,State,and local agencies formally partner with local Workforce Development Boards at what is now known as America’s Jobs Centers of California (AJCC),in order to refer clients between the partners for City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1604 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-C America’s Jobs Centers of California (AJCC),in order to refer clients between the partners for specific services to better serve the community and leverage resources from multiple sources,as appropriate. The Act requires that the MOUs be reviewed,updated as needed and renewed every three (3)years. This is the first renewal. These mandated partners are to represent the following areas of need: ·State of California Employment Development Department ·Representatives of Community Services Block Grant Act ·Representatives for Older Americans ·Department of Rehabilitation ·Fresno County Department of Social Services ·Representatives of Adult Education/Community Colleges ·Representatives for Native Americans ·Representatives for Migrant Seasonal Farmworkers ·Job Corps BACKGROUND The initial MOU process was split between Phase I and Phase II,where Phase I established the AJCC system,partnerships and shared services.These Phase I agreements were completed in July 2016.Phase II established the Resource Sharing Agreements (RSAs)between the local board and the co-located partners.The purpose of the RSAs is to share equitably in the infrastructure cost of running the One-Stop System.These RSAs also document the total costs of Career Services provided to the community across all of the Partners.These RSAs are required to be reviewed, renegotiated and renewed every year. With this renewal,the RSA,now known as the Infrastructure Funding Agreement (IFA),is now incorporated into the MOU,as Exhibit A.Each year,the IFA will be reviewed,updated as needed and executed as an addendum to the MOU. FRWDB staff is in final negotiation with all mandated partners for the 2019 renewal. By approving this item,the signature process will allow the FRWDB to complete the signatory process with the Chief Local Elected Officials (City of Fresno and County of Fresno)in a timely manner.This will prevent the State of California Workforce Development Board and State of California Employment Development Department from sanctioning the Local Workforce Development Area and a possible loss of critical funding to support the local community. Any specific MOU that has funding tied to it in the amount of $50,000 or over will be presented to the City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1604 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-C Council for approval at its June 13, 2019, meeting. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: There is no alternative action.If a Memorandum of Understanding is not executed and in effect with each mandated partner by July 1,2019,Fresno County will be out of compliance with WIOA requirements and could lose funding for WIOA activities that benefit the residents of Fresno County. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines section 15378 the approval of this agreement does not qualify as a “project,” as defined by CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered since this item does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no increase in Net City Cost associated with the Recommended Action.The Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board is 100%funded by non-City sources.These have their origin primarily with the United States Department of Labor,being supplemented by other federal and State of California grants. Attachments:MOU Template Attachment 1: AJCC Partners and Services Provided Attachment 2: AJCC Partner Service Locations Attachment 3: AJCC Partner Referral Process Exhibit A: AJCC Infrastructure Funding Agreement Attachment A: AJCC One Stop Infrastructure Budget Attachment B: AJCC One Stop Infrastructure Allocation Methodology and Allocation Plan Attachment C: AJCC One Stop Consolidated Career Services Budget City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 1 of 15 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board And {Partner Name} In accordance with the Workforce Innovation and Opportunit y Act of 2014, Public Law 113-128, 29 U.S.C. 3101, et seq., as amended (hereafter referred to as "WIOA"), the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board (hereinafter referred to as the "WDB") shall develop a local plan, and enter into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU ") with local America’s Job Center One -Stop Partners (as defined in Section IV(B) below) regarding the operation of the local America’s Job Center One - Stop System of service delivery (the "local One -Stop System") and the performance of the functions described in Section 121(e)(1) of the WIOA. MOUs must be executed between the WDB and the America’s Job Center One -Stop Partners, with the agreement of the Chief Local Elected Official. The Chief Local Elected Official in the WDB’s Local Workforce Development Area (collectively, the City and County of Fresno) has delegated to the WDB the ability to execute this MOU pursuant to that certain Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement dated May 19, 2009, as amended (the “Joint Powers Agreement”). I. VISION, MISSION AND GOAL OF THE FRESNO COUNTY AMERICA’S JOB CENTER OF CALIFORNIA (AJCC) ONE-STOP SYSTEM A. Vision To fully engage all available public and private resources to ensure the Fresno Regional Workforce Development system as the premier source for the human capital needs of growth industry clusters within Fresno County. By integrating education and workforce preparation to assist the best companies in Fresno County to remain and thrive in our local community, to achieve sustainable economic growth. To concu rrently assist our unemployed and underemployed residents to achieve a higher quality of life by acces s to such careers in growth industry sectors. B. Mission The Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board, a Joint Powers Authority between the City and County of Fresno, in partnership with both the public and private sectors, exists primarily to assist local businesses in meeting their human capital needs. In this, we both (1) screen and train prospective new employees and (2) assist in upskilling existing employees. By offering such quality referral and training services, directly linked to local industry needs, we are of greatest benefit to our unemployed and underemployed clients. II. PURPOSE OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING A. To define, establish, and reinforce relationships between the WDB and the designated America’s Job Center of California (AJCC) One-Stop Partners; B. To define the roles and responsibilities of these entities in the performance of their combined goal of establishing a workforce development system through the local One - Stop System that is: 1. Integrated (offering as many employment, training, and education services as possible for employers and individuals seeking jobs or wishing to enhance their skills and Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 2 of 15 affording universal access to the system overall); 2. Comprehensive (offering to participant/customer a large array of useful information with wide and easy access to needed services); 3. Participant/customer -focused (providing the means for judging the quality of servi ces and making informed choices); and 4. Performance-based (based on clear outcomes to be achieved, mutually negotiated outcomes and methods for measurements, and the means for measuring and attaining participant/customer satisfaction); and C. To describe how cost of services and the operating cost of the local One -Stop System will be funded. III . STATEMENT OF ISSUE As a partner under the WIOA, the {Partner Name}, hereinafter referred to as the “Partner”, enters into an MOU with the WDB regarding the manner in which the Partner will participate and provide access to their services through the local One -Stop System. IV. DEFINITIONS The following definitions apply to this MOU: A. AJCC One-Stop Operator: The WDB sub-contracted entity or entities designated to operate the local One -Stop System, provide Basic Career Services (as defined in Section IV(D) below), and to coordinate services within the local One -Stop System under the WIOA. Sometimes also referred to he rein as the "One -Stop Operator" B. AJCC One-Stop Partner: An entity that carries out one or more programs or activities described herein, makes those programs or activities available to participants through the local One -Stop System, and participates in the operation of the local One-Stop System consistent with the terms of this MOU and with the requirements of the ir Authorizing Law (as defined in Section IV(C) below) by which the programs or activities are authorized under the WIOA. Sometimes also referred to herein as "Partner" C. Authorizing Law: Refers to each respective Partner's legal authority to engage in the specific programs or activities that the Partner will provide in connection with WIOA authorized programs, activities, or services. D. Basic Career Services: Refers to services and resources available to the general public without enrollment into the WIOA program or any Partner’s program. These services are overseen by the AJCC One- Stop Operator. These services include but are not limited to the following services, and are provided either by the WDB or by the Partners, as appropriate, applicable and allowable: 1. Determination of eligibility to receive WIOA-enrolled services. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 3 of 15 2. Outreach, intake, and orientation to the services available through the One-Stop System. 3. Initial assessment of skill levels (including literacy, numeracy, and English language proficiency), aptitudes, abilities (including skills gaps), and supportive service needs. 4. Labor exchange services, including the following: a. Job search, placement assistance, and career counseling, including information on in- demand industry sectors and occupations as well as nontraditional employment. b. Recruitment and other business services on behalf of employers in the local area, such as information and referral to specialized business services not traditionally offered through the local One-Stop System. 5. Referrals to, and coordination of activities with, other programs and services, including programs and services within the local One-Stop System and other workforce development programs. 6. Workforce and labor market employment statistics information, including information relating to local, regional, state, and national labor market areas, including the following: a. Job vacancy listings and the job skills necessary to obtain them. b. Information on local in-demand occupations and the earnings, skill requirements, and opportunities for advancement that accompany them. 7. Information on performance and program cost of eligible providers of training services, youth workforce development activities, adult education, career and technical education activities at the postsecondary level, career and technical education activities available to school dropouts, and vocational rehabilitation services. 8. Information regarding how the local area is performing on the local performance accountability measures and any additional performance information with respect to the local One-Stop System. 9. Information on, and referral to, supportive services or assistance, including the following: a. Child care, child support, medical or child health assistance under title XIX or XXI of the Social Security Act. b. Benefits under the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. c. Assistance through the earned income tax credit under section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. d. Assistance under a state program for temporary assistance for needy families funded under part A of Title IV of the Social Security Act. e. Other supportive services and transportation available in the local area. 10. Information and assistance regarding filing claims for unemployment compensation. 11. Assistance in establishing eligibility for programs of financial aid assistance for training and education programs that are not funded under WIOA. E. Business Services: The terms “Business Services” means services and resources available to employers in the local area and are provided by Partners and sub-contracted providers of services, with Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 4 of 15 oversight by WDB staff, where applicable, appropriate and allowable. These services include, but are not limited to: 1. Labor exchange activities and labor market information; 2. Customized screening and referral of qualified participants in training services to employers; 3. Customized services to employers, employer associations, or other such organizations, on employment-related issues; 4. Customized recruitment events and related services for employers including targeted job fairs; 5. Human Resource consultation services, including but not limited to assistance with: a. Writing/reviewing job descriptions and employee handbooks; b. Developing performance evaluation and personnel policies; c. Creating orientation sessions for new workers; d. Honing job interview techniques for efficiency and compliance; e. Analyzing employee turnover; or f. Explaining labor laws to help employers comply with wage/hour and safety/health regulations; 6. Customized labor market information for specific employers, sectors, industries or clusters; 7. Rapid Response and lay-off aversion; and 8. Other similar customized services. F. Individualized Career Services: The term “Individualized Career Services ” means services available to persons who meet the eligibility requirements as defined in the WIOA and subsequent regulations. These services are provided by the WDB’s subcontracted service providers and Partners, where applicable, appropriate and allowable . These services are subject to priority of service and include, but are not limited to: 1. Comprehensive and specialized assessments of the skill levels and service needs of adults and dislocated workers, which may include the following: a. Diagnostic testing and use of other assessment tools. b. In-depth interviewing and evaluation to identify employment barriers and appropriate employment goals. 2. Development of an individual employment plan to identify the employment goals, appropriate achievement objectives, and appropriate combination of services for the participant to achieve the employment goals, including providing information on eligible providers of training services and career pathways to attain career objectives. 3. Group counseling. 4. Individual counseling. 5. Career planning. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 5 of 15 6. Short-term prevocational services, including development of learning skills, communication skills, interviewing skills, punctuality, personal maintenance skills, and professional conduct, to prepare individuals for unsubsidized employment or training. 7. Internships and work experiences linked to careers. 8. Workforce preparation activities. 9. Financial literacy services. 10. Out-of-area job search assistance and relocation assistance. 11. English language acquisition and integrated education and training programs. G. AJCC Partner Services: The term “AJCC Partner Services” means those services described in Section IX, Description of Services To Be Provided By Partner, of this MOU carried out under the Partner's Authorizing Law. H. Participant/Customer: The term “Participant/Customer” is defined as a person or persons receiving integrated local One-Stop System employment, training, educational services, and/or business services for employers from any AJCC partner. I. Training Services: The term “Training Services” means services available to persons who meet the eligibility requirements as defined in the WIOA, subsequent regulations, and locally -defined prerequisites. These services are provided by the WDB’s subcontracted service providers and Partners, wher e applicable, appropriate and allowable. These services are subject to priority of service and include, but are not limited to: 1. Occupational skills training, including training for nontraditional employment. 2. On-the-job training. 3. Incumbent worker training. 4. Programs that combine workplace training with related instruction, which may include cooperative education programs. 5. Training programs operated by the private sector. 6. Skill upgrading and retraining. 7. Pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship training 8. Entrepreneurial training. 9. Transitional jobs (Work Experience). 10. Job readiness training provided in combination with another training service. 11. Adult education and literacy activities, including activities of English language acquisition and integrated education and training programs, provided concurrently or in combination with another training service. 12. Customized training conducted with a commitment by an employer or group of employers to employ an individual upon successful completion of the training. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 6 of 15 13. Other similar training services V. AJCC ONE-STOP PARTNER PARTICIPATION Partner agree s to participate in a joint planning process which results in the development of the local and regional Strategic Plan submitted to the State in accordance with issued WIOA guidelines (the "Strategic Plan"). Partners agree to engage in planning, plan development, and activities, to result in: A. Continuous partnership building between all parties to this MOU; B. Continuous partnership building and planning responsive to State requirements; C. Continuous partnership between State and local representatives engaged in WIOA activities and related workforce preparation and development; D. Responsive to specific local and economic conditions, including employer needs; E. Adherence to strategic planning principles adopted by the WIOA for long range planning, including the requirement for continuous improvement; F. Adherence to common data collection and reporting, including needs for modification or change; G. Diligence in developing coordinated local leaders hip in workforce development through: H. Responsiveness to participant/customer needs; I. Maintenance of system infrastructure; J. Shared technology and information; K. Performance management to measure the success of the local One -Stop System overall and to enhance performance in a spirit of quality management and continuous improvement. L. Identification of each Partner’s appropriate contribution to meeting the performance standards negotiated between the State of California and WDB. VI. THE CUSTOMERS TO BE SERVED The AJCC One-Stop Center will serve: A. Those Fresno County residents who are seeking employment, need guidance on how to make career choices, and are building basic educational or occupational skills. 1. Priority of Service will be given to those who are (in order of priority): a. Veterans and eligible spouses who are also recipients of public assistance, other low income individuals, or individuals who are basic skills deficient; b. I ndividuals who are recipients of public assistance, other low income individuals, Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 7 of 15 individuals who are basic skills deficient, or individuals with other barriers to employment. c. Veterans and eligible spouses who are not included in WIOA’s priority groups. d. Other individuals not included in WIOA’s priority groups. B. Those businesses who are seeking a skilled and stable workforce; need guidance in various business operations or in need of assistance in case of reductions in force. C. All AJCC One-Stop Center Services and Partner services will be available to all eligible residents no matter their English language proficiency or physical abilities. VII. AMERICAN’S WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE Partner agrees to ensure that the policies and procedures, as well as the programs and services provided at the AJCC and Partner’s facilities, are in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and its amendments. Additionally, partners agree to fully comply with the provisions of WIOA, Title VII of the civil Rights act of 1964, the Age Decimation Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 29 CRF Part 37 and all other regulations implementing the aforementioned laws. VIII. NON-DISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY A. Partner agrees that no person shall, because of ethnic group identification, age, sex, gender identification, sexual orientation, color, disability, me dical condition, national origin, race, ancestry, marital status, religion, religious creed, or political belief be excluded from participation, be denied benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiv ing state or federal assistance. Such practices include retirement, recruitment advertising, hiring, layoff, termination, upgrading, demotion, transfer, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, use of facilities, and other terms and conditions of employment. B. Partner assur es compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. IX. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PARTNER Partner agrees that they will provide access to all the services described below at the designated AJCC One-Stop and any other satellite location deeme d appropriate by the Partner. Partner will participate in the creation of the local One-Stop System which provides universal access and enables customers to become self -sufficient. Partner will ensure that services are provided either by (i) assigning staff to the local AJCC One-Stop(s); (ii) using a mutually developed referral process; (iii) training the One -Stop Operator and other Partner staff to deliver information about the services available to eligible individuals; and/or (iv) using technology to provide services to participants/customers, except as noted below. Partner will ensure that the needs of workers and youth, and individuals with barriers to employment, including but not limited to individuals with disabilities and limited English proficient individuals , are provided necessary and appropriate access to services, inclu ding Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 8 of 15 access to technology and materials, available through the local One -Stop System. Any Partner funded by Wagner -Peyser is required to be co -located in the Comprehensive America's Job Center One -Stop Center (as defined and identified in Section XI(A) below). Partner agrees that it will provide One -Stop Partner Core Services to participants/customers and support local One -Stop System activities , depending on individual eligibility and availability of funding: : A. ADD SPECIFIC PARTNER SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED X. WDB RESPONSIBILITIES As authorized under the WIOA, and pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement, the WDB will establish policies necessary for implementation of the WIOA in the local area and shall: A. Develop and submit a local plan to the Governor; B. Collaborate with other Workforce Development Boards to develop a Regional Plan ; C. Identify eligible AJCC One-Stop Operators by awarding grants or contracts on a competitive basis; D. Conduct programmatic and fiscal reviews of the WIOA services provided by sub- contracted program providers of services, training services providers and report to the WDB the results of those reviews ; E. Identify eligible providers of youth activities in the local area by awarding grants or contracts on a competitive ba sis based on the recommendations of the WDB Youth Council; F. Identify eligible providers of training services in the local area by awarding grants or contracts on a competitive basis; G. Identify eligible providers of Individualized Career Services in the loc al area by awarding grants or contracts on a competitive basis; H. Provide adequate facilities for the Partners as needed and as funding allows; I. Develop a local One -Stop System budget for the purpose of carrying out the duties of the WDB; J. Solicit and accept grants and donations from sources other than federal funds made available under WIOA; K. Conduct regular program and physical plant assessments for compliance to federal, state and local Equal Opportunity and Americans with Disabilities Act regulations as required by law; Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 9 of 15 L. Negotiate local performance measures; M. Coordinate the workforce development activities carried out in the local area with economic development strategies and develop other employer linkages with such activities; N. Promot e participation by private sector employers in the statewide workforce development system and help such employers meet their hiring needs using the system by providing connecting, brokering, and coaching activities to the employers; O. Make available to the public, on a regular basis through open meetings and/or through publications online, information regarding the activities of the WDB, including information regarding the Strategic Plan prior to submission of the Strategic Plan, membership, the designation and certification of AJCC One-Stop Operator(s), the award of grants or contracts to eligible providers of youth activities, and, on request, minutes of formal meetings of the WDB; P. Negotiate and enter into an MOU with each AJCC One-Stop Partner that meets the requirements of the WIOA and sets forth their respective responsibilities for making a full range of services available through the local One -Stop System; and shall modify this MOU to add additional Partners as needed for the benefit of the community and system. XI. LOCATION OF AMERICA’S JOB CENTER ONE -STOP SITES A. The WDB will establish a minimum of one physical location called the "Comprehensive AJCC" within the workforce development area in which all AJCC One-Stop Partners will provide access to the services provided under the WIOA. The parties agree that the Comprehensive AJCC shall be located at the Manchester Shopping Center, 3302 N. Blackstone Avenue, Fresno, California 93726. This location may be changed by the WDB during the term of this MOU upon thirty (30) days advance notice of such change to the Partners. Each Partner agrees that it will provide access to the services described in this MOU at such location and any other satellite location deemed appropriate by each Partner, with concurrence of the WDB. B. If the WDB establishes additional AJCC One-Stop Centers within its local workforce development area, each Partner will determine the extent and manner in which it will participate in such additional centers. However, access to each Partner’s services will be made available at all locations, ei ther with on-site staff, via technology, or referral to the nearest office of the Partner. 1. Affiliate AJCC One-Stop Centers are listed on Attachment 2, Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board and Partner Workforce Services Centers. C. The Partner commits to providing information and access to all AJCC Partner services, as described in this MOU, at each of its service locations. XII. METHODS OF REFERRAL A. The WDB, through its designated AJCC One-Stop Operator(s), and the Partners agree to utilize the approved referral processes and forms for common intake and referral among the AJCC One-Stop Partners and providers of services. The WDB and Partners developed a Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 10 of 15 universal referral system and form that is used for all cross-agency referrals, copies of which are attached hereto, and incorporated herein, as Attachment 3 B. The WDB and Partner agree to train and provide technical assistance to the appropriate staff of each of the other participating AJCC One-Stop Partners and sub-contracted providers of services on topics that include but are not limited to eligibility for and scope of allowable services for the Partner’s programs. C. Partner agrees to suggest appropriate referrals for its applicants and clients, the availability of additional services from other AJCC partners if they determine the client could benefit from those referral(s). D. A listing of Partner Services and Partner Sites and Locations can be found in Attachments 1 and 2, respectful ly, for referral purposes. XIII. CONFIDENTIALITY Partner shall be in strict conformance with all applicable federal, State of California and/or local laws and regulations relating to confidentiality , including Welfare and Institutions Code , section 10850 and ensure that all applications and records concerning participants/customers shall be kept confidential and shall not be opened to examination, publicized, disclosed, or used for any purpose not directly connected with the administration of the local One-Stop System. The Partner shall inform all of its employees, agents, officers, subcontractors, Board members, or partners of this provision and that any person knowingly and intentionally violating this provision is guilty of a misdemeanor. A. All participant/customer applications and records related to services provided under this MOU, including eligibility for services, enrollment, and referral shall be confidential and shall not be open to examination for any purpose not directly connected with the delivery of such services. Signed information releases will be obtained where appropriate. B. Partner agrees to share information either agreed upon by them or as interpreted by the Chief Local Elected Official or designee to be necessary for the ad ministration of the local One-Stop System. Partner shall obtain signed releases allowing for the sharing of participant/customer information necessary for provision of services under the WIOA; i.e. assessment; universal intake; program or training referral ; job development or placement activities; and other services as needed for employment or program support purposes. C. At any time an America’s Job Center One -Stop Partner requests confidential information regarding another Partner's participant/customer, th e request shall be accompanied by a written Release of Confidential Information signed by the participant/customer. XIV. GRIEVANCES AND COMPLAINTS Partner agrees to establish and maintain a procedure for grievance and complaints as outlined in WIOA. The process for handling grievances and complaints is applicable to customers and partners. These procedures will allow the customer or entity filing the complaint to exhaust every administrative remedy in receiving a fair and complete hearing and resolution of their grievance. The partner further agrees to communicate openly and directly to resolve any problems or disputes related to the provision of services in a cooperative manner and at the lowest level of intervention possible. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 11 of 15 XV. COST ALLOCATION A. Partner agrees to financially participate in the operating costs related to the common costs of the One-Stop System attributable to the Partner’s program(s). B. Partner commits to work collaboratively with the WDB and other AJCC One -Stop Partners to participate in the implementation of the Infrastructure Funding Agreement (IFA) process . C. The IFA is incorporated into this MOU as Exhibit A. XVI. TERM AND RENEWAL OF MOU AND IFA A. The term of this MOU is from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2022, unless it is terminated earlier as provided in Section X VIII, below. B. The term of the IFA is from July 1, 2019 , to June 30, 2020, and will be updated annually. 1. Each update will be incorporated into this MOU, replacing the previous year’s IFA. C. This MOU is of no force or effect until signed by authorized representatives of the participating America’s Job Center One -Stop Partner and the WDB. Once signed thereby, this MOU is effective commencing upon July 1, 2019, and shall supersede in its entirety any MOU entered into previously by and between the participating AJCC One-Stop Partner and the WDB. D. The MOU, once signed, becomes a part of the local Strategic Plan. XVII. REVISIONS AND MODIFICATIONS This MOU may be revised or modified with the approval of both the WDB and of the Partner. XVIII. TERMINATION Partner may terminate its participation in this MOU upon thirty (30) days writt en notice to the WDB; or The WDB may terminate this MOU upon thirty (30) days written notice of such termination to partner. XIX. NOTICE Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party to this MOU shall be deemed given upon personal delivery to the other parties or two (2) days after being deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first class mail addressed to the othe r parties at the following addresses or to such other address as the parties may provide by written notice given in accordance herewith: Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Attn: Blake Konczal, Executive Director 2125 Kern Street, Suite 208 Fresno, CA 93721 Partner's address as identified on the signature page below. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 12 of 15 XX. ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT It is understood that the Partner and its staff are subject to their existing personnel policies, procedures, regulations and statutes as well as applicable collective bargaining agreements. The WDB will assure to the extent possible that the One -Stop Operator will work with all Partners in developing and implementing policies and procedures for the One -Stop System, in order to avoid inconsistencies with their respective policies, procedures, regulations and collective bargaining agreements. XXI. SHARED INFORMATION AND SYSTEM SECUR ITY WIOA emphasizes technology as a critical tool for making all aspects of information exchange possible, including client tracking, common case management, reporting, and data collection. To support the use of these tools, each AJCC Partner agrees to the following: A. Comply with the applicable provisions of WIOA, Welfare and Institutions Code, California Education Code, Rehabilitation Act, and any other applicable statutes or requirements. B. Commit to share information to the greatest extent allowable under their governing legislation and confidentiality requirements. C. System security provisions shall be agreed upon by all partners. XXII. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AND BRANDING RELATED TO WIOA SERVICES A. All communications must be approved by the WDB Marketing Manager or Executive Director prior to the communication. B. Partner agrees to utilize the AJCC logo developed by the State of California and the Local Board on buildings identified for AJCC usage. XXIII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties ag ree to try to resolve policy and practice disputes at the lowest level, starting with the site supervisor(s) and staff. If issues cannot be resolved at this level, they shall be referred to the management staff or the respective staff employer and the WDB, for discussion and resolution. XXI V. INDEMNIFICATION Except as otherwise expressly provided in this MOU and to the fullest extent of the law, each party shall indemnify and hold harmless (the "Indemnifying Party") the other parties, including the One-Stop Operator and the WDB, and their respective partners, directors, officers, agents, customers and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all losses, costs, expenses (including reasonable attorneys', experts' and consultants' fees and court costs at all levels of proceedings), damages and/or liabilities which any of the Indemnified Parties may sustain or incur in connection with or arising out of the performance of this MOU or any breach by the Indemnifying Party of its obligations under this MOU, except t o the extent the foregoing is caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. The terms of this Section XXIV shall survive the termination of this MOU. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 13 of 15 Signatures: In WITNESS THEREOF, the parties to this Memorandum of Understanding execute this agreement. Dated: 2019 BY : Paul Bauer, FRWDB Board Chairperson Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2125 Kern Street, Suite 208 Fresno, CA 93721 Dated: , 2019 BY : Name Agency Name Address Address Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 14 of 15 APPROVED BY THE COUNTY OF FRESNO AS TO ITS CAPACITY AS CHIEF LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIAL (CLEO): By: __________________________________ Nathan Magsig, Chairman Board of Supervisors BERNICE E. SEIDEL, CLERK Board of Supervisors By: __________________________________ APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DANIEL C. CEDERBORG, COUNTY COUNSEL By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board 2019 WIOA Partner MOU Page 15 of 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at Fresno, California. CITY OF FRESNO, A California municipal corporation Dated: _________________________ By: ________________________________ Wilma Quan-Schecter City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney By: _______________________________ Brandon M. Collet Date Senior Deputy City Attorney ATTEST: YVONNE SPENCE, MMC CRM By: _______________________________ Date Attachment 1 1 One Stop Partners and Services Provided Partner Services Provided Department of Social Services Will be co-located at Manchester and Reedley AJCCs. Assistance with reception duties; assistance with Job Fairs and employer services events; participate in scholarship panels; liaison between AJCC partners, DSS staff and participants; Welfare-to Work case management; participate on Self Reliance Team; participate on WIOA Training Scholarship panels, CalWORKs Intake and CalFresh/Medi-Cal services (Reedley only) Department of Rehabilitation Disability Awareness training to frontline AJCC staff; Co-location of DOR staff at Manchester AJCC; Training to AJCC staff and core partners on Competitive Integrated Employment. California Indian Manpower Consortium Provide access to WIOA career services for Native Americans in Fresno County, as funding and eligibility allows, utilizing agreed to referral process with other WIOA partners. Employment Development Department Workforce Services: Will be co-located at Manchester, Fresno West, Reedley AJCCs. California Training Benefits; CalJOBS; Employer Services; Fidelity Bonding services; H-2A Temporary Agriculture Program; Jobs for Veterans services; Migrant Seasonal Farmworker services; personal job search assistance workshops; assist with Rapid Response events; Trade Adjustment Assistance; Work Opportunity Tax Credits; assistance with Worker Adjustment Retraining Notification Act; Youth Employment Opportunity Program/Youth Services. Labor Market Information Division: Labor Market Information in support of Basic Career Services; occupational guides/profiles; wage data; skills information and transference; education and licensing requirements; in- demand occupations listings; crosswalks for occupation and education program offerings; state-wide Eligible Training Provider List; commute pattern data. Unemployment Insurance Branch: UI claim information upon request (per process); worker profiling and re- employment services, Guidance to individuals filing UI claims via UI Online; Assistance to AJCC staff and customers for California Training Benefits; Collaborate with partners and AJCC staff on TAA process and requirements; participate in local Rapid Response events and roundtable meetings; provide lay-off aversion information to employers. Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission Support AJCC staff with referrals to any Community Services Block Grant services and any other service available through EOC, depending on eligibility requirements; depending on need and space availability, the following programs could co-locate in the AJCC: Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and Low-Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP). Will provide CSBB services information via technology in the AJCC and Orientation. State Center Adult Education Consortium In the State Center Community College District area (urban Fresno County, east side rural area), provide GED or High School Equivalency preparation classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC; Provide ESL classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC; Provide Basic Computer Literacy classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC; provide counseling services and assistance to WIOA enrolled participants who have expressed interest in attending State Center Community College District training programs that are approved and listed on the state Eligible Training Provider List. All of these services will be provided by the adult schools and community college campuses who make up this consortium. Proteus, Inc. - Migrant Seasonal Farm Worker Will provide outreach and recruitment for the Migrant Seasonal Farm Worker Program; conduct eligibility determination; case management; career counseling; orientation; skills assessment; co-enrollment with other appropriate agencies; provide Youth Farmworker Services; job placement services. Attachment 1 2 State Center Community College District Provide Career Planning, short-term pre-vocational services including development of learning skills, communication skills, interviewing skills , punctuality, personal maintenance skills and professional conduct, to prepare individuals for unsubsidized employment or training. West Hills Adult Education Consortium In the West Hills Community College District area (urban Fresno County, west side rural area), Provide GED or High School Equivalency preparation classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC; Provide ESL classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC; Provide Basic Computer Literacy classes either by agreed to schedule or referral from the AJCC These services will be provided by the adult schools located in Fresno County who are members of this consortium. SER Jobs for Progress, Inc.Will provide outreach, intake and Orientation services; provide information and referrals to supportive services available to eligible persons; provide group presentations; provide Older Americans workshops, as needed or requested; provide group counseling services; Short-term pre-vocational services; specialized assessments; health screening; organize monthly support group meetings for Older Americans; provide staffing support to the Manchester AJCC resource room and clerical support to co-located partner staff. Senior Services of America, Inc. Provide: outreach, intake (that may include Worker Profiling, Readjustment Service Referrals and orientation to the One-Stop Center); performance information on eligible training providers; Information about and referral to the array of supportive services provided by SSAI and other community partners; enroll eligible seniors who are 55+, low income and have barriers to employment as defined in the Older Americans Act (OAA); provide part time, temporary on the job training through community service assignments at local nonprofits and government agencies to enrolled participants; provide group presentations in One-Stops as necessary; comprehensive and specialized assessment and individual employment plan for enrolled participants; short-term pre-vocational services; to the extent practical and available, leveraging funding streams such as TANF, WIOA, HUD, Veteran's Outreach and Migrant Workers; may assign program participants to provide staffing support to the Resource Room and clerical support to co-located partners at the comprehensive AJCC. Job Corps Eligibility determination for Job Corps services; initial assessments for Job Corp services; individual and group counseling/mentoring; short term pre-vocational services; internships/work experiences linked to careers; soft skills development; financial literacy workshops; occupational job training related to Job Corp; job readiness workshops/training; GED/HS diploma assistance; information about Job Corp provided in literature and electronically; participate in Self Reliance Team panels. Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board & Partner Workforce Services Centers Prepared by FRWDB Information Systems Page 1 of 1 28Mar2019 A. Workforce Connection Manchester Arthur Moss-559-230-1100 3302 N. Blackstone Ave. Suite 155, Fresno CA 93726 B. DSS – Fresno 559.600.2650 1209 E Street Fresno, CA 93706 C. Ca. Department of Rehabilitation 559.445.6011 2550 Mariposa Mall, Rm. 2000 Fresno, CA 93721 D. MSFW-Fresno 3454 E. Date Ave. Fresno, CA 93725 559.473.4485 E. Workforce Connection Reedley Cynthia Rye - 559-637-2444 DSS – 559.637.2971 1680 E. Manning Ave. Reedley, CA 93654 F.MSFW Sanger 1849 Academy Ave. Sanger, CA 93657 559.875.7146 G. Proteus, Inc. Selma Service Center Cynthia Rye-559.637-2444 MSFW-559.891.0135 3706 McCall Ave. Suite 116 Selma, CA 93662 H. DSS – Selma 559.600.5205 3800 McCall Ave. Selma, CA 93662 I.MSFW Kerman 437 S. Madera Ave. Kerman, CA 93630 559.473.4489 J.Workforce Connection Coalinga Claudia Call-559-934-2424 300 Cherry Ln. Bldg. A, Coalinga, CA 93210 K. DSS – Coalinga 559.600.6300 311 Coalinga Plaza Coalinga, CA 93210 L. Business Services Center 7475 N. Palm Ave., Ste. 105 Fresno, CA 93711 559.230.4062 M. Workforce Connection - Mendota Claudia Call-559.655.5281 655 Quince St. Ste. C Mendota CA 93640 Attachment 3 Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Page 1 of 2 Form# QUA-197, revised 051916 Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board A proud member of America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM Network 2125 Kern Street, Suite 208 Fresno, California 93721 559.490.7100 Fax 559.490.7199 www.workforce-connection.com Blake Konczal, Executive Director OPERATIONAL DIRECTIVE FRWIB OD # 06-16 Date Released: July 1, 2016 To: All Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board AJCC Partners and Service Providers From: Blake Konczal, Executive Director Effective Date: July 1, 2016 Subject: America’s Job Centers of California (AJCC) Partner Referral Process Applicable Program: All Revision History: Initial Release This Operational Directive (OD) replaces the referral process described in OD 35-05, Partner Co-Enrollment and Referral Process. This OD obsoletes Form REG-102, Universal Referral Checklist and adds updated referral forms. Partners may be required to use their own Release of Information form, instead of the Universal Release of Information (Form REG-100) when making referrals to other Partners. Those Partners are required to identify the approved form to be used when referring clients from their organization. Purpose As mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), each Local Workforce Development Area (LWDA) is required to have a documented process for referrals between partner agencies, as defined by WIOA (mandated partners) and the local Board as AJCC partners (local one-stop partners). The intent of a referral activity is to ensure that needed services for a client are provided through the most appropriate funding stream in the most efficient manner and are not duplicative. The client should have an experience that is as seamless as possible. This OD describes, on page 2, the steps to be taken to facilitate a referral between any Partner agency, including any of Fresno County’s WIOA-funded programs, and to track the outcome of those referrals. Each partner is required to identify all departments that provide the services described in their individual Partner Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board. Additionally, each partner and sub-contracted provider of service is required to identify a single point of contact (SPOC) for all referrals to their agency and their full contact information (telephone number and email address). The FRWDB Quality Systems Manager will be responsible for maintaining and disseminating this information. PROCESS Level I – Referrals to other partners or community services for perceived or stated needs of clients. Use Form REG-108. There will be no follow-up for Level I Referrals. Referrals will be counted and reported, when appropriate. Level II – Direct referral between partners for specific services. Use Form # REG-109. Referring partner will fill out the form, contact the referred to agency single point of contact (SPOC) and make appointment for client if Attachment 3 Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Page 2 of 2 Form# QUA-197, revised 051916 appropriate. Referral to be scanned to referred agency and copy given to client. Review the referral with the client. Referring Partner will file the original referral form. If any questions, please contact the FRWDB Program Manager. Forms: REG-100 – Universal Release of Information (Partners may require the use of their own Release of Information form in order to release client specific information). REG-101 – Agency Summary of Services Checklist REG-104 – Interest Checklist REG-108 – AJCC Partner Referral – Level I REG-109 – AJCC Partner Referral – Level II Referral To Partner - Level I Client needs services not provided by agency Agency identifies services needed and agency that could provide those services Referring agency staff fills out form including location and contact information Start End Referral To Partner - Level II (SRT or enrolled) - Start - 2 business days after referral appointment date Referred to agency SPOC contacts client to find out if still interested in receiving services - See Note 1 Did the client show up? Interested? Determine cause for missing 1st appointment and schedule new appointment Record result & report at next AJCC Site Ops Meeting End Yes No Yes No Note 1: If this is the 2nd missed appointment, notify referring agency s SPOC Exhibit A 1 Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act AJCC Partner INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AGREEMENT Program Year 2019 This Infrastructure Funding Agreement (IFA) is entered into between the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board (FRWDB) and (Partner Name), an America’s Job Center of California (AJCC) Partner in the Fresno County Local Workforce Development Area, effective as of the first day of the term hereof. RECITALS WHEREAS the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) provides that the FRWDB shall establish and operate a One-Stop System, also known as AJCC, to serve customers in Fresno County with the collaboration of the Partner; and WHEREAS, the FRWDB has established Workforce Connection, located at 3302 Blackstone Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726, as the comprehensive AJCC; and WHEREAS, the Partner is to share the cost and burden of the AJCC to the fullest extent allowable taking into account restrictions imposed by sources of funding relied upon by the Partner, which, if possible, shall contribute services or space, if prohibited from paying cash, to contribute its share of the in-kind expenses of the AJCC benefiting; and WHEREAS, FRWDB has contracted with the Fresno Area Workforce Investment Corporation (FAWIC) to provide administrative services, including, without limitation, administering this Agreement on behalf of the FRWDB; and WHEREAS, the FRWDB and Partner desire to enter into this Agreement in order to establish the methodology, terms and conditions under which they will provide resources or funds in sharing the costs of the AJCC. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: I.Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2019, and terminate on June 30, 2020, unless otherwise terminated as hereinafter provided. II.AJCC Partners.The following entities are partners in the operation of the AJCC. a.Co-Located Partners (subject to comprehensive AJCC infrastructure cost sharing): i. Employment Development Department ii. Fresno County Department of Social Services iii. Department of Rehabilitation b.Co-located Partners (Federally exempt from AJCC infrastructure cost sharing) i. Job Corps Exhibit A 2 c.Non Co-Located Partners (subject to other comprehensive AJCC services cost sharing and reporting): i. Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission ii. Proteus, Inc. (MSFW program) iii. West Hills Adult Education Consortium iv. California Indian Manpower Consortium v. State Center Adult Education Consortium vi. Senior Service America, Inc. vii. SER of California viii. State Center Community College District III.Cost Allocation Methodology. The FRWDB and Partner agree that the AJCC Budget and Allocation Plan set forth in Attachments A and B, respectfully, bears an equitable relationship to the benefits received by each at the comprehensive AJCC. The Methodology will: a.Be consistent with federal laws authorizing each partner’s program. b.Comply with federal cost principles in the Uniform Guidance. c.Include only costs that are allowable, reasonable, necessary, and allocable to each program partner. Those partners who are co-located in the comprehensive AJCC, identified in Section II c, are mandated to share in the infrastructure costs of the comprehensive AJCC, to the extent allowed under their authorizing law. Those partners co-located in the comprehensive AJCC, as identified in Section II d, are exempt from infrastructure cost sharing by the federal government. These partners are subject to other comprehensive AJCC services cost sharing and reporting. Those partners not co-located in the comprehensive AJCC, as identified in Section II e, are not subject to sharing in the infrastructure costs until such time the State defines and communicates the process and methodology for assessing the benefit and or value to the non co-located partner. The infrastructure costs shall be allocated as follows: a.Direct Charge: Costs that are incurred solely for the benefit of Partner shall be allocated to Partner. b.Square Footage Percentage at an AJCC Site: Partner shall be allocated the cost of providing and maintaining facilities at the site based upon the percentage of the number of square feet at the site Partner commits to use relative to the total space of the site. c.Communication Costs: Partner shall be allocated the communication costs at the site based upon the percentage of the number of square feet at the site Partner commits to use relative to the total space of the site. IV.Partner-provided Career Services For all partners (co-located and non co-located), other costs associated with providing Career Services to the AJCC system are described in Exhibit A 3 Attachment C. Reporting of these services are further described in Section VI, Partner Resources. V.Other System Costs - Shared Costs. FAWIC will pay to the appropriate vendors the shared non-infrastructure costs for the comprehensive AJCC. These payments will be considered the WIOA resources for payment of allocable costs to WIOA. VI.Partner Resources. Partner agrees to provide the following resources in support of the AJCC system: a.For infrastructure costs, co-located partners will provide cash payment for the amount allocated to them as shown in Attachment B. i. If a cash payment is required from the partner, FAWIC will invoice the partner monthly. The partner shall submit their payment to the Fresno Area Workforce Investment Corporation, 2125 Kern Street, Suite 208, Fresno, CA 93721. All cash payments must be received by FAWIC no later than 45 calendar days after receipt of the invoice unless an alternative arrangement is agreed to in writing by FAWIC and the partner. A partner’s failure to pay within a timely manner will be reported to the FRWDB Adult Council and may be subsequently submitted for dispute resolution as provided for in Section VII. b.All partners (co-located and non-co-located) will provide estimated annual budgets that reflects their agency expenditures/contributions to provide Career Services to Fresno County residents. The Consolidated Career Services Budget is further described in Attachment C. i. Partner agrees to submit semi-annually actual versus budget reports for Career Services Expenditures. ii. Reviews of the consolidated report will be in accordance with Section VII. VII.Periodic Review of Costs, Allocations and Contributions.The FAWIC will provide quarterly reports to the partners showing the actual costs, allocations and contributions versus budget and/or plan. After the close of the second calendar quarter, FAWIC will convene an AJCC Partner Review meeting to determine if adjustments to budget and or allocations need to be made based on actual expenditures. If a modification is deemed appropriate, then this IFA amendment will be modified as agreed to by all partners. VIII.Dispute Resolution. Any dispute among or between the parties hereto shall be addressed by the FRWDB in accordance with WIOA and the appropriate Final Rules promulgated with respect thereto, as amended and applicable. Following a decision by FRWDB, the parties involved may appeal to the State of California following the applicable procedures. Pending final resolution of a dispute hereunder, the parties involved shall proceed diligently to perform their respective obligations under the Agreement in accordance with the FRWDB decision, unless the parties have given a notice of termination as provided for in Section XI. XI.Termination. Use of funds identified in this IFA as being available to pay the costs, charges, and fees set forth herein are contingent upon receipt of those funds by Partner. Partner may withdraw from this Agreement in the event that funding is either eliminated or reduced such that Partner can no longer pay the costs set forth above. Such withdrawal shall be effective with no less than a 30-day written notification to FAWIC that Partner lacks funding, or upon the vacating of the premises by Partner, if applicable, whichever is later. Exhibit A 4 The FRWDB and Partner executing this Infrastructure Funding Agreement agree to its terms and conditions: {PARTNER NAME} {SIGNATORY & TITLE} ___________________________________ Signature Date Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Paul Bauer, Chair ___________________________________ Signature Date ATTACHMENT A – MANCHESTER COMPREHENSIVE AJCC BUDGET – Twelve (12) Months Category Description Cost Communication Telephone - Local Service $9,500 Communication Communications - Data/Internet $21,500 Communication Telephone - Long Distance $500 Maintenance Janitorial Service $45,800 Maintenance Pest Control $1,740 Facility Security Guard Services $38,000 Facility Rent $440,400 Facility Utilities $85,000 TOTAL $642,440 Attachment B –AJCC One Stop Infrastructure Costs Allocation Methodology and Plan Allocation Methodology The infrastructure costs shall be allocated as follows: a.Direct Charge: Costs that are incurred solely for the benefit of Partner shall be allocated to Partner. b.Square Footage Percentage at an AJCC Site: Partner shall be allocated the cost of providing and maintaining facilities at the site based upon the percentage of the number of square feet at the site Partner commits to use relative to the total space of the site. c.Communication Costs: Partner shall be allocated the communication costs at the site based upon the percentage of the number of square feet at the site Partner commits to use relative to the total space of the site. Allocated Square Footage Summary Agency Total Direct Area Common and Customer Space Partner Total Partner % DOR 137 71 208 .63% DSS 1,449 750 2,199 6.71% EDD 7,747 4,009 11,756 35.88% WIOA 11,697 6,908 18,605 56.78% 21,030 11,738 32,768 100% DSS EDD DOR WIOA Total All Partners Manchester Proposed PY 19-20 Allocation Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount 6.71%35.88%0.63%56.78%100.00% Based on Square Footage 2,199 11,756 208 18,605 32,768 Communication 31,500 2,114 11,301 200 17,885 31,500 Maintenance 47,540 3,190 17,056 302 26,992 47,540 Security Guard 38,000 2,550 13,633 241 21,576 38,000 Rent 440,400 29,554 158,000 2,796 250,050 440,400 Utilities 85,000 5,704 30,495 540 48,261 85,000 Proposed Total $642,440 43,113 230,485 4,078 364,764 $642,440 Totals may be off $1 due to rounding. Attachment C - Applicable Career Services Consolidated Budget - Twelve (12) Months Amounts are Estimates and Services provided are checked. WP UI Vets TAA Basic Career Services $726,105 $2,059,746 $66,597 $246,447 $4,319 $2,948,202 $253,984 $70,342 $506,027 $623,935 $7,834 Program Eligibility √√√√√√√√√√ Outreach, Intake, Orient √√√√√√√√√√√ Initial Assess.√√√√√√√√√ Labor Exch/Job Search √√√√√√√√ Referrals to Partners √√√√√√√√√ Labor Market Information √√√√√√√ Perf/Cost Info √√ Supportive Services Info √√√√√√√√ UI Info/Assist.√√√ Fin Aid Info √√√√ WIOA DOR SER DSS Proteus MSFW CIMC EDD FEOC WHAECSCCCDSSAI SCAEC Job Corps Page 1 of 2 Attachment C - Applicable Career Services Consolidated Budget - Twelve (12) Months Amounts are Estimates and Services provided are checked. WP UI VETS TAA Individual Career Services $1,531,192 $363,485 $43,491 $762 $253,984 $55,095 $144,580 $265,858 Comp. Assess.√√√√√√ IEP √√√√√√√ Career Planning /Counseling √√√√√√ Short-Term Pre-voc. Assistance √√√ Out of Area Job Search √√√ Fin. Lit.√√√√ IET/ELA √ Workforce Prep √√√√√√√ WP UI Vets TAA Other Services $393,245 $358,620 $253,984 $39,044 $72,290 Training Assistance √√√ CalJOBS √ LMI Fixed Cost √ Barrier Assesment √ EDD WIOA FEOC WHAECDORCIMC CIMC FEOC SCCCD SSAI SER DSS Proteus MSFW WHAECWIOADORSCCCDSSAISER EDD DSS Proteus MSFW SCAEC SCAEC Job Corps Job Corps Page 2 of 2 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1629 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-D REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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 Haaker Equipment Company Inc., of La Verne, California, for the purchase of one Vactor Jetter truck in the amount of $315,236 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a purchase contract to Haaker Equipment Company Inc., of La Verne, California, for the purchase of one Vactor Jetter truck in the amount of $315,236. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities,Wastewater Management Division seeks to purchase one Jetter truck to perform cleaning and maintenance on the wastewater collection system.The Jetter truck will be purchased as a replacement through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Source Well, formally the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND The Department of Public Utilities,Wastewater Management Division is responsible for the day-to- day operations of the sanitary sewer (collection)system.This includes customer service responses, video inspection,preventative maintenance cleaning,chemical root application,and repair of the wastewater collection system.Currently,there is over 1,500 miles of sewer main that range in size City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1629 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-D from 6 to 84 inches in diameter along with 15 sewer lift stations that service the city. Currently,the Wastewater Management Division operates a Vactor Jetter truck outfitted with a high pressure water jet nozzle designed to drill through and clear obstructions that clog wastewater collection pipes.This jetting system has been utilized by the Wastewater Collection maintenance team for more than 15 years and has proven to be the best solution available to keep the Wastewater Collection system flowing efficiently.The new Vactor Jetter truck will utilize the same proven system, mounted on a new truck compliant with the latest clean emissions standards. The current Jetter truck is on a 10-year or 5,000 hour replacement schedule,which has been established by the Municipal Fleet Division as the optimum replacement time.Currently,the unit identified for replacement is 11 years old and has 10,523 operational hours. The Jetter truck will be purchased through the cooperative procurement process administered by Source Well,formerly NJPA.Sourcewell utilizes a rigorous request for proposal (RFP),which includes development of solicitation document and proposal evaluation criteria,public advertisement, a five-to six-week response period and a pre-proposal conference.Upon closing of the response period,a committee evaluates proposals to determine the responsiveness against the pre- determined RFP evaluation criteria.Multi-year contracts are awarded based on the evaluation scores. The purchase price for this unit is $315,236.This price includes the Source Well,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 because the City is purchasing this item using another government entity's contract. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase this item.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the Jetter truck has been included in the FY19 adopted budget under the operations of the Department of Public Utilities,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 and Award Affidavit of Advertisement Comment & Review City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1629 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-D Evaluation Federal Signal Contract RFP City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1 Carol Jackson From:Miranda Andersen <miranda@aamdc.com> Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:11 PM To:Carol Jackson Subject:Re: RFP for Advertisement Thank you Carol, We would like to post this RFP. Please forward it to me when it is available. Much thanks, Miranda Andersen Sent from my iPhone On Nov 16, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Carol Jackson <Carol.Jackson@njpacoop.org> wrote: Good Morning! Please let me know if you would like to post this RFP and I will forward additional information. 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO‐EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Thank you! <image001.png> Carol Jackson Procurement Analyst III phone 218-894-5481 email carol.jackson@njpacoop.org website NJPAcoop.org Bid Information /∠Home ∠List of Bids Bid Information Bid Information for 122017 Bid Number 122017 Bid Name Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies Published By National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type Open to all suppliers Contract Type RFP Procurement Name Procurement Published Date 11/16/2017 Closing Date 12/20/2017 04:30:00 PM CT Country & Province/State Ontario, Canada Region & City , Bid Type Goods Group Estimated Contract Amount $99,999,999.00 Remind Notice Date Not Applicable Publish Option NIGP Code Value Range Not Applicable Client Departments Accept questions Not Applicable Tender Area NDA Requirement Not Applicable NOI Date Not Applicable Site Meetings Not Applicable Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies 122017 Closing Date: 12/20/2017 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. No Bid Document Selected Unclassified Categories Miscellaneous items Miscellaneous Bids located within this category are not classified in the existing Biddingo categories. Roads/ Sewer/ Watermain Roads/Sewer/Watermain Projects-Excavating, Ditch, Culvert, Streetscaping, Traffic Lights, Road Painting, Visors, Polycarb, Asphalt Overlay, Fire Hydrant, Guard Rails, Drainage Systems Pending Biddingo Approval Pending Biddingo Approval Requirements Bid Advertisement Bid Document Selected Categories (Biddingo Category) Attached Bid Documents Page 1 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 11/16/2017https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/377075/1285722 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 2017 R2CoW. All Rights Reserved. Powered by [ SUPPORT (Download Training Manuals) ] Invited Bidders Page 2 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 11/16/2017https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/377075/1285722 National Joint Powers Alliance :: -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies https://www.njpacoop.org/index.php?cID=6174[11/16/2017 10:06:01 AM] Procurement Process About Us Affiliations & Relationships Become a Member Member Resources Get to Know NJPA - Indefinite Quantity Construction Contracting Systems and related services - 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 - Multi-Function Copiers, Printers, and Equipment - Express Courier, Overnight, Ground Delivery Logistics Services - Elevators, Escalators, and Moving Walks with Related Equipment, Services, Accessories and Supplies - Forklifts, Lift Trucks, and Related Material Handling Equipment, Attachments, Accessories, and Services - Pest Management with Related Current & Pending Solicitations Become a Vendor Cooperative Purchasing Vendor Name: * Vendor Address: * Vendor City: * Vendor State: * Vendor Zip Code: * Contact Name: * Contact email: * Vendor Phone Number: -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and StreetSweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories andSupplies 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Pre-Proposal Conference: December 5, 2017 at 10:00 am CT Sealed proposals due: December 20, 2017 at 4:30 pm CT Proposals will be publicly opened: December 21, 2017 at 8:30 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. Home > Cooperative Purchasing >Become a Vendor >Current & Pending Solicitations > -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies Home 888.894.1930 Contact Us About Us Cooperative Purchasing Statewide/Regional Solutions Organizational Notice Basic Information Details Dates Contact Information Bid Submission Process Estimated Contract Value (CAD)$999,999,999.00 (Not shown to suppliers) Reference Number 0000071479 Issuing Organization National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type RFP - Request for Proposal Solicitation Number 122017 Title Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Equipment with Related Accessories Source ID PP.CO.USA.868485.C88455 Region All of Canada, All of Canada Purchase Type Term: 2018/03/22 12:00:00 AM CDT - 2021/03/16 12:00:00 AM CDT 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Proposals will be received until December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Publication 2017/11/16 10:46:02 AM CST Question Acceptance Deadline 2017/12/13 04:30:00 PM CST Questions are submitted online No Bid Intent Not Available Closing Date 2017/12/20 04:30:00 PM CST Procurement Department 218-894-1930 rfp@njpacoop.org 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 Yes 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 1 of 4 Documents Documents Document Size Uploaded Date Language How to obtain Sewer RFP.DOCX [docx] 12 Kb 2017/11/16 10:44:39 AM CST English 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 2 of 4 Categories Selected Categories MERX Categories (5) G Goods Goods G28 Special Purpose Vehicles Special Purpose Vehicles G22 Miscellaneous Goods Miscellaneous Goods G18 Industrial Equipment Industrial Equipment G19 Machinery and Tools Machinery and Tools U Other Other U Undefined Undefined 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST 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. 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 4 of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n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`` ` i &NQJSF4UBUF%FWFMPQNFOUIUUQXXXFTEOZHPW RI Chat Help Logout [Switch to Vendor View] Home New Bid Closed Bids My Stuff Tools Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and supplies Bid Type RFP Bid Number 122017 Title Sewer Vacuum, Hydro- Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and supplies Start Date Nov 16, 2017 1:54:33 PM CST End Date Dec 20, 2017 4:30:00 PM CST Agency NJPA Bid Contact Chris Robinson (218) 895-4168 rfp@njpacoop.org 202 12th Street NE P.O. Box 219 Staples, MN 56479-0219 Access Reports View reports on who has been notified of the bid or accessed it. [Notification report] [Access report] Questions 0 Questions 0 Unanswered [View/Ask Questions] Edit Bid [Create Addendum] 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Delivery Information Chris Robinson, NJPA 202 12th St NE, PO Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 Pre-Bid Conference Date Dec 5, 2017 10:00:00 AM CST Location Page 1 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Swee... 11/16/2017http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=87674 Notes Pre-Proposal information will be sent two days prior. Documents No Documents for this bid Customer Support: agencysupport@publicpurchase.com | Copyright 1999-2017 © | The Public Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Swee... 11/16/2017http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=87674 PUBLIC NOTICES 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. usat-usatnonbus-100074451nationaljointpowersal-display-public-notice-12388.indd 111/13/17 2:39 PM 1 National Joint Powers Alliance® REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL for the procurement of SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES RFP Opening DECEMBER 21, 2017 8:30 a.m. Central Time At the offices of the National Joint Powers Alliance® 202 12th Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479 RFP #122017 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. RFP Timeline November 16, 2017 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 and also RFP Appendix B), 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. December 5, 2017 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. December 13, 2017 Deadline for RFP questions. December 20, 2017 4:30 p.m. CT Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be returned unopened. December 21, 2017 8:30 a.m. CT Public Opening of Proposals. Direct questions regarding this RFP to: Chris Robinson at chris.robinson@njpacoop.org or (218) 895-4168. 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 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. 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 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) 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 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 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/. 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. 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 NJPA: 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 Chief Procurement Officer. NJPA’s primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract that offer opportunities for NJPA 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 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 in the best interests of NJPA and the NJPA Members and preferred by NJPA to provide the widest array of solutions to meet the member agency’s needs. 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: In addition to SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES, this solicitation should be read to include, but not to be limited to: 3.17.1 Equipment, accessories and supplies for the purpose of cleaning sewer lines, catch basins and storm sewers, such as sewer vacuums, jetters, rodders, and self-propelled or chassis-mounted hydro-excavators; and, 7 3.17.2 Equipment, accessories and supplies for the purpose of street or parking lot sweeping, such as mechanical, vacuum, air, and high efficiency sweepers. 3.17.3 NJPA reserves the right to limit the scope of this solicitation for NJPA and current and potential NJPA member agencies. 3.17.3.1 Respondent’s proposal may include no more than an incidental offering of trailer or skid-mounted hydro-excavation equipment. Respondent’s primary offerings must be the equipment identified in sub-sections 3.17.1 or 3.17.2 above. 3.17.3.2 This solicitation is not intended to include pumps. Such items in a proposal will be considered out of scope. 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: 3.23.3 Multiple solutions to the needs of NJPA and NJPA Members are possible. Examples could include: 3.23.3.1 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. 3.23.3.2 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 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 3.23.3.3 Good, Better, Best: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may offer the choice “of good, better, best” multiple-grade solutions to meet NJPA 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 NJPA Members’ needs. 3.23.4 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. 3.24 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES 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. 9 3.25 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. 3.25.1 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. 3.26 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. 3.27 [This section is intentionally blank.] 3.28 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. 3.28.1 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. 3.29 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 3.30 Industry Standards: Except as contained herein, the specifications or solutions for this RFP shall be those accepted guidelines set forth by the SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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 NJPA Member agencies; and 10 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 NJPA 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 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. 3.35 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 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. 3.37 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. 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 NJPA’s 11 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. 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. 12 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 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES to Chris Robinson at NJPA 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or to RFP@njpacoop.org. You may also call Chris Robinson at (218) 895-4168. 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 t he 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 13 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 Procurement 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 4.23 Sealed and properly identified responses for this RFP entitled SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES will be received by Chris Robinson, Procurement 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES 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. At the time of the public opening, the NJPA Director of Procurement 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. 14 4 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 $150 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 NJPA. 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. 15 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. 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 16 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. 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. 17 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. 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. 18 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. 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; 19 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 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 20 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 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. 21 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. 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. 22 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 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 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. 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 23 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 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 typical administrative fee under this Contract is two percent (2%). 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 24 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. 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. 7 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 25 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 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 7.7 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 7.8 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. 7.8.1 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors must provide a quarterly Contract sales report regardless of the amount of sales. D. AUDITS 7.9 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 7.10 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 26 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: 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].” F. TRADE-INS 7.12 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 7.13 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 7.14 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. 7.14.1 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 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; 7.14.4 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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 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 27 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 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. 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.] 28 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 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, 29 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.] 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.] 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 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. 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 NJPA or an NJPA 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 NJPA to take action or to assert any right hereunder does not constitute a waiver of such right. 30 L. 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 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. M. 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. 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 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. 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 31 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, 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. 2) Provide a brief history of your company, including your company’s core values, business philosophy, and longevity in the SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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. 33 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 NJPA 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 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. 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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. 34 25) 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? 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 NJPA 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) accreditations that your company or hub partners have obtained. 31) 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? 32) 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 #122017 FORM D Formal Offering of Proposal (To be completed only by the Proposer) SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES In compliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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 & Bradstreet Number:____________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Authorized Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ (Name printed or typed) 38 Form E Contract Acceptance and Award (To be completed only by NJPA) NJPA #122017 ______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 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 #122017 NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ ________________________________________ NJPA Board Member (Name printed or typed) Executed this ______ day of __________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number #122017 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 #122017 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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_________________________________ 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 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 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) 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 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 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 inspection. Identify any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. 14) If delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA Member, describe in detail the complete shipping and delivery program. 15) Specifically describe those 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 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. 18) 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 19) Describe the top three market differentiators of your products/services relative to the industry. 20) Identify how your products, services and supplies address the scope of this RFP. Signature: ___________________________________________________________Date: _______________________ 44 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 45 11 NJPA 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 wr iting by completing sections 2, 3, and 4 of this NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form and signed by an authorized Vendor representative in section 5. All changes are subject to review by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager and to approval by NJPA’s Chief Procurement Officer. Submit request through email to your assigned NJPA Contract Administrator. NJPA will determine whether the request is 1) within the scope of the original RFP, and 2) in the best interests of NJPA and NJPA 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 NJPA product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA 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: NJPA 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 NJPA CONTRACT NUMBER: ☐ Price Decrease 46 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 NJPA contract pricing. 47 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, NJPA Director of Cooperative Contracts and Procurement/CPO Date 48 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 Appendix B - Political Subdivision List for HI, ID, OR, SC, UT, WA Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington County County County County County County Hawaii County Ada County Baker County Abbeville County Beaver County Adams County Kauai County Adams County Benton County Aiken County Box Elder County Asotin County Maui County Bannock County Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Allendale County Cache County Benton County Municipality Bear Lake County Clackamas County Anderson County Carbon County Chelan County City and County of Honolulu Benewah County Clackamas County Service District No. 1 Bamberg County Daggett County Clallam County Higher Education Bingham County Clatsop County Barnwell County Davis County Clark County Hawaii Community College Blaine County Columbia County Beaufort County Duchesne County Columbia County Honolulu Community College Boise County Coos County Berkeley County Duchesne County Special Service District No. 2 Cowlitz County University of Hawaii Bonner County Crook County Calhoun County Emery County Douglas County University of Hawaii Research Corporation Bonneville County Curry County Catawba Regional Council of Governments Five County Association of Governments Ferry County Windward Community College Boundary County Deschutes County Central Midlands Council of Governments Garfield County Franklin County Education (K-12)Butte County Douglas County Charleston County Grand County Garfield County Hanalani Schools Camas County Gilliam County Cherokee County Iron County Grant County Kamehameha Schools Canyon County Grant County Chester County Juab County Grays Harbor County Special District Caribou County Harney County Chesterfield County Kane County Island County Hawaii Community Development Authority Cassia County Hood River County Clarendon County Millard County Jefferson County Hawaii Public Housing Authority Clark County Jackson County Colleton County Morgan County King County Hawaii Tourism Authority Clearwater County Jefferson County Darlington County Piute County King County Directors' Association Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Custer County Josephine County Dillon County Rich County Kitsap County Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority Elmore County Klamath County Dorchester County Salt Lake County Kittitas County State Franklin County Lake County Edgefield County San Juan County Klickitat County Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services Fremont County Lane Council of Governments Fairfield County Sanpete County Lewis County Hawaii Department of Finance and Administration Gem County Lane County Florence County Sevier County Lincoln County Hawaii Department of Health Gooding County Lincoln County Georgetown County Summit County Mason County Hawaii Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund Idaho County Linn County Greenville County Tooele County Okanogan County Hawaii Health Systems Corporation Jefferson County Malheur County Greenwood County Uintah County Pacific County State Of Hawaii Jerome County Marion County Hampton County Utah County Pend Oreille County Kootenai County Marion County Housing Authority Horry County Wasatch County Pierce County Latah County Morrow County Jasper County Washington County San Juan County Lemhi County Multnomah County Kershaw County Wayne County Skagit County Lewis County Polk County Lancaster County Weber County Skamania County Lincoln County Sherman County Laurens County Municipality Snohomish County Madison County Tillamook County Lee County Centerfield City Spokane County Minidoka County Umatilla County Lexington County City of Alpine City Stevens County Nez Perce County Union County Lower Savannah Council of Governments City of American Fork Thurston County Oneida County Wallowa County Marion County City of Aurora Thurston Regional Planning Council Owyhee County Wasco County Marlboro County City of Ballard Wahkiakum County Payette County Washington County McCormick County City of Beaver Walla Walla County Power County Wheeler County Newberry County City of Blanding Whatcom County Shoshone County Yamhill County Oconee County City of Bluffdale Whitman County Teton County Municipality Orangeburg County City of Bountiful Yakima County Twin Falls County City of Adair Village Pickens County City of Brigham Yakima County Public Services Valley County City of Adrian Richland County City of Castle Dale Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Washington County City of Albany Saluda County City of Cedar City Municipality Municipality City of Amity Spartanburg County City of Cedar Hills City of Aberdeen City of Aberdeen City of Arlington Sumter County City of Centerville City of Airway Heights City of Albion City of Ashland Union County City of Clearfield City of Algona City of American Falls City of Astoria Williamsburg County City of Clinton City of Anacortes City of Ammon City of Athena York County City of Coalville City of Arlington City of Arco City of Aumsville Municipality City of Colorado City City of Asotin City of Arimo City of Aurora City of Abbeville City of Corinne City City of Auburn City of Ashton City of Baker City City of Aiken City of Cottonwood Heights City of Bainbridge Island City of Athol City of Bandon City of Anderson City of Delta City of Battle Ground City of Atomic City City of Banks City of Barnwell City of Draper City of Bellevue City of Bancroft City of Bay City City of Beaufort City of Duchesne City of Bellingham City of Bellevue City of Beaverton City of Belton City of East Carbon City of Benton City City of Blackfoot City of Bend City of Bennettsville City of Elk Ridge City of Bingen City of Bliss City of Boardman City of Bishopville City of Elmo City of Black Diamond City of Bloomington City of Brookings City of Camden City of Enoch City of Blaine City of Boise City of Brownsville City of Cayce City of Enterprise City of Bonney Lake City of Bonners Ferry City of Burns City of Charleston City of Ephraim City of Bothell City of Bovill City of Canby City of Chesnee City of Escalante City of Bremerton City of Buhl City of Cannon Beach City of Chester City of Eureka City of Brewster City of Burley City of Canyonville City of Clemson City of Fairview City of Bridgeport City of Caldwell City of Carlton City of Clinton City of Farmington City of Brier City of Cambridge City of Cascade Locks City of Columbia City of Farr West City of Buckley City of Carey City of Cave Junction City of Conway City of Ferron City of Burien City of Cascade City of Central Point City of Darlington City of Fillmore City of Burlington City of Castleford City of Chiloquin City of Denmark City of Fountain Green City of Camas City of Challis City of Clatskanie City of Dillon City of Fruit Heights City of Carnation City of Chubbuck City of Coburg City of Easley City of Garland City of Cashmere City of Clayton City of Columbia City City of Florence City of Grantsville City of Castle Rock City of Clifton City of Condon City of Folly Beach City of Green River City of Centralia City of Coeur d'Alene City of Coos Bay City of Forest Acres City of Gunnison City of Chehalis City of Council City of Coquille City of Fountain Inn City of Harrisville City of Chelan City of Craigmont City of Cornelius City of Gaffney City of Heber City City of Cheney City of Crouch City of Corvallis City of Georgetown City of Helper City City of Chewelah City of Culdesac City of Cottage Grove City of Goose Creek City of Herriman City of Clarkston City of Dalton Gardens City of Cove City of Greenville City of Highland City of Cle Elum City of Dayton City of Creswell City of Greenwood City of Hildale City of Clyde Hill City of Deary City of Culver City of Greer City of Holladay City of Colfax City of Dietrich City of Dallas City of Hanahan City of Honeyville City of College Place City of Donnelly City of Damascus City of Hardeeville City of Hooper City of Colville Appendix B Page 1 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington City of Dover City of Dayton City of Hartsville City of Huntington City of Connell City of Downey City of Dayville City of Inman City of Hurricane City of Cosmopolis City of Driggs City of Depoe Bay City of Isle of Palms City of Hyde Park City of Covington City of Dubois City of Detroit City of Johnsonville City of Hyrum City of Davenport City of Eagle City of Donald City of Lake City City of Ivins City of Dayton City of Eden City of Drain City of Lancaster City of Kamas City of Deer Park City of Elk River City of Dundee City of Landrum City of Kanab City of Des Moines City of Emmett City of Dunes City City of Laurens City of Kaysville City of DuPont City of Fairfield City of Durham City of Liberty City of La Verkin City of Duvall City of Fernan Lake Village City of Eagle Point City of Loris City of Layton City of East Wenatchee City of Filer City of Echo City of Manning City of Lehi City of Edgewood City of Firth City of Elgin City of Marion City of Lewiston City of Edmonds City of Franklin City of Enterprise City of Mauldin City of Lindon City of Electric City City of Fruitland City of Estacada City of Mullins City of Logan City of Ellensburg City of Garden City City of Eugene City of Myrtle Beach City of Manti City of Elma City of Genesee City of Fairview City of New Ellenton City of Mapleton City of Entiat City of Georgetown City of Falls City City of Newberry City of Marriott-Slaterville City of Enumclaw City of Glenns Ferry City of Florence City of North Augusta City of Mendon City of Ephrata City of Gooding City of Forest Grove City of North Charleston City of Midvale City of Everett City of Grace City of Fossil City of North Myrtle Beach City of Midway City of Everson City of Grand View City of Garibaldi City of Orangeburg City of Milford City of Federal Way City of Grangeville City of Gaston City of Pickens City of Millville City of Ferndale City of Greenleaf City of Gates City of Rock Hill City of Moab City of Fife City of Hagerman City of Gearhart City of Seneca City of Mona City of Fircrest City of Hailey City of Gervais City of Simpsonville City of Monroe City of Forks City of Hansen City of Gladstone City of Spartanburg City of Monticello City of George City of Harrison City of Glendale City of Sumter City of Morgan City of Gig Harbor City of Hayden City of Gold Beach City of Tega Cay City of Moroni City of Gold Bar City of Hazelton City of Gold Hill City of Travelers Rest City of Mt. Pleasant City City of Goldendale City of Heyburn City of Grants Pass City of Union City of Murray City of Grand Coulee City of Hollister City of Greenhorn City of Walhalla City of Myton City of Grandview City of Homedale City of Gresham City of Walterboro City of Naples City of Granger City of Hope City of Haines City of Wellford City of Nephi City of Granite Falls City of Horseshoe Bend City of Halfway City of West Columbia City of Nibley City of Harrington City of Huetter City of Halsey City of Westminster City of North Logan City of Hoquiam City of Idaho City City of Happy Valley City of Woodruff City of North Ogden City of Ilwaco City of Idaho Falls City of Harrisburg City of York City of North Salt Lake City of Issaquah City of Inkom City of Helix Town of Allendale City of Oakley City of Kahlotus City of Island Park City of Heppner Town of Andrews City of Ogden City of Kalama City of Jerome City of Hermiston Town of Atlantic Beach City of Orangeville City of Kelso City of Juliaetta City of Hillsboro Town of Awendaw City of Orem City of Kenmore City of Kamiah City of Hines Town of Aynor City of Panguitch City of Kennewick City of Kellogg City of Hood River Town of Batesburg-Leesville City of Park City City of Kent City of Kendrick City of Hubbard Town of Bethune City of Parowan City of Kettle Falls City of Ketchum City of Huntington Town of Blacksburg City of Payson City of Kirkland City of Kimberly City of Idanha Town of Blackville City of Perry City of Kittitas City of Kooskia City of Imbler Town of Blenheim City of Plain City City of La Center City of Kuna City of Independence Town of Bluffton City of Pleasant Grove City of Lacey City of Lapwai City of Irrigon Town of Blythewood City of Pleasant View City of Lake Forest Park City of Lava Hot Springs City of Island City Town of Bowman City of Price City of Lake Stevens City of Lewiston City of Jacksonville Town of Branchville City of Providence City of Lakewood City of Mackay City of Jefferson Town of Briarcliffe Acres City of Provo City of Langley City of Malad City City of John Day Town of Brunson City of Richfield City of Leavenworth City of Marsing City of Johnson City Town of Calhoun Falls City of Richmond City of Liberty Lake City of McCall City of Joseph Town of Cameron City of River Heights City of Long Beach City of McCammon City of Junction City Town of Campobello City of Riverdale City of Longview City of Melba City of Keizer Town of Central City of Riverton City of Lynden City of Menan City of King City Town of Chapin City of Roosevelt City of Lynnwood City of Meridian City of Klamath Falls Town of Cheraw City of Roy City of Mabton City of Middleton City of La Grande Town of Chesterfield City of Salem City of Maple Valley City of Midvale City of La Pine Town of Clio City of Salina City of Marysville City of Moscow City of Lafayette Town of Clover City of Salt Lake City City of Mattawa City of Mountain Home City of Lake Oswego Town of Cottageville City of Sandy City of McCleary City of Mullan City of Lakeside Town of Coward City of Santa Clara City of Medical Lake City of Murtaugh City of Lebanon Town of Cowpens City of Santaquin City of Medina City of Nampa City of Lincoln City Town of Denmark City of Saratoga Springs City of Mercer Island City of New Meadows City of Lonerock Town of Donalds City of Smithfield City City of Mesa City of New Plymouth City of Lostine Town of Due West City of South Jordan City of Mill Creek City of Newdale City of Lowell Town of Duncan City of South Ogden City of Milton City of Nezperce City of Lyons Town of Eastover City of South Salt Lake City City of Monroe City of Notus City of Madras Town of Edgefield City of South Weber City of Montesano City of Orofino City of Malin Town of Edisto Beach City of Spanish Fork City of Morton City of Osburn City of Manzanita Town of Ehrhardt City of Spring City City of Moses Lake City of Parker City of Maupin Town of Elgin City of Springville City of Mossyrock City of Parma City of McMinnville Town of Elloree City of St. George City of Mountlake Terrace City of Paul City of Medford Town of Estill City of Sunnyside City of Moxee City of Payette City of Metolius Town of Eutawville City of Sunset City of Mt. Vernon City of Pierce City of Mill City Town of Fairfax City of Syracuse City of Mukilteo City of Pinehurst City of Millersburg Town of Ft. Mill City of Taylorsville City of Napavine City of Plummer City of Milton-Freewater Town of Furman City of Tooele City of Newcastle City of Pocatello City of Milwaukie Town of Gaston City of Toquerville City of Newport City of Ponderay City of Molalla Town of Gifford City of Tremonton City of Nooksack City of Post Falls City of Monmouth Town of Gilbert City of Tropic City of Normandy Park City of Potlatch City of Monroe Town of Govan City of Uintah City of North Bend City of Preston City of Monument Town of Gray Court City of Vernal City of North Bonneville City of Priest River City of Moro Town of Great Falls City of Washington City of Oak Harbor City of Rathdrum City of Mosier Town of Greeleyville City of Washington Terrace City of Oakville City of Reubens City of Mt. Angel Town of Hampton City of Wellington City of Ocean Shores City of Rexburg City of Mt. Vernon Town of Harleyville City of Wellsville City of Okanogan City of Richfield City of Myrtle Creek Town of Heath Springs City of Wendover City of Olympia City of Rigby City of Myrtle Point Town of Hemingway City of West Bountiful City of Omak City of Riggins City of Nehalem Town of Hilda City of West Haven City City of Oroville City of Ririe City of Newberg Town of Hilton Head Island City of West Jordan City of Orting City of Roberts City of Newport Town of Hodges City of West Point City of Othello Appendix B Page 2 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington City of Rockland City of North Bend Town of Holly Hill City of West Valley City City of Pacific City of Rupert City of North Plains Town of Hollywood City of Willard City of Palouse City of Salmon City of North Powder Town of Honea Path City of Woodland Hills City of Pasco City of Sandpoint City of Nyssa Town of Irmo City of Woods Cross City of Pateros City of Shelley City of Oakland Town of Iva Town of Alta City of Pomeroy City of Shoshone City of Oakridge Town of Jackson Town of Altamont City of Port Angeles City of Smelterville City of Ontario Town of James Island Town of Alton City of Port Orchard City of Soda Springs City of Oregon City Town of Jamestown Town of Amalga City of Port Townsend City of Spirit Lake City of Paisley Town of Jefferson Town of Annabella City of Poulsbo City of St. Anthony City of Pendleton Town of Jenkinsville Town of Antimony City of Prosser City of St. Charles City of Philomath Town of Johnston Town of Apple Valley City of Pullman City of Stanley City of Phoenix Town of Jonesville Town of Ballard City of Puyallup City of Star City of Pilot Rock Town of Kershaw Town of Bear River City City of Quincy City of Stites City of Port Orford Town of Kiawah Island Town of Bicknell City of Rainier City of Sugar City City of Portland Town of Kingstree Town of Big Water City of Raymond City of Sun Valley City of Powers Town of Lake View Town of Boulder City of Redmond City of Tensed City of Prairie City Town of Lamar South Carolina Town of Brian Head City of Renton City of Tetonia City of Prineville Town of Lane Town of Bryce Canyon City City of Republic City of Troy City of Rainier Town of Latta Town of Cannonville City of Richland City of Twin Falls City of Redmond Town of Lexington Town of Castle Valley City of Ridgefield City of Ucon City of Reedsport Town of Lincolnville Town of Cedar Fort City of Ritzville City of Victor City of Richland Town of Little Mountain Town of Centerfield City of Rock Island City of Wallace City of Riddle Town of Lockhart Town of Central Valley City of Roslyn City of Weippe City of Rockaway Beach Town of Lyman Town of Circleville City of Roy City of Weiser City of Rogue River Town of Lynchburg Town of Clarkston City of Royal City City of Wendell City of Roseburg Town of Mayesville Town of Clawson City of Sammamish City of Weston City of Rufus Town of McBee Town of Cleveland City of SeaTac City of White Bird City of Salem Town of McClellanville Town of Cornish City of Seattle City of Wilder City of Sandy Town of McColl Town of Daniel City of Sedro-Woolley City of Winchester City of Scappoose Town of McCormick Town of Deweyville City of Selah Higher Education City of Scio Town of Meggett Town of Eagle Mountain City of Sequim Boise State University City of Scotts Mills Town of Moncks Corner Town of Elmo City of Shelton College of Southern Idaho City of Seaside Town of Mt. Pleasant Town of Elsinore City of Shoreline College of Western Idaho City of Seneca Town of Neeses Town of Elwood City of Snohomish Eastern Idaho Technical College City of Shady Cove Town of New Ellenton Town of Emery City of Snoqualmie Idaho Division of Professional Technical Education City of Sheridan Town of Nichols Town of Fairfield City of Soap Lake Idaho State University City of Sherwood Town of Ninety Six Town of Francis City of South Bend Lewis-Clark State College City of Siletz Town of Norris Town of Garden City City of Spokane North Idaho College City of Silverton Town of North Town of Genola City of Spokane Valley University of Idaho City of Sisters Town of Norway Town of Glendale City of Sprague Education (K-12)City of Sodaville Town of Olanta Town of Glenwood City of Stanwood Aberdeen School District No. 58 City of Spray Town of Pacolet Town of Goshen City of Stevenson Arbon Elementary School District No. 383 City of Springfield Town of Pageland Town of Hanksville City of Sultan Avery School District City of St. Helens Town of Pamplico Town of Hatch City of Sumas Basin School District No. 72 City of St. Paul Town of Patrick Town of Henefer City of Sumner Bear Lake County School District No. 33 City of Stanfield Town of Pawleys Island Town of Henrieville City of Sunnyside Bear Lake School District No. 33 City of Stayton Town of Pelion Town of Hideout City of Tacoma Blackfoot School District No. 55 City of Sublimity Town of Pelzer Town of Hinckley City of Tekoa Blaine County School District No. 61 City of Sumpter Town of Pendleton Town of Holden City of Tenino Bliss Joint School District No. 234 City of Sutherlin Town of Perry Town of Howell City of Tieton Bonneville Joint School District No. 93 City of Sweet Home Town of Port Royal Town of Huntsville City of Toledo Boundary County School District No. 101 City of Talent Town of Prosperity Town of Joseph City of Tonasket Bruneau-Grand View Joint School District City of Tangent Town of Ravenel Town of Junction City of Toppenish Buhl Joint School District No. 412 City of The Dalles Town of Reidville Town of Kanarraville City of Tukwila Butte County Joint School District No. 111 City of Tigard Town of Ridge Spring Town of Kanosh City of Tumwater Caldwell School District No. 132 City of Tillamook Town of Ridgeland Town of Kingston City of Union Gap Camas County School District No. 121 City of Toledo Town of Ridgeville Town of Koosharem City of University Place Cambridge School District City of Troutdale Town of Ridgeway Town of Leeds City of Vader Cascade School District No. 422 City of Tualatin Town of Saint Matthews Town of Levan City of Vancouver Cassia County Joint School District No. 151 City of Turner Town of Saint Stephen Town of Loa City of Waitsburg Castleford Joint School District No. 417 City of Ukiah Town of Salem Town of Manila City of Walla Walla Challis Joint School District No. 181 City of Umatilla Town of Salley Town of Mantua City of Wapato Clark County School District No. 161 City of Union Town of Saluda Town of Marysvale City of Warden Coeur d'Alene School District No. 271 City of Unity Town of Santee Town of Meadow City of Washougal Cottonwood Joint School District No. 242 City of Vale Town of Scranton Town of Minersville City of Wenatchee Council School District No. 13 City of Veneta Town of Seabrook Island Town of New Harmony City of West Richland Culdesac Joint School District No. 342 City of Vernonia Town of Sellers Town of Newton City of Westport Dietrich School District No. 314 City of Waldport Town of Sharon Town of Ophir City of White Salmon Emmett Independent School District No. 221 City of Wallowa Town of Six Mile Town of Orderville City of Winlock Filer School District No. 413 City of Warrenton Town of Snelling Town of Paradise City of Woodinville Firth School District No. 59 City of Wasco Town of Society Hill Town of Paragonah City of Woodland Fremont County School District No. 215 City of West Linn Town of South Congaree Town of Portage Utah City of Yakima/Yakima County Fruitland School District No. 373 City of Westfir Town of Springdale Town of Randolph City of Yelm Garden Valley School District City of Weston Town of St. George Town of Redmond City of Zillah Genesee Joint School District No. 282 City of Wheeler Town of St. Matthews Town of Rockville Consolidated Borough of Quil Ceda Village Glenns Ferry Joint School District No. 192 City of Willamina Town of Stuckey Town of Rocky Ridge Grays Harbor Council of Governments Gooding Joint School District No. 231 City of Wilsonville Town of Sullivans Island Town of Rush Valley Town of Almira Grace Joint School District No. 148 City of Winston Town of Summerton Town of Scipio Town of Beaux Arts Village Hagerman Joint School District No. 233 City of Wood Village Town of Summerville Town of Scofield Town of Bucoda Hansen School District No. 415 City of Woodburn Town of Summit Town of Sigurd Town of Carbonado Highland Joint School District No. 305 City of Yachats Town of Surfside Beach Town of Springdale Town of Cathlamet Homedale School District No. 370 City of Yamhill Town of Swansea Town of Stockton Town of Clyde Hill Horseshoe Bend School District No. 73 City of Yoncalla Town of Timmonsville Town of Toquerville Town of Colton Idaho Falls School District No. 91 Town of Bonanza Town of Trenton Town of Torrey Town of Conconully Independent School District of Boise City Town of Butte Falls Town of Turbeville Town of Trenton Town of Concrete Jefferson County School District No. 251 Town of Canyon City Town of Ulmer Town of Tropic Town of Coulee City Jerome Joint School District No. 261 Town of Lakeview Town of Varnville Town of Uintah Town of Coulee Dam Joint School District No. 2 Town of Lexington Town of Wagener Town of Vernon Town of Coupeville Kamiah School District No. 304 Higher Education Town of Ward Town of Vineyard Town of Creston Kellogg Joint School District 391 Blue Mountain Community College Town of Ware Shoals Town of Virgin Town of Cusick Kendrick Joint School District No. 283 Central Oregon Community College Town of West Pelzer Town of Wales Town of Darrington Kimberly School District No. 414 Chemeketa Community College Town of West Union Town of Wallsburg Town of Eatonville Kootenai School District No. 274 Clackamas Community College Town of Whitmire Uintah Basin Association of Governments Town of Elmer City Kuna Joint School District No. 3 Clatsop Community College Town of Williamston Higher Education Town of Endicott Appendix B Page 3 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Lake Pend Oreille School District No. 84 Columbia Gorge Community College Town of Williston College of Eastern Utah Town of Fairfield Lakeland School District No. 272 Eastern Oregon University Town of Winnsboro Davis Applied Technology College Town of Farmington Lapwai School District No. 341 Klamath Community College District Town of Yemassee Dixie Applied Technology College Town of Friday Harbor Lewiston Independent School District No. 1 Lane Community College Higher Education Dixie State University Town of Garfield Mackay School District No. 182 Linn-Benton Community College Aiken Technical College Mountainland Applied Technology College Town of Hamilton Madison School District No. 321 Mt. Hood Community College Beaufort Jasper Higher Education Commission Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions Town of Harrah Marsh Valley Joint School District No. 21 Oregon Coast Community College Central Carolina Technical College Salt Lake Community College Town of Hatton Marsing Joint School District No. 363 Oregon Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development Clemson University Snow College Town of Hunts Point McCall-Donnelly Joint School District No. 421 Oregon Health and Science University Coastal Carolina University Southern Utah University Town of Index Meadows Valley School District No. 11 Oregon Institute of Technology College of Charleston Tooele Applied Technology College Town of Ione Melba School District No. 136 Oregon State University Denmark Technical College Uintah Basin Applied Technology College Town of La Conner Middleton School District No. 134 Oregon State University, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Florence-Darlington Technical College University of Utah Town of LaCrosse Midvale School District No. 433 Oregon University System Francis Marion University University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics Town of Lamont Minidoka County School District No. 331 Portland Community College Greenville Technical College Utah State University Town of Latah Moscow School District No. 281 Portland State University Horry-Georgetown Technical College Utah System of Higher Education Town of Lind Mountain Home School District No. 193 Reed College Lander University Utah Valley University Town of Lyman Mountain View School District No. 244 Rogue Community College Medical University of South Carolina Weber State University Town of Malden Mullan School District 392 Southern Oregon University Midlands Technical College Education (K-12)Town of Mansfield Murtaugh Joint School District No. 418 Southern Oregon University Family Housing Northeastern Technical College Alpine School District Town of Marcus Nampa Christian Schools Inc.Southwestern Oregon Community College Orangeburg-Calhoun Technical College Beaver County School District Town of Metaline Nampa School District No. 131 Tillamook Bay Community College Piedmont Technical College Box Elder School District Town of Millwood New Plymouth School District Treasure Valley Community College South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education Cache County School District Town of Naches Nez Perce Joint School District No. 302 Umpqua Community College South Carolina State University Canyons School District Town of Nespelem North Gem School District No. 149 University of Oregon South Carolina Technical College System Carbon School District Town of Northport Notus School District Western Oregon University Spartanburg Community College Centro De La Familia De Utah Head Start Program School District Town of Oakesdale Oneida County School District No. 351 Education (K-12)Technical College of the Lowcountry Daggett School District Town of Odessa Orofino Joint School District No. 171 Adel School District 21 The Citadel Davis School District Town of Pe Ell Parma School District No. 137 Adrian School District Tri-County Technical College Duchesne County School District Town of Prescott Payette School District No. 371 Alsea School District No. 7J Trident Technical College Emery County School District Town of Reardan Plummer-Worley Joint School District No. 44 Amity School District 4J University of South Carolina Freedom Preparatory Academy School District Town of Riverside Pocatello-Chubbuck School District No. 25 Annex School District 29 University of South Carolina, Aiken Garfield County School District Town of Rockford Post Falls School District No. 273 Arlington School District No. 3 University of South Carolina, Upstate Grand County School District Town of Rosalia Potlatch School District No. 285 Arock School District No. 81 Williamsburg Technical College Granite School District Town of Ruston Preston Joint School District No. 201 Ashland School District No. 5 Winthrop University Iron County School District Town of Skykomish Richfield School District No. 316 Ashwood School District York Technical College Jordan School District Town of South Cle Elum Ririe Joint School District No. 252 Astoria School District No. 1C Education (K-12)Juab School District Town of South Prairie Rockland School District No. 382 Athena-Weston School District No. 29RJ Abbeville County School District Kane County School District Town of Spangle Salmon River Joint School District No. 243 Baker School District No. 5J Aiken County Public Schools Logan City School District Town of Springdale Salmon School District No. 291 Bandon School District Allendale County School District Millard School District Town of St. John Shelley 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 Steilacoom Shoshone Joint School District No. 312 Beaverton School District No. 48 Anderson School District No. 1 Mountainland Head Start Program School District Office Town of Twisp Snake River School District Bend-La Pine Public Schools Anderson School District No. 2 Murray City School District Town of Uniontown Soda Springs Joint School District No. 150 Bethel School District No. 52 Anderson School District No. 3 Nebo School District Town of Washtucna South Lemhi School District No. 292 Blachly School District Anderson School District No. 4 North Sanpete County School District Town of Waterville St. Maries Joint School District No. 41 Blachly School District 90 Anderson School District No. 5 North Sanpete School District Town of Waverly Sugar-Salem Joint District No. 322 Brookings Harbor School District Bamberg School District No. 1 North Summit School District Town of Wilbur Swan Valley Elementary School District No. 33 Camas Valley School District Bamberg School District No. 2 Ogden City School District Town of Wilkeson Swan Valley School District No. 92 Canby School District No. 86 Barnwell School District No. 45 Park City School District Town of Wilson Creek Teton County School District No. 401 Cascade School District No. 5 Beaufort County School District Piute County School District Town of Winthrop Three Creek Joint School District No. 416 Centennial School District No. 28J Berkeley County School District Provo City School District Town of Woodway Troy School District No. 287 Central Curry School District No. 1 Blackville-Hilda Public Schools Rich County School District Town of Yacolt Twin Falls School District No. 411 Central Linn School District Calhoun County School District Rich School District Town of Yarrow Point Valley School District No. 262 Central Point School District No. 6 Charleston County School District Rural Utah Child Development Head Start Program School District OfficeHigher Education Vallivue School District No. 139 Central School District No. 13J Cherokee County School District Salt Lake City School District Bates Technical College Vision Charter School District # 463 Clackamas Education Service District Chester County School District San Juan School District Bellevue Community College Wallace School District No. 393 Clatskanie School District No. 6J Chesterfield County School District Sevier School District Bellingham Technical College Weiser School District No. 431 Colton School District No. 53 Clarendon County School District No. 1 South Sanpete School District Big Bend Community College Wendell School District No. 232 Columbia Gorge Education Service District Clarendon County School District No. 2 South Summit School District Cascadia Community College West 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 University West Jefferson School District No. 253 Coos Bay School District No. 9 Clover School District No. 2 Thomas Edison Charter Schools Centralia College West Side School District No. 202 Coquille School District No. 8 Colleton County School District Tintic School District Clark College Whitepine Joint School District No. 288 Corbett School District No. 39 Darlington County School District Tooele County School District Clover Park Technical College Wilder School District No. 133 Corvallis School District No. 509J Delta R-V School District Uintah School District Columbia Basin Community College Special District Cove School District No. 15 Dillon County School District No. 1 Wasatch County School District Community Colleges of Spokane Ada County Emergency Medical Services District Crane Elementary School District Dillon County School District No. 2 Washington County School District Eastern Washington University Ada County Highway District Creswell School District No. 40 Dillon County School District No. 3 Wayne County School District Edmonds Community College Adams County Recreation District Crook County School District Dillon County School District No. 4 Weber School District Everett Community College Ahsahka Water and Sewer District Crow-Applegate-Lorane School District No. 66 Diocese Of Charleston Schools Special District Evergreen State College Albion Highway District Culver School District No. 4 Dorchester School District No. 2 Ash Creek Special Service District Grays Harbor College Alpine 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 College American Falls Free Library District David Douglas School District No. 40 Edgefield County Schools Ballard Water and Sewer Improvement District Highline Community College American Falls Housing Authority Dayton School District No. 8 Fairfield County School District Bear Lake Special Service District Lake Washington Institute of Technology Atlanta Highway District Dayville School District No. 16J Florence County School District No. 1 Bear River Water Conservancy District Lower Columbia College Avery Water and Sewer District Douglas County School District Florence County School District No. 2 Benchland Water District Northwest Indian College Avondale Irrigation District Douglas County School District No. 4 Florence County School District No. 3 Benson Culinary Water Improvement District Olympic College Bayview Water and Sewer District Douglas Education Service District Florence County School District No. 4 Bona Vista Water Improvement District Peninsula College Bear Lake County Library District Dufur School District No. 29 Florence County School District No. 5 Cache Mosquito Abatement District Pierce College Bench Sewer District Eagle Point School District No. 9 Ft. Mill School District No. 4 Cache Valley Transit District Renton Technical College Benewah County Free Library District Echo School District No. 5 Georgetown County School District Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District Seattle Community Colleges District VI Big Canyon Fire District Elgin School District Greenville County School District Carbon County Housing Authority Shoreline Community College Blaine County Housing Authority Elkton School District No. 34 Greenwood School District No. 50 Carbon County Municipal Building Authority Skagit Valley College Blaine County Recreation District Enterprise School District No. 21 Greenwood School District No. 52 Carbon County Recreation Transportation Special Service District South Puget Sound Community College Bliss Fire District Estacada School District No. 108 Hampton County School District No. 2 Carbon Water Conservancy District Tacoma Community College Boise Basin Library District Eugene School District No. 4J Hampton School District No. 1 Castle Valley Special Service District University of Washington Boise City/Ada County Housing Authority Falls City School District Horry County Schools Cedar City Housing Authority Walla Walla Community College Boise-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 Colleges Bonneville 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 Authority Bruneau Valley District Library Fossil School District 21J Kershaw County School District Central Davis County Sewer District Washington State Student Achievement Council Bruneau Water and Sewer District Gaston School District 511 J Lancaster County School District Central Iron County Water Conservancy District Washington State University Buhl Highway District Gervais School District Laurens County School District No. 55 Central Utah Water Conservancy District Washington State University, Vancouver Buhl Rural Fire Protection District Gladstone School District Laurens County School District No. 56 Central Weber Sewer Improvement District Wenatchee Valley College Burley Highway District Glendale School District No. 77 Lee County School District Charleston Water Conservancy District Western Washington University Caldwell Housing Authority Glide School District Legacy Charter Schools Copperton Improvement District Whatcom Community College Canyon Highway District No. 4 Grant County Education Service District Lexington County School District No. 1 Cottonwood Improvement District Yakima Valley Community College Appendix B Page 4 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Cascade Rural Fire District Grant School District No. 3 Lexington County School District No. 2 Davis Community Housing Authority Education (K-12) Castleford Rural Fire District Grants Pass School District No. 7 Lexington County School District No. 3 Davis County Housing Authority Aberdeen School District No. 5 Central Fire District Greater Albany Public School District 8J Lexington County School District No. 4 Davis-Salt Lake Aerial Spray Authority Adna School District No. 226 Central 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. 17 Central Shoshone County Water District Harney County School District No. 3 Marion County School District Duchesne County Water Conservancy District Anacortes School District No. 103 Clark County District Library Harney Education Service District Marion County School District No. 7 Emery County Housing Authority Arlington Public Schools Clarkia Free Library District Harper School District No. 66 Marlboro County School District Emery County Municipal Building Authority Asotin-Anatone School District Clarkia Highway District Harrisburg School District No. 7 McCormick County School District Emery County Special Service District No. 1 Auburn School District No. 408 Clearwater Free Library District Helix School District No. 1-R Newberry County School District Emery Water Conservancy District Bainbridge Island School District No. 303 Clearwater Highway District Hermiston School District Oconee County School District Emigration Improvement District Battle Ground School District No. 119 Clearwater Soil and Water Conservation District High Desert Education Service District Orangeburg Consolidated School District Four Fruitland Special Service District Bellevue Christian School District Clearwater Water District Hillsboro School District No. 1J Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 3 Garden City Fire District Bellevue School District No. 405 Consolidated Free Library District Hood River County School District Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 5 Grand County Housing Authority Bellingham School District No. 501 Cottonwood Highway District Huntington School District No. 16J Pickens County School District Granger-Hunter Improvement District Benge School District No. 122 Custer 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. 403 Dietrich Fire District InterMountain Education Service District Richland County School District No. 2 Hooper Water Improvement District Bickleton School District Dietrich Highway District Ione School District R2 Rock Hill School District No. 3 Jensen Water Improvement District Blaine School District No. 503 Doumecq Highway District Jackson County School District No. 9 Saluda School District No. 1 Johnson Water Improvement District Boistfort School District No. 234 Downey Swan Lake Highway District Jackson Education Service District South Carolina Public Charter School District Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District Bremerton School District Dry 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. 111 Eagle Fire Protection District Jefferson School District Spartanburg County School District No. 2 Juab Special Service Fire District Bridgeport School District No. 75 Eagle Sewer District Jewell School District No. 8 Spartanburg County School District No. 3 Kane County Water Conservancy District Brinnon School District No. 46 East 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. 100 East Bonner County Library District Jordan Valley School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 5 Lake Point Improvement District Camas School District East Greenacres Irrigation District Joseph School District No. 6 Spartanburg County School District No. 6 Logan-Cache Airport Authority Cape Flattery School District No. 401 Eastern 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. 113 Eastern Idaho Regional Wastewater Authority Klamath County School District Sumter School District Magna Mosquito Abatement District Carbonado Historical School District No. 19 Elk River Free Library District Klamath Falls City Schools Sumter School District No. 17 Magna Water District Cascade Christian Schools Elmore 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. 228 Fenn Highway District La Grande School District No. 1 Union County School District Midvalley Improvement District Cashmere School District No. 222 Ferdinand Highway District Lake County School District No. 7 Ware Shoals School District No. 51 Midway Sanitation District Castle Rock School District No. 401 Fish Haven Mosquito Abatement District Lake Ed Service District Williamsburg County Schools Milford Area Healthcare Service District Central Kitsap School District No. 401 Fremont County District Library Lake Oswego School District No. 7J Williston School District No. 29 Moab Mosquito Abatement District Central Valley School District No. 356 Friedman Memorial Airport Authority Lakeview School District No. 7 York School District No. 1 Moab Valley Fire Protection District Centralia School District No. 401 Garden Valley District Library Lane Education Service District Special District Mountain Green Sewer Improvement District Chehalis School District No. 302 Garden Valley Fire Protection District Lebanon Community School District No. 9 Abbeville Housing Authority Mountain Regional Water Special Service District Cheney School District No. 360 Garden Valley Recreation District Lincoln County School District Aiken Housing Authority Mountain View Special Service District Chewelah School District No. 36 Gateway Fire Protection District Linn-Benton-Lincoln Education Service District Anderson Housing Authority Mt. Olympus Improvement District Chief Leschi School System Gem County Fire Protection District Long Creek School District No. 17 Atlantic Beach Housing Authority North Davis County Sewer District Chimacum School District No. 49 Gem County Mosquito Abatement District Lowell School District No. 71 Beaufort Housing Authority North Davis Fire District Clarkston School District No. J250-185 Glenns 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 District Golden 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. 400 Gooding County Memorial Hospital District McKenzie School District Belton-Honea Path Water Authority North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District Colfax School District No. 300 Grace District Library McMinnville School District No. 40 Bennettsville Housing Authority North Summit Fire District College Place School District No. 250 Grangeville Highway District Medford School District No. 549C Berea Public Service District North Tooele County Fire Protection District Colton School District No. 306 Granite 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. 206 Greater Boise Auditorium District Mitchell School District No. 55 Big Creek Water and Sewerage District North View Fire District Columbia School District No. 206, Stevens County Greater Middleton Parks and Recreation District Molalla River School District Bluffton Township Fire District Ogden Housing Authority Columbia School District No. 400 Greater 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. 115 Groveland Water and Sewer District Morrow County School District Broad Creek Public Service District Park City Fire Service District Concrete School District No. 11 Harbor 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. 317 Hayden Lake Irrigation District Multnomah Education Service District Consortium Burton Fire District Provo Housing Authority Cosmopolis School District Hayden 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. 151 Hillsdale Highway District Neah-Kah-Nie School District No. 56 Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority Roosevelt City Housing Authority Coupeville School District No. 204 Homedale Highway District Nestucca Valley School District No. 101 Charleston County Aviation Authority Salt Lake City Housing Authority Crescent School District Hoo 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. 73 Horseshoe Bend Fire Protection District Newberg School District No. 29J Charleston Housing Authority Salt Lake County Housing Authority Curlew School District No- 50 Idaho Soil and Water Conservation District North Bend School District No. 13 Charleston Naval Complex Redevelopment Authority Sandy Suburban Improvement District Cusick School District Indian Valley Rural Fire District North Central Education Service District Charleston Soil and Water Conservation District Scofield Reservoir Special Service District Darrington School District No. 330 Iona-Bonneville Sewer District North Clackamas School District No. 12 Cheraw Housing Authority Sevier County Special Service District No. 1 Davenport School District No. 207 Island Park Fire District North Douglas School District No. 22 Chester Housing Authority Skyline Mountain Special Service District Dayton School District No. 2 Jerome Highway District North Lake School District Chester Metropolitan District Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District Deer Park School District No. 414 Jerome Recreation District North Marion School District No. 15 Chester Sewer District Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District Dieringer School District Jerome Rural Fire District No. 1 North Santiam School District No. 29 Coast Regional Transportation Authority Solid Waste Special Service District No. 1 Dixie School District Kamiah Fire Protection District North Wasco County School District No. 21 Columbia Housing Authority South Davis Sewer District East Valley School District No. 361 Kamiah Highway District Northwest Regional Education Service District Conway Housing Authority South Davis Water District East Valley School District No. 361, Spokane County Ketchum Rural Fire Protection District Nyssa School District No. 26 Daniel Morgan Water District South Ogden Conservation District East Valley School District No. 90, Yakima County Kidder Harris Highway District Oakland School District Darlington County Fire District South Salt Lake Valley Mosquito Abatement District Eastmont School District No. 206 Kingston Water District Oakridge School District No. 76 Darlington County Water and Sewer Authority South Summit Fire Protection District Eatonville School District No. 404 Kootenai County Water District No. 1 Ontario School District No. 8C Darlington Housing Authority South Utah Valley Solid Waste District Edmonds School District No. 15 Kootenai Ponderay Sewer District Oregon City School District No. 62 Donalds-Due West Water and Sewer Authority South Valley Sewer District Educational Service District No. 112 Kootenai-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. 401 Kuna Library District Paisley School District No. 11 Dorchester County Water Authority Spanish Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Elma School District No. 68 Laclede Water District Parkrose School District No. 3 Duncan Chapel Fire District St. George Housing Authority Endicott School District No. 308 Lakes Highway District Pendleton School District No. 16 Easley Housing Authority Stansbury Park Improvement District Entiat School District No. 127 Latah County Library District Perrydale School District No. 21J Easley-Central Water District Strawberry Electric Service District Enumclaw School District No. 216 Latah Soil and Water Conservation District Philomath School District No. 17J East Richland County Public Service District Sugar House Park Authority Ephrata School District No. 165 Lemhi 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. 36 Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District Pilot Rock School District No. 2 Florence Housing Authority Taylorsville-Bennion Improvement District Everett School District No. 2 Lewiston-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 County Lincoln County Recreation District Pinehurst School District Fripp Island Public Service District Timpanogos Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 205 Little Blacktail Ranch Water District Pleasant Hill School District Gaffney Housing Authority Tooele County Housing Authority Federal Way Public Schools Little Wood River Library District Plush School District 18 Gaston Rural Community Water District Tooele County Recreation Special Service District Ferndale School District No. 502 Lizard 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. 417 Lost River Highway District Portland Public School District No. 1 Georgetown Housing Authority Uintah Animal Control and Shelter Special Service District Finley School District M&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. 402 Mackay 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. 358 Madison Library District Prospect School District Greenville Arena District Uintah Health Care Special Service District Garfield School District No. 302 Marsing Rural Fire District Rainier School District No. 13 Greenville County Recreation District Uintah Highlands Water and Sewer Improvement District Glenwood School District McCall Fire Protection District Redmond School District No. 2J Greenville County Redevelopment Authority Uintah Mosquito Abatement District Goldendale School District McCall Memorial Hospital District Reedsport School District No. 105 Greenville Housing Authority Uintah Recreation District Grand Coulee Dam School District Meridian Cemetery Maintenance District Region 9 Education Service District Greenville Transit Authority Uintah Transportation Special Service District Grandview School District No. 200 Meridian Library District Reynolds School District No. 7 Greenwood Metropolitan District Uintah Water Conservancy District Granger School District No. 204 Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Riddle School District No. 70 Greer Housing Authority Unified Fire Authority Granite Falls School District No. 332 Appendix B Page 5 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Mica Kidd Island Fire Protection District Riverdale School District No. 51J Hartsville Housing Authority Utah County Housing Authority Grapeview School District No. 54 Middleton Rural Fire District Rogue River School District No. 35 Hilton Head No. 1 Public Service District Utah Paiute Housing Authority Great Northern School District Midvale Fire Protection District Roseburg Public Schools Holly Springs Fire-Rescue District Utah Transit Authority Green Mountain School District No. 103 Minidoka 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. 324 Minidoka County Highway District Santiam Canyon School District No. 129J James Island Public Service District Wasatch County Fire District Harrington Public Schools Moreland Water and Sewer District Santiam Christian Schools Kingstree Housing Authority Wasatch Front Waste and Recycling District Highland School District No. 203 Mountain Home Highway District Scappoose School District No. 1J Lady's Island-St. Helena Fire District Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District Highline School District No. 401 Mountain Rides Transportation Authority Scio School District No. 95C Lake City Housing Authority Washington County Water Conservancy District Hockinson School District Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District Seaside School District Lancaster County Water and Sewer District Waste Management Service District No. 5 Hood Canal School District No. 404 Nampa Highway District No. 1 Sheridan School District No. 48J Lancaster Housing Authority Weber Basin Water Conservancy District Hoquiam School District No. 28 Nampa Housing Authority Sherman County School District Lancaster Soil and Water Conservation District Weber Fire District Inchelium School District No. 70 New Plymouth Fire District Sherwood School District No. 88J Laurens Housing Authority Weber Mosquito Abatement District Issaquah School District No. 411 North 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. 56 North Custer Hospital District Sisters School District No. 6 Liberty-Chesnee-Fingerville Water District Wellsville-Mendon Conservancy District Kalama School District No. 402 North Kootenai Water and Sewer District Siuslaw School District No. 97J Local Housing Authority White City Water Improvement District Keller School District No. 3 North 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. 458 North Latah County Highway District South Lane School District No. 45J3 Lugoff-Elgin Water Authority State Kennewick School District No. 17 Northern Lakes Fire District South Umpqua School District No. 19 Marion Housing Authority State Of Utah Kent School District No. 415 Northside Fire District South Wasco County School District No. 1 Marlboro County Housing Authority Utah Department of Administrative Services Kettle Falls School District No. 212 Notus-Parma Highway District No. 2 Southern Oregon Education Service District McColl Housing Authority Utah Department of Health Kiona-Benton City School District No. 52 Oakley Highway District Spray School District No. 1 Medical University Hospital Authority Utah State Legislature Kittitas School District Oakley Library District Springfield School District No. 19 Metropolitan Sewer Sub-District Utah State Treasurer Klickitat School District No. 402 Ola District Library St. Helens School District No. 502 Mitford Water and Sewer District Tribal La Center School District Oneida County Fire District St. Paul School District No. 45 Mullins Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation La Conner School District No. 311 Oregon 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 District Outlet 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. 129 Panhandle Health District Sweet Home School District No. 55 Myrtle Beach Housing Authority Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Lake Quinault School District No. 97 Parma 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. 4 Pine Ridge Water and Sewer District Tigard-Tualatin School District No. 23J Newberry Housing Authority Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Lake Washington School District No. 414 Pinehurst Water District Tillamook School District No. 9 North Charleston Housing Authority Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians Lakewood School District No. 306 Pioneer Irrigation District Ukiah School District 80 R North Charleston Sewer District Ute Indian Tribe Lamont School District Placerville Fire Protection District Umatilla School District No. 6 North Greenville Fire District Liberty School District No. 362 Pocatello Housing Authority Union School District 5 Oconee County Joint Regional Sewer Authority Lind School District Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Vale School District No. 84 Parker Sewer and Fire Subdistrict Longview School District No. 122 Portneuf District Library Vernonia School District No. 47J Patriots Point Development Authority Loon Lake School District No. 183 Post Falls Highway District Wallowa School District No. 12 Pee Dee Regional Airport District Lopez Island School District No. 144 Power County Highway District Warrenton-Hammond School District No. 30 Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority Lyle School District No- 406 Prairie Highway District West Linn-Wilsonville School District Piedmont Public Service District Lynden School District No. 504 Prairie-River Library District Willamette Education Service District Pioneer Rural Water District Mabton School District No. 120 Progressive Irrigation District Willamina School District No. 30J Powdersville Water District Mansfield School District No. 207 Raft River Highway District Winston-Dillard School District No. 116 Richland-Lexington Airport District Manson School District Rapid River Water and Sewer District Woodburn School District No. 103 Richland-Lexington Riverbanks Park District Mary M. Knight School District Richfield District Library Yamhill-Carlton School District No. 1 Rock Hill Housing Authority Mary Walker School District No. 207 Riverside Independent Water District Yoncalla School District No. 32 Saluda County Water and Sewer Authority Marysville School District No. 25 Rock Creek Fire District Special District Sandy Springs Water District McCleary School District No. 65 Rockland Rural Fire District Adair Rural Fire Protection District Santee Fire Service District Mead School District No. 354 Rogerson Water District Amity Fire District Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority Medical Lake School District No. 326 Ross Point Water District Applegate Valley Fire District No. 9 Sheldon Township Fire District Mercer Island School District No. 400 Sagle Fire District Arch Cape Sanitary District Slater-Marietta Fire District Meridian School District No. 505 Salmon River Clinic Hospital District Arch Cape Water District South Carolina Housing Authority Bond Council Methow Valley School District Sam Owen Fire District Arnold Irrigation District South Carolina Public Employee Benefit Authority Monroe School District No. 103 Santa-Fernwood Water and Sewer District Aumsville Rural Fire District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 1 Montesano School District No. 66 Schweitzer Fire-Rescue District Baker County Library District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 3 Morton School District No. 214 Settlers Irrigation District Baker Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Education Assistance Authority Moses Lake School District No. 161 Shelley/Firth Fire District Baker Valley Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina State Fiscal Accountability Authority Mossyrock School District No. 206 Shoshone City & Rural Fire District Bandon Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Housing Finance and Development Authority Mt. Adams School District No. 209 Shoshone County Fire Protection District No. 2 Barlow Water Improvement District South Carolina State Ports Authority Mt. Baker School District No. 507 Shoshone Highway District No. 2 Bay Area Hospital District South Greenville Fire District Mt. Vernon School District No. 320 South Bannock Library District Bend Parks and Recreation District South Island Public Service District Mukilteo School District No. 6 South Bingham Soil Conservation District Beverly Beach Water District Southside Rural Community Water District Naches Valley School District No. 3 South Boundary Fire Protection District Black Butte Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Spartanburg Housing Authority Napavine School District No. 14 South Custer Fire District Blue Mountain Hospital District Spartanburg Regional Health Services District Naselle-Grays River Valley School District No.165 South Fork Coeur d'Alene River Sewer District Blue River Water District St. Andrews Public Service District South Carolina Nespelem School District No. 14 South Latah Highway District Boardman Park and Recreation District St. John's Fire District Newport School District No. 56-415 Southside Water and Sewer District Boardman Rural Fire Protection District Starr-Iva Water and Sewer District Nine Mile Falls School District No. 325/179 Southwestern Idaho Cooperative Housing Authority Boring Water District No. 24 Startex-Jackson-Wellford-Duncan Water District Nooksack Valley School District No. 506 St. Maries Fire Protection District Boulder Creek Retreat Special Road District Sumter Housing Authority North Beach School District No. 64 Star Joint Fire District Brownsville Rural Fire District Talatha Rural Community Water District North Franklin School District No. 51 Star Sewer and Water District Buell-Red Prairie Water District Taylors Fire and Sewer District North Kitsap School District No. 400 Sun Valley Water and Sewer District Bunker Hill Sanitary District Three Rivers Solid Waste Authority North Mason School District Sunset Heights Water District Burlington Water District Tigerville Fire District North Thurston Public Schools Targhee Regional Public Transit Authority Camellia Park Sanitary District Tri-County Solid Waste Authority Northport School District No. 211 Targhee Regional Public Transportation Authority Cannon Beach Rural Fire Protection District Union Housing Authority Northshore School District No. 417 Teton County Fire Protection District Central Lincoln People's Utility District Valley Public Service Authority Oak Harbor School District No. 201 Three Creek Highway District Central Oregon Irrigation District Waccamaw Regional Transportation Authority Oakesdale School District No. 324 Three Mile Water District Central Oregon Park and Recreation District Wedgefield Stateburg Water District Oakville School District No. 400 Timberlake Fire Protection District Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority West Anderson Water District Ocean Beach School District No. 101 Twin Falls Highway District Charleston Fire District Westview-Fairforest Fire District Ocosta School District No. 172 Twin Falls Housing Authority Charleston Sanitary District Whitney Fire Protection District Odessa School District No. 105 Twin Falls Rural Fire Protection District Chehalem Park and Recreation District Williamsburg County Transit Authority Okanogan School District No. 105 Twin Ridge Rural Fire District Chenowith Water Public Utility District Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority Olympia School District No. 111 Union Independent Highway District Chiloquin-Agency Lake Rural Fire Protection District Woodruff Housing Authority Olympic Educational Service District Upper Fords Creek Rural Fire District Christmas Valley Domestic Water Supply District Woodruff-Roebuck Water District Omak School District No. 19 Warm Lake Recreational Water District Christmas Valley Park and Recreation District York County Natural Gas Authority Onalaska School District No. 300 Wendell Highway District Clackamas County Fire District No. 1 State Onion Creek School District No. 30 West Boise Sewer District Clackamas County Housing Authority Santee-Lynches Regional Council of Governments Orcas Island School District No. 137 West Bonner Library District Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Orchard Prairie School District No. 123 West Bonner Water and Sewer District Clatskanie Park and Recreation District South Carolina Department of Mental Health Orient School District No. 65 West Pend Oreille Fire District Clatskanie People's Utility District South Carolina Department of Revenue Oroville School District No. 410 Western Ada Recreation District Clatskanie Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina General Services Division Orting School District No. 344 Western Elmore County Recreation District Clatsop Care Center Health District South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff Othello School District Wilder Irrigation District Clatsop County Housing Authority South Carolina State Budget and Control Board Palisades School District No. 102 Wilder Public Library District Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Treasurer's Office Palouse School District No. 301 Wilder Rural Fire Protection District Coburg Rural Fire Protection District State Of South Carolina Pasco School District No. 1 Appendix B Page 6 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Wilderness Ranch Fire Protection District Colton Fire District Township Pateros School District Winona Highway District Colton Water District Township of Grand Meadow Paterson School District No. 50 Worley Fire District Columbia Corridor Drainage Districts Joint Contracting Authority Tribal Pe Ell School District No. 301 Worley Highway District Columbia Health District Catawba Indian Nation Peninsula School District State Columbia Improvement District Pioneer School District No. 402 Idaho Department of Administration Columbia River People's Utility District Pomeroy School District No. 110 Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Columbia Soil and Water Conservation District Port Angeles School District No. 121 State Of Idaho Coos County Airport District Port Townsend School District No. 50 Tribal Coos County Library Service District Prescott School District No. 402-37 Coeur d'Alene Tribe Coquille Indian Housing Authority Pride Prep Schools Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Coquille Valley Hospital District Prosser School District No. 116 Nez Perce Tribal Enterprises Corbett Water District Puget Sound Educational Service District Nez Perce Tribe Corvallis Rural Fire Protection District Pullman School District No. 267 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cove Rural Fire Protection District Puyallup School District No. 3 Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 Crooked River Ranch Special Road District Quilcene School District No. 48 Curry Health District Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 Curry Public Library District Quincy School District No. 144 Dallas Cemetery District No. 4 Rainier School District No. 307 Dean Minard Water District Raymond School District No. 116 Dee Rural Fire Protection District Reardan-Edwall School District Deschutes County 911 Service District Renton School District No. 403 Deschutes County Rural Fire District No. 1 Republic School District Deschutes Valley Water District Richland School District No. 400 Devils Lake Water Improvement District Ridgefield School District No. 122 Dexter Rural Fire Protection District Ritzville School District Douglas County Fire District No. 2 Riverside School District Douglas County Housing Authority Riverview School District No. 407 Douglas Soil and Water Conservation District Rochester School District Drakes Crossing Rural Fire Protection District Rosalia School District No. 320 Dufur Recreation District Royal School District Eagle Valley Soil and Water Conservation District San Juan Island School District No. 149 East Fork Irrigation District Satsop School District No. 104 East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District Seattle Public Schools East Umatilla County Health District Sedro-Woolley School District No. 101 East Valley Water District Selah School District No. 119 Echo Rural Fire District Selkirk School District No. 70 Elsie-Vinemaple Rural Fire Protection District No. 11 Sequim School District No. 323 Emerald People's Utility District Shaw Island School District No. 10 Estacada Rural Fire District No. 69 Shelton School District No. 309 Fairview Water District Shoreline School District No. 412 Falcon Cove Beach Water District Skykomish School District Farmers Irrigation District Snohomish School District No. 201 Gardiner Sanitary District Snoqualmie Valley School District No. 410 Gaston Rural Fire District Soap Lake School District No. 156 Gates Rural Fire Protection District South Bend School District No. 118 Gearhart Rural Fire Protection District South Kitsap School District No. 402 Glendale Rural Fire Protection District South Whidbey School District No. 206 Gleneden Sanitary District Southside School District Goshen Fire District Spokane Public Schools Government Camp Sanitary District Sprague School District Grand Ronde Sanitary District St. John School District No. 322 Grant County Transportation District Stanwood-Camano School District No. 401 Grant Soil and Water Conservation District Steilacoom Historical School District No. 1 Grants Pass Irrigation District Steptoe School District No. 304 Green Sanitary District Stevenson-Carson School District No. 303 Hahlen Road Special District Sultan School District No. 311 Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection District Summit Valley School District 202 Hamlet Rural Fire Protection District Sumner School District No. 320 Harbor Sanitary District Sunnyside School District No. 201 Harbor Water Public Utility District Tacoma School District No. 10 Harney District Hospital Taholah School District No. 77 Harney Soil and Water Conservation District Tahoma School District No. 409 Harriman Rural Fire Protection District Tekoa School District No. 265 Hazeldell Rural Fire Protection District Tenino School District No. 402 Hebo Joint Water and Sewer Authority Thorp School District No. 400 Heceta Water District Toledo School District No. 237 Hermiston Cemetery District Tonasket School District Hermiston Fire and Emergency Services District Toppenish School District No. 202 Hermiston Irrigation District Touchet School District No. 300 Hood River County Library District Toutle Lake School District No. 130 Hood River County Transportation District Trout Lake School District No. R-400 Hood River Valley Parks and Recreation District Tukwila School District No. 406 Hoodland Fire District No. 74 Tumwater School District No. 33 Hubbard Rural Fire Protection District Union Gap School District No. 2 Ice Fountain Water District University Place School District No. 83 Illinois Valley Rural Fire Protection District Valley School District Ione Rural Fire Protection District Valley School District No. 70 Irrigon Community Park and Recreation Maintenance District Vancouver School District No. 37 Jackson County Airport Authority Vashon Island School District No. 402 Jackson County Fire District No. 3 Wahkiakum School District No. 200 Jackson County Fire District No. 5 Wahluke School District No. 73 Jackson County Housing Authority Waitsburg School District Jackson County Library District Walla Walla School District No. 140 Jackson County Vector Control District Wapato School District No. 207 Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District Warden School District No. 146-161 Jefferson Rural Fire Protection District Washington Schools Risk Management Pool John Day/Canyon City Parks and Recreation District Washington State Educational Service District Junction City Rural Fire Protection District Washougal School District Juniper Flat Rural Fire Protection District Washtucna School District Keating Soil and Water Conservation District Waterville School District No. 209 Keizer Rural Fire Protection District Wellpinit School District Keno Fire Protection District Wenatchee School District No. 246 Kernville-Gleneden Beach-Lincoln Beach Water District West Valley School District No. 208, Yakima County Appendix B Page 7 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Klamath County Fire District No. 1 West Valley School District No. 363, Spokane County Klamath County Library Service District White Pass School District No. 303 Klamath Housing Authority White River School District No. 416 Klamath Irrigation District White Salmon Valley School District No. 405-17 Klamath Vector Control District Wilbur School District No. 200 La Grande Rural Fire Protection District Willapa Valley School District No. 160 La Pine Park and Recreation District Wilson Creek School District La Pine Rural Fire Protection District Winlock School District No. 232 La Pine Water District Wishkah Valley School District No. 117 Lake District Hospital Woodland School District No. 404 Lake Grove Water District Yakima School District No. 7 Lakeside Fire District No. 4 Yelm Community School District No. 2 Lane County Fire District No. 1 Zillah School District No. 205 Lane Library District Special District Lane Transit District Acme Water District No. 18 Langlois Water District Adams County Fire Protection District No. 1 LaPine Special Sewer District Adams County Mosquito Control District Lebanon Aquatic District Aeneas Lake Irrigation District Lebanon Fire District Alderwood Water and Wastewater District Lewis and Clark Rural Fire Protection District Alpine Water District Libby Drainage District Anacortes Housing Authority Linn Benton Housing Authority Annapolis Water District Lookingglass Rural Fire District Asotin County Cemetery District No. 1 Lorane Rural Fire Protection District Asotin County Conservation District Lowell Rural Fire Protection District Asotin County Fire District No. 1 Lower Umpqua Hospital District Asotin County Housing Authority Lusted Water District Asotin County Public Utility District No. 1 Madras Aquatic Center District Badger Mountain Irrigation District Malheur County Housing Authority Bainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation District Malin Rural Fire Protection District Basin City Water/Sewer District Mapleton Water District Bayview Beach Water District Marion County Fire District No. 1 Beacon Hill Water and Sewer District Marion Soil and Water Conservation District Beehive Irrigation District Medford Irrigation District Belfair Water District No. 1 Merrill Rural Fire Protection District Bellevue Convention Center Authority Mid-County Cemetery Maintenance District Bellingham Housing Authority Middle Fork Irrigation District Bellingham Public Development Authority Miles Crossing Sanitary Sewer District Benton County Diking District No. 1 Mill City Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 1 Milton-Freewater Water Control District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 2 Mist-Birkenfeld Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 4 Mohawk Valley Rural Fire District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 5 Molalla River Improvement District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 6 Molalla Rural Fire Protection District No. 73 Benton County Mosquito Control District Monroe Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Public Utility District No. 1 Morrow County Health District Benton Irrigation District Mountain View Hospital District Benton-Franklin Health District Mt. Angel Fire District Beverly Water District Multnomah County Drainage District No. 1 Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Multnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 10 Black Diamond Water District Multnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 14 Bremerton Housing Authority Nesika Beach-Ophir Water District Buckhannon-Upshur County Airport Authority Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority Burbank Irrigation District No. 4 Neskowin Regional Water District Carnhope Irrigation District No 7 Nestucca Rural Fire Protection District Cascadia Conservation District Netarts Oceanside Sanitary District Cedar River Water and Sewer District Netarts-Oceanside Rural Fire Protection District Central Klickitat County Park and Recreation District North Bay Rural Protection Fire District Central Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 6 North Bend City/Coos-Curry Housing Authority Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority North Central Public Health District Central Valley Ambulance Authority North Clackamas Parks and Recreation District Chelan County Fire District No. 1 North County Recreation District Chelan County Fire District No. 3 North Gilliam Cemetery District Chelan County Fire District No. 5 North Gilliam County Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 6 North Lincoln Fire and Rescue District No. 1 Chelan County Fire District No. 7 North Powder Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 8 North Sherman County Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 9 North Unit Irrigation District Chelan County Public Hospital District No. 1 Northeast Oregon Housing Authority Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1 Northern Wasco County Park and Recreation District Chelan County/Wenatchee Housing Authority Northern Wasco County People's Utility District Chelan-Douglas Health District Northwest Oregon Housing Authority Chinook Water District Nyssa Road Assessment District No. 2 Chuckanut Community Forest Park District Nyssa Rural Fire Protection District Clallam Conservation District Oak Hill Sanitary District Clallam County Fire District No. 2 Oak Lodge Sanitary District Clallam County Fire District No. 5 Oak Lodge Water District Clallam County Fire District No. 6 Oceanside Water District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 1 Ochoco West Sanitary District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 3 Odell Sanitary District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 4 Ontario Library District Clallam County Hospital District No. 1 Oregon Fire Districts Association Clallam County Housing Authority Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority Clallam County Parks and Recreation District No. 1 Oregon Trail Library District Clallam County Public Hospital District No. 2 Oregon Water Wonderland Unit II Sanitary District Clallam County Public Utility District No. 1 Owyhee Irrigation District Clark County Fire District No. 10 Pacific City Joint Water Sanitary Authority Clark County Fire District No. 11 Pacific Communities Health District Clark County Fire District No. 13 Palatine Hill Water District Clark County Fire District No. 5 Peninsula Drainage District No. 1 Clark County Fire Protection District No. 3 Peninsula Drainage District No. 2 Clark County Fire Protection District No. 6 Pilot Rock Fire Protection District Clark County Public Utility District No. 1 Pine Grove Rural Fire Protection District Clark Regional Wastewater District Pleasant Hill Rural Fire Protection District Cline Irrigation District Appendix B Page 8 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Pleasant Home Water District Clinton Water District Polk County Fire District No- 1 Coal Creek Utility District Polk County Housing Authority Columbia Conservation District Polk Soil and Water Conservation District Columbia County Fire District No. 3 Portland Metropolitan Area Water District Columbia County Public Hospital District No. 1 Public Procurement Authority Columbia County Rural Library District Rainbow Water District Columbia Irrigation District Raleigh Water District Columbia Valley Water District Redmond Area Park and Recreation District Colville Indian Housing Authority Riddle Rural Fire District Consolidated Irrigation District No. 14 River Forest Acres Special Road District Covington Water District River Road Park and Recreation District Cowiche Sewer District Rivergrove Water District Cowlitz County Cemetery District No. 2 Roads End Sanitary District Cowlitz County Fire District No. 6 Roberts Creek Water District Cowlitz County Public Utility District No. 1 Rockwood Water People's Utility District Cowlitz Transit Authority Rogue River Cemetery Maintenance District Cross Valley Water District Rogue Valley Transportation District Dallesport Water District Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority Douglas County Fire District No. 2 Sable Drive Road District Douglas County Fire Protection District No. 5 Salem Area Mass Transit District Douglas County Public Utility District No. 1 Salem Housing Authority Douglas County Sewer District No. 1 Salem-Keizer Transit District Douglas-Okanogan County Fire District No. 15 Santa Clara Rural Fire Protection District East Columbia Basin Irrigation District Santiam Water Control District East Gig Harbor Water District Scappoose Rural Fire District East Lewis County Public Development Authority Scio Rural Fire District East Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 22 Scottsburg Rural Fire District East Spokane Water District No. 1 Seal Rock Fire District East Wenatchee Water District Seal Rock Water District Eastmont Metropolitan Park District Shangri-La Water District Eastsound Sewer and Water District Shasta View Irrigation District Edmonds Public Facilities District Siletz Rural Fire Protection District Ellensburg Business Development Authority Silverton Fire District Enterprise Cemetery District No. 7 Sisters-Camp Sherman Rural Fire Protection District Entiat Irrigation District Siuslaw Public Library District Everett Housing Authority South Clackamas Transportation District Everett Public Facilities District South Suburban Sanitary District Evergreen Water-Sewer District No. 19 Southern Curry Cemetery Maintenance District Fall City Water District Southwest Lincoln County Water District Ferry County Public Utility District No. 1 Spring River Special Road District Ferry/Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 13 Springfield Utility District Fisherman Bay Sewer District Stanfield Fire District No. 7-402 Foster Creek Conservation District Stayton Fire District Four Lakes Water District No. 10 Suburban East Salem Water District Franklin Conservation District Sunrise Water Authority Franklin County Cemetery District No. 2 Sunset Empire Transportation District Franklin County Fire District No. 1 Swalley Irrigation District Franklin County Fire Protection District No. 3 Sweet Home Fire and Ambulance District Franklin County Irrigation District No. 1 Talent Irrigation District Franklin County Public Utility District No. 1 Terrebonne Domestic Water District Freeland Water and Sewer District Three Sisters Irrigation District Ft. Worden Public Development Authority Tillamook County Transportation District Gardena Farms Irrigation District No. 13 Tillamook People's Utility District Goforth Special Utility District Tiller Rural Fire District Grand Coulee Project Hydroelectric Authority Toledo Rural Fire Protection District Grandview Irrigation District Tri City Rural Fire District No. 4 Grant County Airport District No. 1 Tri City Water District Grant County Fire District No. 10 Tri-City Service District Grant County Fire District No. 11 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District Grant County Fire District No. 3 Tualatan Hills Park and Recreation District Grant County Fire District No. 4 Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Grant County Fire District No. 7 Tualatin Valley Irrigation District Grant County Fire Protection District No. 5 Tualatin Valley Water District Grant County Housing Authority Tumalo Irrigation District Grant County Mosquito Control District No. 1 Twin Rocks Sanitary District Grant County Mosquito District No. 2 Umatilla County Housing Authority Grant County Port District No. 4 Umatilla Hospital District Grant County Port District No. 6 Umatilla Land Redevelopment Authority Grant County Port District No. 7 Umatilla Morrow Radio and Data District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 1 Umatilla Reservation Housing Authority Grant County Public Hospital District No. 2 Umatilla Rural Fire Protection District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 3 Union Cemetery District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 4 Vale Oregon Irrigation District Grant County Public Utility District No. 2 Valley View Water District Grant Transit Authority Vandevert Acres Special Road District Grays Harbor Conservation District Vineyard Mountain Water and Improvement District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 1 Walla Walla River Irrigation District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 12 Wallowa County Health Care District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 14 Wamic Water and Sanitary Authority Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 2 Warm Springs Housing Authority Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 7 Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation District Grays Harbor County Housing Authority Washington County Fire District No. 2 Grays Harbor County Water District No. 1 Washington County Housing Authority Grays Harbor County Water District No. 2 Water Wonderland Improvement District Grays Harbor Drainage District No. 1 Wedderburn Sanitary District Grays Harbor Fire District No. 10 West Slope Water District Grays Harbor Historical Seaport Authority West Valley Housing Authority Grays Harbor Public Utility District No. 1 Western Lane Ambulance District Grays Harbor Transportation Authority Westport Wauna Rural Fire Protection District Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District Westwood Hills Road District Greater Wenatchee Regional Events Center Public Facilities District Wiard Memorial Park District Green Tank Irrigation District No. 11 Wickiup Water District Hartstene Pointe Water-Sewer District Willamalane Park and Recreation District Highland Water District Appendix B Page 9 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Williams Rural Fire Protection District Highlands Sewer District Willow Creek Park District Highline Water District Winchester Bay Sanitary District Historic Seattle Preservation and Development Authority Winston-Dillard Fire District Holmes Harbor Sewer District Winston-Dillard Water District Hunters Water District Woodburn Rural Fire Protection District Hydro Irrigation District No. 9 Yamhill County Housing Authority Icicle Irrigation District Yamhill Fire Protection District Inchelium Water District Youngs River-Lewis and Clark Water District Irvin Water District No. 6 State Island County Fire District No. 3 Oregon Department of Administrative Services Island County Fire Protection District No. 1 Oregon Department of Revenue Island County Housing Authority Oregon Health Licensing Agency Jefferson County Conservation District Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission Jefferson County Fire District No. 5 Oregon Secretary of State Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 Oregon State Board of Nursing Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 State of Oregon Jefferson County Public Utility District No. 1 Tribal Jefferson County Water District No. 3 Burns Paiute Tribe Jefferson Transit Authority Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians Juniper Beach Water District Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community Kapowsin Water District Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians Kelso Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Kennewick Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Kennewick Irrigation District Coquille Indian Tribe Kennewick Public Facilities District Klamath Tribes Kennewick Public Hospital District Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority Key Peninsula Metro Parks District King County Airport District No. 1 King County Ferry District King County Fire Protection District No. 16 King County Fire Protection District No. 2 King County Fire Protection District No. 20 King County Fire Protection District No. 25 King County Fire Protection District No. 27 King County Fire Protection District No. 28 King County Fire Protection District No. 34 King County Fire Protection District No. 37 King County Fire Protection District No. 40 King County Fire Protection District No. 43 King County Fire Protection District No. 44 King County Fire Protection District No. 45 King County Fire Protection District No. 47 King County Fire Protection District No. 50 King County Flood Control District King County Hospital District No. 4 King County Housing Authority King County Public Hospital District No. 1 King County Public Hospital District No. 2 King County Water District No. 1 King County Water District No. 111 King County Water District No. 117 King County Water District No. 119 King County Water District No. 125 King County Water District No. 19 King County Water District No. 20 King County Water District No. 45 King County Water District No. 49 King County Water District No. 54 King County Water District No. 90 Kitsap Conservation District Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority Kitsap County Fire District No. 18 Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1 Kitsap County Rural Library District Kitsap Public Health District Kittitas County Conservation District Kittitas County Fire District No. 2 Kittitas County Fire Protection District No. 7 Kittitas County Hospital District No. 2 Kittitas County Housing Authority Kittitas County Public Utility District No. 1 Kittitas County Water District No. 5 Kittitas County Water District No. 6 Kittitas County Water District No. 7 Klickitat County Fire District No. 14 Klickitat County Fire District No. 15 Klickitat County Fire District No.1 Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 4 Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 5 Klickitat County Port District No. 1 Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 1 Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 2 Klickitat County Public Utility District No. 1 Lacey Fire District 3 Lake Chelan Reclamation District Lake Chelan Sewer District Lake Forest Park Water District Lake Stevens Sewer District Lake Wenatchee Water District Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Lakehaven Utility District Lakewood Water District Lenora Water and Sewer District Appendix B Page 10 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Lewis County Conservation District Lewis County Fire District No. 1 Lewis County Fire District No. 11 Lewis County Fire District No. 13 Lewis County Fire District No. 18 Lewis County Fire District No. 9 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 14 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 16 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 2 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 5 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 6 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 8 Lewis County Hospital District No. 1 Lewis County Public Facilities District Lewis County Public Utility District No. 1 Lewis County Water District No. 1 Lewis County Water District No. 3 Lewis Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority Liberty Lake Sewer and Water District Lincoln County Fire District No. 1 Lincoln County Fire District No. 4 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 5 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 6 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 8 Lincoln County Hospital District No. 3 Lincoln-Adams County Fire Protection District No. 3 Longview Housing Authority Lopez Island Library District Lower Elwha Housing Authority Lower Squilchuck Irrigation District Lummi Housing Authority Lummi Tribal Sewer and Water District Makah Housing Authority Malaga Water District Manchester Water District Manson Park and Recreation District Marshland Flood Control District Marysville Fire District Mason Conservation District Mason County Fire District No. 13 Mason County Fire District No. 17 Mason County Fire District No. 2 Mason County Fire District No. 4 Mason County Fire Protection District No. 5 Mason County Fire Protection District No. 8 Mason County Housing Authority Mason County Public Hospital District No. 1 Mason County Public Utility District No. 1 Mason County Public Utility District No. 3 Mason County Transit Authority Methow Valley Irrigation District Mid-Columbia Library District Midway Sewer District Moab Irrigation District No. 20 Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation District Mukilteo Water and Wastewater District Naches-Selah Irrigation District North Beach Water District North Central Washington Economic Development District North City Water District North County Regional Fire Authority North Highline Fire District North Perry Avenue Water District North Whidbey Park and Recreation District Northeast Sammamish Sewer and Water District Northshore Utility District Northwest Park and Recreation District No. 2 Okanogan Conservation District Okanogan County Cemetery District No. 4 Okanogan County Fire District No. 6 Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 11 Okanogan County Housing Authority Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 3 Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 4 Okanogan County Public Utility District No. 1 Okanogan Fire Protection District No. 16 Okanogan Irrigation District Olympic View Water and Sewer District Olympus Terrace Sewer District Orcas Island Library District Orchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6 Oroville Housing Authority Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District Othello Housing Authority Pacific Conservation District Pacific County Fire District No. 2 Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 1 Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 3 Pacific County Public Healthcare Services District No. 3 Pacific County Public Utility District No. 2 Pacific Hospital Preservation and Development Authority Palouse Conservation District Pasco/Franklin County Housing Authority Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 2 Appendix B Page 11 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 4 Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 5 Pend Oreille County Library District Pend Oreille County Public Hospital District No. 1 Pend Oreille County Public Utility District No. 1 Peninsula Housing Authority Peninsula Metropolitan Park District Peshastin Irrigation District Peshastin Water District Pierce Conservation District Pierce County Fire District No. 13 Pierce County Fire District No. 16 Pierce County Fire District No. 18 Pierce County Fire District No. 23 Pierce County Fire District No. 27 Pierce County Fire District No. 3 Pierce County Fire District No. 5 Pierce County Fire District No. 8 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 14 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 2 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 21 Pierce County Housing Authority Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority Point Roberts Water District No. 4 Ponderay Shores Water and Sewer District Port Ludlow Drainage District Prescott Joint Parks and Recreation District Prosser Fire District No. 3 Prosser Public Hospital District Public Hospital District No. 1 Public Hospital District No. 3 Public Utility District No- 1 Puyallup Tribal Health Authority Quileute Housing Authority Quinault Housing Authority Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District Renton Housing Authority Richland Housing Authority Richland Public Facilities District Ronald Wastewater District Roza Irrigation District Sacheen Lake Sewer and Water District Sammamish Plateau Water and Sewer District San Juan Island Library District Saratoga Water District Scatchet Head Water District Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority Seattle Housing Authority Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority Selah-Moxee Irrigation District Si View Metropolitan Park District Silver Lake Flood Control District Silver Lake Water And Sewer District Silverdale Water District Skagit Conservation District Skagit County Cemetery District No. 2 Skagit County Fire District No. 10 Skagit County Fire District No. 11 Skagit County Fire District No. 15 Skagit County Fire District No. 9 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 13 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 14 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 2 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 3 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 4 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 5 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 8 Skagit County Housing Authority Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 1 Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 2 Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 304 Skagit County Public Utility District No. 1 Skagit County Sewer District No. 1 Skagit County Sewer District No. 2 Skagit Valley Public Hospital District No. 1 Skamania County Fire District No. 1 Skamania County Fire District No. 4 Skamania County Public Hospital District No. 1 Skamania County Public Utility District No. 1 Skamokawa Water and Sewer District Skyway Water and Sewer District Snohomish County Fire District No. 15 Snohomish County Fire District No. 16 Snohomish County Fire District No. 19 Snohomish County Fire District No. 26 Snohomish County Fire District No. 5 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 17 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 21 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 22 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 25 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 28 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 3 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 7 Appendix B Page 12 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Snohomish County Housing Authority Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 1 Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 2 Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 Snohomish Health District Snohomish River Regional Water Authority Snoqualmie Valley Hospital District South Columbia Basin Irrigation District South Correctional Entity Public Development Authority South Naches Irrigation District South Whatcom Fire Authority South Whidbey Parks and Recreation District South Yakima Conservation District Southwest Suburban Sewer District Spokane Conservation District Spokane County Fire District No. 12 Spokane County Fire District No. 2 Spokane County Fire District No. 4 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 10 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 11 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 13 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 3 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 5 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 8 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 9 Spokane County Library District Spokane County Water District No. 3 Spokane Housing Authority Spokane Indian Housing Authority Spokane Public Facilities District Spokane Regional Health District Spokane Transit Authority Startup Water District Steptoe Sewer District No. 1 Stevens County Fire District No. 2 Stevens County Fire District No. 6 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 1 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 10 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 12 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 5 Stevens County Public Utility District No. 1 Stevens County Rural Library District Stevens Pass Sewer District Sun Harbor Water District No. 3 Sunnyside Housing Authority Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District Sunnyslope Water District Swinomish Housing Authority Tacoma Community Redevelopment Authority Tacoma Housing Authority Tacoma Metropolitan Park District Terrace Heights Sewer District Thea Foss Waterway Development Authority Three Rivers Regional Wastewater Authority Thurston Conservation District Thurston County Fire District No. 12 Thurston County Fire District No. 4 Thurston County Fire District No. 9 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 3 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 5 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 6 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 8 Thurston County Housing Authority Thurston County Public Utility District No. 1 Tri-County Economic Development District Tukwila Metropolitan Park District Underwood Conservation District Union Gap Irrigation District Val Vue Sewer District Valley Regional Fire Authority Valley View Sewer District Valley Water District Vancouver Housing Authority Vashon Park District Wahkiakum County Public Utility District No. 1 Wahkiakum Fire Protection District No. 1 Wahkiakum Port District No. 1 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 1 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 3 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 4 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 5 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 8 Walla Walla County Rural Library District Walla Walla Housing Authority Wallula Water District No. 1 Washington State Convention Center Public Facilities District Washington State Major League Baseball Stadium Public Facilities District Washington State Tobacco Settlement Authority Water District 19 Wells Ranch Irrigation District Wenatchee Reclamation District Wenatchee-Chiwawa Irrigation District West Sound Utility District Whatcom Conservation District Appendix B Page 13 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Whatcom County Fire District No. 1 Whatcom County Fire District No. 11 Whatcom County Fire District No. 14 Whatcom County Fire District No. 16 Whatcom County Fire District No. 17 Whatcom County Fire District No. 4 Whatcom County Fire District No. 5 Whatcom County Fire District No. 7 Whatcom County Fire District No. 8 Whatcom County Public Utility District No. 1 Whatcom County Water District No. 12 Whatcom County Water District No. 13 Whatcom County Water District No. 2 Whatcom County Water District No. 7 Whatcom Transportation Authority Whidbey Island Public Hospital District Whitestone Reclamation District Whitman County Fire District No. 11 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 12 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 14 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7 Whitman County Public Hospital District No. 3 Whitman County Rural Library District Whitworth Water District No. 2 Willapa Valley Water District William Shore Memorial Pool District Williams Lake Sewer District No. 2 Wine Science Center Development Authority Wollochet Harbor Sewer District Woodinville Water District Yakima County Fire District No. 1 Yakima County Fire District No. 3 Yakima County Fire District No. 4 Yakima County Fire District No. 5 Yakima County Fire District No. 6 Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 12 Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 14 Yakima County Mosquito Control District Yakima Housing Authority Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority Yakima Rural County Library District Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District State North Seattle Community College Seattle Colleges State Of Washington Washington State Department of Enterprise Services Washington State Department of Health Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Washington State Health Care Authority Tribal Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation Confederated Tribes of the Yakama Nation Cowlitz Indian Tribe Hoh Indian Tribe Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe Kalispel Tribe of Indians Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Lummi Indian Nation Makah Tribe Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Nisqually Indian Tribe Nooksack Indian Tribe Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Puyallup Tribe of Indians Quileute Indian Tribe Quinault Indian Nation Samish Indian Nation Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Skokomish Indian Tribe Snoqualmie Indian Tribe Spokane Tribe Squaxin Island Tribe Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Suquamish Tribe Swinomish Indian Tribal Community Tulalip Tribes Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Yakama Nation Land Enterprise Appendix B Page 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 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1633 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-E REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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 Atlantic Machinery, Inc., of Silver Springs, Maryland, for the purchase of one Ravo 5-i Series compact street sweeper in the amount of $256,238 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a purchase contract to Atlantic Machinery,Inc.,of Silver Springs,Maryland,for the purchase of one Ravo 5-i Series compact street sweeper in the amount of $256,238. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Works,Street Maintenance Division is requesting approval to purchase one Ravo 5-i Series compact street sweeping unit at a total cost of $256,238.The new unit will be used by the Streets Maintenance Division to complete city routes currently assigned to a larger sweeper that is less efficient in tight spaces.The Department of Transportation recommends this purchase based on the quality of the product and needs of the division.The unit will be purchased as an addition to the fleet through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Source Well, formally the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND The Department of Public Works,Street Maintenance Division is responsible for maintaining the City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1633 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-E The Department of Public Works,Street Maintenance Division is responsible for maintaining the cleanliness of a street network that totals nearly 1,700 centerline miles.This task is accomplished with 13 employees working day and night shifts throughout the city.The street sweeper fleet is made up of 88 percent Elgin Broom Bear mechanical sweepers,which have proven to be the most effective and reliable sweepers for varied road conditions throughout the majority of the city.While the current sweeper fleet is effective,the Streets Maintenance Division has recognized a need for one specialized sweeper to maintain tight spaces. The new compact sweeper will be a purpose built highly maneuverable and highly adjustable solution to areas of downtown that are narrow and have abrupt transitions.The chassis design and drive train feature the latest technology to maximize efficiency and meet the highest standard for emissions in this equipment class.The focus of this new sweeper will be the Fulton Mall,Tower District,and Chinatown areas where the larger Elgin sweepers struggle to maneuver.The new unit will be purchased as an addition to the street sweeper fleet,increasing the overall capacity and versatility of the sweeping team. The compact sweeper will be purchased through the cooperative procurement process administered by Source Well,formerly NJPA.Sourcewell utilizes a rigorous request for proposal (RFP),which includes development of solicitation document and proposal evaluation criteria,public advertisement, a five-to six-week response period and a pre-proposal conference.Upon closing of the response period,a committee evaluates proposals to determine the responsiveness against the pre- determined RFP evaluation criteria.Multi-year contracts are awarded based on the evaluation scores. The purchase price for this unit is $256,238.This price includes the Source Well 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; this purchase is using another government entity's contract. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase this item.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the Ravo 5-i Series compact street sweeper has been included in the FY19 adopted budget under the operations of the Streets Maintenance Division.The source of funding for this project is the Community Sanitation Fund, generated by the collection of customer user fees. Attachments: Acceptance and Award Atlantic Machinery Contract Combined Ads City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1633 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-E Comment and Review Evaluation RFP City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Atlantic Machinery, Inc. Contract Administrator M J DuBois February 21 18 1 Carol Jackson From:Miranda Andersen <miranda@aamdc.com> Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:11 PM To:Carol Jackson Subject:Re: RFP for Advertisement Thank you Carol, We would like to post this RFP. Please forward it to me when it is available. Much thanks, Miranda Andersen Sent from my iPhone On Nov 16, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Carol Jackson <Carol.Jackson@njpacoop.org> wrote: Good Morning! Please let me know if you would like to post this RFP and I will forward additional information. 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO‐EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Thank you! <image001.png> Carol Jackson Procurement Analyst III phone 218-894-5481 email carol.jackson@njpacoop.org website NJPAcoop.org Bid Information /∠Home ∠List of Bids Bid Information Bid Information for 122017 Bid Number 122017 Bid Name Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies Published By National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type Open to all suppliers Contract Type RFP Procurement Name Procurement Published Date 11/16/2017 Closing Date 12/20/2017 04:30:00 PM CT Country & Province/State Ontario, Canada Region & City , Bid Type Goods Group Estimated Contract Amount $99,999,999.00 Remind Notice Date Not Applicable Publish Option NIGP Code Value Range Not Applicable Client Departments Accept questions Not Applicable Tender Area NDA Requirement Not Applicable NOI Date Not Applicable Site Meetings Not Applicable Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies 122017 Closing Date: 12/20/2017 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. No Bid Document Selected Unclassified Categories Miscellaneous items Miscellaneous Bids located within this category are not classified in the existing Biddingo categories. Roads/ Sewer/ Watermain Roads/Sewer/Watermain Projects-Excavating, Ditch, Culvert, Streetscaping, Traffic Lights, Road Painting, Visors, Polycarb, Asphalt Overlay, Fire Hydrant, Guard Rails, Drainage Systems Pending Biddingo Approval Pending Biddingo Approval Requirements Bid Advertisement Bid Document Selected Categories (Biddingo Category) Attached Bid Documents Page 1 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 11/16/2017https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/377075/1285722 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 2017 R2CoW. All Rights Reserved. Powered by [ SUPPORT (Download Training Manuals) ] Invited Bidders Page 2 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 11/16/2017https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/377075/1285722 National Joint Powers Alliance :: -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies https://www.njpacoop.org/index.php?cID=6174[11/16/2017 10:06:01 AM] Procurement Process About Us Affiliations & Relationships Become a Member Member Resources Get to Know NJPA - Indefinite Quantity Construction Contracting Systems and related services - 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 - Multi-Function Copiers, Printers, and Equipment - Express Courier, Overnight, Ground Delivery Logistics Services - Elevators, Escalators, and Moving Walks with Related Equipment, Services, Accessories and Supplies - Forklifts, Lift Trucks, and Related Material Handling Equipment, Attachments, Accessories, and Services - Pest Management with Related Current & Pending Solicitations Become a Vendor Cooperative Purchasing Vendor Name: * Vendor Address: * Vendor City: * Vendor State: * Vendor Zip Code: * Contact Name: * Contact email: * Vendor Phone Number: -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and StreetSweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories andSupplies 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Pre-Proposal Conference: December 5, 2017 at 10:00 am CT Sealed proposals due: December 20, 2017 at 4:30 pm CT Proposals will be publicly opened: December 21, 2017 at 8:30 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. Home > Cooperative Purchasing >Become a Vendor >Current & Pending Solicitations > -Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and Supplies Home 888.894.1930 Contact Us About Us Cooperative Purchasing Statewide/Regional Solutions Organizational Notice Basic Information Details Dates Contact Information Bid Submission Process Estimated Contract Value (CAD)$999,999,999.00 (Not shown to suppliers) Reference Number 0000071479 Issuing Organization National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type RFP - Request for Proposal Solicitation Number 122017 Title Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Equipment with Related Accessories Source ID PP.CO.USA.868485.C88455 Region All of Canada, All of Canada Purchase Type Term: 2018/03/22 12:00:00 AM CDT - 2021/03/16 12:00:00 AM CDT 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Proposals will be received until December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Publication 2017/11/16 10:46:02 AM CST Question Acceptance Deadline 2017/12/13 04:30:00 PM CST Questions are submitted online No Bid Intent Not Available Closing Date 2017/12/20 04:30:00 PM CST Procurement Department 218-894-1930 rfp@njpacoop.org 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 Yes 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 1 of 4 Documents Documents Document Size Uploaded Date Language How to obtain Sewer RFP.DOCX [docx] 12 Kb 2017/11/16 10:44:39 AM CST English 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 2 of 4 Categories Selected Categories MERX Categories (5) G Goods Goods G28 Special Purpose Vehicles Special Purpose Vehicles G22 Miscellaneous Goods Miscellaneous Goods G18 Industrial Equipment Industrial Equipment G19 Machinery and Tools Machinery and Tools U Other Other U Undefined Undefined 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST 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. 122017 - Sewer Vacuum Hydro-Excavation Street Sweeper Eq... 2017/11/16 10:46:45 AM CST Page 4 of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n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`` ` i &NQJSF4UBUF%FWFMPQNFOUIUUQXXXFTEOZHPW RI Chat Help Logout [Switch to Vendor View] Home New Bid Closed Bids My Stuff Tools Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and supplies Bid Type RFP Bid Number 122017 Title Sewer Vacuum, Hydro- Excavation, and Street Sweeper Equipment, with Related Accessories and supplies Start Date Nov 16, 2017 1:54:33 PM CST End Date Dec 20, 2017 4:30:00 PM CST Agency NJPA Bid Contact Chris Robinson (218) 895-4168 rfp@njpacoop.org 202 12th Street NE P.O. Box 219 Staples, MN 56479-0219 Access Reports View reports on who has been notified of the bid or accessed it. [Notification report] [Access report] Questions 0 Questions 0 Unanswered [View/Ask Questions] Edit Bid [Create Addendum] 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Delivery Information Chris Robinson, NJPA 202 12th St NE, PO Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 Pre-Bid Conference Date Dec 5, 2017 10:00:00 AM CST Location Page 1 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Swee... 11/16/2017http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=87674 Notes Pre-Proposal information will be sent two days prior. Documents No Documents for this bid Customer Support: agencysupport@publicpurchase.com | Copyright 1999-2017 © | The Public Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #122017 - Sewer Vacuum, Hydro-Excavation, and Street Swee... 11/16/2017http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=87674 PUBLIC NOTICES 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. usat-usatnonbus-100074451nationaljointpowersal-display-public-notice-12388.indd 111/13/17 2:39 PM 1 National Joint Powers Alliance® REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL for the procurement of SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES RFP Opening DECEMBER 21, 2017 8:30 a.m. Central Time At the offices of the National Joint Powers Alliance® 202 12th Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479 RFP #122017 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 #122017 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning November 16, 2017. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Chris Robinson, 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 December 20, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened December 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. RFP Timeline November 16, 2017 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 and also RFP Appendix B), 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. December 5, 2017 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. December 13, 2017 Deadline for RFP questions. December 20, 2017 4:30 p.m. CT Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be returned unopened. December 21, 2017 8:30 a.m. CT Public Opening of Proposals. Direct questions regarding this RFP to: Chris Robinson at chris.robinson@njpacoop.org or (218) 895-4168. 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 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. 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 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) 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 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 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/. 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. 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 NJPA: 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 Chief Procurement Officer. NJPA’s primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract that offer opportunities for NJPA 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 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 in the best interests of NJPA and the NJPA Members and preferred by NJPA to provide the widest array of solutions to meet the member agency’s needs. 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES. 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: In addition to SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES, this solicitation should be read to include, but not to be limited to: 3.17.1 Equipment, accessories and supplies for the purpose of cleaning sewer lines, catch basins and storm sewers, such as sewer vacuums, jetters, rodders, and self-propelled or chassis-mounted hydro-excavators; and, 7 3.17.2 Equipment, accessories and supplies for the purpose of street or parking lot sweeping, such as mechanical, vacuum, air, and high efficiency sweepers. 3.17.3 NJPA reserves the right to limit the scope of this solicitation for NJPA and current and potential NJPA member agencies. 3.17.3.1 Respondent’s proposal may include no more than an incidental offering of trailer or skid-mounted hydro-excavation equipment. Respondent’s primary offerings must be the equipment identified in sub-sections 3.17.1 or 3.17.2 above. 3.17.3.2 This solicitation is not intended to include pumps. Such items in a proposal will be considered out of scope. 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: 3.23.3 Multiple solutions to the needs of NJPA and NJPA Members are possible. Examples could include: 3.23.3.1 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. 3.23.3.2 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 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 3.23.3.3 Good, Better, Best: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may offer the choice “of good, better, best” multiple-grade solutions to meet NJPA 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 NJPA Members’ needs. 3.23.4 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. 3.24 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES 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. 9 3.25 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. 3.25.1 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. 3.26 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. 3.27 [This section is intentionally blank.] 3.28 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. 3.28.1 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. 3.29 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 3.30 Industry Standards: Except as contained herein, the specifications or solutions for this RFP shall be those accepted guidelines set forth by the SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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 NJPA Member agencies; and 10 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 NJPA 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 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. 3.35 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 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. 3.37 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. 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 NJPA’s 11 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. 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. 12 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 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES to Chris Robinson at NJPA 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or to RFP@njpacoop.org. You may also call Chris Robinson at (218) 895-4168. 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 t he 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 13 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 Procurement 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 4.23 Sealed and properly identified responses for this RFP entitled SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO- EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES will be received by Chris Robinson, Procurement 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES 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. At the time of the public opening, the NJPA Director of Procurement 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. 14 4 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 $150 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 NJPA. 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. 15 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. 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 16 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. 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. 17 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. 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. 18 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. 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; 19 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 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 20 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 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. 21 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. 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. 22 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 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 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. 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 23 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 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 typical administrative fee under this Contract is two percent (2%). 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 24 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. 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. 7 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 25 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 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 7.7 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 7.8 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. 7.8.1 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors must provide a quarterly Contract sales report regardless of the amount of sales. D. AUDITS 7.9 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 7.10 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 26 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: 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].” F. TRADE-INS 7.12 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 7.13 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 7.14 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. 7.14.1 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 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; 7.14.4 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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 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 27 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 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. 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.] 28 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 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, 29 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.] 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.] 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 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. 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 NJPA or an NJPA 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 NJPA to take action or to assert any right hereunder does not constitute a waiver of such right. 30 L. 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 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. M. 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. 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 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. 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 31 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, 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. 2) Provide a brief history of your company, including your company’s core values, business philosophy, and longevity in the SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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. 33 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 NJPA 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 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. 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 NJPA 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 NJPA 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. 34 25) 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? 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 NJPA 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) accreditations that your company or hub partners have obtained. 31) 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? 32) 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 #122017 FORM D Formal Offering of Proposal (To be completed only by the Proposer) SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES In compliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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 & Bradstreet Number:____________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Authorized Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ (Name printed or typed) 38 Form E Contract Acceptance and Award (To be completed only by NJPA) NJPA #122017 ______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 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 #122017 NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ ________________________________________ NJPA Board Member (Name printed or typed) Executed this ______ day of __________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number #122017 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 #122017 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 SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES 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_________________________________ 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 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 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) 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 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 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 inspection. Identify any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. 14) If delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA Member, describe in detail the complete shipping and delivery program. 15) Specifically describe those 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 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. 18) 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 19) Describe the top three market differentiators of your products/services relative to the industry. 20) Identify how your products, services and supplies address the scope of this RFP. Signature: ___________________________________________________________Date: _______________________ 44 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 45 11 NJPA 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 wr iting by completing sections 2, 3, and 4 of this NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form and signed by an authorized Vendor representative in section 5. All changes are subject to review by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager and to approval by NJPA’s Chief Procurement Officer. Submit request through email to your assigned NJPA Contract Administrator. NJPA will determine whether the request is 1) within the scope of the original RFP, and 2) in the best interests of NJPA and NJPA 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 NJPA product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA 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: NJPA 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 NJPA CONTRACT NUMBER: ☐ Price Decrease 46 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 NJPA contract pricing. 47 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, NJPA Director of Cooperative Contracts and Procurement/CPO Date 48 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 Appendix B - Political Subdivision List for HI, ID, OR, SC, UT, WA Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington County County County County County County Hawaii County Ada County Baker County Abbeville County Beaver County Adams County Kauai County Adams County Benton County Aiken County Box Elder County Asotin County Maui County Bannock County Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Allendale County Cache County Benton County Municipality Bear Lake County Clackamas County Anderson County Carbon County Chelan County City and County of Honolulu Benewah County Clackamas County Service District No. 1 Bamberg County Daggett County Clallam County Higher Education Bingham County Clatsop County Barnwell County Davis County Clark County Hawaii Community College Blaine County Columbia County Beaufort County Duchesne County Columbia County Honolulu Community College Boise County Coos County Berkeley County Duchesne County Special Service District No. 2 Cowlitz County University of Hawaii Bonner County Crook County Calhoun County Emery County Douglas County University of Hawaii Research Corporation Bonneville County Curry County Catawba Regional Council of Governments Five County Association of Governments Ferry County Windward Community College Boundary County Deschutes County Central Midlands Council of Governments Garfield County Franklin County Education (K-12)Butte County Douglas County Charleston County Grand County Garfield County Hanalani Schools Camas County Gilliam County Cherokee County Iron County Grant County Kamehameha Schools Canyon County Grant County Chester County Juab County Grays Harbor County Special District Caribou County Harney County Chesterfield County Kane County Island County Hawaii Community Development Authority Cassia County Hood River County Clarendon County Millard County Jefferson County Hawaii Public Housing Authority Clark County Jackson County Colleton County Morgan County King County Hawaii Tourism Authority Clearwater County Jefferson County Darlington County Piute County King County Directors' Association Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Custer County Josephine County Dillon County Rich County Kitsap County Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority Elmore County Klamath County Dorchester County Salt Lake County Kittitas County State Franklin County Lake County Edgefield County San Juan County Klickitat County Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services Fremont County Lane Council of Governments Fairfield County Sanpete County Lewis County Hawaii Department of Finance and Administration Gem County Lane County Florence County Sevier County Lincoln County Hawaii Department of Health Gooding County Lincoln County Georgetown County Summit County Mason County Hawaii Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund Idaho County Linn County Greenville County Tooele County Okanogan County Hawaii Health Systems Corporation Jefferson County Malheur County Greenwood County Uintah County Pacific County State Of Hawaii Jerome County Marion County Hampton County Utah County Pend Oreille County Kootenai County Marion County Housing Authority Horry County Wasatch County Pierce County Latah County Morrow County Jasper County Washington County San Juan County Lemhi County Multnomah County Kershaw County Wayne County Skagit County Lewis County Polk County Lancaster County Weber County Skamania County Lincoln County Sherman County Laurens County Municipality Snohomish County Madison County Tillamook County Lee County Centerfield City Spokane County Minidoka County Umatilla County Lexington County City of Alpine City Stevens County Nez Perce County Union County Lower Savannah Council of Governments City of American Fork Thurston County Oneida County Wallowa County Marion County City of Aurora Thurston Regional Planning Council Owyhee County Wasco County Marlboro County City of Ballard Wahkiakum County Payette County Washington County McCormick County City of Beaver Walla Walla County Power County Wheeler County Newberry County City of Blanding Whatcom County Shoshone County Yamhill County Oconee County City of Bluffdale Whitman County Teton County Municipality Orangeburg County City of Bountiful Yakima County Twin Falls County City of Adair Village Pickens County City of Brigham Yakima County Public Services Valley County City of Adrian Richland County City of Castle Dale Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Washington County City of Albany Saluda County City of Cedar City Municipality Municipality City of Amity Spartanburg County City of Cedar Hills City of Aberdeen City of Aberdeen City of Arlington Sumter County City of Centerville City of Airway Heights City of Albion City of Ashland Union County City of Clearfield City of Algona City of American Falls City of Astoria Williamsburg County City of Clinton City of Anacortes City of Ammon City of Athena York County City of Coalville City of Arlington City of Arco City of Aumsville Municipality City of Colorado City City of Asotin City of Arimo City of Aurora City of Abbeville City of Corinne City City of Auburn City of Ashton City of Baker City City of Aiken City of Cottonwood Heights City of Bainbridge Island City of Athol City of Bandon City of Anderson City of Delta City of Battle Ground City of Atomic City City of Banks City of Barnwell City of Draper City of Bellevue City of Bancroft City of Bay City City of Beaufort City of Duchesne City of Bellingham City of Bellevue City of Beaverton City of Belton City of East Carbon City of Benton City City of Blackfoot City of Bend City of Bennettsville City of Elk Ridge City of Bingen City of Bliss City of Boardman City of Bishopville City of Elmo City of Black Diamond City of Bloomington City of Brookings City of Camden City of Enoch City of Blaine City of Boise City of Brownsville City of Cayce City of Enterprise City of Bonney Lake City of Bonners Ferry City of Burns City of Charleston City of Ephraim City of Bothell City of Bovill City of Canby City of Chesnee City of Escalante City of Bremerton City of Buhl City of Cannon Beach City of Chester City of Eureka City of Brewster City of Burley City of Canyonville City of Clemson City of Fairview City of Bridgeport City of Caldwell City of Carlton City of Clinton City of Farmington City of Brier City of Cambridge City of Cascade Locks City of Columbia City of Farr West City of Buckley City of Carey City of Cave Junction City of Conway City of Ferron City of Burien City of Cascade City of Central Point City of Darlington City of Fillmore City of Burlington City of Castleford City of Chiloquin City of Denmark City of Fountain Green City of Camas City of Challis City of Clatskanie City of Dillon City of Fruit Heights City of Carnation City of Chubbuck City of Coburg City of Easley City of Garland City of Cashmere City of Clayton City of Columbia City City of Florence City of Grantsville City of Castle Rock City of Clifton City of Condon City of Folly Beach City of Green River City of Centralia City of Coeur d'Alene City of Coos Bay City of Forest Acres City of Gunnison City of Chehalis City of Council City of Coquille City of Fountain Inn City of Harrisville City of Chelan City of Craigmont City of Cornelius City of Gaffney City of Heber City City of Cheney City of Crouch City of Corvallis City of Georgetown City of Helper City City of Chewelah City of Culdesac City of Cottage Grove City of Goose Creek City of Herriman City of Clarkston City of Dalton Gardens City of Cove City of Greenville City of Highland City of Cle Elum City of Dayton City of Creswell City of Greenwood City of Hildale City of Clyde Hill City of Deary City of Culver City of Greer City of Holladay City of Colfax City of Dietrich City of Dallas City of Hanahan City of Honeyville City of College Place City of Donnelly City of Damascus City of Hardeeville City of Hooper City of Colville Appendix B Page 1 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington City of Dover City of Dayton City of Hartsville City of Huntington City of Connell City of Downey City of Dayville City of Inman City of Hurricane City of Cosmopolis City of Driggs City of Depoe Bay City of Isle of Palms City of Hyde Park City of Covington City of Dubois City of Detroit City of Johnsonville City of Hyrum City of Davenport City of Eagle City of Donald City of Lake City City of Ivins City of Dayton City of Eden City of Drain City of Lancaster City of Kamas City of Deer Park City of Elk River City of Dundee City of Landrum City of Kanab City of Des Moines City of Emmett City of Dunes City City of Laurens City of Kaysville City of DuPont City of Fairfield City of Durham City of Liberty City of La Verkin City of Duvall City of Fernan Lake Village City of Eagle Point City of Loris City of Layton City of East Wenatchee City of Filer City of Echo City of Manning City of Lehi City of Edgewood City of Firth City of Elgin City of Marion City of Lewiston City of Edmonds City of Franklin City of Enterprise City of Mauldin City of Lindon City of Electric City City of Fruitland City of Estacada City of Mullins City of Logan City of Ellensburg City of Garden City City of Eugene City of Myrtle Beach City of Manti City of Elma City of Genesee City of Fairview City of New Ellenton City of Mapleton City of Entiat City of Georgetown City of Falls City City of Newberry City of Marriott-Slaterville City of Enumclaw City of Glenns Ferry City of Florence City of North Augusta City of Mendon City of Ephrata City of Gooding City of Forest Grove City of North Charleston City of Midvale City of Everett City of Grace City of Fossil City of North Myrtle Beach City of Midway City of Everson City of Grand View City of Garibaldi City of Orangeburg City of Milford City of Federal Way City of Grangeville City of Gaston City of Pickens City of Millville City of Ferndale City of Greenleaf City of Gates City of Rock Hill City of Moab City of Fife City of Hagerman City of Gearhart City of Seneca City of Mona City of Fircrest City of Hailey City of Gervais City of Simpsonville City of Monroe City of Forks City of Hansen City of Gladstone City of Spartanburg City of Monticello City of George City of Harrison City of Glendale City of Sumter City of Morgan City of Gig Harbor City of Hayden City of Gold Beach City of Tega Cay City of Moroni City of Gold Bar City of Hazelton City of Gold Hill City of Travelers Rest City of Mt. Pleasant City City of Goldendale City of Heyburn City of Grants Pass City of Union City of Murray City of Grand Coulee City of Hollister City of Greenhorn City of Walhalla City of Myton City of Grandview City of Homedale City of Gresham City of Walterboro City of Naples City of Granger City of Hope City of Haines City of Wellford City of Nephi City of Granite Falls City of Horseshoe Bend City of Halfway City of West Columbia City of Nibley City of Harrington City of Huetter City of Halsey City of Westminster City of North Logan City of Hoquiam City of Idaho City City of Happy Valley City of Woodruff City of North Ogden City of Ilwaco City of Idaho Falls City of Harrisburg City of York City of North Salt Lake City of Issaquah City of Inkom City of Helix Town of Allendale City of Oakley City of Kahlotus City of Island Park City of Heppner Town of Andrews City of Ogden City of Kalama City of Jerome City of Hermiston Town of Atlantic Beach City of Orangeville City of Kelso City of Juliaetta City of Hillsboro Town of Awendaw City of Orem City of Kenmore City of Kamiah City of Hines Town of Aynor City of Panguitch City of Kennewick City of Kellogg City of Hood River Town of Batesburg-Leesville City of Park City City of Kent City of Kendrick City of Hubbard Town of Bethune City of Parowan City of Kettle Falls City of Ketchum City of Huntington Town of Blacksburg City of Payson City of Kirkland City of Kimberly City of Idanha Town of Blackville City of Perry City of Kittitas City of Kooskia City of Imbler Town of Blenheim City of Plain City City of La Center City of Kuna City of Independence Town of Bluffton City of Pleasant Grove City of Lacey City of Lapwai City of Irrigon Town of Blythewood City of Pleasant View City of Lake Forest Park City of Lava Hot Springs City of Island City Town of Bowman City of Price City of Lake Stevens City of Lewiston City of Jacksonville Town of Branchville City of Providence City of Lakewood City of Mackay City of Jefferson Town of Briarcliffe Acres City of Provo City of Langley City of Malad City City of John Day Town of Brunson City of Richfield City of Leavenworth City of Marsing City of Johnson City Town of Calhoun Falls City of Richmond City of Liberty Lake City of McCall City of Joseph Town of Cameron City of River Heights City of Long Beach City of McCammon City of Junction City Town of Campobello City of Riverdale City of Longview City of Melba City of Keizer Town of Central City of Riverton City of Lynden City of Menan City of King City Town of Chapin City of Roosevelt City of Lynnwood City of Meridian City of Klamath Falls Town of Cheraw City of Roy City of Mabton City of Middleton City of La Grande Town of Chesterfield City of Salem City of Maple Valley City of Midvale City of La Pine Town of Clio City of Salina City of Marysville City of Moscow City of Lafayette Town of Clover City of Salt Lake City City of Mattawa City of Mountain Home City of Lake Oswego Town of Cottageville City of Sandy City of McCleary City of Mullan City of Lakeside Town of Coward City of Santa Clara City of Medical Lake City of Murtaugh City of Lebanon Town of Cowpens City of Santaquin City of Medina City of Nampa City of Lincoln City Town of Denmark City of Saratoga Springs City of Mercer Island City of New Meadows City of Lonerock Town of Donalds City of Smithfield City City of Mesa City of New Plymouth City of Lostine Town of Due West City of South Jordan City of Mill Creek City of Newdale City of Lowell Town of Duncan City of South Ogden City of Milton City of Nezperce City of Lyons Town of Eastover City of South Salt Lake City City of Monroe City of Notus City of Madras Town of Edgefield City of South Weber City of Montesano City of Orofino City of Malin Town of Edisto Beach City of Spanish Fork City of Morton City of Osburn City of Manzanita Town of Ehrhardt City of Spring City City of Moses Lake City of Parker City of Maupin Town of Elgin City of Springville City of Mossyrock City of Parma City of McMinnville Town of Elloree City of St. George City of Mountlake Terrace City of Paul City of Medford Town of Estill City of Sunnyside City of Moxee City of Payette City of Metolius Town of Eutawville City of Sunset City of Mt. Vernon City of Pierce City of Mill City Town of Fairfax City of Syracuse City of Mukilteo City of Pinehurst City of Millersburg Town of Ft. Mill City of Taylorsville City of Napavine City of Plummer City of Milton-Freewater Town of Furman City of Tooele City of Newcastle City of Pocatello City of Milwaukie Town of Gaston City of Toquerville City of Newport City of Ponderay City of Molalla Town of Gifford City of Tremonton City of Nooksack City of Post Falls City of Monmouth Town of Gilbert City of Tropic City of Normandy Park City of Potlatch City of Monroe Town of Govan City of Uintah City of North Bend City of Preston City of Monument Town of Gray Court City of Vernal City of North Bonneville City of Priest River City of Moro Town of Great Falls City of Washington City of Oak Harbor City of Rathdrum City of Mosier Town of Greeleyville City of Washington Terrace City of Oakville City of Reubens City of Mt. Angel Town of Hampton City of Wellington City of Ocean Shores City of Rexburg City of Mt. Vernon Town of Harleyville City of Wellsville City of Okanogan City of Richfield City of Myrtle Creek Town of Heath Springs City of Wendover City of Olympia City of Rigby City of Myrtle Point Town of Hemingway City of West Bountiful City of Omak City of Riggins City of Nehalem Town of Hilda City of West Haven City City of Oroville City of Ririe City of Newberg Town of Hilton Head Island City of West Jordan City of Orting City of Roberts City of Newport Town of Hodges City of West Point City of Othello Appendix B Page 2 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington City of Rockland City of North Bend Town of Holly Hill City of West Valley City City of Pacific City of Rupert City of North Plains Town of Hollywood City of Willard City of Palouse City of Salmon City of North Powder Town of Honea Path City of Woodland Hills City of Pasco City of Sandpoint City of Nyssa Town of Irmo City of Woods Cross City of Pateros City of Shelley City of Oakland Town of Iva Town of Alta City of Pomeroy City of Shoshone City of Oakridge Town of Jackson Town of Altamont City of Port Angeles City of Smelterville City of Ontario Town of James Island Town of Alton City of Port Orchard City of Soda Springs City of Oregon City Town of Jamestown Town of Amalga City of Port Townsend City of Spirit Lake City of Paisley Town of Jefferson Town of Annabella City of Poulsbo City of St. Anthony City of Pendleton Town of Jenkinsville Town of Antimony City of Prosser City of St. Charles City of Philomath Town of Johnston Town of Apple Valley City of Pullman City of Stanley City of Phoenix Town of Jonesville Town of Ballard City of Puyallup City of Star City of Pilot Rock Town of Kershaw Town of Bear River City City of Quincy City of Stites City of Port Orford Town of Kiawah Island Town of Bicknell City of Rainier City of Sugar City City of Portland Town of Kingstree Town of Big Water City of Raymond City of Sun Valley City of Powers Town of Lake View Town of Boulder City of Redmond City of Tensed City of Prairie City Town of Lamar South Carolina Town of Brian Head City of Renton City of Tetonia City of Prineville Town of Lane Town of Bryce Canyon City City of Republic City of Troy City of Rainier Town of Latta Town of Cannonville City of Richland City of Twin Falls City of Redmond Town of Lexington Town of Castle Valley City of Ridgefield City of Ucon City of Reedsport Town of Lincolnville Town of Cedar Fort City of Ritzville City of Victor City of Richland Town of Little Mountain Town of Centerfield City of Rock Island City of Wallace City of Riddle Town of Lockhart Town of Central Valley City of Roslyn City of Weippe City of Rockaway Beach Town of Lyman Town of Circleville City of Roy City of Weiser City of Rogue River Town of Lynchburg Town of Clarkston City of Royal City City of Wendell City of Roseburg Town of Mayesville Town of Clawson City of Sammamish City of Weston City of Rufus Town of McBee Town of Cleveland City of SeaTac City of White Bird City of Salem Town of McClellanville Town of Cornish City of Seattle City of Wilder City of Sandy Town of McColl Town of Daniel City of Sedro-Woolley City of Winchester City of Scappoose Town of McCormick Town of Deweyville City of Selah Higher Education City of Scio Town of Meggett Town of Eagle Mountain City of Sequim Boise State University City of Scotts Mills Town of Moncks Corner Town of Elmo City of Shelton College of Southern Idaho City of Seaside Town of Mt. Pleasant Town of Elsinore City of Shoreline College of Western Idaho City of Seneca Town of Neeses Town of Elwood City of Snohomish Eastern Idaho Technical College City of Shady Cove Town of New Ellenton Town of Emery City of Snoqualmie Idaho Division of Professional Technical Education City of Sheridan Town of Nichols Town of Fairfield City of Soap Lake Idaho State University City of Sherwood Town of Ninety Six Town of Francis City of South Bend Lewis-Clark State College City of Siletz Town of Norris Town of Garden City City of Spokane North Idaho College City of Silverton Town of North Town of Genola City of Spokane Valley University of Idaho City of Sisters Town of Norway Town of Glendale City of Sprague Education (K-12)City of Sodaville Town of Olanta Town of Glenwood City of Stanwood Aberdeen School District No. 58 City of Spray Town of Pacolet Town of Goshen City of Stevenson Arbon Elementary School District No. 383 City of Springfield Town of Pageland Town of Hanksville City of Sultan Avery School District City of St. Helens Town of Pamplico Town of Hatch City of Sumas Basin School District No. 72 City of St. Paul Town of Patrick Town of Henefer City of Sumner Bear Lake County School District No. 33 City of Stanfield Town of Pawleys Island Town of Henrieville City of Sunnyside Bear Lake School District No. 33 City of Stayton Town of Pelion Town of Hideout City of Tacoma Blackfoot School District No. 55 City of Sublimity Town of Pelzer Town of Hinckley City of Tekoa Blaine County School District No. 61 City of Sumpter Town of Pendleton Town of Holden City of Tenino Bliss Joint School District No. 234 City of Sutherlin Town of Perry Town of Howell City of Tieton Bonneville Joint School District No. 93 City of Sweet Home Town of Port Royal Town of Huntsville City of Toledo Boundary County School District No. 101 City of Talent Town of Prosperity Town of Joseph City of Tonasket Bruneau-Grand View Joint School District City of Tangent Town of Ravenel Town of Junction City of Toppenish Buhl Joint School District No. 412 City of The Dalles Town of Reidville Town of Kanarraville City of Tukwila Butte County Joint School District No. 111 City of Tigard Town of Ridge Spring Town of Kanosh City of Tumwater Caldwell School District No. 132 City of Tillamook Town of Ridgeland Town of Kingston City of Union Gap Camas County School District No. 121 City of Toledo Town of Ridgeville Town of Koosharem City of University Place Cambridge School District City of Troutdale Town of Ridgeway Town of Leeds City of Vader Cascade School District No. 422 City of Tualatin Town of Saint Matthews Town of Levan City of Vancouver Cassia County Joint School District No. 151 City of Turner Town of Saint Stephen Town of Loa City of Waitsburg Castleford Joint School District No. 417 City of Ukiah Town of Salem Town of Manila City of Walla Walla Challis Joint School District No. 181 City of Umatilla Town of Salley Town of Mantua City of Wapato Clark County School District No. 161 City of Union Town of Saluda Town of Marysvale City of Warden Coeur d'Alene School District No. 271 City of Unity Town of Santee Town of Meadow City of Washougal Cottonwood Joint School District No. 242 City of Vale Town of Scranton Town of Minersville City of Wenatchee Council School District No. 13 City of Veneta Town of Seabrook Island Town of New Harmony City of West Richland Culdesac Joint School District No. 342 City of Vernonia Town of Sellers Town of Newton City of Westport Dietrich School District No. 314 City of Waldport Town of Sharon Town of Ophir City of White Salmon Emmett Independent School District No. 221 City of Wallowa Town of Six Mile Town of Orderville City of Winlock Filer School District No. 413 City of Warrenton Town of Snelling Town of Paradise City of Woodinville Firth School District No. 59 City of Wasco Town of Society Hill Town of Paragonah City of Woodland Fremont County School District No. 215 City of West Linn Town of South Congaree Town of Portage Utah City of Yakima/Yakima County Fruitland School District No. 373 City of Westfir Town of Springdale Town of Randolph City of Yelm Garden Valley School District City of Weston Town of St. George Town of Redmond City of Zillah Genesee Joint School District No. 282 City of Wheeler Town of St. Matthews Town of Rockville Consolidated Borough of Quil Ceda Village Glenns Ferry Joint School District No. 192 City of Willamina Town of Stuckey Town of Rocky Ridge Grays Harbor Council of Governments Gooding Joint School District No. 231 City of Wilsonville Town of Sullivans Island Town of Rush Valley Town of Almira Grace Joint School District No. 148 City of Winston Town of Summerton Town of Scipio Town of Beaux Arts Village Hagerman Joint School District No. 233 City of Wood Village Town of Summerville Town of Scofield Town of Bucoda Hansen School District No. 415 City of Woodburn Town of Summit Town of Sigurd Town of Carbonado Highland Joint School District No. 305 City of Yachats Town of Surfside Beach Town of Springdale Town of Cathlamet Homedale School District No. 370 City of Yamhill Town of Swansea Town of Stockton Town of Clyde Hill Horseshoe Bend School District No. 73 City of Yoncalla Town of Timmonsville Town of Toquerville Town of Colton Idaho Falls School District No. 91 Town of Bonanza Town of Trenton Town of Torrey Town of Conconully Independent School District of Boise City Town of Butte Falls Town of Turbeville Town of Trenton Town of Concrete Jefferson County School District No. 251 Town of Canyon City Town of Ulmer Town of Tropic Town of Coulee City Jerome Joint School District No. 261 Town of Lakeview Town of Varnville Town of Uintah Town of Coulee Dam Joint School District No. 2 Town of Lexington Town of Wagener Town of Vernon Town of Coupeville Kamiah School District No. 304 Higher Education Town of Ward Town of Vineyard Town of Creston Kellogg Joint School District 391 Blue Mountain Community College Town of Ware Shoals Town of Virgin Town of Cusick Kendrick Joint School District No. 283 Central Oregon Community College Town of West Pelzer Town of Wales Town of Darrington Kimberly School District No. 414 Chemeketa Community College Town of West Union Town of Wallsburg Town of Eatonville Kootenai School District No. 274 Clackamas Community College Town of Whitmire Uintah Basin Association of Governments Town of Elmer City Kuna Joint School District No. 3 Clatsop Community College Town of Williamston Higher Education Town of Endicott Appendix B Page 3 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Lake Pend Oreille School District No. 84 Columbia Gorge Community College Town of Williston College of Eastern Utah Town of Fairfield Lakeland School District No. 272 Eastern Oregon University Town of Winnsboro Davis Applied Technology College Town of Farmington Lapwai School District No. 341 Klamath Community College District Town of Yemassee Dixie Applied Technology College Town of Friday Harbor Lewiston Independent School District No. 1 Lane Community College Higher Education Dixie State University Town of Garfield Mackay School District No. 182 Linn-Benton Community College Aiken Technical College Mountainland Applied Technology College Town of Hamilton Madison School District No. 321 Mt. Hood Community College Beaufort Jasper Higher Education Commission Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions Town of Harrah Marsh Valley Joint School District No. 21 Oregon Coast Community College Central Carolina Technical College Salt Lake Community College Town of Hatton Marsing Joint School District No. 363 Oregon Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development Clemson University Snow College Town of Hunts Point McCall-Donnelly Joint School District No. 421 Oregon Health and Science University Coastal Carolina University Southern Utah University Town of Index Meadows Valley School District No. 11 Oregon Institute of Technology College of Charleston Tooele Applied Technology College Town of Ione Melba School District No. 136 Oregon State University Denmark Technical College Uintah Basin Applied Technology College Town of La Conner Middleton School District No. 134 Oregon State University, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Florence-Darlington Technical College University of Utah Town of LaCrosse Midvale School District No. 433 Oregon University System Francis Marion University University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics Town of Lamont Minidoka County School District No. 331 Portland Community College Greenville Technical College Utah State University Town of Latah Moscow School District No. 281 Portland State University Horry-Georgetown Technical College Utah System of Higher Education Town of Lind Mountain Home School District No. 193 Reed College Lander University Utah Valley University Town of Lyman Mountain View School District No. 244 Rogue Community College Medical University of South Carolina Weber State University Town of Malden Mullan School District 392 Southern Oregon University Midlands Technical College Education (K-12)Town of Mansfield Murtaugh Joint School District No. 418 Southern Oregon University Family Housing Northeastern Technical College Alpine School District Town of Marcus Nampa Christian Schools Inc.Southwestern Oregon Community College Orangeburg-Calhoun Technical College Beaver County School District Town of Metaline Nampa School District No. 131 Tillamook Bay Community College Piedmont Technical College Box Elder School District Town of Millwood New Plymouth School District Treasure Valley Community College South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education Cache County School District Town of Naches Nez Perce Joint School District No. 302 Umpqua Community College South Carolina State University Canyons School District Town of Nespelem North Gem School District No. 149 University of Oregon South Carolina Technical College System Carbon School District Town of Northport Notus School District Western Oregon University Spartanburg Community College Centro De La Familia De Utah Head Start Program School District Town of Oakesdale Oneida County School District No. 351 Education (K-12)Technical College of the Lowcountry Daggett School District Town of Odessa Orofino Joint School District No. 171 Adel School District 21 The Citadel Davis School District Town of Pe Ell Parma School District No. 137 Adrian School District Tri-County Technical College Duchesne County School District Town of Prescott Payette School District No. 371 Alsea School District No. 7J Trident Technical College Emery County School District Town of Reardan Plummer-Worley Joint School District No. 44 Amity School District 4J University of South Carolina Freedom Preparatory Academy School District Town of Riverside Pocatello-Chubbuck School District No. 25 Annex School District 29 University of South Carolina, Aiken Garfield County School District Town of Rockford Post Falls School District No. 273 Arlington School District No. 3 University of South Carolina, Upstate Grand County School District Town of Rosalia Potlatch School District No. 285 Arock School District No. 81 Williamsburg Technical College Granite School District Town of Ruston Preston Joint School District No. 201 Ashland School District No. 5 Winthrop University Iron County School District Town of Skykomish Richfield School District No. 316 Ashwood School District York Technical College Jordan School District Town of South Cle Elum Ririe Joint School District No. 252 Astoria School District No. 1C Education (K-12)Juab School District Town of South Prairie Rockland School District No. 382 Athena-Weston School District No. 29RJ Abbeville County School District Kane County School District Town of Spangle Salmon River Joint School District No. 243 Baker School District No. 5J Aiken County Public Schools Logan City School District Town of Springdale Salmon School District No. 291 Bandon School District Allendale County School District Millard School District Town of St. John Shelley 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 Steilacoom Shoshone Joint School District No. 312 Beaverton School District No. 48 Anderson School District No. 1 Mountainland Head Start Program School District Office Town of Twisp Snake River School District Bend-La Pine Public Schools Anderson School District No. 2 Murray City School District Town of Uniontown Soda Springs Joint School District No. 150 Bethel School District No. 52 Anderson School District No. 3 Nebo School District Town of Washtucna South Lemhi School District No. 292 Blachly School District Anderson School District No. 4 North Sanpete County School District Town of Waterville St. Maries Joint School District No. 41 Blachly School District 90 Anderson School District No. 5 North Sanpete School District Town of Waverly Sugar-Salem Joint District No. 322 Brookings Harbor School District Bamberg School District No. 1 North Summit School District Town of Wilbur Swan Valley Elementary School District No. 33 Camas Valley School District Bamberg School District No. 2 Ogden City School District Town of Wilkeson Swan Valley School District No. 92 Canby School District No. 86 Barnwell School District No. 45 Park City School District Town of Wilson Creek Teton County School District No. 401 Cascade School District No. 5 Beaufort County School District Piute County School District Town of Winthrop Three Creek Joint School District No. 416 Centennial School District No. 28J Berkeley County School District Provo City School District Town of Woodway Troy School District No. 287 Central Curry School District No. 1 Blackville-Hilda Public Schools Rich County School District Town of Yacolt Twin Falls School District No. 411 Central Linn School District Calhoun County School District Rich School District Town of Yarrow Point Valley School District No. 262 Central Point School District No. 6 Charleston County School District Rural Utah Child Development Head Start Program School District OfficeHigher Education Vallivue School District No. 139 Central School District No. 13J Cherokee County School District Salt Lake City School District Bates Technical College Vision Charter School District # 463 Clackamas Education Service District Chester County School District San Juan School District Bellevue Community College Wallace School District No. 393 Clatskanie School District No. 6J Chesterfield County School District Sevier School District Bellingham Technical College Weiser School District No. 431 Colton School District No. 53 Clarendon County School District No. 1 South Sanpete School District Big Bend Community College Wendell School District No. 232 Columbia Gorge Education Service District Clarendon County School District No. 2 South Summit School District Cascadia Community College West 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 University West Jefferson School District No. 253 Coos Bay School District No. 9 Clover School District No. 2 Thomas Edison Charter Schools Centralia College West Side School District No. 202 Coquille School District No. 8 Colleton County School District Tintic School District Clark College Whitepine Joint School District No. 288 Corbett School District No. 39 Darlington County School District Tooele County School District Clover Park Technical College Wilder School District No. 133 Corvallis School District No. 509J Delta R-V School District Uintah School District Columbia Basin Community College Special District Cove School District No. 15 Dillon County School District No. 1 Wasatch County School District Community Colleges of Spokane Ada County Emergency Medical Services District Crane Elementary School District Dillon County School District No. 2 Washington County School District Eastern Washington University Ada County Highway District Creswell School District No. 40 Dillon County School District No. 3 Wayne County School District Edmonds Community College Adams County Recreation District Crook County School District Dillon County School District No. 4 Weber School District Everett Community College Ahsahka Water and Sewer District Crow-Applegate-Lorane School District No. 66 Diocese Of Charleston Schools Special District Evergreen State College Albion Highway District Culver School District No. 4 Dorchester School District No. 2 Ash Creek Special Service District Grays Harbor College Alpine 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 College American Falls Free Library District David Douglas School District No. 40 Edgefield County Schools Ballard Water and Sewer Improvement District Highline Community College American Falls Housing Authority Dayton School District No. 8 Fairfield County School District Bear Lake Special Service District Lake Washington Institute of Technology Atlanta Highway District Dayville School District No. 16J Florence County School District No. 1 Bear River Water Conservancy District Lower Columbia College Avery Water and Sewer District Douglas County School District Florence County School District No. 2 Benchland Water District Northwest Indian College Avondale Irrigation District Douglas County School District No. 4 Florence County School District No. 3 Benson Culinary Water Improvement District Olympic College Bayview Water and Sewer District Douglas Education Service District Florence County School District No. 4 Bona Vista Water Improvement District Peninsula College Bear Lake County Library District Dufur School District No. 29 Florence County School District No. 5 Cache Mosquito Abatement District Pierce College Bench Sewer District Eagle Point School District No. 9 Ft. Mill School District No. 4 Cache Valley Transit District Renton Technical College Benewah County Free Library District Echo School District No. 5 Georgetown County School District Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District Seattle Community Colleges District VI Big Canyon Fire District Elgin School District Greenville County School District Carbon County Housing Authority Shoreline Community College Blaine County Housing Authority Elkton School District No. 34 Greenwood School District No. 50 Carbon County Municipal Building Authority Skagit Valley College Blaine County Recreation District Enterprise School District No. 21 Greenwood School District No. 52 Carbon County Recreation Transportation Special Service District South Puget Sound Community College Bliss Fire District Estacada School District No. 108 Hampton County School District No. 2 Carbon Water Conservancy District Tacoma Community College Boise Basin Library District Eugene School District No. 4J Hampton School District No. 1 Castle Valley Special Service District University of Washington Boise City/Ada County Housing Authority Falls City School District Horry County Schools Cedar City Housing Authority Walla Walla Community College Boise-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 Colleges Bonneville 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 Authority Bruneau Valley District Library Fossil School District 21J Kershaw County School District Central Davis County Sewer District Washington State Student Achievement Council Bruneau Water and Sewer District Gaston School District 511 J Lancaster County School District Central Iron County Water Conservancy District Washington State University Buhl Highway District Gervais School District Laurens County School District No. 55 Central Utah Water Conservancy District Washington State University, Vancouver Buhl Rural Fire Protection District Gladstone School District Laurens County School District No. 56 Central Weber Sewer Improvement District Wenatchee Valley College Burley Highway District Glendale School District No. 77 Lee County School District Charleston Water Conservancy District Western Washington University Caldwell Housing Authority Glide School District Legacy Charter Schools Copperton Improvement District Whatcom Community College Canyon Highway District No. 4 Grant County Education Service District Lexington County School District No. 1 Cottonwood Improvement District Yakima Valley Community College Appendix B Page 4 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Cascade Rural Fire District Grant School District No. 3 Lexington County School District No. 2 Davis Community Housing Authority Education (K-12) Castleford Rural Fire District Grants Pass School District No. 7 Lexington County School District No. 3 Davis County Housing Authority Aberdeen School District No. 5 Central Fire District Greater Albany Public School District 8J Lexington County School District No. 4 Davis-Salt Lake Aerial Spray Authority Adna School District No. 226 Central 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. 17 Central Shoshone County Water District Harney County School District No. 3 Marion County School District Duchesne County Water Conservancy District Anacortes School District No. 103 Clark County District Library Harney Education Service District Marion County School District No. 7 Emery County Housing Authority Arlington Public Schools Clarkia Free Library District Harper School District No. 66 Marlboro County School District Emery County Municipal Building Authority Asotin-Anatone School District Clarkia Highway District Harrisburg School District No. 7 McCormick County School District Emery County Special Service District No. 1 Auburn School District No. 408 Clearwater Free Library District Helix School District No. 1-R Newberry County School District Emery Water Conservancy District Bainbridge Island School District No. 303 Clearwater Highway District Hermiston School District Oconee County School District Emigration Improvement District Battle Ground School District No. 119 Clearwater Soil and Water Conservation District High Desert Education Service District Orangeburg Consolidated School District Four Fruitland Special Service District Bellevue Christian School District Clearwater Water District Hillsboro School District No. 1J Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 3 Garden City Fire District Bellevue School District No. 405 Consolidated Free Library District Hood River County School District Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 5 Grand County Housing Authority Bellingham School District No. 501 Cottonwood Highway District Huntington School District No. 16J Pickens County School District Granger-Hunter Improvement District Benge School District No. 122 Custer 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. 403 Dietrich Fire District InterMountain Education Service District Richland County School District No. 2 Hooper Water Improvement District Bickleton School District Dietrich Highway District Ione School District R2 Rock Hill School District No. 3 Jensen Water Improvement District Blaine School District No. 503 Doumecq Highway District Jackson County School District No. 9 Saluda School District No. 1 Johnson Water Improvement District Boistfort School District No. 234 Downey Swan Lake Highway District Jackson Education Service District South Carolina Public Charter School District Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District Bremerton School District Dry 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. 111 Eagle Fire Protection District Jefferson School District Spartanburg County School District No. 2 Juab Special Service Fire District Bridgeport School District No. 75 Eagle Sewer District Jewell School District No. 8 Spartanburg County School District No. 3 Kane County Water Conservancy District Brinnon School District No. 46 East 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. 100 East Bonner County Library District Jordan Valley School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 5 Lake Point Improvement District Camas School District East Greenacres Irrigation District Joseph School District No. 6 Spartanburg County School District No. 6 Logan-Cache Airport Authority Cape Flattery School District No. 401 Eastern 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. 113 Eastern Idaho Regional Wastewater Authority Klamath County School District Sumter School District Magna Mosquito Abatement District Carbonado Historical School District No. 19 Elk River Free Library District Klamath Falls City Schools Sumter School District No. 17 Magna Water District Cascade Christian Schools Elmore 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. 228 Fenn Highway District La Grande School District No. 1 Union County School District Midvalley Improvement District Cashmere School District No. 222 Ferdinand Highway District Lake County School District No. 7 Ware Shoals School District No. 51 Midway Sanitation District Castle Rock School District No. 401 Fish Haven Mosquito Abatement District Lake Ed Service District Williamsburg County Schools Milford Area Healthcare Service District Central Kitsap School District No. 401 Fremont County District Library Lake Oswego School District No. 7J Williston School District No. 29 Moab Mosquito Abatement District Central Valley School District No. 356 Friedman Memorial Airport Authority Lakeview School District No. 7 York School District No. 1 Moab Valley Fire Protection District Centralia School District No. 401 Garden Valley District Library Lane Education Service District Special District Mountain Green Sewer Improvement District Chehalis School District No. 302 Garden Valley Fire Protection District Lebanon Community School District No. 9 Abbeville Housing Authority Mountain Regional Water Special Service District Cheney School District No. 360 Garden Valley Recreation District Lincoln County School District Aiken Housing Authority Mountain View Special Service District Chewelah School District No. 36 Gateway Fire Protection District Linn-Benton-Lincoln Education Service District Anderson Housing Authority Mt. Olympus Improvement District Chief Leschi School System Gem County Fire Protection District Long Creek School District No. 17 Atlantic Beach Housing Authority North Davis County Sewer District Chimacum School District No. 49 Gem County Mosquito Abatement District Lowell School District No. 71 Beaufort Housing Authority North Davis Fire District Clarkston School District No. J250-185 Glenns 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 District Golden 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. 400 Gooding County Memorial Hospital District McKenzie School District Belton-Honea Path Water Authority North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District Colfax School District No. 300 Grace District Library McMinnville School District No. 40 Bennettsville Housing Authority North Summit Fire District College Place School District No. 250 Grangeville Highway District Medford School District No. 549C Berea Public Service District North Tooele County Fire Protection District Colton School District No. 306 Granite 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. 206 Greater Boise Auditorium District Mitchell School District No. 55 Big Creek Water and Sewerage District North View Fire District Columbia School District No. 206, Stevens County Greater Middleton Parks and Recreation District Molalla River School District Bluffton Township Fire District Ogden Housing Authority Columbia School District No. 400 Greater 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. 115 Groveland Water and Sewer District Morrow County School District Broad Creek Public Service District Park City Fire Service District Concrete School District No. 11 Harbor 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. 317 Hayden Lake Irrigation District Multnomah Education Service District Consortium Burton Fire District Provo Housing Authority Cosmopolis School District Hayden 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. 151 Hillsdale Highway District Neah-Kah-Nie School District No. 56 Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority Roosevelt City Housing Authority Coupeville School District No. 204 Homedale Highway District Nestucca Valley School District No. 101 Charleston County Aviation Authority Salt Lake City Housing Authority Crescent School District Hoo 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. 73 Horseshoe Bend Fire Protection District Newberg School District No. 29J Charleston Housing Authority Salt Lake County Housing Authority Curlew School District No- 50 Idaho Soil and Water Conservation District North Bend School District No. 13 Charleston Naval Complex Redevelopment Authority Sandy Suburban Improvement District Cusick School District Indian Valley Rural Fire District North Central Education Service District Charleston Soil and Water Conservation District Scofield Reservoir Special Service District Darrington School District No. 330 Iona-Bonneville Sewer District North Clackamas School District No. 12 Cheraw Housing Authority Sevier County Special Service District No. 1 Davenport School District No. 207 Island Park Fire District North Douglas School District No. 22 Chester Housing Authority Skyline Mountain Special Service District Dayton School District No. 2 Jerome Highway District North Lake School District Chester Metropolitan District Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District Deer Park School District No. 414 Jerome Recreation District North Marion School District No. 15 Chester Sewer District Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District Dieringer School District Jerome Rural Fire District No. 1 North Santiam School District No. 29 Coast Regional Transportation Authority Solid Waste Special Service District No. 1 Dixie School District Kamiah Fire Protection District North Wasco County School District No. 21 Columbia Housing Authority South Davis Sewer District East Valley School District No. 361 Kamiah Highway District Northwest Regional Education Service District Conway Housing Authority South Davis Water District East Valley School District No. 361, Spokane County Ketchum Rural Fire Protection District Nyssa School District No. 26 Daniel Morgan Water District South Ogden Conservation District East Valley School District No. 90, Yakima County Kidder Harris Highway District Oakland School District Darlington County Fire District South Salt Lake Valley Mosquito Abatement District Eastmont School District No. 206 Kingston Water District Oakridge School District No. 76 Darlington County Water and Sewer Authority South Summit Fire Protection District Eatonville School District No. 404 Kootenai County Water District No. 1 Ontario School District No. 8C Darlington Housing Authority South Utah Valley Solid Waste District Edmonds School District No. 15 Kootenai Ponderay Sewer District Oregon City School District No. 62 Donalds-Due West Water and Sewer Authority South Valley Sewer District Educational Service District No. 112 Kootenai-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. 401 Kuna Library District Paisley School District No. 11 Dorchester County Water Authority Spanish Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Elma School District No. 68 Laclede Water District Parkrose School District No. 3 Duncan Chapel Fire District St. George Housing Authority Endicott School District No. 308 Lakes Highway District Pendleton School District No. 16 Easley Housing Authority Stansbury Park Improvement District Entiat School District No. 127 Latah County Library District Perrydale School District No. 21J Easley-Central Water District Strawberry Electric Service District Enumclaw School District No. 216 Latah Soil and Water Conservation District Philomath School District No. 17J East Richland County Public Service District Sugar House Park Authority Ephrata School District No. 165 Lemhi 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. 36 Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District Pilot Rock School District No. 2 Florence Housing Authority Taylorsville-Bennion Improvement District Everett School District No. 2 Lewiston-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 County Lincoln County Recreation District Pinehurst School District Fripp Island Public Service District Timpanogos Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 205 Little Blacktail Ranch Water District Pleasant Hill School District Gaffney Housing Authority Tooele County Housing Authority Federal Way Public Schools Little Wood River Library District Plush School District 18 Gaston Rural Community Water District Tooele County Recreation Special Service District Ferndale School District No. 502 Lizard 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. 417 Lost River Highway District Portland Public School District No. 1 Georgetown Housing Authority Uintah Animal Control and Shelter Special Service District Finley School District M&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. 402 Mackay 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. 358 Madison Library District Prospect School District Greenville Arena District Uintah Health Care Special Service District Garfield School District No. 302 Marsing Rural Fire District Rainier School District No. 13 Greenville County Recreation District Uintah Highlands Water and Sewer Improvement District Glenwood School District McCall Fire Protection District Redmond School District No. 2J Greenville County Redevelopment Authority Uintah Mosquito Abatement District Goldendale School District McCall Memorial Hospital District Reedsport School District No. 105 Greenville Housing Authority Uintah Recreation District Grand Coulee Dam School District Meridian Cemetery Maintenance District Region 9 Education Service District Greenville Transit Authority Uintah Transportation Special Service District Grandview School District No. 200 Meridian Library District Reynolds School District No. 7 Greenwood Metropolitan District Uintah Water Conservancy District Granger School District No. 204 Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Riddle School District No. 70 Greer Housing Authority Unified Fire Authority Granite Falls School District No. 332 Appendix B Page 5 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Mica Kidd Island Fire Protection District Riverdale School District No. 51J Hartsville Housing Authority Utah County Housing Authority Grapeview School District No. 54 Middleton Rural Fire District Rogue River School District No. 35 Hilton Head No. 1 Public Service District Utah Paiute Housing Authority Great Northern School District Midvale Fire Protection District Roseburg Public Schools Holly Springs Fire-Rescue District Utah Transit Authority Green Mountain School District No. 103 Minidoka 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. 324 Minidoka County Highway District Santiam Canyon School District No. 129J James Island Public Service District Wasatch County Fire District Harrington Public Schools Moreland Water and Sewer District Santiam Christian Schools Kingstree Housing Authority Wasatch Front Waste and Recycling District Highland School District No. 203 Mountain Home Highway District Scappoose School District No. 1J Lady's Island-St. Helena Fire District Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District Highline School District No. 401 Mountain Rides Transportation Authority Scio School District No. 95C Lake City Housing Authority Washington County Water Conservancy District Hockinson School District Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District Seaside School District Lancaster County Water and Sewer District Waste Management Service District No. 5 Hood Canal School District No. 404 Nampa Highway District No. 1 Sheridan School District No. 48J Lancaster Housing Authority Weber Basin Water Conservancy District Hoquiam School District No. 28 Nampa Housing Authority Sherman County School District Lancaster Soil and Water Conservation District Weber Fire District Inchelium School District No. 70 New Plymouth Fire District Sherwood School District No. 88J Laurens Housing Authority Weber Mosquito Abatement District Issaquah School District No. 411 North 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. 56 North Custer Hospital District Sisters School District No. 6 Liberty-Chesnee-Fingerville Water District Wellsville-Mendon Conservancy District Kalama School District No. 402 North Kootenai Water and Sewer District Siuslaw School District No. 97J Local Housing Authority White City Water Improvement District Keller School District No. 3 North 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. 458 North Latah County Highway District South Lane School District No. 45J3 Lugoff-Elgin Water Authority State Kennewick School District No. 17 Northern Lakes Fire District South Umpqua School District No. 19 Marion Housing Authority State Of Utah Kent School District No. 415 Northside Fire District South Wasco County School District No. 1 Marlboro County Housing Authority Utah Department of Administrative Services Kettle Falls School District No. 212 Notus-Parma Highway District No. 2 Southern Oregon Education Service District McColl Housing Authority Utah Department of Health Kiona-Benton City School District No. 52 Oakley Highway District Spray School District No. 1 Medical University Hospital Authority Utah State Legislature Kittitas School District Oakley Library District Springfield School District No. 19 Metropolitan Sewer Sub-District Utah State Treasurer Klickitat School District No. 402 Ola District Library St. Helens School District No. 502 Mitford Water and Sewer District Tribal La Center School District Oneida County Fire District St. Paul School District No. 45 Mullins Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation La Conner School District No. 311 Oregon 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 District Outlet 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. 129 Panhandle Health District Sweet Home School District No. 55 Myrtle Beach Housing Authority Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Lake Quinault School District No. 97 Parma 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. 4 Pine Ridge Water and Sewer District Tigard-Tualatin School District No. 23J Newberry Housing Authority Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Lake Washington School District No. 414 Pinehurst Water District Tillamook School District No. 9 North Charleston Housing Authority Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians Lakewood School District No. 306 Pioneer Irrigation District Ukiah School District 80 R North Charleston Sewer District Ute Indian Tribe Lamont School District Placerville Fire Protection District Umatilla School District No. 6 North Greenville Fire District Liberty School District No. 362 Pocatello Housing Authority Union School District 5 Oconee County Joint Regional Sewer Authority Lind School District Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Vale School District No. 84 Parker Sewer and Fire Subdistrict Longview School District No. 122 Portneuf District Library Vernonia School District No. 47J Patriots Point Development Authority Loon Lake School District No. 183 Post Falls Highway District Wallowa School District No. 12 Pee Dee Regional Airport District Lopez Island School District No. 144 Power County Highway District Warrenton-Hammond School District No. 30 Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority Lyle School District No- 406 Prairie Highway District West Linn-Wilsonville School District Piedmont Public Service District Lynden School District No. 504 Prairie-River Library District Willamette Education Service District Pioneer Rural Water District Mabton School District No. 120 Progressive Irrigation District Willamina School District No. 30J Powdersville Water District Mansfield School District No. 207 Raft River Highway District Winston-Dillard School District No. 116 Richland-Lexington Airport District Manson School District Rapid River Water and Sewer District Woodburn School District No. 103 Richland-Lexington Riverbanks Park District Mary M. Knight School District Richfield District Library Yamhill-Carlton School District No. 1 Rock Hill Housing Authority Mary Walker School District No. 207 Riverside Independent Water District Yoncalla School District No. 32 Saluda County Water and Sewer Authority Marysville School District No. 25 Rock Creek Fire District Special District Sandy Springs Water District McCleary School District No. 65 Rockland Rural Fire District Adair Rural Fire Protection District Santee Fire Service District Mead School District No. 354 Rogerson Water District Amity Fire District Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority Medical Lake School District No. 326 Ross Point Water District Applegate Valley Fire District No. 9 Sheldon Township Fire District Mercer Island School District No. 400 Sagle Fire District Arch Cape Sanitary District Slater-Marietta Fire District Meridian School District No. 505 Salmon River Clinic Hospital District Arch Cape Water District South Carolina Housing Authority Bond Council Methow Valley School District Sam Owen Fire District Arnold Irrigation District South Carolina Public Employee Benefit Authority Monroe School District No. 103 Santa-Fernwood Water and Sewer District Aumsville Rural Fire District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 1 Montesano School District No. 66 Schweitzer Fire-Rescue District Baker County Library District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 3 Morton School District No. 214 Settlers Irrigation District Baker Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Education Assistance Authority Moses Lake School District No. 161 Shelley/Firth Fire District Baker Valley Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina State Fiscal Accountability Authority Mossyrock School District No. 206 Shoshone City & Rural Fire District Bandon Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Housing Finance and Development Authority Mt. Adams School District No. 209 Shoshone County Fire Protection District No. 2 Barlow Water Improvement District South Carolina State Ports Authority Mt. Baker School District No. 507 Shoshone Highway District No. 2 Bay Area Hospital District South Greenville Fire District Mt. Vernon School District No. 320 South Bannock Library District Bend Parks and Recreation District South Island Public Service District Mukilteo School District No. 6 South Bingham Soil Conservation District Beverly Beach Water District Southside Rural Community Water District Naches Valley School District No. 3 South Boundary Fire Protection District Black Butte Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Spartanburg Housing Authority Napavine School District No. 14 South Custer Fire District Blue Mountain Hospital District Spartanburg Regional Health Services District Naselle-Grays River Valley School District No.165 South Fork Coeur d'Alene River Sewer District Blue River Water District St. Andrews Public Service District South Carolina Nespelem School District No. 14 South Latah Highway District Boardman Park and Recreation District St. John's Fire District Newport School District No. 56-415 Southside Water and Sewer District Boardman Rural Fire Protection District Starr-Iva Water and Sewer District Nine Mile Falls School District No. 325/179 Southwestern Idaho Cooperative Housing Authority Boring Water District No. 24 Startex-Jackson-Wellford-Duncan Water District Nooksack Valley School District No. 506 St. Maries Fire Protection District Boulder Creek Retreat Special Road District Sumter Housing Authority North Beach School District No. 64 Star Joint Fire District Brownsville Rural Fire District Talatha Rural Community Water District North Franklin School District No. 51 Star Sewer and Water District Buell-Red Prairie Water District Taylors Fire and Sewer District North Kitsap School District No. 400 Sun Valley Water and Sewer District Bunker Hill Sanitary District Three Rivers Solid Waste Authority North Mason School District Sunset Heights Water District Burlington Water District Tigerville Fire District North Thurston Public Schools Targhee Regional Public Transit Authority Camellia Park Sanitary District Tri-County Solid Waste Authority Northport School District No. 211 Targhee Regional Public Transportation Authority Cannon Beach Rural Fire Protection District Union Housing Authority Northshore School District No. 417 Teton County Fire Protection District Central Lincoln People's Utility District Valley Public Service Authority Oak Harbor School District No. 201 Three Creek Highway District Central Oregon Irrigation District Waccamaw Regional Transportation Authority Oakesdale School District No. 324 Three Mile Water District Central Oregon Park and Recreation District Wedgefield Stateburg Water District Oakville School District No. 400 Timberlake Fire Protection District Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority West Anderson Water District Ocean Beach School District No. 101 Twin Falls Highway District Charleston Fire District Westview-Fairforest Fire District Ocosta School District No. 172 Twin Falls Housing Authority Charleston Sanitary District Whitney Fire Protection District Odessa School District No. 105 Twin Falls Rural Fire Protection District Chehalem Park and Recreation District Williamsburg County Transit Authority Okanogan School District No. 105 Twin Ridge Rural Fire District Chenowith Water Public Utility District Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority Olympia School District No. 111 Union Independent Highway District Chiloquin-Agency Lake Rural Fire Protection District Woodruff Housing Authority Olympic Educational Service District Upper Fords Creek Rural Fire District Christmas Valley Domestic Water Supply District Woodruff-Roebuck Water District Omak School District No. 19 Warm Lake Recreational Water District Christmas Valley Park and Recreation District York County Natural Gas Authority Onalaska School District No. 300 Wendell Highway District Clackamas County Fire District No. 1 State Onion Creek School District No. 30 West Boise Sewer District Clackamas County Housing Authority Santee-Lynches Regional Council of Governments Orcas Island School District No. 137 West Bonner Library District Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Orchard Prairie School District No. 123 West Bonner Water and Sewer District Clatskanie Park and Recreation District South Carolina Department of Mental Health Orient School District No. 65 West Pend Oreille Fire District Clatskanie People's Utility District South Carolina Department of Revenue Oroville School District No. 410 Western Ada Recreation District Clatskanie Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina General Services Division Orting School District No. 344 Western Elmore County Recreation District Clatsop Care Center Health District South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff Othello School District Wilder Irrigation District Clatsop County Housing Authority South Carolina State Budget and Control Board Palisades School District No. 102 Wilder Public Library District Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Treasurer's Office Palouse School District No. 301 Wilder Rural Fire Protection District Coburg Rural Fire Protection District State Of South Carolina Pasco School District No. 1 Appendix B Page 6 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Wilderness Ranch Fire Protection District Colton Fire District Township Pateros School District Winona Highway District Colton Water District Township of Grand Meadow Paterson School District No. 50 Worley Fire District Columbia Corridor Drainage Districts Joint Contracting Authority Tribal Pe Ell School District No. 301 Worley Highway District Columbia Health District Catawba Indian Nation Peninsula School District State Columbia Improvement District Pioneer School District No. 402 Idaho Department of Administration Columbia River People's Utility District Pomeroy School District No. 110 Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Columbia Soil and Water Conservation District Port Angeles School District No. 121 State Of Idaho Coos County Airport District Port Townsend School District No. 50 Tribal Coos County Library Service District Prescott School District No. 402-37 Coeur d'Alene Tribe Coquille Indian Housing Authority Pride Prep Schools Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Coquille Valley Hospital District Prosser School District No. 116 Nez Perce Tribal Enterprises Corbett Water District Puget Sound Educational Service District Nez Perce Tribe Corvallis Rural Fire Protection District Pullman School District No. 267 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cove Rural Fire Protection District Puyallup School District No. 3 Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 Crooked River Ranch Special Road District Quilcene School District No. 48 Curry Health District Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 Curry Public Library District Quincy School District No. 144 Dallas Cemetery District No. 4 Rainier School District No. 307 Dean Minard Water District Raymond School District No. 116 Dee Rural Fire Protection District Reardan-Edwall School District Deschutes County 911 Service District Renton School District No. 403 Deschutes County Rural Fire District No. 1 Republic School District Deschutes Valley Water District Richland School District No. 400 Devils Lake Water Improvement District Ridgefield School District No. 122 Dexter Rural Fire Protection District Ritzville School District Douglas County Fire District No. 2 Riverside School District Douglas County Housing Authority Riverview School District No. 407 Douglas Soil and Water Conservation District Rochester School District Drakes Crossing Rural Fire Protection District Rosalia School District No. 320 Dufur Recreation District Royal School District Eagle Valley Soil and Water Conservation District San Juan Island School District No. 149 East Fork Irrigation District Satsop School District No. 104 East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District Seattle Public Schools East Umatilla County Health District Sedro-Woolley School District No. 101 East Valley Water District Selah School District No. 119 Echo Rural Fire District Selkirk School District No. 70 Elsie-Vinemaple Rural Fire Protection District No. 11 Sequim School District No. 323 Emerald People's Utility District Shaw Island School District No. 10 Estacada Rural Fire District No. 69 Shelton School District No. 309 Fairview Water District Shoreline School District No. 412 Falcon Cove Beach Water District Skykomish School District Farmers Irrigation District Snohomish School District No. 201 Gardiner Sanitary District Snoqualmie Valley School District No. 410 Gaston Rural Fire District Soap Lake School District No. 156 Gates Rural Fire Protection District South Bend School District No. 118 Gearhart Rural Fire Protection District South Kitsap School District No. 402 Glendale Rural Fire Protection District South Whidbey School District No. 206 Gleneden Sanitary District Southside School District Goshen Fire District Spokane Public Schools Government Camp Sanitary District Sprague School District Grand Ronde Sanitary District St. John School District No. 322 Grant County Transportation District Stanwood-Camano School District No. 401 Grant Soil and Water Conservation District Steilacoom Historical School District No. 1 Grants Pass Irrigation District Steptoe School District No. 304 Green Sanitary District Stevenson-Carson School District No. 303 Hahlen Road Special District Sultan School District No. 311 Halsey-Shedd Rural Fire Protection District Summit Valley School District 202 Hamlet Rural Fire Protection District Sumner School District No. 320 Harbor Sanitary District Sunnyside School District No. 201 Harbor Water Public Utility District Tacoma School District No. 10 Harney District Hospital Taholah School District No. 77 Harney Soil and Water Conservation District Tahoma School District No. 409 Harriman Rural Fire Protection District Tekoa School District No. 265 Hazeldell Rural Fire Protection District Tenino School District No. 402 Hebo Joint Water and Sewer Authority Thorp School District No. 400 Heceta Water District Toledo School District No. 237 Hermiston Cemetery District Tonasket School District Hermiston Fire and Emergency Services District Toppenish School District No. 202 Hermiston Irrigation District Touchet School District No. 300 Hood River County Library District Toutle Lake School District No. 130 Hood River County Transportation District Trout Lake School District No. R-400 Hood River Valley Parks and Recreation District Tukwila School District No. 406 Hoodland Fire District No. 74 Tumwater School District No. 33 Hubbard Rural Fire Protection District Union Gap School District No. 2 Ice Fountain Water District University Place School District No. 83 Illinois Valley Rural Fire Protection District Valley School District Ione Rural Fire Protection District Valley School District No. 70 Irrigon Community Park and Recreation Maintenance District Vancouver School District No. 37 Jackson County Airport Authority Vashon Island School District No. 402 Jackson County Fire District No. 3 Wahkiakum School District No. 200 Jackson County Fire District No. 5 Wahluke School District No. 73 Jackson County Housing Authority Waitsburg School District Jackson County Library District Walla Walla School District No. 140 Jackson County Vector Control District Wapato School District No. 207 Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District Warden School District No. 146-161 Jefferson Rural Fire Protection District Washington Schools Risk Management Pool John Day/Canyon City Parks and Recreation District Washington State Educational Service District Junction City Rural Fire Protection District Washougal School District Juniper Flat Rural Fire Protection District Washtucna School District Keating Soil and Water Conservation District Waterville School District No. 209 Keizer Rural Fire Protection District Wellpinit School District Keno Fire Protection District Wenatchee School District No. 246 Kernville-Gleneden Beach-Lincoln Beach Water District West Valley School District No. 208, Yakima County Appendix B Page 7 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Klamath County Fire District No. 1 West Valley School District No. 363, Spokane County Klamath County Library Service District White Pass School District No. 303 Klamath Housing Authority White River School District No. 416 Klamath Irrigation District White Salmon Valley School District No. 405-17 Klamath Vector Control District Wilbur School District No. 200 La Grande Rural Fire Protection District Willapa Valley School District No. 160 La Pine Park and Recreation District Wilson Creek School District La Pine Rural Fire Protection District Winlock School District No. 232 La Pine Water District Wishkah Valley School District No. 117 Lake District Hospital Woodland School District No. 404 Lake Grove Water District Yakima School District No. 7 Lakeside Fire District No. 4 Yelm Community School District No. 2 Lane County Fire District No. 1 Zillah School District No. 205 Lane Library District Special District Lane Transit District Acme Water District No. 18 Langlois Water District Adams County Fire Protection District No. 1 LaPine Special Sewer District Adams County Mosquito Control District Lebanon Aquatic District Aeneas Lake Irrigation District Lebanon Fire District Alderwood Water and Wastewater District Lewis and Clark Rural Fire Protection District Alpine Water District Libby Drainage District Anacortes Housing Authority Linn Benton Housing Authority Annapolis Water District Lookingglass Rural Fire District Asotin County Cemetery District No. 1 Lorane Rural Fire Protection District Asotin County Conservation District Lowell Rural Fire Protection District Asotin County Fire District No. 1 Lower Umpqua Hospital District Asotin County Housing Authority Lusted Water District Asotin County Public Utility District No. 1 Madras Aquatic Center District Badger Mountain Irrigation District Malheur County Housing Authority Bainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation District Malin Rural Fire Protection District Basin City Water/Sewer District Mapleton Water District Bayview Beach Water District Marion County Fire District No. 1 Beacon Hill Water and Sewer District Marion Soil and Water Conservation District Beehive Irrigation District Medford Irrigation District Belfair Water District No. 1 Merrill Rural Fire Protection District Bellevue Convention Center Authority Mid-County Cemetery Maintenance District Bellingham Housing Authority Middle Fork Irrigation District Bellingham Public Development Authority Miles Crossing Sanitary Sewer District Benton County Diking District No. 1 Mill City Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 1 Milton-Freewater Water Control District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 2 Mist-Birkenfeld Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 4 Mohawk Valley Rural Fire District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 5 Molalla River Improvement District Benton County Fire Protection District No. 6 Molalla Rural Fire Protection District No. 73 Benton County Mosquito Control District Monroe Rural Fire Protection District Benton County Public Utility District No. 1 Morrow County Health District Benton Irrigation District Mountain View Hospital District Benton-Franklin Health District Mt. Angel Fire District Beverly Water District Multnomah County Drainage District No. 1 Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Multnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 10 Black Diamond Water District Multnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 14 Bremerton Housing Authority Nesika Beach-Ophir Water District Buckhannon-Upshur County Airport Authority Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority Burbank Irrigation District No. 4 Neskowin Regional Water District Carnhope Irrigation District No 7 Nestucca Rural Fire Protection District Cascadia Conservation District Netarts Oceanside Sanitary District Cedar River Water and Sewer District Netarts-Oceanside Rural Fire Protection District Central Klickitat County Park and Recreation District North Bay Rural Protection Fire District Central Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 6 North Bend City/Coos-Curry Housing Authority Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority North Central Public Health District Central Valley Ambulance Authority North Clackamas Parks and Recreation District Chelan County Fire District No. 1 North County Recreation District Chelan County Fire District No. 3 North Gilliam Cemetery District Chelan County Fire District No. 5 North Gilliam County Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 6 North Lincoln Fire and Rescue District No. 1 Chelan County Fire District No. 7 North Powder Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 8 North Sherman County Rural Fire Protection District Chelan County Fire District No. 9 North Unit Irrigation District Chelan County Public Hospital District No. 1 Northeast Oregon Housing Authority Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1 Northern Wasco County Park and Recreation District Chelan County/Wenatchee Housing Authority Northern Wasco County People's Utility District Chelan-Douglas Health District Northwest Oregon Housing Authority Chinook Water District Nyssa Road Assessment District No. 2 Chuckanut Community Forest Park District Nyssa Rural Fire Protection District Clallam Conservation District Oak Hill Sanitary District Clallam County Fire District No. 2 Oak Lodge Sanitary District Clallam County Fire District No. 5 Oak Lodge Water District Clallam County Fire District No. 6 Oceanside Water District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 1 Ochoco West Sanitary District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 3 Odell Sanitary District Clallam County Fire Protection District No. 4 Ontario Library District Clallam County Hospital District No. 1 Oregon Fire Districts Association Clallam County Housing Authority Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority Clallam County Parks and Recreation District No. 1 Oregon Trail Library District Clallam County Public Hospital District No. 2 Oregon Water Wonderland Unit II Sanitary District Clallam County Public Utility District No. 1 Owyhee Irrigation District Clark County Fire District No. 10 Pacific City Joint Water Sanitary Authority Clark County Fire District No. 11 Pacific Communities Health District Clark County Fire District No. 13 Palatine Hill Water District Clark County Fire District No. 5 Peninsula Drainage District No. 1 Clark County Fire Protection District No. 3 Peninsula Drainage District No. 2 Clark County Fire Protection District No. 6 Pilot Rock Fire Protection District Clark County Public Utility District No. 1 Pine Grove Rural Fire Protection District Clark Regional Wastewater District Pleasant Hill Rural Fire Protection District Cline Irrigation District Appendix B Page 8 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Pleasant Home Water District Clinton Water District Polk County Fire District No- 1 Coal Creek Utility District Polk County Housing Authority Columbia Conservation District Polk Soil and Water Conservation District Columbia County Fire District No. 3 Portland Metropolitan Area Water District Columbia County Public Hospital District No. 1 Public Procurement Authority Columbia County Rural Library District Rainbow Water District Columbia Irrigation District Raleigh Water District Columbia Valley Water District Redmond Area Park and Recreation District Colville Indian Housing Authority Riddle Rural Fire District Consolidated Irrigation District No. 14 River Forest Acres Special Road District Covington Water District River Road Park and Recreation District Cowiche Sewer District Rivergrove Water District Cowlitz County Cemetery District No. 2 Roads End Sanitary District Cowlitz County Fire District No. 6 Roberts Creek Water District Cowlitz County Public Utility District No. 1 Rockwood Water People's Utility District Cowlitz Transit Authority Rogue River Cemetery Maintenance District Cross Valley Water District Rogue Valley Transportation District Dallesport Water District Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority Douglas County Fire District No. 2 Sable Drive Road District Douglas County Fire Protection District No. 5 Salem Area Mass Transit District Douglas County Public Utility District No. 1 Salem Housing Authority Douglas County Sewer District No. 1 Salem-Keizer Transit District Douglas-Okanogan County Fire District No. 15 Santa Clara Rural Fire Protection District East Columbia Basin Irrigation District Santiam Water Control District East Gig Harbor Water District Scappoose Rural Fire District East Lewis County Public Development Authority Scio Rural Fire District East Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 22 Scottsburg Rural Fire District East Spokane Water District No. 1 Seal Rock Fire District East Wenatchee Water District Seal Rock Water District Eastmont Metropolitan Park District Shangri-La Water District Eastsound Sewer and Water District Shasta View Irrigation District Edmonds Public Facilities District Siletz Rural Fire Protection District Ellensburg Business Development Authority Silverton Fire District Enterprise Cemetery District No. 7 Sisters-Camp Sherman Rural Fire Protection District Entiat Irrigation District Siuslaw Public Library District Everett Housing Authority South Clackamas Transportation District Everett Public Facilities District South Suburban Sanitary District Evergreen Water-Sewer District No. 19 Southern Curry Cemetery Maintenance District Fall City Water District Southwest Lincoln County Water District Ferry County Public Utility District No. 1 Spring River Special Road District Ferry/Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 13 Springfield Utility District Fisherman Bay Sewer District Stanfield Fire District No. 7-402 Foster Creek Conservation District Stayton Fire District Four Lakes Water District No. 10 Suburban East Salem Water District Franklin Conservation District Sunrise Water Authority Franklin County Cemetery District No. 2 Sunset Empire Transportation District Franklin County Fire District No. 1 Swalley Irrigation District Franklin County Fire Protection District No. 3 Sweet Home Fire and Ambulance District Franklin County Irrigation District No. 1 Talent Irrigation District Franklin County Public Utility District No. 1 Terrebonne Domestic Water District Freeland Water and Sewer District Three Sisters Irrigation District Ft. Worden Public Development Authority Tillamook County Transportation District Gardena Farms Irrigation District No. 13 Tillamook People's Utility District Goforth Special Utility District Tiller Rural Fire District Grand Coulee Project Hydroelectric Authority Toledo Rural Fire Protection District Grandview Irrigation District Tri City Rural Fire District No. 4 Grant County Airport District No. 1 Tri City Water District Grant County Fire District No. 10 Tri-City Service District Grant County Fire District No. 11 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District Grant County Fire District No. 3 Tualatan Hills Park and Recreation District Grant County Fire District No. 4 Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Grant County Fire District No. 7 Tualatin Valley Irrigation District Grant County Fire Protection District No. 5 Tualatin Valley Water District Grant County Housing Authority Tumalo Irrigation District Grant County Mosquito Control District No. 1 Twin Rocks Sanitary District Grant County Mosquito District No. 2 Umatilla County Housing Authority Grant County Port District No. 4 Umatilla Hospital District Grant County Port District No. 6 Umatilla Land Redevelopment Authority Grant County Port District No. 7 Umatilla Morrow Radio and Data District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 1 Umatilla Reservation Housing Authority Grant County Public Hospital District No. 2 Umatilla Rural Fire Protection District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 3 Union Cemetery District Grant County Public Hospital District No. 4 Vale Oregon Irrigation District Grant County Public Utility District No. 2 Valley View Water District Grant Transit Authority Vandevert Acres Special Road District Grays Harbor Conservation District Vineyard Mountain Water and Improvement District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 1 Walla Walla River Irrigation District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 12 Wallowa County Health Care District Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 14 Wamic Water and Sanitary Authority Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 2 Warm Springs Housing Authority Grays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 7 Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation District Grays Harbor County Housing Authority Washington County Fire District No. 2 Grays Harbor County Water District No. 1 Washington County Housing Authority Grays Harbor County Water District No. 2 Water Wonderland Improvement District Grays Harbor Drainage District No. 1 Wedderburn Sanitary District Grays Harbor Fire District No. 10 West Slope Water District Grays Harbor Historical Seaport Authority West Valley Housing Authority Grays Harbor Public Utility District No. 1 Western Lane Ambulance District Grays Harbor Transportation Authority Westport Wauna Rural Fire Protection District Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District Westwood Hills Road District Greater Wenatchee Regional Events Center Public Facilities District Wiard Memorial Park District Green Tank Irrigation District No. 11 Wickiup Water District Hartstene Pointe Water-Sewer District Willamalane Park and Recreation District Highland Water District Appendix B Page 9 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Williams Rural Fire Protection District Highlands Sewer District Willow Creek Park District Highline Water District Winchester Bay Sanitary District Historic Seattle Preservation and Development Authority Winston-Dillard Fire District Holmes Harbor Sewer District Winston-Dillard Water District Hunters Water District Woodburn Rural Fire Protection District Hydro Irrigation District No. 9 Yamhill County Housing Authority Icicle Irrigation District Yamhill Fire Protection District Inchelium Water District Youngs River-Lewis and Clark Water District Irvin Water District No. 6 State Island County Fire District No. 3 Oregon Department of Administrative Services Island County Fire Protection District No. 1 Oregon Department of Revenue Island County Housing Authority Oregon Health Licensing Agency Jefferson County Conservation District Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission Jefferson County Fire District No. 5 Oregon Secretary of State Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 Oregon State Board of Nursing Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 State of Oregon Jefferson County Public Utility District No. 1 Tribal Jefferson County Water District No. 3 Burns Paiute Tribe Jefferson Transit Authority Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians Juniper Beach Water District Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community Kapowsin Water District Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians Kelso Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Kennewick Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Kennewick Irrigation District Coquille Indian Tribe Kennewick Public Facilities District Klamath Tribes Kennewick Public Hospital District Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority Key Peninsula Metro Parks District King County Airport District No. 1 King County Ferry District King County Fire Protection District No. 16 King County Fire Protection District No. 2 King County Fire Protection District No. 20 King County Fire Protection District No. 25 King County Fire Protection District No. 27 King County Fire Protection District No. 28 King County Fire Protection District No. 34 King County Fire Protection District No. 37 King County Fire Protection District No. 40 King County Fire Protection District No. 43 King County Fire Protection District No. 44 King County Fire Protection District No. 45 King County Fire Protection District No. 47 King County Fire Protection District No. 50 King County Flood Control District King County Hospital District No. 4 King County Housing Authority King County Public Hospital District No. 1 King County Public Hospital District No. 2 King County Water District No. 1 King County Water District No. 111 King County Water District No. 117 King County Water District No. 119 King County Water District No. 125 King County Water District No. 19 King County Water District No. 20 King County Water District No. 45 King County Water District No. 49 King County Water District No. 54 King County Water District No. 90 Kitsap Conservation District Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority Kitsap County Fire District No. 18 Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1 Kitsap County Rural Library District Kitsap Public Health District Kittitas County Conservation District Kittitas County Fire District No. 2 Kittitas County Fire Protection District No. 7 Kittitas County Hospital District No. 2 Kittitas County Housing Authority Kittitas County Public Utility District No. 1 Kittitas County Water District No. 5 Kittitas County Water District No. 6 Kittitas County Water District No. 7 Klickitat County Fire District No. 14 Klickitat County Fire District No. 15 Klickitat County Fire District No.1 Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 4 Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 5 Klickitat County Port District No. 1 Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 1 Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 2 Klickitat County Public Utility District No. 1 Lacey Fire District 3 Lake Chelan Reclamation District Lake Chelan Sewer District Lake Forest Park Water District Lake Stevens Sewer District Lake Wenatchee Water District Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Lakehaven Utility District Lakewood Water District Lenora Water and Sewer District Appendix B Page 10 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Lewis County Conservation District Lewis County Fire District No. 1 Lewis County Fire District No. 11 Lewis County Fire District No. 13 Lewis County Fire District No. 18 Lewis County Fire District No. 9 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 14 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 16 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 2 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 5 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 6 Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 8 Lewis County Hospital District No. 1 Lewis County Public Facilities District Lewis County Public Utility District No. 1 Lewis County Water District No. 1 Lewis County Water District No. 3 Lewis Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority Liberty Lake Sewer and Water District Lincoln County Fire District No. 1 Lincoln County Fire District No. 4 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 5 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 6 Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 8 Lincoln County Hospital District No. 3 Lincoln-Adams County Fire Protection District No. 3 Longview Housing Authority Lopez Island Library District Lower Elwha Housing Authority Lower Squilchuck Irrigation District Lummi Housing Authority Lummi Tribal Sewer and Water District Makah Housing Authority Malaga Water District Manchester Water District Manson Park and Recreation District Marshland Flood Control District Marysville Fire District Mason Conservation District Mason County Fire District No. 13 Mason County Fire District No. 17 Mason County Fire District No. 2 Mason County Fire District No. 4 Mason County Fire Protection District No. 5 Mason County Fire Protection District No. 8 Mason County Housing Authority Mason County Public Hospital District No. 1 Mason County Public Utility District No. 1 Mason County Public Utility District No. 3 Mason County Transit Authority Methow Valley Irrigation District Mid-Columbia Library District Midway Sewer District Moab Irrigation District No. 20 Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation District Mukilteo Water and Wastewater District Naches-Selah Irrigation District North Beach Water District North Central Washington Economic Development District North City Water District North County Regional Fire Authority North Highline Fire District North Perry Avenue Water District North Whidbey Park and Recreation District Northeast Sammamish Sewer and Water District Northshore Utility District Northwest Park and Recreation District No. 2 Okanogan Conservation District Okanogan County Cemetery District No. 4 Okanogan County Fire District No. 6 Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 11 Okanogan County Housing Authority Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 3 Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 4 Okanogan County Public Utility District No. 1 Okanogan Fire Protection District No. 16 Okanogan Irrigation District Olympic View Water and Sewer District Olympus Terrace Sewer District Orcas Island Library District Orchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6 Oroville Housing Authority Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District Othello Housing Authority Pacific Conservation District Pacific County Fire District No. 2 Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 1 Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 3 Pacific County Public Healthcare Services District No. 3 Pacific County Public Utility District No. 2 Pacific Hospital Preservation and Development Authority Palouse Conservation District Pasco/Franklin County Housing Authority Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 2 Appendix B Page 11 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 4 Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 5 Pend Oreille County Library District Pend Oreille County Public Hospital District No. 1 Pend Oreille County Public Utility District No. 1 Peninsula Housing Authority Peninsula Metropolitan Park District Peshastin Irrigation District Peshastin Water District Pierce Conservation District Pierce County Fire District No. 13 Pierce County Fire District No. 16 Pierce County Fire District No. 18 Pierce County Fire District No. 23 Pierce County Fire District No. 27 Pierce County Fire District No. 3 Pierce County Fire District No. 5 Pierce County Fire District No. 8 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 14 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 2 Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 21 Pierce County Housing Authority Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority Point Roberts Water District No. 4 Ponderay Shores Water and Sewer District Port Ludlow Drainage District Prescott Joint Parks and Recreation District Prosser Fire District No. 3 Prosser Public Hospital District Public Hospital District No. 1 Public Hospital District No. 3 Public Utility District No- 1 Puyallup Tribal Health Authority Quileute Housing Authority Quinault Housing Authority Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District Renton Housing Authority Richland Housing Authority Richland Public Facilities District Ronald Wastewater District Roza Irrigation District Sacheen Lake Sewer and Water District Sammamish Plateau Water and Sewer District San Juan Island Library District Saratoga Water District Scatchet Head Water District Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority Seattle Housing Authority Seattle Southside Regional Tourism Authority Selah-Moxee Irrigation District Si View Metropolitan Park District Silver Lake Flood Control District Silver Lake Water And Sewer District Silverdale Water District Skagit Conservation District Skagit County Cemetery District No. 2 Skagit County Fire District No. 10 Skagit County Fire District No. 11 Skagit County Fire District No. 15 Skagit County Fire District No. 9 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 13 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 14 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 2 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 3 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 4 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 5 Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 8 Skagit County Housing Authority Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 1 Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 2 Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 304 Skagit County Public Utility District No. 1 Skagit County Sewer District No. 1 Skagit County Sewer District No. 2 Skagit Valley Public Hospital District No. 1 Skamania County Fire District No. 1 Skamania County Fire District No. 4 Skamania County Public Hospital District No. 1 Skamania County Public Utility District No. 1 Skamokawa Water and Sewer District Skyway Water and Sewer District Snohomish County Fire District No. 15 Snohomish County Fire District No. 16 Snohomish County Fire District No. 19 Snohomish County Fire District No. 26 Snohomish County Fire District No. 5 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 17 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 21 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 22 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 25 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 28 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 3 Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 7 Appendix B Page 12 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Snohomish County Housing Authority Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 1 Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 2 Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 Snohomish Health District Snohomish River Regional Water Authority Snoqualmie Valley Hospital District South Columbia Basin Irrigation District South Correctional Entity Public Development Authority South Naches Irrigation District South Whatcom Fire Authority South Whidbey Parks and Recreation District South Yakima Conservation District Southwest Suburban Sewer District Spokane Conservation District Spokane County Fire District No. 12 Spokane County Fire District No. 2 Spokane County Fire District No. 4 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 10 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 11 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 13 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 3 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 5 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 8 Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 9 Spokane County Library District Spokane County Water District No. 3 Spokane Housing Authority Spokane Indian Housing Authority Spokane Public Facilities District Spokane Regional Health District Spokane Transit Authority Startup Water District Steptoe Sewer District No. 1 Stevens County Fire District No. 2 Stevens County Fire District No. 6 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 1 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 10 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 12 Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 5 Stevens County Public Utility District No. 1 Stevens County Rural Library District Stevens Pass Sewer District Sun Harbor Water District No. 3 Sunnyside Housing Authority Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District Sunnyslope Water District Swinomish Housing Authority Tacoma Community Redevelopment Authority Tacoma Housing Authority Tacoma Metropolitan Park District Terrace Heights Sewer District Thea Foss Waterway Development Authority Three Rivers Regional Wastewater Authority Thurston Conservation District Thurston County Fire District No. 12 Thurston County Fire District No. 4 Thurston County Fire District No. 9 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 3 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 5 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 6 Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 8 Thurston County Housing Authority Thurston County Public Utility District No. 1 Tri-County Economic Development District Tukwila Metropolitan Park District Underwood Conservation District Union Gap Irrigation District Val Vue Sewer District Valley Regional Fire Authority Valley View Sewer District Valley Water District Vancouver Housing Authority Vashon Park District Wahkiakum County Public Utility District No. 1 Wahkiakum Fire Protection District No. 1 Wahkiakum Port District No. 1 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 1 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 3 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 4 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 5 Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 8 Walla Walla County Rural Library District Walla Walla Housing Authority Wallula Water District No. 1 Washington State Convention Center Public Facilities District Washington State Major League Baseball Stadium Public Facilities District Washington State Tobacco Settlement Authority Water District 19 Wells Ranch Irrigation District Wenatchee Reclamation District Wenatchee-Chiwawa Irrigation District West Sound Utility District Whatcom Conservation District Appendix B Page 13 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah Washington Whatcom County Fire District No. 1 Whatcom County Fire District No. 11 Whatcom County Fire District No. 14 Whatcom County Fire District No. 16 Whatcom County Fire District No. 17 Whatcom County Fire District No. 4 Whatcom County Fire District No. 5 Whatcom County Fire District No. 7 Whatcom County Fire District No. 8 Whatcom County Public Utility District No. 1 Whatcom County Water District No. 12 Whatcom County Water District No. 13 Whatcom County Water District No. 2 Whatcom County Water District No. 7 Whatcom Transportation Authority Whidbey Island Public Hospital District Whitestone Reclamation District Whitman County Fire District No. 11 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 12 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 14 Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7 Whitman County Public Hospital District No. 3 Whitman County Rural Library District Whitworth Water District No. 2 Willapa Valley Water District William Shore Memorial Pool District Williams Lake Sewer District No. 2 Wine Science Center Development Authority Wollochet Harbor Sewer District Woodinville Water District Yakima County Fire District No. 1 Yakima County Fire District No. 3 Yakima County Fire District No. 4 Yakima County Fire District No. 5 Yakima County Fire District No. 6 Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 12 Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 14 Yakima County Mosquito Control District Yakima Housing Authority Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority Yakima Rural County Library District Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District State North Seattle Community College Seattle Colleges State Of Washington Washington State Department of Enterprise Services Washington State Department of Health Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Washington State Health Care Authority Tribal Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation Confederated Tribes of the Yakama Nation Cowlitz Indian Tribe Hoh Indian Tribe Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe Kalispel Tribe of Indians Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Lummi Indian Nation Makah Tribe Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Nisqually Indian Tribe Nooksack Indian Tribe Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Puyallup Tribe of Indians Quileute Indian Tribe Quinault Indian Nation Samish Indian Nation Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Skokomish Indian Tribe Snoqualmie Indian Tribe Spokane Tribe Squaxin Island Tribe Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Suquamish Tribe Swinomish Indian Tribal Community Tulalip Tribes Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Yakama Nation Land Enterprise Appendix B Page 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 ADDENDUM ONE (1) To that certain NJPA RFP #122017 Issued by National Joint Powers Alliance® For the procurement of SEWER VACUUM, HYDRO-EXCAVATION, AND STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT, WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES Consider the following to be part of the above-titled RFP: Question and Answer. QUESTION: Are sewer pipeline inspection cameras within the scope? ANSWER: Yes, as equipment or an accessory used in the cleaning of sewer lines, sewer pipeline inspection cameras are within the scope of this RFP. Acknowledgment of Addendum One (1) to RFP 122017 emailed on December 7, 2017. 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 #:ID19-1638 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-F REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:KERRI L. DONIS, Fire Chief Fire Department SUBJECT: RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopts the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the hazard mitigation plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards.Fresno County and other participating jurisdictions developed this multi- hazard mitigation plan to make the County and its residents less vulnerable to future hazard events. This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000,so Fresno County would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA)Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants,including Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant programs,as well as,lower flood insurance premiums (in jurisdictions that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System). The plan was originally developed in 2007-2008 and FEMA approved it in 2009.The plan was comprehensively updated in 2017-2018.The County followed a planning process in alignment with FEMA guidance during its original development and update,which began with the formation of a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC)comprised of key County,city,and district representatives and other stakeholders.The HMPC conducted a risk assessment that identified and profiled hazards that pose a risk to Fresno County,assessed the County’s vulnerability to these hazards,and examined the capabilities in place to mitigate them.The County is vulnerable to several hazards that are identified,profiled,and analyzed in this plan.Floods,wildfires,severe weather, drought,and agricultural hazards are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the County. Based on the risk assessment,the HMPC identified goals and objectives for reducing the County’s vulnerability to hazards.To meet identified goals and objectives,the plan recommends a number of mitigation actions that include actions specific to each participating jurisdiction.This plan has been formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1638 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-F formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years at a minimum. BACKGROUND The current Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was created in 2000 as a requirement of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and updated in 2007.The plan underwent another update known as the 2017-2018 update.The City of Fresno has participated in the initial draft,the update,and provided information to the County of Fresno to include in the plan. While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts,the regulations established the requirements that local hazard mitigation plans must meet in order for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T.Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Public Law 93-288).Because the Fresno County planning area is subject to many kinds of hazards,access to these programs is vital. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future.Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to communities and their residents by protecting critical community facilities,reducing liability exposure,and minimizing overall community impacts and disruptions.The Fresno County planning area has been affected by hazards in the past and is thus committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and becoming eligible for mitigation-related federal funding. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not applied since this is an adoption of a plan that the City of Fresno has previously been involved with. FISCAL IMPACT This item has no fiscal impact.The City of Fresno currently provides these services in case of an emergency. Attachments: Exhibit A: FEMA Approval Letter dated February 8, 2019 Exhibit B: Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 EMC Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 Cover Photo Credits: Lake of the Lone Indian, The Armchair Explorer, www.thearmchairexplorer.com/california/sierra-national-forest San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Lands, Limoneira buys 757 acres of orchards in San Joaquin Valley, Staff Report, Thursday, December 3, 2015, https://www.pacbiztimes.com/2015/12/03/limoneira-buys-757- acres-of-orchards-in-san-joaquin-valley/ Clovis Flooding, ABC 30 News, http://abc30.com/news/map-widespread-flooding-reported-on-the-east-side-of-fresno-and-clovis/1699471 Wildfire, Sierra News Online, https://sierranewsonline.com/wildfire-in-fresno-county-prompts-health-caution/ Fresno County Line, Geocaching, https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC22X5Q_fresno-monterey-co-line-priest-valley-quadrangle?guid=9bc54552-7fc5-48ac-ad4a-23e5851c90b9 Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 Fresno County i Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of hazard mitigation is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards. Fresno County and the other participating jurisdictions developed this multi- jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan to make the County and its residents less vulnerable to future hazard events. This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 so that Fresno County would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants, including Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant programs as well as lower flood insurance premiums (in jurisdictions that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System). The plan was originally developed in 2007-2008 and FEMA approved in 2009. The plan was comprehensively updated in 2017-2018. The County followed a planning process in alignment with FEMA guidance during its original development and update, which began with the formation of a hazard mitigation planning committee (HMPC) comprised of key county, city, and district representatives and other stakeholders. The HMPC conducted a risk assessment that identified and profiled hazards that pose a risk to Fresno County, assessed the County’s vulnerability to these hazards, and examined the capabilities in place to mitigate them. The County is vulnerable to several hazards that are identified, profiled, and analyzed in this plan. Floods, wildfires, severe weather, drought, and agricultural hazards are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the County. Based on the risk assessment, the HMPC identified goals and objectives for reducing the County’s vulnerability to hazards. To meet identified goals and objectives, the plan recommends a number of mitigation actions that include actions specific to each participating jurisdiction. This plan has been formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years at a minimum. TABLE OF CONTENTS Fresno County ii Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Chapters 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1.1 1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................ 1.1 1.2 Background and Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 1.1 1.3 Plan Organization ............................................................................................................................................... 1.3 1.3.1 Jurisdictional Annexes ................................................................................................................................ 1.3 2 Community Profile ...................................................................................................... 2.1 2.1 History ................................................................................................................................................................. 2.1 2.2 Geography and Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 2.2 2.3 Economy .............................................................................................................................................................. 2.2 2.4 Population ........................................................................................................................................................... 2.6 2.5 Development Trends ........................................................................................................................................... 2.7 3 Planning Process .......................................................................................................... 3.1 3.1 Background on Mitigation Planning in Fresno County .................................................................................. 3.1 3.2 What’s New in the Plan Update......................................................................................................................... 3.1 3.3 Local Government Participation ....................................................................................................................... 3.4 3.4 The 10-Step Planning Process ............................................................................................................................ 3.6 3.4.1 Phase 1: Organize Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3.7 3.4.2 Phase 2: Assess Risks ............................................................................................................................... 3.17 3.4.3 Phase 3: Develop the Mitigation Plan ...................................................................................................... 3.18 3.2.4 Phase 4: Implement the Plan and Monitor Progress ................................................................................. 3.19 4 Risk Assessment ........................................................................................................... 4.1 4.1 Hazard Identification: Natural Hazards .......................................................................................................... 4.2 4.1.1 Methodology and Results ........................................................................................................................... 4.2 4.1.2 Disaster Declaration History ...................................................................................................................... 4.5 4.2 Hazard Profiles ................................................................................................................................................... 4.8 4.2.1 Agricultural Hazards ................................................................................................................................ 4.10 4.2.2 Avalanche ................................................................................................................................................. 4.15 4.2.3 Dam Failure .............................................................................................................................................. 4.16 4.2.4 Drought ..................................................................................................................................................... 4.23 4.2.5 Earthquake ................................................................................................................................................ 4.32 4.2.6 Flood ......................................................................................................................................................... 4.48 4.2.7 Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic ........................................................................................... 4.77 4.2.8 Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus ................................................................................................. 4.81 4.2.9 Landslide .................................................................................................................................................. 4.84 4.2.10 Soil Hazards............................................................................................................................................ 4.88 4.2.11 Soil Hazards: Expansive Soils ................................................................................................................ 4.95 4.2.12 Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence .............................................................................................................. 4.98 4.2.13 Severe Weather: General ...................................................................................................................... 4.102 4.2.14 Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures .............................................................................................. 4.105 4.2.15 Severe Weather: Fog ............................................................................................................................ 4.113 4.2.16 Severe Weather: Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning/Wind ...................................................... 4.118 4.2.17 Severe Weather: Winter Storm ............................................................................................................. 4.129 Fresno County iii Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.2.18 Severe Weather: Tornado ..................................................................................................................... 4.132 4.2.19 Volcano ................................................................................................................................................ 4.136 4.2.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................ 4.143 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 4.155 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk .................................................................................... 4.156 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards .............................................................................. 4.189 4.4 Human-Caused Hazards ................................................................................................................................ 4.248 4.4.1 Hazard Identification and Profiles: Human-Caused Hazards ................................................................. 4.248 4.4.2 Asset Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment ...................................................................................... 4.262 4.5 Fresno County’s Mitigation Capabilities ...................................................................................................... 4.266 4.5.1 Fresno County’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities ............................................................................. 4.266 4.5.2 Fresno County’s Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities ...................................................... 4.290 4.5.3 Fresno County’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities ..................................................................................... 4.296 5 Mitigation Strategy ...................................................................................................... 5.1 5.1 Goals and Objectives .......................................................................................................................................... 5.1 5.2 Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Actions ........................................................................................... 5.4 5.2.1 Prioritization Process .................................................................................................................................. 5.6 5.3 Mitigation Action Plan ....................................................................................................................................... 5.7 5.3.1 Progress on Previous Mitigation Actions ................................................................................................... 5.8 5.3.2 Continued Compliance with NFIP............................................................................................................. 5.10 6 Plan Adoption .............................................................................................................. 6.1 7 Plan Implementation and Maintenance .................................................................... 7.1 7.1 Implementation ................................................................................................................................................... 7.1 7.1.1 Role of Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee in Implementation and Maintenance .............................. 7.2 7.2 Maintenance/Monitoring ................................................................................................................................... 7.3 7.2.1 Maintenance/Monitoring Schedule ............................................................................................................. 7.3 7.2.2 Maintenance Evaluation Process ................................................................................................................ 7.3 7.2.3 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms ..................................................................................... 7.5 7.2.4 Continued Public Involvement ................................................................................................................... 7.6 Annexes Annex A: City of Clovis Annex B: City of Coalinga Annex C: City of Firebaugh Annex D: City of Fowler Annex E: City of Fresno Annex F: City of Kerman Annex G: City of Kingsburg Annex H: City of Mendota Annex I: City of Sanger Annex J: City of Selma Annex K: City of Reedley Annex L: City of San Joaquin 5.3.3 Updated Mitigation Action Plan ................................................................................................................ 5.11 Fresno County iv Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex M: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Annex N: Lower San Joaquin Levee District Annex O: Kings River Conservation District Annex P: Sierra Resource Conservation District Annex Q: Westlands Water District Appendices Appendix A: Adoption Resolutions Appendix B: Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee Appendix C: Mitigation Categories, Alternatives, and Selection Criteria Appendix D: References Appendix E: Planning Process Fresno County 1.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose Fresno County, along with 17 participating jurisdictions, prepared this local multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan to better protect the people and property of the County from the effects of hazard events. This plan underwent a comprehensive update in 2017-2018 building upon the plan that was originally developed in 2009. This plan demonstrates the community’s commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision makers direct mitigation activities and resources. This plan was also developed to make Fresno County and participating jurisdictions eligible for certain federal disaster assistance, specifically, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA). This plan also meets the planning requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System (CRS), in order to earn points under CRS Activity 510, which could lower flood insurance premiums in CRS communities. 1.2 Background and Scope Each year in the United States, natural disasters take the lives of hundreds of people and injure thousands more. Nationwide, taxpayers pay billions of dollars annually to help communities, organizations, businesses, and individuals recover from disasters. These monies only partially reflect the true cost of disasters, because additional expenses to insurance companies and nongovernmental organizations are not reimbursed by tax dollars. Many natural disasters are predictable, and much of the damage caused by these events can be alleviated or even eliminated through planned mitigation. Hazard mitigation is defined by FEMA as “any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long- term risk to human life and property from a hazard event.” The results of a three-year, congressionally mandated independent study to assess future savings from mitigation activities provides evidence that mitigation activities are highly cost-effective. On average, each dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4 in avoided future losses in addition to saving lives and preventing injuries (National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council 2005). An update to this report in 2017 (Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: 2017 Interim Report) indicates that mitigation grants funded through select federal government agencies, on average, can save the nation $6 in future disaster costs, for every $1 spent on hazard mitigation. Hazard mitigation planning is the process through which hazards that threaten communities are identified, likely impacts of those hazards are determined, mitigation goals are set, and appropriate strategies to lessen impacts are determined, prioritized, and implemented. This plan documents Fresno County 1.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County’s hazard mitigation planning process, identifies relevant hazards and vulnerabilities, and provides strategies the County and participating jurisdictions will use to decrease vulnerability and increase resiliency and sustainability in Fresno County. The Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is a multi-jurisdictional plan that geographically covers everything within Fresno County’s jurisdictional boundaries (hereinafter referred to as the planning area). Unincorporated Fresno County and the following communities and special districts participated in the planning process; an asterisk ‘*’ indicates jurisdictions added to the plan during the 2017-2018 update: • City of Clovis • City of Coalinga • City of Firebaugh* • City of Fowler* • City of Fresno • City of Kerman • City of Kingsburg • City of Mendota • City of Reedley* • City of San Joaquin* • City of Sanger • City of Selma • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District • Lower San Joaquin Levee District • Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council • Kings River Conservation District* • Westlands Water District* This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) and the implementing regulations set forth by the Interim Final Rule published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002, (44 CFR §201.6) and finalized on October 31, 2007. (Hereafter, these requirements and regulations will be referred to collectively as the Disaster Mitigation Act.) While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts, the regulations established the requirements that local hazard mitigation plans must meet in order for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Public Law 93-288). Because the Fresno County planning area is subject to many kinds of hazards, access to these programs is vital. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future. Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to communities and their residents by protecting critical Fresno County 1.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan community facilities, reducing liability exposure, and minimizing overall community impacts and disruptions. The Fresno County planning area has been affected by hazards in the past and is thus committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and becoming eligible for mitigation- related federal funding. 1.3 Plan Organization The Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is organized as follows: • Chapter 2: Community Profile • Chapter 3: Planning Process • Chapter 4: Risk Assessment • Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategy • Chapter 6: Plan Adoption • Chapter 7: Plan Implementation and Maintenance • Jurisdictional Annexes • Appendices 1.3.1 Jurisdictional Annexes Each jurisdiction participating in this plan developed its own annex, which provides a more detailed assessment of the jurisdiction’s unique risks as well as their mitigation strategy to reduce long-term losses. Each jurisdictional annex contains the following: • Community profile summarizing geography and climate, history, economy, and population; • Hazard risk information for geographically specific hazards or unique vulnerabilities; • Hazard map(s) at an appropriate scale for the jurisdiction, if available; • Number and value of buildings, critical facilities, and other community assets located in hazard areas, if available; • Vulnerability information in terms of future growth and development in hazard areas; • A capability assessment describing existing regulatory, administrative, technical, and fiscal resources and tools as well as outreach efforts and partnerships and past mitigation projects; and • Mitigation actions specific to the jurisdiction. Fresno County 2.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2 COMMUNITY PROFILE Fresno County is illustrated in Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1 Fresno County Base Map 2.1 History When the first European settlers came to the Fresno area in the early 1800s, the Yokuts tribe was living on the valley floor and in the foothills along the San Joaquin and the Kings Rivers. The Monache tribe lived further up the rivers. After the initial Spanish explorers came, others began to arrive, including trappers, hunters, and miners. Kit Carson, the famous mountain man, explored the area during the 1840s. Named for the Spanish word for ash or ash tree, Fresno County was created in 1856, yet its present day boundaries were not established until 1909. The County was a part of the mining boom of California from its early years until the mid-1860s. Once gold fever subsided, the County turned to livestock and general farming, which received its Fresno County 2.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan impetus from the arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad in 1872. As more water became available, the County shifted from general farming to orchards and vineyards. 2.2 Geography and Climate California’s 10th largest county, Fresno County covers an area of over 6,000 square miles in central California. It is approximately 200 miles north-northwest of Los Angeles and approximately 160 miles southeast of San Francisco. The County is located near the center of California’s San Joaquin Valley and is part of the Great Central Valley, one of the state’s distinct physical regions. The County’s topography is characterized by broad, flat valley floors that generally slope from southeast to northwest; foothills and moderately high mountains (Coast Ranges) in the west; and foothills and high mountains (Sierra Nevada) in the east. Approximately 55 percent of the County is mountainous, and 45 percent is valley land. Elevations range from 100 to 400 feet on the valley floor to 4,000 feet in the Coast Ranges and more than 14,000 feet in the Sierra Nevada. There are two major rivers in Fresno County, both which originate in the Sierra Nevada: the San Joaquin and Kings rivers. The climate varies among the County’s three regions. Summers are long, hot, and dry in the valley; moderate to hot in the Coast Ranges; and relatively cool in the high elevations of the Sierra Nevada. There is little precipitation in the County during the summer. Winters in the valley and Coast Ranges are short and mild with light rain in the valley and moderate rainfall in the Coast Ranges. In the Sierra Nevada, winters vary from short and mild with frequent rain and some snow to moderately severe with frequent snow. Most of the seasonal precipitation occurs between October and April. More specific information about Fresno County’s climate can be found in Chapter 4 Risk Assessment. 2.3 Economy Agriculture is Fresno County’s primary industry and is a driving force in the County’s economy. Fresno County is the third largest agricultural county in the state, with a total gross production value of over $7 billion. The county leads the State in tomato processing, accounting for over 30 percent of the State’s total production, and chickens, with nearly 50 percent of the State’s total production, followed by Merced with 26 percent. Fresno County ranks second in production of almonds, with 17 percent of the State’s total production, grapes, with 13 percent, cattle and calves, with 13 percent, pistachios, with 23 percent, and tangerines, with 32 percent. The ten leading crops, in order of dollar value, were grapes, cotton, almonds, tomatoes, turkeys, cattle, milk, plums, oranges, peaches, and nectarines. The 2014 Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner’s Report includes a comparison of gross production value of crops by year. The Agricultural Commissioner’s Report shows that field crops and fruit and nut crops experienced the most dramatic change in the percentage of total profits between 1994 and 2014. From 1994 to 2014, field crops dropped from 21.4 to 4.6 percent of the Fresno County 2.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan total gross production value of crops harvested, and during that same period fruit and nut crops grew from 32.2 to 49.0 percent. Agriculture accounts for the largest portion of jobs in Fresno County; However, since 1990, the percentage of agriculture-related jobs has continuously fallen. In 1990 agriculture-related jobs accounted for over 50 percent of the total jobs within the top ten raking industries. By 2000, there was a decrease, with agriculture-related jobs falling to approximately 47 percent of those total jobs. By 2013, the percentage had decreased to approximately 36 percent. The 2006 Fresno County Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report states that while the agricultural economy is improving, the industry struggles with labor shortages during peak harvest periods, increased production expenses, and hazard-related losses (drought, frost, hail, rain, and excessive heat). Fresno County farm employment represents 13.2 percent of the total countywide employment, compared to 2.5 percent of statewide employment. Within the Valley, San Joaquin County had the lowest unemployment rate (8.8 percent) and Tulare County had the highest (12.2 percent), with Fresno County falling in between (10.3 percent). Fresno County has slightly more service-related employment than the rest of the San Joaquin Valley. The total goods-producing employment (e.g., mining, construction, and manufacturing) represented 12.3 percent of the total nonfarm employment, which is just slightly lower than the state and also lower than that of the San Joaquin Valley, at 12.7 and 13.8 percent, respectively Beyond agriculture and farming, the healthcare field has shown robust growth in Fresno County. Between 1990 and 2013, employment in ambulatory health services more than doubled, with an average annual growth rate of 3.4 percent. The hospital sector has also grown, with an annual growth rate of 1.4 percent from 1990 to 2013. Additionally, employment in the administrative and support services sector increased at an average annual rate of 3.9 percent between 1990 to 2013. When looking at total employment within the entire Valley, Fresno County ranked highest, with 33 percent of total employment, followed by Kern and San Joaquin counties with 30 and 23 percent, respectively. Though Fresno County has the highest percentage of jobs, the number of jobs grew much faster in other counties, at 1.6 percent average annual growth rate between 2010 and 2014, in comparison to Kern, Madera, and Merced counties which during the same period grew at rates of 3.0 percent, 2.3 percent and 2.0 percent, respectively. While Fresno County’s total employment was the highest among San Joaquin Valley counties, the unemployment rate fell in the middle. San Joaquin County had the lowest unemployment rate in December 2015 (8.8 percent) and Tulare County had the highest (12.2 percent), with Fresno County at 10.3 percent, a rate very similar to other counties in the Valley. All counties in the San Joaquin Valley had unemployment rates significantly higher than that of the state average of 5.8 percent. In relation to the state and neighboring counties, Fresno County has a lower population to jobs ratio, which may indicate a lack of available jobs to match the skills of the county’s residents or reflect the number of residents who work outside the county but who can afford the cost of housing Fresno County 2.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in the County as opposed to the higher cost housing in the Bay Area. Education levels are also lower; approximately 20 percent of the county population with a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to over 30 percent of the statewide population. Comprehensive economic data available for Fresno County comes from the U.S. Census Bureau by way of the American Community Survey. Select estimates of economic characteristics for Fresno County are shown in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 Fresno County Economic Characteristics Characteristic Fresno County In civilian labor force, total, percent of population age 16 years+ 60.9 In civilian labor force, female, percent of population age 16 years+ 54.6 Total accommodation and food services sales, 2012 ($1,000) 1,226,169 Total health care and social assistance receipts/revenue, 2012 ($1,000) 5,325,615 Total retail sales, 2012 ($1,000) (c) 9,117,752 Median household income (in 2015 dollars), 2010-2014 45,233 Per capita income in past 12 months (in 2015 dollars), 2010-2014 20,408 Persons in poverty, percent 26.8 Total employer establishments, 2015 16,350 Total employment 2015 374,564 Total annual payroll ($1,000), 2015 10,056,124 Total employment, percent change 2014-2015 2.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates The median household income for Fresno County has increased over the past nine years, from about $41,900 in 2005 to $45,233 in 2015. In comparison with other San Joaquin Valley counties, the median household income is somewhat low. The County falls significantly short of the state median household income ($61,900), as well as other counties in the San Joaquin Valley ($52,000 in San Joaquin County and $51,000 in Stanislaus County). More recent data from the California Employment Development Department indicates that, in 2015, there were 432,146 people in the Fresno County labor force. Of these, 374,564 were employed; 57,137 were not. The unemployment rate was 13.2 percent. Areas with seasonal economies, such as the County’s agriculture industry, tend to have higher unemployment. Table 2.2 illustrates the breakdown of employment by industry in Fresno County in 2016, and Table 2.3 compares the distribution of employment in Fresno County to the San Joaquin Valley and State of California. The best available data on industry is compiled by Fresno County Economic Development Corporation using US Economic Census information from 2012. This information is also included in the 2040 Fresno County General Plan. Fresno County 2.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 2.2 Fresno County’s Employment by Industry, 2016 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care, and Social Assistance 89,768 23.6 Retail Trade 40,404 10.6 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 38,340 10.1 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 33,510 8.8 Professional, Scientific, and Management, and Administrative and Waste Management Services 31,818 8.4 Manufacturing 28,025 7.4 Public Administration 23,284 6.1 Construction 20,259 5.3 Other Services, Except Public Administration 19,208 5.0 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 18,381 4.8 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 18,293 4.8 Wholesale Trade 14,526 3.8 Information 4,805 1.3 Totals 380,621 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table 2.3 Annual Employment by Industry*-- California, Fresno, and San Joaquin Valley* Sector/Industry California Fresno San Joaquin Valley Avg Emp % of Total Avg Emp % of Total Avg Emp % of Total Total Farm 399,100 2.5% 48,900 13.2% 196,400 13.7% Total Nonfarm 14,706,300 90.3% 292,600 79.2% 1,124,100 78.6% Goods Producing Mining and Logging*** 30,500 0.2% 300 0.1% 51,800 4.6% Construction 589,900 4.0% 12,200 4.2% Manufacturing 1,252,100 8.5% 23,600 8.1% 103,300 9.2% Subtotal Goods Producing 1,872,500 12.7% 36,100 12.3% 155,100 13.8% Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Wholesale Trade 675,700 4.6% 12,800 4.4% 44,900 4.0% Retail Trade 1,572,300 10.7% 33,800 11.6% 137,900 12.3% Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities 487,300 3.3% 11,600 4.0% 52,500 4.7% Subtotal Trade, Transportation, Utilities 2,735,300 18.6% 58,200 19.9% 235,300 20.9% Service Providing Information 435,100 3.0% 3,800 1.3% 11,500 1.0% Financial Activities 773,500 5.3% 12,800 4.4% 41,600 3.7% Professional and Business Services 2,238,200 15.2% 28,000 9.6% 102,000 9.1% Education Services (Private), Health Care, Social Assistance 2,172,100 14.8% 51,100 17.5% 174,000 15.5% Leisure and Hospitality 1,598,700 10.9% 28,000 9.6% 101,200 9.0% Other (excluding Private Household Workers) 504,700 3.4% 10,600 3.6% 35,100 3.1% Government 2,376,300 16.2% 64,100 21.9% 256100 22.8% Subtotal Service Producing 10,098,600 68.7% 198,400 67.8% 721,500 64.2% Total Employment 16,281,000 100.0% 369,300 100.0% 1,430,500 100.0% *Employment reflects number of jobs. Data is not seasonally adjusted. **Includes Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare Counties. Fresno County 2.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan ***The total number and percentage for San Joaquin Valley is higher than the actual estimate; numbers for Kern, Fresno, and San Joaquin County included construction numbers separately from Mining and Logging but the other five counties did not. Therefore, the total for Mining and Logging jobs in San Joaquin Valley also includes construction jobs. Source: California Employment Development Department, 2012. 2.4 Population Fresno County is one of the largest, fastest growing, and most diverse counties in California. It is the state’s 10th most populous county according to the California Department of Finance. Fresno County’s population is projected to grow by 606,200 over the 45-year period, an increase of 61.8 percent overall and an average annual rate of 1.1 percent. The county’s rate falls between the San Joaquin Valley (76.1 percent overall and 1.4percent annually) and California (32.8percent overall and 0.6percent annually). Overall, Fresno County has a younger population than the rest of California. Minors (under 18) account for 29.3 percent of the population, while seniors (age 65 and above) account for 10.6 percent of the population. Approximately 30.6 percent of the population in Fresno County cities is under 18, compared with 26.2 percent in unincorporated areas (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey). Fresno County residents have completed less formal education than residents of California as a whole, with 50.6 percent of the population in Fresno County attaining education levels beyond a high school diploma, compared with 60.8 percent of the population in California (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey). Population estimates for the years 2010-2016 for each of the incorporated towns and the unincorporated County are provided in Table 2.4. Table 2.4 Fresno County Population 2010-2016* Source: U.S Census Bureau American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates http://factfinder.census.gov/ *Estimate Select demographic and social characteristics for Fresno County from the 2012-2016 American Community Survey are shown in Table 2.5. 2010 2011* 2012* 2013* 2014* 2015* 2016* County Total 932,463 940,496 946,844 953,762 963,151 972,130 979,915 City of Clovis 96,210 97,452 98,560 99,656 101,980 103,926 106,583 City of Coalinga 18,067 18,047 16,812 16,736 16,412 16,521 16,598 City of Firebaugh 7,373 7,474 7,639 7,773 7,935 8,084 8,176 City of Fowler 5,305 5,434 5,655 5,785 5,908 6,006 6,083 City of Fresno 496,879 500,897 505,261 508,971 514,376 518,503 522,053 City of Huron 6,755 6,754 6,763 6,777 6,789 6,812 6,941 City of Kerman 13,641 13,894 14,314 14,338 14,376 14,463 14,594 City of Kingsburg 11,411 11,512 11,601 11,668 11,702 11,774 11,807 City of Mendota 11,179 11,356 11,382 11,381 11,377 11,398 11,418 City of Reedley 23,669 23,968 24,304 24,562 24,858 25,092 25,273 City of Sanger 24,303 24,467 24,542 24,625 24,716 24,857 25,007 City of San Joaquin 3,927 3,965 3,974 3,991 4,010 4,008 4,011 City of Selma 23,317 23,445 23,775 24,160 24,2345 24,349 24,597 Fresno County 2.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 2.5 Fresno County Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2016 Fresno County Population Population estimates, 2016 963,160 Population, percent change- 2010 (estimates base) to 2016 3.5 Population, Census, 2010 930,450 Age and Sex Persons under 5 years, percent 8.2 Persons under 18 years, percent 28.9 Persons 65 years and over, percent 11.2 Female persons, percent 50.1 Race and Hispanic Origin White alone, percent 61.6 Black or African American alone, percent 5.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent 1.0 Asian alone, percent 9.9 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent 0.2 Two or More Races, percent 3.9 Hispanic or Latino, percent 52.0 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent 30.8 Education High school graduate or higher, percent of persons age 25 years+ 73.8 Bachelor's degree or higher, percent of persons age 25 years+ 19.7 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, 2016 Population Estimates, American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 2.5 Development Trends The California Department of Finance (DOF) forecasts population growth from 2015 through 2060 for the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley and for California overall. Fresno County’s population is projected to grow by 606,200 over the 45-year period, an increase of 61.8 percent overall and an average annual rate of 1.1 percent. The growth rate is expected to be higher over the first few decades before tapering-off in the later decades. Fresno County’s rate falls between the San Joaquin Valley (76.1percent overall and 1.4percent annually) and California (32.8 percent overall and 0.6 percent annually). Fresno County’s growth rate through 2060 is expected to be lower than all other San Joaquin Valley counties, except Stanislaus County (59.0percent overall and 1.0 percent annually). Since 1960, Fresno County’s population has shifted from the county’s unincorporated area to the county’s cities, with the incorporated-unincorporated split changing from 50.2percent to 49.8percent in 1960 to 82.5percent to 17.5percent in 2015. Fresno County’s population and anticipated growth is mostly concentrated in and around the county’s cities. The Fresno metropolitan area has absorbed much of the county’s population growth, either through annexations or new development. Over 53 percent of the county’s population now resides in the City of Fresno and almost 11 percent resides in Clovis. Between 1960 and 2015, the population of unincorporated Fresno County decreased by 11,670 from 182,120 to 170,450, a reduction of 6.4 percent. Fresno County 2.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The FCOG projections indicate an increasing percentage of employment growth occurring in Fresno County’s cities, compared with the unincorporated areas. Between 2015 and 2050, 91.8percent of the employment growth is projected to occur in city spheres of influence. This will result in 16.8 percent of the county’s employees located in the unincorporated area by 2050 . The fastest-growing sectors will be construction (3.8 percent annually), professional and business services (3.1 percent annually), and educational services, health care, and social assistance (3.2 percent annually). Fresno County 3.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3 PLANNING PROCESS Requirements §201.6(b) and §201.6(c)(1): An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: 1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; 2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests to be involved in the planning process; and 3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. [The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. 3.1 Background on Mitigation Planning in Fresno County The primary purpose of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) update is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects on the Fresno County, California planning area. Fresno County recognized the need and importance of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and initiated its development in 2007 after receiving a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which served as the primary funding source for this plan. The original LHMP was developed in 2007-2008 and received FEMA approval in 2009. Additional details on the original planning effort can be referenced in the 2009 Plan. The plan underwent a comprehensive update in 2017-2018. The planning process followed during the update was similar to that used in the original plan development utilizing the input from a multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC). Amec Foster Wheeler was procured to assist with the update in 2017. The process is described further in this section and documented in Appendix E. 3.2 What's New in the Plan Update Requirements §201.6(d)(3): A local jurisdiction must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within 5 years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding. Fresno County 3.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The updated LHMP complies with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidance and California Office of Emergency Services guidelines for Local Hazard Mitigation Plans. The update followed the requirements noted in the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 and the 2013 Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Handbook. This HMP update involved a comprehensive review and update of each section of the 2009 plan and includes an assessment of the progress of the participating communities in evaluating, monitoring and implementing the mitigation strategy outlined in the initial plan. Only the information and data still valid from the 2009 plan was carried forward as applicable into this HMP update. Also to be noted, Section 7 Plan Implementation of this plan update identifies key requirements for updating future plans including: •Consider changes in vulnerability due to action implementation; •Document success stories where mitigation efforts have proven effective; •Document areas where mitigation actions were not effective; •Document any new hazards that may arise or were previously overlooked; •Document hazard events and impacts that occurred within the five-year period; •Incorporate new data or studies on hazards and risks; •Incorporate new capabilities or changes in capabilities; •Incorporate documentation of continued public involvement; •Incorporate documentation to update the planning process that may include new or additional stakeholder involvement; •Incorporate growth and development-related changes to building inventories; •Incorporate new project recommendations or changes in project prioritization; •Include a public involvement process to receive public comment on the updated plan prior to submitting the updated plan to Cal OES/FEMA; and •Include re-adoption by all participating entities following FEMA approval. These requirements and others as detailed throughout this plan were addressed during the 2017- 2018 plan update process. Plan Section Review and Analysis – 2018 Update During the 2017-2018 plan update, the HMPC updated each of the sections of the previously approved plan to include new information. Amec Foster Wheeler developed a summary of each section in the plan and guided the HMPC through the elements that needed updating during the kickoff meeting in July 2017. This included analyzing each section using FEMA’s local plan update guidance (2013) to ensure that the plan met the latest requirements. The HMPC and Amec Foster Wheeler determined that nearly every section of the plan would need revision to align the plan with the latest FEMA planning guidance and requirements. A summary of the changes in this plan update is highlighted in the table below Fresno County 3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 3.1 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Highlights Plan Section Summary of Plan Review, Analysis, and Updates 1. Introduction Updated language to describe purpose and requirements of the Fresno County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update process. Identified new participating jurisdictions. 2. Community Profile Updated with recent census data and current economy description 3. Planning Process Described and document the planning process for the update, including coordination among agencies Described how 2009 plan was integrated with/into other planning efforts. Removes 2009 planning process info. Described any changes in participation in detail. Described 2017-2018 public participation process Described updates to the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee 4. Risk Assessment Revisited former hazards list for possible modifications. Reviewed the County and City of Fresno’s CRS participation Updated list of disaster declarations to include recent data. Updated tables to include recent National Center for Environmental Information data. Updated past occurrences for each hazard to include recent data. Updated critical facilities identified from the 2009 plan. Updated growth and development trends to include recent Census and local data sources. Updated historic and cultural resources using local/state/national sources. Updated property values for vulnerability and exposure analysis, using updated building information based on assessor’s data. Updated estimate flood losses using the latest Fresno County Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) and assessor’s data. Updated National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) data and Repetitive Loss structure data from the previous plan. Incorporated new hazard loss estimates since 2009, as applicable. Used updated GIS inventory data to assess wildfire threat to the County Updated HAZUS-MH Level I earthquake vulnerability analysis data Updated information regarding specific vulnerabilities to hazards, including maps and tables of specific assets at risk, specific critical facilities at risk, and specific populations at risk. Updated maps in plan where appropriate. Reviewed mitigation capabilities and update to reflect current capabilities. 5. Mitigation Strategy Indicated what projects have been implemented that may reduce previously identified vulnerabilities. Updated Chapter 5 based on the results of the updated risk assessment, completed mitigation actions, and implementation obstacles and opportunities since the completion of the 2009 plan. Reviewed and updated goals and objectives based on HMPC input. Revised to include more information on the Community Rating System (CRS) categories of mitigation measures (structural projects, natural resource protection, emergency services, etc.) and how they are reviewed when considering the options for mitigation. Included updated information on how actions are prioritized. Reviewed mitigation actions from the 2009 plan and develop a status report for each; identified if actions have been completed, deleted, or deferred/carried forward. Updated priorities on actions. Identified examples of successful implementation to highlight positive movement on actions identified in 2009 plan. Identified and detailed new mitigation actions proposed by the HMPC. Fresno County 3.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Plan Section Summary of Plan Review, Analysis, and Updates 6. Plan Adoption Plan will be re-adopted as part of the update process 7. Plan Maintenance Reviewed and updated procedures for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan. Revised to reflect current methods. Updated the system for monitoring progress of mitigation activities by identifying additional criteria for plan monitoring and maintenance. Jurisdictional Annexes Developed annexes for new participating jurisdictions in 2017-2018. Updated previous participants’ annexes with recent Census data. Updated past event history and hazard loss estimates. Added new maps and updated old maps as needed. Updated mitigation actions from 2009 and added new mitigation actions. Appendices Updated references. Updated planning process documentation. Updated mitigation alternatives analyzed in the process. Public participation plan updated Plan Adoption. 3.3 Local Government Participation In the 2017-2018 plan update, the following jurisdictions participated in the planning process and will be adopting the updated plan following FEMA approval. Changes in participation during the 2017-2018 are denoted below by an asterisk ‘*’ which indicates jurisdictions added to the plan during the update process. This included four municipalities and two special districts. Only one municipality (Huron) that participated in the 2009 plan did not participate in the update and no longer has an annex specific to them. Lead Jurisdiction: • Fresno County Municipalities: • City of Clovis • City of Coalinga • City of Firebaugh* • City of Fowler* • City of Fresno • City of Kerman • City of Kingsburg • City of Mendota • City of Reedley* • City of San Joaquin* • City of Sanger • City of Selma Fresno County 3.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Special Districts: • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District • Lower San Joaquin Levee District • Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council • Kings River Conservation District* • Westlands Water District* *indicates new to plan in 2017-2018 The DMA planning regulations and guidance stress that each local government seeking FEMA approval of their mitigation plan must participate in the planning effort in the following ways: • Participate in the process as part of the HMPC • Detail areas within the planning area where the risk differs from that facing the entire area • Identify potential mitigation actions • Formally adopt the plan For the Fresno County planning area’s HMPC, “participation” meant the following: • Providing facilities for meetings • Attending and participating in the HMPC meetings • Completing and returning Amec Foster Wheeler Data Collection worksheets or reviewing and jurisdictional annexes • Collecting and providing other requested data (as available) • Identifying mitigation actions for the plan • Reviewing and providing comments on plan drafts • Informing the public, local officials, and other interested parties about the planning process and providing opportunity for them to comment on the plan • Coordinating, and participating in the public input process • Coordinating the formal adoption of the plan by the governing boards The County and all jurisdictions with annexes to this plan and seeking FEMA approval met all of these participation requirements. In most cases one or more representatives for each jurisdiction attended the multi-jurisdictional meetings described in Table 3.2, Schedule of Planning Meetings, and also brought together a local planning team to help collect data, identify mitigation actions and implementation strategies, and review and provide data on annex drafts. In some cases, the jurisdictions had limited capacity to attend or had conflicts with HMPC meetings; in these cases, side-bar phone calls and emails were used to provide input into the process. Appendix E provides additional information and documentation of the planning process. Fresno County 3.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.4 The 10-Step Planning Process Amec Foster Wheeler established the planning process for the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan using the DMA planning requirements and FEMA’s associated guidance. The original FEMA planning guidance is structured around a four-phase process: 1) Organize Resources 2) Assess Risks 3) Develop the Mitigation Plan 4) Implement the Plan and Monitor Progress Into this process, Amec Foster Wheeler integrated a more detailed 10-step planning process used for FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) and Flood Mitigation Assistance programs. Thus, the modified 10-step process used for this plan meets the requirements of major grant programs including: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation program, Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, and flood control projects authorized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In 2013, FEMA released the Local Mitigation Planning Handbook that has become the official guide for local governments to develop, update and implement local mitigation plans. While the requirements under §201.6 have not changed, the Handbook provides guidance to local governments on developing or updating hazard mitigation plans to meet the requirements under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 44 – Emergency Management and Assistance §201.6, Local Mitigation Plans for FEMA approval and eligibility to apply for FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs. It also offers practical approaches, tools, worksheets and local mitigation planning examples for how communities can engage in effective planning to reduce long-term risk from natural hazards and disasters. The Handbook complements and liberally references the Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide (October 1, 2011), which is the official guidance for Federal and State officials responsible for reviewing local mitigation plans in a fair and consistent manner. Table 3.1 shows how the modified 10-step process fits into FEMA’s four-phase process, and how these elements correspond to the tasks in the FEMA Mitigation Planning Handbook. Fresno County 3.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 3.2 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Process FEMA’s 4-Phase DMA Process Modified 10-Step CRS Process FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook Tasks 1) Organize Resources 201.6(c)(1) 1) Organize the Planning Effort 1: Determine the planning area and resources 201.6(b)(1) 2) Involve the Public 2: Build the planning team - 44 CFR 201.6 (C)(1) 201.6(b)(2) and (3) 3) Coordinate with Other Departments and Agencies 3: Create an outreach strategy - 44 CFR 201.6(b)(1) 4: Review community capabilities - 44 CFR 201.6 (b)(2)&(3) 2) Assess Risks 201.6(c)(2)(i) 4) Identify the Hazards 5: Conduct a risk assessment - 44 CFR 201.6 (C)(2)(i) 44 CFR 201.6(C)(2)(ii)&(iii) 201.6(c)(2)(ii) 5) Assess the Risks 3) Develop the Mitigation Plan 201.6(c)(3)(i) 6) Set Goals 6: Develop a mitigation strategy - 44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(i); 44 CFR 201(c)(3)(ii) and 44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii) 201.6(c)(3)(ii) 7) Review Possible Activities 201.6(c)(3)(iii) 8) Draft an Action Plan 4) Implement the Plan and Monitor Progress 201.6(c)(5) 9) Adopt the Plan 7: Review and adopt the plan 201.6(c)(4) 10) Implement, Evaluate, and Revise the Plan 8: Keep the plan current 9: Create a safe and resilient community - 44 CFR 201.6(c)(4) 3.4.1 Phase 1: Organize Resources Planning Step 1: Organize the Planning Effort The 2017-2018 planning process and update of the LHMP was formally initiated in April and May of 2017 under the coordination of the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services (OES) as the lead entity. Amec Foster Wheeler worked with the OES staff to establish the framework and organization for development of the plan. Amec Foster Wheeler assisted OES with coordination with other governmental agencies and public process elements to develop the updated LHMP for the Fresno County Operational Area. Organizational efforts were initiated with a series emails to inform and educate jurisdictions within the County of the purpose and need for an update to the countywide hazard mitigation plan. Representatives from participating jurisdictions and HMPC members to the 2009 plan were used as a starting point for the invite list, with additional invitations extended as appropriate throughout the planning process. The list of initial invitees is included in Appendix B. Email invitations were sent to all city managers (15) and fire chiefs, county departments; and all special districts in the County. The HMPC was re-established as a result of this effort. Fresno County 3.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee The HMPC, which included key County, city, and other local government and stakeholder representatives, updated the plan with leadership from the County’s emergency services manager and facilitation by Amec Foster Wheeler. The following participated on the HMPC: Fresno County • Agriculture Department • CAO • Public Health Department • Public Health -Environmental Health and Safety • Fresno County Fire Protection District • Internal Services Department • Information Technology Services Department • Office of Emergency Services (Lead) • Public Works - Development Services • Public Works and Planning Department • Public Works - Roads • Sheriff’s Department Participating Jurisdictions • City of Clovis − Fire • City of Coalinga − Fire • City of Fresno − Office of Emergency Services • City of Firebaugh • City of Fowler • City of Kerman − Police − Public Works • City of Kingsburg − Fire • City of Mendota • City of Reedley • City of San Joaquin • City of Sanger − Fire • City of San Joaquin • City of Selma • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fresno County 3.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Lower San Joaquin Levee District • Sierra Resource Conservation District – in cooperation with Oak to Timberline Fire Safe and Highway 168 Fire Safe Council • Westlands Water District Other Government and Stakeholder Representatives: • California Department of Water Resources • California Department of Forestry and Fire (CAL FIRE: Fresno County) • Fresno Irrigation District* • Fresno Mosquito District • Kings River Conservation District* • San Joaquin Valley Resource Conservation Development • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pine Flat • U.S. Forest Service – Sierra National Forest* • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation* A list of the primary HMPC representatives for each jurisdiction and a complete list of participating HMPC members are included in Appendix B. The jurisdictions participated in all elements of the planning process in accordance with the definition of participation noted previously in Section 3.3 Local Government Participation. Each jurisdiction also utilized the support of many other support staff in order to collect and provide requested data and conduct timely reviews of the draft documents. Note that the above list of HMPC members also includes several other government and stakeholder representatives that contributed to the planning process. Specific participants from these other agencies are also identified in Appendix B. Planning Meetings The planning process officially began with a kick-off meeting on July 12, 2017. The meeting covered the scope of work and an introduction to the DMA requirements. Participants were provided with a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide, which included worksheets to facilitate the collection of information necessary to support update of the plan. Using FEMA guidance, Amec Foster Wheeler designed these worksheets to capture information on past hazard events, identify hazards of concern to each of the participating jurisdictions, quantify values at risk to identified hazards, inventory existing capabilities, and record possible mitigation actions. A copy of Amec Foster Wheeler’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide for this project is included in Appendix E. The County and each jurisdiction seeking FEMA approval of their plan completed and returned the worksheets in either the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide, or the Jurisdictional Annex Template (described further below) to Amec Foster Wheeler for incorporation into the plan document. During the planning process, the HMPC communicated through face-to-face meetings, email, telephone conversations, and a project-based website. Draft documents were posted on this website so that the HMPC members could easily access and review them. The HMPC formally met three Fresno County 3.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan times during the planning period (July 12, 2017 – November 16, 2017). The purposes of these meetings are described in Table 3.2. In addition to these meetings some jurisdictions held meetings with subcommittees to discuss the needed input for the plan update. An example is a meeting with County OES and other department representatives on August 15, 2017. In a couple cases some municipalities were not able to attend the planning workshops due to scheduling conflicts or limited staff capacity. The County emergency manager and the planning consultant worked with the jurisdictions individually in those cases to obtain necessary information and input into the planning process. This was done through direct emails from the planning consultant and follow- up phone conversations with the consultant and County emergency manager where necessary. Table 3.3 Schedule of Planning Meetings Meeting Type Meeting Topic Meeting Date(s) Meeting Location(s) HMPC #1 Kick-off meeting: introduction to DMA, the planning process, and hazard identification July 12, 2017 Clovis HMPC #2 Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Mitigation Goals/Strategy October 6, 2107 Clovis HMPC #3 Development and prioritization of mitigation action recommendations November 16, 2017 Clovis During the kickoff meeting, a template for the jurisdictional annexes was distributed. Similar to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide described above, this template included blank tables and other directional information to facilitate the collection of key jurisdictional information for jurisdictions that would be new to the plan in 2017-2018. A copy of the Jurisdictional Annex Template is included in Appendix E. A project Google drive was used to coordinate the population of the templates and receive edits to existing jurisdictional annexes. Each jurisdiction with an annex in this plan provided data as requested in the annex template and reviewed and commented on the draft annexes throughout the development of the plan. Information each jurisdiction reviewed and updated included jurisdictional hazards and vulnerabilities, growth and development trends, capabilities, progress on previously identified mitigation actions and new mitigation actions. The information was provided directly through the edits to the draft annexes and in emails exchanged with the planning consultant. Agendas for each of the meetings and lists of attendees are included in Appendix E. Planning Step 2: Involve the Public Involving the public assures support from the community at large and is a part of the planning process. Early discussions with the Fresno County OES established the initial plan for public involvement in the plan update. Public outreach began early in the process with a public survey and a meeting held in November 2017 to inform the public of the purpose of the DMA and the hazard mitigation planning process for the Fresno County planning area. Fresno County 3.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan At the kick-off meeting, the HMPC discussed additional options for public involvement and agreed to an approach using established public information mechanisms and resources within the community. Public involvement activities included press releases, website postings, flyer development and distribution, public meetings, and the collection of public comments on the draft plan. The Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan was also discussed on the local radio during interview with the County OES manager. A public involvement ‘backgrounder’ document (see Appendix E) was prepared and presented to the HMPC at the kickoff meeting. The document outlines the FEMA definition of hazard mitigation, explains why hazard mitigation is important, gives some background on hazard mitigation plans and the process of updating the plans, and finally offers information on how the public can become involved in the process. This backgrounder was used as handout at various public meetings and events as a mechanism to outreach and engage the public in the planning process for the update. An example of a public meeting where the flyer was distributed was a commissioner’s meeting on personal disaster preparedness held November 13, 2017. Hardcopy versions of a public survey discussed below were also distributed. During the plan update’s drafting stage, an online public survey was developed as a tool to gather public input. A hardcopy version was also developed. The survey was for the public to provide feedback to the Fresno County multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee on reducing hazard impacts. The survey provided an opportunity for public input during the planning process, prior to finalization of the plan update. The survey gathered public feedback on concerns about hazards and input on strategies to reduce their impacts. The survey was released in November and closed on December 31st. The HMPC provided links to a public survey by distributing it using social media, email, and posting the link on websites. One hundred eighty four (184) people filled out the survey online and in hardcopy (which was faxed or scanned and emailed). Results showed that the public perceives the most significant hazards to be drought, tree mortality and wildfire. Wildfire fuels treatment projects, evacuation route development and hazardous tree removal were cited as the most popular mitigation actions. A summary of the survey data can be found in Appendix E. Fresno County 3.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 3.1 Example of Public Survey Response Fresno County 3.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A public meeting that was held during the draft-plan development and prior to finalizing the plan is noted in Table 3.3. Eight citizens attended and learned about the plan update process; hazards and vulnerabilities identified in the plan were discussed. Example press releases and sign in sheets are located in Appendix E. Prior to finalizing the plan the draft was available online on the Fresno County OES website. The draft plan was advertised through social media, mass emailing and an advertisement in the Fresno Bee. An electronic comment form was provided with the draft plan. Three comments were received and are documented in Appendix E. Some of these comments resulted in minor changes to the plan (corrections or clarifications in Chapters 3 and 4). One comment noted that long-term power outages or electro-magnetic pulse events were not directly addressed in the plan. The plan was not revised specific to this comment since power disruption is accounted for as a consequence of many hazards identified in the plan, including severe weather, earthquake, landslide and wildfire, and the mitigation strategy does include projects related to enhancing backup power. The public outreach activities described here were conducted with participation from and on behalf of all jurisdictions participating in this plan. Table 3.4 Public Meeting Schedule Meeting Topic Meeting Date Meeting Location Public education and feedback Meeting: risk assessment overview, mitigation project options overview, an update on planning process, and public survey November 16, 2017 Clovis Planning Step 3: Coordinate with Other Departments and Agencies Early in the planning process, state, federal, and local agencies and organizations were invited to participate as stakeholders in the process. Stakeholders could participate in various ways, either by contributing input at HMPC meetings, being aware of planning activities through an email group, providing information to support the effort, or reviewing and commenting on the draft plan. Based on their involvement in other hazard mitigation planning efforts, status in the County, and interest as a neighboring jurisdiction, representatives from the following agencies were invited to participate as stakeholders in the process: • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE: Fresno County)* • California Department of Water Resources • California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services* • California Department of Transportation CAL Trans • Fresno Irrigation District* • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District* • Fresno Mosquito District • Highway 168 Fire Safe Council • Lower San Joaquin Levee District* • Madera County Office of Emergency Services • Table Mountain Rancheria Fresno County 3.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Pine Flat • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation* • Westlands Water District* * Participated on HMPC The HMPC also used technical data, reports, and studies from the following agencies and groups in the development and update of this plan: • Bureau of Land Management • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection* • California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation • California Department of Transportation • California Geological Survey • Fresno County Agricultural Department* • Fresno County Health Department* • Fresno County Information Technology/Geographic Information Systems Department* • Fresno County Internal Services Department* • Fresno County Land Use Department • Fresno County Public Works and Planning Department* • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center • National Register of Historic Places • Natural Resource Conservation Service • National Weather Service • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Geological Survey • US Sierra National Forest* • Western Regional Climate Center * Participated on HMPC The majority of the listed stakeholders were invited to participate in the planning process, which included an invitation to the kickoff meeting. Several opportunities were provided for the above groups to participate in the planning process. At the beginning of the planning process, invitations were extended to these groups to actively participate on the HMPC. Coordination with key agencies, organizations, and advisory groups throughout the planning process allowed the HMPC to review common problems, development policies, and mitigation strategies as well as identifying any conflicts or inconsistencies with regional mitigation policies, plans, programs and regulations. Phone calls and emails were used during plan development to directly coordinate with key individuals representing other regional programs. As noted by the asterisks next to the above names, many of these groups found it beneficial to participate on the HMPC. Others assisted in the process by providing data directly as requested in Fresno County 3.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide or through data contained on their websites. Further as part of the both HMPC and public outreach processes, all groups were invited to review and comment on the plan prior to submittal to CA-OES and FEMA. As part of the public review and comment period for the draft plan, key agencies were again specifically solicited to provide any final input to the draft plan document. This input was solicited both through membership on the HMPC and by direct emails to key groups and associations to review and comment on the plan. As part of this targeted outreach, these key stakeholders were also specifically invited to attend the HMPC and public meeting to discuss any outstanding issues and to provide input on the draft document and final mitigation strategies. In summary, several opportunities were provided for the groups listed above to participate in the planning process. At the beginning of the planning process, invitations were extended to these groups to actively participate on the HMPC. Specific participants from these groups are detailed in Appendix B. Others assisted in the process by providing data directly as requested or through data contained on their websites or as maintained by their offices. Further as part of the public outreach process, all groups were invited to attend the public meetings and to review and comment on the plan prior to submittal to Cal OES and FEMA. In addition, as part of the review of the draft plan, key agency stakeholders were contacted and their comments specifically solicited. Emergency managers in adjacent counties (Kings, Inyo, Madera, Merced, Mono, Monterey, San Benito and Tulare) were contacted by the County emergency manager via email and asked to provide comments on the public review draft of the plan. Kern County Emergency Management was also notified of the draft plan. No comments were received. This process accomplished as part of planning steps two and three in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook. Other Community Planning Efforts and Hazard Mitigation Activities The coordination and synchronization with other community planning mechanisms and efforts are vital to the success of this plan. To have a thorough evaluation of hazard mitigation practices already in place, appropriate planning procedures should also involve identifying and reviewing existing plans, policies, regulations, codes, tools, and other actions are designed to reduce a community’s risk and vulnerability from natural hazards. Fresno County uses a variety of mechanisms to guide growth and development. Integrating existing planning efforts, mitigation policies, and action strategies into this plan establishes a credible, comprehensive document that weaves the common threads of a community’s values together. The development and update of this plan involved a comprehensive review of existing plans, studies, reports, and initiatives from Fresno County and each participating municipality that relate to hazards or hazard mitigation. A high level summary of the key plans, studies and reports is summarized in the table below. Information on how they informed the update are noted and incorporated where applicable. Fresno County 3.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 3.5 Summary of Review of Key Plans, Studies and Reports Plan, Study, Report Name How Plan informed LHMP Update to the Fresno County General Plan Policy Document (revised public review draft 2016) • Reviewed goals and policies and integrated related information to inform capability assessment and risk assessment Update to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report and Safety Element and (draft 2016) • Incorporated relevant hazard information from this element of the General Plan to inform the risk assessment • Updated references associated with safety element and background report, specifically those that address geologic conditions, floods, and hazardous materials • Reviewed Chapter 2 Demographic and Employment and incorporated information into the Community Profile of this plan update Municipal General Plans • Reviewed goals and policies and integrated related information to inform capability assessment and risk assessment • See jurisdictional annexes for specific references Fresno County Flood Insurance Study • Reviewed for information on past floods and flood problems to inform risk assessment (Chapter 4) • Utilized Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps effective January 2016 to update maps and flood risk assessment in Chapter 4. State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (draft 2018) • Reviewed information on climate change and hazard assessment data to ensure consistency with this plan update • Reviewed list of hazards to inform risk assessment (Chapter 4) • Reviewed goals for consistency during the update of the Fresno Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information- State Climate Summaries • Reviewed information on climate change to inform risk assessment (Chapter 4) Other documents were reviewed and considered, as appropriate, during the collection of data to support Planning Steps 4 and 5, which include the hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and capability assessment. Appendix D References provides a detailed list of references used in the preparation of this plan update. Specific references relied on in the development of this plan are also sourced throughout the document as appropriate. More details on the incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports and technical information, including policies, regulations, plans and programs that were used for the LHMP update are included in Chapter 4, Section 4.5, Capability Assessment as well as the jurisdictional annexes. During the 2017-2018 update this LHMP update was coordinated with the following planning efforts that were ongoing at the time: • Fresno County General Plan Update - The HMP utilized information from the ongoing update of the General Plan that is anticipated to be approved in 2018. This included referencing Fresno County 3.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan information from the 2016 Revised Background Report and Safety Element. Members of the Amec Foster Wheeler consulting team included Mintier Harnish which was the consultant updating the General Plan. The references to the General Plan policies in Section 4.5 of this plan were reviewed by Mintier Harnish and Department of Public Works staff to reflect recent changes that will be in the updated General Plan. The HMP will be incorporated by reference into the Safety Element in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. • 2017 update of Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan • The Central California Irrigation District (CCID) Hazard Mitigation Plan is a plan that was developed in 2017 in an adjacent jurisdiction and included participation of staff from Fresno County OES in a planning meeting. 2009 Mitigation Plan Inclusion in Other Planning Mechanisms Chapter 7 Plan Implementation and Maintenance in the 2009 Plan recommended the incorporation of the hazard mitigation plan recommendations and their underlying principles into other County and City plans and mechanisms. The following is a list of plans that the 2009 LHMP was integrated into, or cross referenced. In some cases communities have deferred this for future planning mechanisms, as discussed in the Chapter 7 Plan Implementation and Maintenance. Table 3.6: 2009 Mitigation Plan Inclusion in Other Planning Mechanisms Jurisdiction Planning Mechanism Fresno County Fresno County Operational Area, Master Emergency Services Plan- used to inform Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Incorporated by reference into the Safety Element in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. Clovis Incorporated by reference into the Safety Element in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. Coalinga Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Fresno Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Huron Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Kerman Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Kingsburg Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Mendota Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Sanger Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Selma Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Lower San Joaquin Levee District Deferred for incorporation by reference in future planning mechanisms, where applicable Sierra Resource Conservation District Highway 168 Fire Safe Council CWPP - Cross references the LHMP and mitigation projects Fresno County 3.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.4.2 Phase 2: Assess Risks Planning Step 4: Identify the Hazards Amec Foster Wheeler led the HMPC in an effort to review the list of hazards identified in the 2009 plan and document all the hazards that have, or could, impact the planning area, including documenting recent drought, flood, wildfire and winter storm events. Data collection worksheets were used in this effort to aid in determining hazards and vulnerabilities and where risk varies across the planning area. The profile of each of these hazards was then updated in 2017 with information from the HMPC and additional sources. Web resources, existing reports and plans, and existing GIS layers were used to compile information about past hazard events and determine the location, previous occurrences, probability of future occurrences, and magnitude/severity of each hazard. Geographic information systems (GIS) were used to display, analyze, and quantify hazards and vulnerabilities where data permitted. A more detailed description of the hazard identification and risk assessment process and the results are included in Chapter 4 Risk Assessment. Planning Step 5: Assess the Risks After updating the profiles of the hazards that could affect the County, the HMPC collected information to describe the likely impacts of future hazard events on the participating jurisdictions. This step included two parts: a vulnerability assessment and a capability assessment. Vulnerability Assessment—Participating jurisdictions updated their assets at risk to natural hazards—overall and in identified hazard areas. These assets included total number and value of structures; critical facilities and infrastructure; natural, historic, and cultural assets; and economic assets. The HMPC also analyzed development trends in hazard areas. The latest DFIRM was used to refine the estimate flood losses during the update, where available for the NFIP participating communities. Capability Assessment— The HMPC also conducted a capability assessment update to review and document the planning area’s current capabilities to mitigate risk and vulnerability from natural hazards. By collecting information about existing government programs, policies, regulations, ordinances, and emergency plans, the HMPC can assess those activities and measures already in place that contribute to mitigating some of the risks and vulnerabilities identified. This information for the County is included in Section 4.5 and in the respective jurisdictional annexes. This addressed FEMA planning task 4: Review community capabilities - 44 CFR 201.6 (b)(2)&(3). Results of the risk assessment were presented and comments discussed at the second meeting of the HMPC in November 2017. A more detailed description of the risk assessment process and the results are included in Chapter 4 Risk Assessment. Fresno County 3.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.4.3 Phase 3: Develop the Mitigation Plan Planning Step 6: Set Goals Amec Foster Wheeler facilitated a discussion session with the HMPC to review the 2009 plan’s goals and objectives. The HMPC discussed definitions and examples of goals, objectives, and actions and considered the goals of the state hazard mitigation plan and other relevant local plans when reviewing and revising the goals and objectives. The resulting updated goals and objectives are presented in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Planning Step 7: Review Possible Activities Amec Foster Wheeler facilitated a discussion at an HMPC meeting to review the alternatives for mitigating hazards. This included a brainstorming session with the HMPC to identify a comprehensive range of mitigation actions for each identified hazard, and a method of selecting and defending recommended mitigation actions using a series of selection criteria. More specifics on the process and the results of this collaborative process are captured in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Planning Step 8: Draft an Action Plan Based on input from the HMPC regarding the draft risk assessment and the goals and activities identified in Planning Steps 6 and 7, Amec Foster Wheeler produced a complete first draft of the plan. This complete was shared electronically with the HMPC for review and comment. Other agencies were invited to comment on this draft as well. HMPC and agency comments were integrated into the second draft, which was advertised and distributed to collect public input and comments. Amec Foster Wheeler integrated comments and issues from the public, as appropriate, along with additional internal review comments and produced a final draft for the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX to review and approve, contingent upon final adoption by the governing boards of each participating jurisdiction. 3.4.4 Phase 4: Implement the Plan and Monitor Progress Planning Step 9: Adopt the Plan In order to secure buy-in and officially implement the plan, the plan was adopted by the governing boards of each participating jurisdiction on the dates included in the adoption resolutions in Appendix A: Adoption Resolutions. The final plan will be included in the safety element of the County General Plan and result in the County’s eligibility for Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. This adoption makes the jurisdiction eligible for consideration for part or all of its local costs on eligible public assistance to be provided by State share funding through the California Disaster Assistance Act. Fresno County 3.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Planning Step 10: Implement, Evaluate, and Revise the Plan The true worth of any mitigation plan is in the effectiveness of its implementation. Up to this point in the plan update process, all of the HMPC’s efforts have been directed at researching data, coordinating input from participating entities, and updating and developing appropriate mitigation actions. Each recommended action includes key descriptors, such as hazard(s) addressed, lead manager and priority, to help initiate implementation. An overall implementation strategy is described in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation and Maintenance. Finally, there are numerous organizations within the Fresno County planning area whose goals and interests interface with hazard mitigation. Coordination with these other planning efforts, as addressed in Planning Step 3, is paramount to the ongoing success of this plan and of mitigation in Fresno County, and is addressed further in Chapter 7. A plan update and maintenance schedule and a strategy for continued public involvement are also included in Chapter 7. Implementation and Maintenance Process: 2009 Plan The 2009 LHMP included a process for implementation and maintenance which was generally followed, with some variation. Implementation of the plan including the status of mitigation actions is captured in Chapter 5 and the jurisdictional annexes. In general the County and participating jurisdictions have made progress in the implementation of the plan. Successes of note are detailed in Chapter 5. An updated implementation and maintenance chapter can be referenced in Chapter 7. Fresno County 4.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4 RISK ASSESSMENT Requirement §201.6(c)(2): [The plan shall include] A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. As defined by FEMA, risk is a combination of hazard, vulnerability, and exposure. “It is the impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities, and structures in a community and refers to the likelihood of a hazard event resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage.” The risk assessment process identifies and profiles relevant hazards and assesses the exposure of lives, property, and infrastructure to these hazards. The process allows for a better understanding of a jurisdiction’s potential risk to hazards and provides a framework for developing and prioritizing mitigation actions to reduce risk from future hazard events. This risk assessment followed the methodology described in the FEMA publication Understanding Your Risks—Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses (FEMA 386-2, 2002), which breaks the assessment into a four-step process: 1) Identify hazards 2) Profile hazard events 3) Inventory assets 4) Estimate losses Data collected through this process has been incorporated into the following sections of this chapter: • Section 4.1 Hazard Identification: Natural Hazards identifies the natural hazards that threaten the planning area and describes why some hazards have been omitted from further consideration. • Section 4.2 Hazard Profiles discusses the threat to the planning area and describes previous occurrences of hazard events and the likelihood of future occurrences. • Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment assesses the County’s total exposure to natural hazards, considering assets at risk, critical facilities, and future development trends. • Section 4.4 Human-Caused Hazards identifies the areas most susceptible to potential human- caused hazard events by evaluating the locations of hazardous materials facilities and transportation routes. • Section 4.5 Capability Assessment inventories existing mitigation activities and policies, regulations, and plans that pertain to mitigation and can affect net vulnerability. Fresno County 4.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This risk assessment covers the entire geographical extent of Fresno County. Since this plan is a multi-jurisdictional plan, the HMPC was required to evaluate how the hazards and risks vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. While these differences are noted in this chapter, they are expanded upon in the annexes of the participating jurisdictions. If no additional data is provided in an annex, it should be assumed that the risk and potential impacts to the affected jurisdiction are similar to those described here for the entire Fresno County planning area. 4.1 Hazard Identification: Natural Hazards Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the type…of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The Fresno County HMPC conducted a hazard identification study to determine the hazards that threaten the planning area. 4.1.1 Methodology and Results Using existing natural hazards data and input gained through planning meetings during both the 2009 LHMP and 2017-2018 update, the HMPC agreed upon a list of natural hazards that could affect Fresno County. Hazards data from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CA-OES), FEMA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and many other sources were examined to assess the significance of these hazards to the planning area. Significance was measured in general terms and focused on key criteria such as frequency and resulting damage, which includes deaths and injuries and property and economic damage. The natural hazards evaluated as part of this plan include those that occurred in the past or have the potential to cause significant human and/or monetary losses in the future. The potential for loss and impacts from the hazards are analyzed further in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment. In alphabetical order, the natural hazards identified and investigated for the Fresno County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan include: • Agricultural Hazards • Avalanche • Dam Failure • Drought − Tree Mortality • Earthquake • Flood • Human Health Hazards − Epidemic/Pandemic − West Nile Virus • Landslide Fresno County 4.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Severe Weather − Extreme Temperatures Extreme Cold/Freeze Extreme Heat − Fog − Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning/Wind − Winter Storm − Tornado • Soil Hazards − Erosion − Expansive Soils − Land Subsidence • Volcano • Wildfire During the 2017-18 LHMP update the HMPC reviewed the list of hazards and confirmed that the original list identified in the 2009 plan was valid. Significant tree deaths have occurred in the Sierras and foothills due to long term drought and insect infestations since the 2009 LHMP. This issue is addressed in the plan update as a consequence and sub-hazard of the drought hazard. It is also noted in the wildfire hazard as it exacerbates the fuel loads. The widespread tree mortality also increases the potential for wind fall hazards. The HMPC eliminated the natural hazards listed below from further consideration in this risk assessment because they occur rarely or not at all in Fresno County. • Coastal Erosion • Coastal Storm • Hurricane • Tsunami Overall Hazard Significance Summary Overall hazard significance was based on a combination of Geographic Extent, Probability and Potential Magnitude/Severity as defined below. The individual ratings are based on or interpolated from the analysis of the hazards in the sections that follow. During the 2017-18 Fresno County LHMP update the individual ratings and significance of the hazards was revisited and updated. Subsidence, as a subset of soil hazards, has become more of an issue due to heavy groundwater withdrawal during the severe multi-year drought 2012-2017. It may also be exacerbating flood hazards by lowering levee heights in some areas. This hazard’s significance was changed from low to medium. Fresno County 4.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.1 Fresno County Hazard Significance Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Negligible High Avalanche Limited Likely Limited Low Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical High Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Negligible High West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Limited Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Limited Highly Likely Negligible Medium Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Significant Likely No Data Medium Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Significant Highly Likely Limited High Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Fresno County 4.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact 4.1.2 Disaster Declaration History One method the HMPC used to identify hazards was the researching of past events that triggered federal and/or state emergency or disaster declarations in the planning area. Federal and/or state disaster declarations may be granted when the severity and magnitude of an event surpasses the ability of the local government to respond and recover. Disaster assistance is supplemental and sequential. When the local government’s capacity has been surpassed, a state disaster declaration may be issued, allowing for the provision of state assistance. Should the disaster be so severe that both the local and state governments’ capacities are exceeded, a federal emergency or disaster declaration may be issued allowing for the provision of federal assistance. The federal government may issue a disaster declaration through FEMA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and/or the Small Business Administration (SBA). FEMA also issues emergency declarations, which are more limited in scope and without the long-term federal recovery programs of major disaster declarations. The quantity and types of damage are the determining factors. A USDA declaration will result in the implementation of the Emergency Loan Program through the Farm Services Agency. This program enables eligible farmers and ranchers in the affected county as well as contiguous counties to apply for low interest loans. A USDA declaration will automatically follow a major disaster declaration for counties designated major disaster areas and those that are contiguous to declared counties, including those that are across state lines. As part of an agreement with the USDA, the SBA offers low interest loans for eligible businesses that suffer economic losses in declared and contiguous counties that have been declared by the USDA. These loans are referred to as Economic Injury Disaster Loans. Fresno is among the many counties in California that are susceptible to disaster. Details on federal and state disaster declarations were obtained by the HMPC, FEMA, and CA-OES and compiled in chronological order in Table 4.1. A review of state and federal declared disasters indicates that Fresno County received 23 state declarations between 1950 and July 2016, 14 of which also received federal disaster declarations. Of the 22 state declarations, 15 were associated with severe winter storms, heavy rains, or flooding; 4 were for freeze; 1 was for drought; 1 was for earthquake; and 2 were for wildfire. USDA declarations for the planning area are discussed in Section 4.2.1 Agricultural Hazards. Fresno County 4.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This disaster history (combined federal and state) suggests that Fresno County experiences a major event worthy of a disaster declaration every 2.7 years. The County has a 39 percent chance of receiving a disaster declaration in any given year. With the exception of the declarations for earthquake and wildfire, every declaration resulted directly or indirectly from severe weather. Similarly, most disaster-related injuries to people and damage to property and crops resulted from severe weather. Table 4.2 Fresno County’s State and Federal Disaster Declarations, 1950-2017 Hazard Type Disaster # Year State Declaration Federal Declaration Location Damage* Floods CDO 50-01 1950 11/21/50 -- Fresno County (statewide) 9 deaths; $32,183,000 Floods DR-47 1955 12/22/55 12/23/55 Fresno County (statewide) 74 deaths; $200,000,000 Unseasonal and Heavy Rainfall -- 1957 5/20/57 -- Fresno County (other cherry producing areas) 2 injuries; $6,000,000 Storm & Flood Damage -- 1958 4/2/58 4/4/58 Fresno County (statewide) 13 deaths $24,000,000 Unseasonal and Heavy Rainfall -- 1959 9/17/59 -- Fresno County (other Tokay grape producing areas) 2 deaths $100,000 Abnormally Heavy and Continuous Rainfall -- 1963 2/14/64 -- Fresno County (and 50 other counties) -- 1969 Storms OEP 253-DR- CA 1969 1/25/69 1/26/69 Fresno County (and 39 other counties) 47 deaths 161 injuries $300,000,000 Freeze and Severe Weather Conditions -- 1972 4/17/72 -- Fresno County (and 16 other counties) $111,517,260 Drought -- 1976 2/9/76 -- Fresno County (and 30 other counties) $2,664,000,000 Rains Causing Agricultural Losses -- 1982 10/26/82 -- Fresno County (and 10 other counties) $345,195,974 Winter Storms DR-682 1982/ 1983 3/15/83 2/9/83 Fresno County (and 43 other counties) $523,617,032 Coalinga Earthquake DR-682 1983 5/02/83 5/3/83 Fresno County No deaths 47 injuries $31,076,300 Storms DR-758 1986 2/26/86 2/18/86 Fresno County (and 38 other counties) 13 deaths 67 injuries $407,538,904 Wildland Fires -- 1987 9/03/87 -- Fresno County (and 23 other counties) 3 deaths 76 injuries $18,000,000 Freeze DR-894 1990 1/11/91 2/11/91 Fresno County (and 32 other counties) $856,329,675 Fresno County 4.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Type Disaster # Year State Declaration Federal Declaration Location Damage* Late Winter Storms DR-979 1992 1/21/93 1/15/93 Fresno County (and 23 other counties) 20 deaths 10 injuries $600,000,000 Severe Winter Storms DR-1044 1995 1/17/95 1/13/95 Fresno County (and 44 other counties) 11 deaths $741,400,000 Late Winter Storms DR-1046 1995 -- 1/10/95 Fresno County (and all other counties except Del Norte) 17 deaths $1,100,000,000 January 1997 Floods DR-1155 1997 1/5/97 1/4/97 Fresno County (and 46 other counties) 8 deaths $1,800,000,000 Severe Winter Storms and Flooding DR-1203 1998 -- 2/9/98 Fresno County (and 39 other counties) 17 deaths $550,000,000 Freeze DR-1267 1998- 1999 -- 2/7/99 Fresno County (and 7 other counties) -- Severe Freeze DR-1689 2007 -- 3/14/07 Fresno County (and 11 other counties) $1,400,000,000 Goose Fire FM-5140 2016 7/30/16 8/8/16 Fresno County -- Floods CDO 50-01 1950 11/21/50 -- Fresno County (statewide) 9 deaths; $32,183,000 Floods DR-47 1955 12/22/55 12/23/55 Fresno County (statewide) 74 deaths; $200,000,000 Unseasonal and Heavy Rainfall -- 1957 5/20/57 -- Fresno County (other cherry producing areas) 2 injuries; $6,000,000 Storm & Flood Damage -- 1958 4/2/58 4/4/58 Fresno County (statewide) 13 deaths $24,000,000 Unseasonal and Heavy Rainfall -- 1959 9/17/59 -- Fresno County (other Tokay grape producing areas) 2 deaths $100,000 Abnormally Heavy and Continuous Rainfall -- 1963 2/14/64 -- Fresno County (and 50 other counties) -- 1969 Storms OEP 253-DR- CA 1969 1/25/69 1/26/69 Fresno County (and 39 other counties) 47 deaths 161 injuries $300,000,000 Freeze and Severe Weather Conditions -- 1972 4/17/72 -- Fresno County (and 16 other counties) $111,517,260 Drought -- 1976 2/9/76 -- Fresno County (and 30 other counties) $2,664,000,000 Rains Causing Agricultural Losses -- 1982 10/26/82 -- Fresno County (and 10 other counties) $345,195,974 Fresno County 4.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Type Disaster # Year State Declaration Federal Declaration Location Damage* Winter Storms DR-682 1982/ 1983 3/15/83 2/9/83 Fresno County (and 43 other counties) $523,617,032 Coalinga Earthquake DR-682 1983 5/02/83 5/3/83 Fresno County No deaths 47 injuries $31,076,300 Storms DR-758 1986 2/26/86 2/18/86 Fresno County (and 38 other counties) 13 deaths 67 injuries $407,538,904 Wildland Fires -- 1987 9/03/87 -- Fresno County (and 23 other counties) 3 deaths 76 injuries $18,000,000 Freeze DR-894 1990 1/11/91 2/11/91 Fresno County (and 32 other counties) $856,329,675 Late Winter Storms DR-979 1992 1/21/93 1/15/93 Fresno County (and 23 other counties) 20 deaths 10 injuries $600,000,000 Severe Winter Storms DR-1044 1995 1/17/95 1/13/95 Fresno County (and 44 other counties) 11 deaths $741,400,000 Late Winter Storms DR-1046 1995 -- 1/10/95 Fresno County (and all other counties except Del Norte) 17 deaths $1,100,000,000 January 1997 Floods DR-1155 1997 1/5/97 1/4/97 Fresno County (and 46 other counties) 8 deaths $1,800,000,000 Severe Winter Storms and Flooding DR-1203 1998 -- 2/9/98 Fresno County (and 39 other counties) 17 deaths $550,000,000 Freeze DR-1267 1998- 1999 -- 2/7/99 Fresno County (and 7 other counties) -- Severe Freeze DR-1689 2007 -- 3/14/07 Fresno County (and 11 other counties) $1,400,000,000 Goose Fire FM-5140 2016 7/30/16 8/8/16 Fresno County -- Source: California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, www.oes.ca.gov/ *Damage amount and deaths and injuries reflect totals for all impacted counties 4.2 Hazard Profiles Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the…location and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. The hazards identified in Section 4.1 Hazard Identification: Natural Hazards are profiled individually in this section. In general, information provided by planning team members is integrated into this section with information from other data sources, such as those mentioned in Fresno County 4.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4.1. These profiles set the stage for Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment, where the vulnerability is quantified, where possible, for each of the priority hazards. Each hazard is profiled in the following format: • Hazard/Problem Description—This section gives a description of the hazard and associated issues followed by details on the hazard specific to the Fresno County planning area. Where known, this includes information on the hazard extent, seasonal patterns, speed of onset/duration, and magnitude and/or secondary effects. • Extent – This section gives a description of the potential strength or magnitude of the hazard as it pertains to Fresno County. The geographic extent or location of the hazard is also discussed. • Past Occurrences—This section contains information on historical incidents, including impacts where known. The extent or location of the hazard within or near the Fresno County planning area is also included here. Historical incident worksheets were used to capture information from participating jurisdictions on past occurrences. • Likelihood of Future Occurrence—The frequency of past events is used in this section to gauge the likelihood of future occurrences. Where possible, frequency was calculated based on existing data. It was determined by dividing the number of events observed by the number of years on record and multiplying by 100. This gives the percent chance of an event happening in any given year (e.g., three droughts over a 30-year period equates to a 10 percent chance of a drought in any given year). The likelihood of future occurrences is categorized into one of the following classifications: − Highly Likely—Near 100 percent chance of occurrence in next year or happens every year. − Likely—Between 10 and 100 percent chance of occurrence in next year or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. − Occasional—Between 1 and 10 percent chance of occurrence in the next year or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. − Unlikely—Less than 1 percent chance of occurrence in next 100 years or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. • Climate Change Considerations - This describes the potential for climate change to affect the frequency and intensity of the hazard in the future Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment has more detail on the County’s total exposure to natural hazards, considering assets at risk, critical facilities, and future development trends. Where feasible the vulnerability of people, property, critical facilities, the natural environment and future development are considered for each hazard. The following sections provide profiles of the natural hazards that the HMPC identified in Section 4.1 Identifying Hazards. The hazards follow alphabetically. Fresno County 4.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.2.1 Agricultural Hazards Hazard/Problem Description Located in the Central San Joaquin Valley, Fresno County’s farming and agricultural industry is ranked as the top agriculture-producing county in California and the country. Farming and agriculture-related businesses are a significant component of the local economy and are responsible for no less than one out of every three jobs. According to the Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner the County has approximately 678,103 acres of prime agricultural land, 404,083 acres of farmland of statewide importance, and 825,276 acres of grazing land (see table below). Table 4.3 Fresno County’s Farmland Inventory, 2012 Soil Category Acres Prime Farmland 678,103 Farmland of Statewide Importance 404,083 Unique Farmland 33,653 Farmland of Local Importance 131,341 Grazing Land 825,276 Urban and Built-Up Land 124,025 Water 4,915 Other Land 116,094 Source: Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner 2017 According to the 2015 Fresno County Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report, the total gross value of agricultural commodities in Fresno County in 2015 was $6.6 billion, exceeding the six billion dollar mark for the fifth consecutive year, though down from 2014’s record of $7,069 billion. This value represents a 6.55 percent decrease from the 2014 production value of $7.069 billion. The County’s leading agricultural products included almonds, grapes, tomatoes, poultry, cattle and calves, tomatoes, milk, peaches, garlic, mandarins and oranges. The report notes that the decrease from 2014 may be attributed to a number of factors, including no allocation of surface water in 2014 and 2015. Fresno’s top ten crops have seen a shift between 1995 and 2015; though the crops have mostly remained constant, their ranks in the county have changed in the intervening 20 years. Table 4.4 Fresno County’s Ten Leading Crops Crop 2015 Rank 2015 Dollar Value 2014 Rank 2005 Rank 1995 Rank Almonds 1 $1,205,730,000 1 2 7 Grapes 2 $896,295,000 2 1 2 Poultry 3 $561,146, 000 3 7 3 Cattle and Calves 4 $551,989,000 5 5 8 Tomatoes 5 $520,146,000 6 4 4 Fresno County 4.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Crop 2015 Rank 2015 Dollar Value 2014 Rank 2005 Rank 1995 Rank Milk 6 $436,765,000 4 3 5 Peaches 7 $223,597,000 9 8 12 Garlic 8 $198,800,000 8 14 11 Mandarins 9 $197,622,000 + Oranges 10 $153,811,000 11 10 10 *Includes turkey, chickens, ducks, geese and game birds +Not previously combined for ranking purposes Source: State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, www.conservation.ca.gov/ According to the HMPC, agricultural losses occur on an annual basis and are usually associated with severe weather events, including heavy rains, floods, hail, freeze, and drought. The State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan attributes most of the agricultural disasters statewide to drought, freeze, and insect infestations. Other agricultural hazards include fires, crop and livestock disease, noxious weeds, and contamination of animal food and water supplies. Fresno County is threatened by a number of insects that, under the right circumstances, can cause severe economic and environmental harm to the agricultural industry. Insects of concern to plants and crops include the medfly, peach fruit fly, Mexican fruit fly, guava fruit fly, oriental fruit fly, melon fly, gypsy moth, Japanese beetle, glassy-winged sharpshooter, paper wasp, and Turkestan roach. Livestock disease can also cause large-scale economic losses in any area that raises large amounts of livestock. Noxious weeds, which are any plant that is or is liable to be troublesome, aggressive, intrusive, detrimental, or destructive to agriculture, silviculture, or important native species and that is difficult to control or eradicate, are also of concern. Noxious weeds within the planning area include yellow starthistle, purple loosestrife, and Japanese dodder. Noxious weeds have been introduced in the planning area by a variety of means, including through commercial nurseries. An absence of natural controls combined with the aggressive growth characteristics and unpalatability of many of these weeds allows these weeds to dominate and replace more desirable native vegetation. Negative effects of weeds include the following: • Loss of wildlife habitat and reduced wildlife numbers • Loss of native plant species • Reduced livestock grazing capacity • Increased soil erosion and topsoil loss • Diminished water quality and fish habitat • Reduced cropland and farmland production • Reduced land value and sale potential Another threat to the agricultural industry is the wild hogs that run free in the eastern and western foothills of the County. These wild hogs can cause extensive agricultural crop and property damage to farm and private land. Wild hogs are known to carry and transmit 30 different diseases both to Fresno County 4.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan humans and livestock. E. coli contamination of leafy vegetables has been linked to wild hogs foraging in vegetable fields. In addition to issues associated with wild hogs, the proper management of other wildlife within the planning area is of significant concern to the County Department of Agriculture. Wildlife such as coyotes, ground squirrels, and others can cause extensive livestock, crop, and property damage. Such wildlife is also known to carry and transmit disease (e.g., bubonic plague and rabies) to livestock and domestic animals as well as to humans. According to the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, the consequences of agricultural disasters to the planning area include ruined plant crops, dead livestock, ruined feed and agricultural equipment, monetary loss, job loss, and possible multi-year effects (i.e., trees might not produce if damaged, loss of markets, food shortages, increased prices, possible spread of disease to people, and loss or contamination of animal products). When these hazards cause a mass die-off of livestock, other issues arise that include the disposal of animals, depopulation of affected herds, decontamination, and resource problems. Those disasters related to severe weather may also require the evacuation and sheltering of animal populations. Overall, any type of severe agricultural disaster can have significant economic impacts on the agricultural community as well as the entire Fresno County planning area. Extent Historically, Fresno County has received disaster declarations from the USDA for a variety of incident types, including drought, hail, rain, cold and wind. Fresno County’s agriculture industry is a multi-billion dollar enterprise; a long-term, widespread agricultural hazard could have impacts in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars. Past Occurrences Based on information from the USDA, Fresno County received 16 USDA disaster declarations between 1991 and 2007 (see). All the declarations were associated with drought or severe weather events; none were related to agricultural disease. Table 4.5 Fresno County’s USDA Disaster Declarations Incident Type Incident Date Damage ($) Short Term Drought 2009 164,893,718 Severe Spring Storms: Rain, Hail, High Winds 6/4 & 5/2009 4,533,107 Lack of Chill Hours 2014 53,534,295 Severe Long-Term Drought 2012 through 2016 Not Quantified Source: Fresno County Department of Agriculture Between January and August of 2017, Fresno County had received one additional USDA Declaration in January for drought. Historical occurrences identified by the HMPC include the following: Fresno County 4.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County • 1970s—A local outbreak of scabies occurred. • 1991—There was an outbreak of bovine tuberculosis in Fresno County. • 1997/1998—One bird in downtown Fresno was discovered with exotic Newcastle disease, a contagious and fatal viral disease affecting all species of birds that does not affect humans. The bird and all chickens within a one-kilometer radius were destroyed. • 1998—Freeze resulted in almost $70 million in losses, including crop loss, broken water pipes and water damage, damaged water treatment plants, and damaged fire sprinkler systems. Other impacts included almost 18,000 applications for services and assistance and over 1,700 unemployment insurance claims filed. • 1999—Severe weather caused a crop loss of over $89 million. • 2006—Fresno County growers were impacted by adverse spring weather with $21 million in losses. • 2006—Twenty-one days of over 100 degrees, including three days over 113 degrees, caused crop, livestock, poultry, and milk production losses of $93 million. • 2008—A Fresno County dairy was quarantined after state and federal agriculture officials found bovine tuberculosis in five cows. • 2009 -Short term drought with no or little allocation to the west side. Springtime hail brought damage to trees along the Kings River corridor. • 2012 Through 2016 – Long-term western states drought. Billions in losses. • 2014 – Warm winter and spring brought a lack of chill hours affecting fruit set in cherry crop. Neighboring Counties • 2002—Merced County had an outbreak of avian influenza H5 (which is different from the severe variety found in Asia). • 2002/2003—After more than 10 years without a case of bovine tuberculosis in California, two dairy herds in Tulare County and one in Kings County were infected with bovine tuberculosis. All three herds were quarantined, 152,000 cattle were tested, 8,000 cattle destroyed, and the affected premises were cleaned and disinfected. • 2002/2003—There was an outbreak of exotic Newcastle disease in Southern California. According to data provided by the USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA), $558,702,249 in indemnities were paid in Fresno County between 2008 and 2017, averaging $5,587,022 over the ten-year period. Table 4.6 Top Ten RMA Indemnities in Fresno County 2008-2017 Year Commodity Damage Cause Affected Acres Indemnity Amount 2014 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 40,958 $39,247,461 2015 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 39,877 $36,446,882 2015 Pistachios Heat 8,938 $33,815,833 2016 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 31,659 $2,916,344 Fresno County 4.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Year Commodity Damage Cause Affected Acres Indemnity Amount 2009 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 18,032 $14,973,864 2015 Almonds Excess Moisture/Precipitation/Rain 9,122 $14,721,498 2013 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 14,033 $12,208,450 2009 Cotton Irrigation Supply Failure 16,185 $10,543,189 2015 Almonds Heat 6,417 $8,374,283 2016 Almonds Excess Moisture/Precipitation/Rain 6,987 $7,906,123 Source: USDA Risk Management Agency Of these payments, $2,755,872 were for damages caused by insects, with damages to cotton, dry beans, tomatoes, alfalfa seed and navel oranges; the average annual payment for indemnities related to insect damage is $145,046 per year. Table 4.7 Indemnities Paid for Insect Damage in Fresno County 2008-2017 Year Commodity Damage Cause Affected Acres Indemnity Amount 2008 Cotton Insects 308 $17,743 2008 Cotton Insects 823 $199,777 2008 Dry Beans Insects 153 $30,911 2008 Tomatoes Insects 195 $42,254 2008 Tomatoes Insects 313 $277,015 2010 Alfalfa Seed Insects 201 $51,102 2011 Cotton Insects 62 $53,030 2011 Alfalfa Seed Insects 286 $220,726 2013 Tomatoes Insects 745 $151,477 2013 Navel Oranges Insects 15 $3,672 2014 Cotton Insects 31 $16,250 2014 Dry Beans Insects 141 $58,601 2014 Dry Beans Insects 86 $47,924 2014 Tomatoes Insects 1,443 $289,636 2014 Alfalfa Seed Insects 17 $10,069 2015 Tomatoes Insects 704 $371,869 2015 Alfalfa Seed Insects 297 $389,272 2016 Tomatoes Insects 396 $452,035 Source: USDA Risk Management Agency In the same timeframe, $3,729,991 in indemnities were paid for damages caused by plant disease, with damages to tomatoes, cotton, onions and grapes; the average annual payment for indemnities related to plant disease between 2008 and 2017 was $177,619 per year. Table 4.8 Indemnities for Plant Disease in Fresno County 2008-2017 Year Commodity Damage Cause Affected Acres Indemnity Amount 2008 Fresh Market Tomatoes Plant Disease 215 $109,429 2010 Tomatoes Plant Disease 765 $382,840 2012 Cotton Plant Disease 56 $11,508 Fresno County 4.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Year Commodity Damage Cause Affected Acres Indemnity Amount 2012 Tomatoes Plant Disease 300 $158,964 2013 Tomatoes Plant Disease 153 $223,531 2013 Tomatoes Plant Disease 2,854 $1,450,955 2013 Tomatoes Plant Disease 137 $227,479 2014 Onions Plant Disease 90 $100,193 2014 Dry Beans Plant Disease 149 $54,061 2014 All Other Crops Plant Disease 35 $10,120 2015 Onions Plant Disease 37 $32,667 2015 Fresh Market Tomatoes Plant Disease 112 $81,769 2015 Tomatoes Plant Disease 270 $420,489 2016 Onions Plant Disease 130 $200,706 2016 Table Grapes Plant Disease 30 $92,066 2016 Table Grapes Plant Disease 33 $274,862 2016 Grapes Plant Disease 19 $7,024 2016 Tomatoes Plant Disease 197 $54,312 2017 Table Grapes Plant Disease 12 $12,956 2017 Table Grapes Plant Disease 1 $3,352 2017 Grapes Plant Disease 6 $4,840 Source: USDA Risk Management Agency Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—As long as the hazards discussed in this section continue to be an ongoing concern to the Fresno County planning area, the potential for agricultural losses remains. Climate Change Considerations As climate change has progressed, noticeable changes have occurred with the climate and weather patterns across the globe. Weather events have become more numerous and more severe. Changes in weather patterns can have dramatic impacts on the ecosystem, including agriculture systems; more severe impacts can be expected into the future. 4.2.2 Avalanche Hazard/Problem Description Avalanches occur when loading of new snow on a slope increases stress at a rate faster than strength develops, and the slope fails. Critical stresses develop more quickly on steeper slopes and where deposition of wind-transported snow is common. The vast majority of avalanches occur during and shortly after storms. This hazard generally affects a small number of people, such as snowboarders, skiers, and hikers, who venture into backcountry areas during or after winter storms. Roads and highway closures, damaged structures, and destruction of forests are also a direct result of avalanches. Avalanches typically occur above 8,000 feet and on slopes ranging between 25 and 50 degrees incline. The eastern portion of Fresno County is in the Sierra National Forest in a high alpine environment and has potential for areas above 8,000 on slopes ranging between 25 and 50 Fresno County 4.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan degrees incline. The combination of steep slopes, abundant snow, weather, snowpack, and an impetus to cause movement creates avalanches. Areas prone to avalanche hazards include hard to access areas deep in the backcountry. Avalanche hazards exist in eastern Fresno County in the Sierras, where combinations of the above criteria occur. Extent Based on this information, the geographic extent rating for avalanches in Fresno County is limited. Occasional death and injury might occur to persons in the backcountry. Past Occurrences Historically, avalanches occur within the County between the months of December and April, following snowstorms. According to the HMPC, there has been some historical avalanche activity involving people, but specific details are unknown. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Likely—Injuries and loss of life from an avalanche are usually due to people recreating in remote areas at the wrong time. Given the topography and amount of snow falling on an annual basis in eastern Fresno County, avalanches will continue to occur, but damage from avalanches should continue to be limited. Climate Change Considerations In the future the likelihood and nature of avalanches may be affected by climate change. As winter is taking longer to descend, weaker snow accumulates at the very bottom of the snow pack. As more snow piles on top of the weak layer, and temperatures remain warm, the upper, moisture- laden layers became vulnerable to sliding, and create a delicate situation. More extreme precipitation events that deposit large amounts of snow in a short period of time could also periodically increase the potential for large avalanches. 4.2.3 Dam Failure Hazard/Problem Description Dams are manmade structures built for a variety of uses, including flood protection, power generation, agriculture, water supply, and recreation. When dams are constructed for flood protection, they usually are engineered to withstand a flood with a computed risk of occurrence. For example, a dam may be designed to contain a flood at a location on a stream that has a certain probability of occurring in any one year. If prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding occur that exceed the design requirements, that structure may be overtopped and fail. Overtopping is the primary cause of earthen dam failure in the United States. Dam failures can also result from any one or a combination of the following causes: Fresno County 4.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Earthquake • Inadequate spillway capacity resulting in excess overtopping flows • Internal erosion caused by embankment or foundation leakage or piping or rodent activity • Improper design • Improper maintenance • Negligent operation • Failure of upstream dams on the same waterway Water released by a failed dam generates tremendous energy and can cause a flood that is catastrophic to life and property. A catastrophic dam failure could challenge local response capabilities and require evacuations to save lives. Impacts to life safety will depend on the warning time and the resources available to notify and evacuate the public. Major loss of life could result as well as potentially catastrophic effects to roads, bridges, and homes. Associated water quality and health concerns could also be issues. Factors that influence the potential severity of a full or partial dam failure are the amount of water impounded; the density, type, and value of development and infrastructure located downstream; and the speed of failure. In general, there are three types of dams: concrete arch or hydraulic fill, earth-rockfill, and concrete gravity. Each type of dam has different failure characteristics. A concrete arch or hydraulic fill dam can fail almost instantaneously: the flood wave builds up rapidly to a peak then gradually declines. An earth-rockfill dam fails gradually due to erosion of the breach: a flood wave will build gradually to a peak and then decline until the reservoir is empty. And, a concrete gravity dam can fail instantaneously or gradually with a corresponding buildup and decline of the flood wave. Extent According to the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, there are several hundred dams in Fresno County constructed for flood control, irrigation storage, electrical generation, recreation, and stock watering purposes. The Homeland Security Infrastructure Program 2015 Freedom database identifies 52 dams from the National Inventory of Dams that are located in or are of significance to Fresno County. Of these dams, 33 are considered high hazard, 5 are significant hazard, and 14 are low hazard. Crane Valley and Mazanita Diversion dams are located in Madera County; however, they pose a threat to Fresno County based on the topography and hydrological flow characteristics of the area. Table 4.9 details the dams affecting Fresno County. The majority of these dams are in the San Joaquin River or Kings River watersheds in the eastern part of the county. Both incorporated and unincorporated areas are at risk of damage from flooding in the event of a dam failure, however, the City of Fresno, Clovis, Sanger and the eastern unincorporated county are at greater risk. Generally, the areas at risk are large urban and rural areas downstream and below the dams on the valley floor. There have not been any failures of major dams in Fresno County; future failures are more likely to occur with smaller dams, with minimal or no damage potential. Fresno County 4.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Based on this information, the geographic extent rating for dam failure in Fresno County is Extensive. Table 4.9 Fresno County Dam Characteristics Hazard Dam Name Downstream City Owner Name Dam Type Capacity (Acre-Feet) H Alluvial Drain Detention Clovis Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth 1,152 H Balsam Meadow Forebay Main Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Rockfill 1,960 H Big Creek Dam No. 1 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/ Gravity/Arch 89,800 H Big Creek Dam No. 2 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/ Gravity/Rockfill 89,800 H Big Creek Dam No. 3 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/ Gravity/Rockfill 89,800 H Big Creek Dam No. 6 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Arch 1,726 H Big Creek Dam No. 7 Auberry Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Gravity 35,000 H Big Dry Creek Clovis Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth 49,661 H Courtright Balch Camp Pacific Gas And Electric Company Rockfill 134,342 H Crane Valley North Fork Pacific Gas And Electric Company - 45,410 H Fancher Creek Clovis Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth 24,300 H Fancher Creek Detention Fresno Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth 2,959 H Florence Lake Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Multi- Arch 68,000 H Fresh Water Pond - Avenal Aggregates Earth 4 H Friant -Fresno U S Bureau Of Reclamation Gravity 520,500 H Friant Dike 3 Fresno U S Bureau Of Reclamation Earth 555,500 H Friant Millerton Road Embankment A Fresno U S Bureau Of Reclamation Earth 555,500 H Giffen Reservoir Centerville Harris Farms Inc Earth 1,244 H Hume Lake - Forest Service Multi-Arch 1,410 H Little Panoche Detention Oro Loma U S Bureau Of Reclamation Earth 13,240 H Mammoth Pool Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Earth 122,175 H Manzanita Diversion North Fork Pacific Gas And Electric Company Concrete/Arch 168 H Mendota Diversion Firebaugh Central Calif Irr Dist Buttress 3,000 H Pine Flat Dam Sanger Cespk Gravity 1,000,000 H Redbank Fresno Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth 2,975 H Redbank Creek Detention Basin Fresno Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Earth - H Sand Creek Orange Cove Tulare Co Resources Mgmt Agency Earth 1,500 H Sequoia Lake Miramonte Y M C A Inc Earth 2,370 H Shaver Dike Shaver Lake Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Earth 135,568 Fresno County 4.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Dam Name Downstream City Owner Name Dam Type Capacity (Acre-Feet) H Shaver Lake Shaver Lake Southern California Edison Company Concrete/ Gravity/Arch 135,568 H Silt Pond Coalinga Granite Construction Earth 25 H Vermilion Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Earth 140,000 H Wishon Main Wishon Village Pacific Gas And Electric Company Rockfill 133,600 S Balch Afterbay Balch Camp Pacific Gas And Electric Company Concrete/Arch 325 S Balch Diversion Balch Camp Pacific Gas And Electric Company Concrete/Arch 1,295 S Big Creek Dam No. 5 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Arch 74 S Mud San Joaquin James Irrigation District Earth 304 S Wishon Auxiliary No. 1 Wishon Village Pacific Gas And Electric Company Concrete/Gravity 133,600 L Balsam Meadow Forebay Dike Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Earth 1,960 L Bear Creek Diversion Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Arch 103 L Big Creek Dam No. 3a Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/ Gravity/Rockfill 89,800 L Big Creek Dam No. 4 Big Creek Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Arch 100 L Chilkoot Bass Lake Pacific Gas And Electric Company Rockfill 308 L Kerckhoff Friant Pacific Gas And Electric Company Concrete/Arch 4,252 L Lemoore Div Weir Hardwick Lemoore Canal And Irrig Co Buttress 50 L Mono Creek Diversion Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Concrete/Arch 45 L Portal Forebay Dike Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Earth 390 L Portal Forebay Main Mono Hot Springs Southern California Edison Company Earth/Rockfill 390 L Reynolds Weir None Laguna Irrigation Dist Buttress 260 L San Joaquin No. 3 Forebay North Fork Pacific Gas And Electric Company Earth 20 L Stinson Weir Burrel Stinson Canal And Irrig Co Buttress 50 L Wishon Forebay Friant Pacific Gas And Electric Company Earth 69 Source: HSIP Freedom, 2015; National Inventory of Dams Note: 1 acre-foot=326,000 gallons Hazard: H=High, S=Significant, L=Low Both unincorporated and incorporated areas of the County are identified on dam failure inundation maps included in the County’s dam failure evacuation plan. The inundation areas for each of the dams are generally downstream and include large rural and urban areas on the valley floor below the dams. Adjacent jurisdictions could also be affected by a dam failure in Fresno County. These include, depending on the dam involved, the Counties of Tulare, Kings, Madera, and Merced. Figure 4.1 illustrates the locations of identified dams of concern within Fresno County, and illustrates their water routes. Fresno County 4.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.1 Fresno County’s Dams of Concern and Capacity Fresno County 4.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.2 Fresno County Dams by Hazard Class Fresno County 4.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.3 Water Routes and Dams that Impact Fresno County Source: Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan, 2003 BalsamCreekNorth ForkWillow CreekCrane Valley(PG&E)Madera CountyManzanitaDam(No. 2Reservoir)(PG&E)Madera CountyMammothPool Dam(SCE)ShaverLake Dam(SCE)HuntingtonLake Dam1(SCE)HuntingtonLake Dam2(SCE)HuntingtonLake Dam3(SCE)HuntingtonLake Dam3A(SCE)Big CreekDam No. 5(SCE)Big CreekDam No. 6(SCE)Big CreekDam No. 7(SCE)KerckhoffDam(PG&E)Friant Dam(US Bureau ofReclamation)BalsamMeadowDam(SCE)San JoaquinRiverBig CreekMono CreekFlorenceLake Dam(SCE)South Fork of theSan Joaquin RiverBig CreekDam No. 4(SCE)Water Routes and Dams that impact Fresno CountyStevensonCreekCourtright Dam(PG&E)Wishon Dam(PG&E)Balch DiversionDam(PG&E)Balch AfterbayDam(PG&E)North Fork KingsRiverKings RiverHelms CreekSequoia Lake(YMCA Inc.)Ten Mile CreekCrab Tree CreekMill Flat CreekFresno SloughSan Joaquin RiverTributary ofHolland CreekHolland CreekKings RiverGiffen Reservoir(Harris Farms)Big Dry CreekDam(FresnoMetropolitanFlood ControlDistrict)Little PanocheDetention Dam(US Bureau ofReclamation)Redbank Dam(FresnoMetropolitanFlood ControlDistrict)These dams are flood control dams and donot flow into major river channels.Hume Lake(US Forest Service)Tulare Lake BedPine Flat Dam(Corps of Engineers)VermilionValleyDam(SCE)Fancher CreekDam(FresnoMetropolitanFlood ControlDistrict) Fresno County 4.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences According to the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, there were 14 dam failures in Fresno County between 1976 and 1983, but all were earthen dams on private property. None of the County’s 23 major dams were involved. The failures were due to inadequate rodent and vegetation control, unauthorized and inadequate construction, and failure to consult an engineer. The main impacts from these failures were silting of downstream waters, properties, and dams; flooded or undermined roadways; and eroded embankments. Main losses were flooding of a residence and construction lumber washed downstream. In 1986, Friant Dam experienced a small, uncontrolled release. The lock on a drum gate opened, releasing 3,000 cubic feet per second. No major flooding resulted. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—The County remains at risk to dam failures from numerous dams under a variety of ownership and control and of varying ages and conditions. Given the high number of dams in the County and the history of past dam failures, the potential exists for future dam failures in the Fresno County planning area, but the likelihood of this is low. Nonetheless, it should be noted that there have not been any failures of major dams in the County. Uncontrolled or controlled release flooding below dams due to excessive rain or runoff are more likely to occur than failures. Climate Change Considerations The potential for climate change to affect the likelihood of dam failure is not fully understood at this point in time. With a potential for more extreme precipitation events a result of climate change, this 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. 4.2.4 Drought Hazard/Problem Description Drought is a gradual phenomenon. Although droughts are sometimes characterized as emergencies, they differ from typical emergency events. Most natural disasters, such as floods or forest fires, occur relatively rapidly and afford little time for preparing for disaster response. Droughts occur slowly, over a multi-year period, and it is often not obvious or easy to quantify when a drought begins and ends. Drought is a complex issue involving many factors—it occurs when a normal amount of moisture is not available to satisfy an area’s usual water-consuming activities. Drought can often be defined regionally based on its effects: Fresno County 4.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Meteorological drought is defined by a period of substantially diminished precipitation duration and/or intensity. The commonly used definition of meteorological drought is an interval of time, generally on the order of months or years, during which the actual moisture supply at a given place consistently falls below the climatically appropriate moisture supply. • Agricultural drought occurs when there is inadequate soil moisture to meet the needs of a particular crop at a particular time. Agricultural drought usually occurs after or during meteorological drought, but before hydrological drought and can affect livestock and other dry-land agricultural operations. • Hydrological drought refers to deficiencies in surface and subsurface water supplies. It is measured as stream flow, snow pack, and as lake, reservoir, and groundwater levels. There is usually a delay between lack of rain or snow and less measurable water in streams, lakes, and reservoirs. Therefore, hydrological measurements tend to lag behind other drought indicators. • Socio-economic drought occurs when physical water shortages start to affect the health, well- being, and quality of life of the people, or when the drought starts to affect the supply and demand of an economic product. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) says the following about drought: “One dry year does not normally constitute a drought in California. California’s extensive system of water supply infrastructure—its reservoirs, groundwater basins, and inter- regional conveyance facilities—mitigates the effect of short-term dry periods for most water users. Defining when a drought begins is a function of drought impacts to water users. Hydrologic conditions constituting a drought for water users in one location may not constitute a drought for water users elsewhere, or for water users having a different water supply. Individual water suppliers may use criteria such as rainfall/runoff, amount of water in storage, or expected supply from a water wholesaler to define their water supply conditions.” The drought issue in California is further compounded by water-rights. Water is a commodity possessed under a variety of legal doctrines. The prioritization of water rights between farming and federally protected fish habitats in California is part of this issue. Drought impacts are wide-reaching and may be economic, environmental, and/or societal. The most significant impacts associated with drought in the planning area are those related to water intensive activities such as agriculture, wildfire protection, municipal usage, commerce, tourism, recreation, and wildlife preservation. Also, during a drought, allocations go down, which results in reduced water availability. Voluntary water conservation measures are typically implemented during extended droughts. A reduction of electric power generation and water quality deterioration are also potential problems. Drought conditions can also cause soil to compact and not absorb water well, potentially making an area more susceptible to flooding. Fresno County 4.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Tree Mortality The HMPC identified tree mortality as an additional drought impact of significance to Fresno County during the 2018 update. In recent years, due to the multi-year drought throughout the planning area and state-wide, a vast number of trees have been (and continue to be) impacted within Fresno County foothill and mountain communities and beyond. Standing dead trees could fall and pose a risk to people, buildings, power lines, roads and other infrastructure. In addition, drought-impacted trees become susceptible to diseases and insect infestations (bark beetle) further adding to the risk of tree mortality and related potential impacts. The location, extent, and probability of occurrence for tree mortality can be viewed as sub-set to the drought hazard. Those areas of the natural environment susceptible to drought comprise a larger area, since tree mortality is related to other sub-factors specific to the species impacted such as tree age and soil composition. Figure 4.4 illustrates the extent of impact of drought and tree mortality in Fresno County. The Tier 1 High Hazard Zones (as indicated in red) depict areas where tree mortality directly coincides with critical infrastructure. Fresno County 4.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.4 Fresno County Drought Related Tree Mortality Hazards Fresno County 4.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extent Given the historical occurrence of severe drought impacts throughout Fresno County and across the state, the HMPC understands that drought will continue to pose a high degree of risk to the entire planning area, potentially impacting crops, livestock, water resources, the natural environment at large, buildings and infrastructure (from land subsidence), and local economies. In addition, although drought affects the entire planning equally, the potential impacts may be variable and specific to each jurisdiction, depending on contextual factors such as the degree of assets and activities historically impacted by drought within each jurisdiction, such as the agricultural and parks and tourism industries. Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 provide “snapshots in time” of the drought conditions in California in January 2018 and August 2015 (during the period of the last drought in Fresno County from 2013 - 2017). The snapshots selected are instrumental in depicting both the historic and potential change in drought’s geographic range and severity in Fresno County (circled in red and yellow respectively). Note: The Drought Monitor maps integrate data from several sources including the Palmer Drought Index, Soil Moisture Models, U.S. Geological Survey Weekly Stream flows, Standardized Precipitation Index, and Satellite Vegetation Health Index. Figure 4.5 U.S. Drought Monitor for California: January 23, 2018 Fresno County 4.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.6 U.S. Drought Monitor for California: August 4, 2015 Tree Mortality Extent According to the CA Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (FRAP), the California Tree Mortality Task Force (TMTF), and the US Forest Service’s Aerial Detection Survey mapping project, over 100 million trees have died throughout the state (2012-2016), with significant losses taking place within Fresno County with an ongoing high probability of occurrence. The Tree Mortality Task Force mapping effort (see previous map) identifies Tier 1 and Tier 2 risk zones in order to fully capture the extent of tree mortality risk to populations, buildings, infrastructure, and natural resources. Tier 1 are those areas that directly coincide with critical infrastructure, and which pose a direct threat to people and assets operating in these areas. Tier 2 are areas defined by watersheds (HUC 12, average of 24,000 acres) and which have a significant degree of tree mortality coinciding with significant community and natural resource assets. (Source: http://calfire.ca.gov) Based on the mapping as well as input from the LHMPC, the extent of the risk in Fresno County comprises approximately 15% - 20% of the total planning area, with areas of greatest risk being located roughly within the eastern third of the county within and around both foothill and mountain communities at elevations between 3,000 and 7,500 feet, with greatest impact to pine tree species. In addition, the mapping project identifies vulnerable populations, buildings, and infrastructure, and (Tier 2) broader fire risk areas, as well as numerous other supporting information layers to assist public and private land owners in preparing for, and mitigating the causes of, and risks associated with tree mortality. Fresno County 4.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences Historically, California has experienced multiple severe droughts. According to the DWR, droughts exceeding three years are relatively rare in Northern California, and the region is the geographic source of much of the state’s developed water supply. The 1929-34 drought established the criteria commonly used in designing storage capacity and yield of large Northern California reservoirs. The table below compares the 1929-34 drought in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys to drought periods in 1976-77, and 1987-92. It does not include the 2012-2017 (California’s most recent multi-year drought). The driest single year of California’s measured hydrologic record was 1977. Table 4.10 Severity of Extreme Droughts in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys Drought Period Sacramento Valley Runoff San Joaquin Valley Runoff (maf*/yr) (% Average1901-96) (maf*/yr) (% Average 1906-96) 1929-34 9.8 55 3.3 57 1976-77 6.6 37 1.5 26 1987-92 10.0 56 2.8 47 Source: California Department of Water Resources, www.water.ca.gov/ *Million acre-feet The HMPC identified the following droughts as having significant impacts on the planning area: • 1976—A federal disaster declaration was declared as a result of a drought affecting Fresno County and much of California. • 1987-1992—Fresno County also suffered adverse effects resulting from this statewide drought. • 2002—Abnormally dry to moderate drought conditions lingering from 2001 into 2002 reduced rangeland grasses and feed for cattle. Losses to rangeland and loss of feed were estimated at $2.5 million. An estimated 850,000 acres were affected in both the east and west side of the valley. A USDA disaster declaration on November 22 made low interest loans available to family-size operations. • 2008 – Drought impacted Fresno County of most of the Central valley, resulting in significant crop damage. In addition, the drought not only impacted agriculture, but the economy of the planning area in general, where small towns were especially hard hit, including job loss and the need for food-supply assistance provided by the state. • 2012 – 2017 – Drought produced severe impacts to water wells throughout the planning area, with a high number of wells running dry. Land subsidence due to increased groundwater pumping also occurred in areas of the San Joaquin Valley including Fresno County. Crop damage was widespread as well. Water allotments were drastically reduced in many towns and water agencies, with extremely high costs for procuring water. In addition, job loss occurred with many families requiring food supply assistance, and water supply assistance provided to home owners with dry wells. According to a report released by UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, the 2014 California drought cost the state's agriculture industry about $1 Fresno County 4.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan billion in lost revenue, with a total statewide economic cost of the drought calculated to be $2.2 billion. The 2014 drought, the report says, is responsible for the greatest water loss ever seen in California agriculture - about one third less than normal. The report calls the groundwater situation in California "a slow-moving train wreck." Spring snowpack at Donner Summit reached record low levels in 2014, exceeded in 2015 by a remarkable April 1 snow- water-equivalent value of only 5% of average. Decreased precipitation since contributed to near-record low levels in the Shasta Reservoir. The ongoing drought has contributed to declines in Fresno County crop values, based on information from an article in the Fresno Bee. Fresno County's overall gross value fell 2.2 percent to $6.4 billion in 2013, and with the reduction lost its status as the number one agricultural county in California. The Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner noted the drought -- one of the worst in state history -- has pinched the production of several west side field crops including cotton, corn silage and barley. The field crop category fell by 42 percent (Source: https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ca). Likelihood of Drought Occurrences Likely —Historical drought data for the Fresno County planning area and the Central Valley region indicate there have been five significant droughts in the last 79 years. This equates to a drought every 15.8 years on average or a 6.3 percent chance of a drought in any given year. Based on this data, droughts will likely affect the planning area. Likelihood of Tree Mortality Occurrence Based on information from the LHMPC, Cal Fire, and the Governor’s Tree Mortality Task Force, established in 2015, it is a certainty that tree mortality resulting from drought and insect infestation will continue in the future, though the degree to which it occurs depends on future rainfall levels and other factors. Some of the current challenges include how to eradicate the bark beetle, dead tree removal strategies, how to utilize the wood once it is removed, and how to restore the forests to a sustainable ecosystem (http://frap.fire.ca.gov/projects/projects_drought). Climate Change Considerations In California, rising temperatures are projected to increase the average lowest elevation at which snow falls, reducing water storage in the snowpack, particularly at those lower mountain elevations which are now on the margins of reliable snowpack accumulation. Higher spring temperatures will also result in earlier melting of the snowpack. The shift in snow melt to earlier in the season is critical for California’s water supply because flood control rules require that water be allowed to flow downstream and that water cannot be stored in reservoirs for use in the dry season. Climate change will likely adversely impact the ability of watersheds and ecosystems to deliver important ecosystem services. There is a broad range of climate change impacts that affect water resources in California. These changes may limit the natural capacity of healthy forests to capture water and regulate stream flows. Peterson et al., (2008) report that Sierra Nevada mountain winters and springs are warming, and on average, precipitation as snowfall relative to rain is decreasing. Fresno County 4.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A warming climate with reduced snowpack will result in earlier snowmelt and will subsequently reduce downstream water availability during summer and early fall. Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/assessment2010/pdfs/3.1water.pdf; p. 139 As such, Fresno County potentially has less capacity to address future drought (and wildfire) risk related to climate change due to projected temperature increases and shortages in water; ground- water withdrawals have been occurring at a deficit rate of one to two million acre feet per year, where the impacts of drought include decreased availability of water for agriculture and environmental uses. In forested and other vegetated areas, prolonged drought decreases the moisture content of forest fuels and increases the risk of high severity wildfires. Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/assessment2010/pdfs/3.1water.pdf; p. 139 California is the single most productive agricultural state with Fresno County and the San Joaquin Valley being a key factor to such productivity. The agricultural industry relies heavily on reservoir water supplied by snowmelt and rainfall runoff. Yearly variations in snowpack depths have implications for water availability as snowmelt from the winter snowpack feeds a network of reservoirs. Spring snowpack at Donner Summit reached record low levels in 2014, exceeded in 2015 by a remarkable April 1 snow-water-equivalent value of only 5% of average. Decreased precipitation since 2011 has contributed to near-record low levels in the Shasta Reservoir. Source: https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ca As such, the HMPC understands that high degree of risk posed by drought will be exacerbated by greater climate variation in the future, which, in this case, means greater variation and uncertainty regarding the availability of water supplies which are already under tremendous stress. The HMPC will continue to explore solutions for mitigating the drought hazard by accessing the best available data and resources on climate change and its relationship to drought. Table 4.11 Summary of Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources Resource Type of Impact Description Sea Level Direct Sea level is rising and will likely impact coastal areas Soil Moisture Direct Prolonged dry seasons can lead to decreases in soil moisture; drier vegetation Vegetation Indirect Longer and more intense fire season with increased extent of area burned Stream Conditions Direct Increases in water temperature; potential effects on fish Snowpack Indirect Increases in temperature will lead to decreases in snowpack Runoff Direct Warmer temperatures are likely to lead to a shift in peak runoff from spring to winter and a likely decrease in summer baseflow Hydropower Indirect Decreased summer flows resulting from earlier snowmelt and a shift Fresno County 4.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Resource Type of Impact Description in peak runoff could affect hydropower generation during summer months Precipitation Direct Warmer winter temperatures will result in a greater percentage of precipitation falling as rain rather than as snow Groundwater Indirect Reduction in snowpack and extended periods of drought are likely to increase dependency on groundwater Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/assessment2010/pdfs/3.1water.pdf p. 140 4.2.5 Earthquake Hazard/Problem Description An earthquake is caused by a sudden slip on a fault. Stresses in the earth’s outer layer push the sides of the fault together. Stress builds up, and the rocks slip suddenly, releasing energy in waves that travel through the earth’s crust and cause the shaking that is felt during an earthquake. The amount of energy released during an earthquake is usually expressed as a magnitude and is measured directly from the earthquake as recorded on seismographs. Another measure of earthquake severity is intensity. Intensity is an expression of the amount of shaking at any given location on the ground surface (see discussion in Extent section). Seismic shaking is typically the greatest cause of losses to structures during earthquakes. Seismic Hazards Earthquakes can cause structural damage, injury, and loss of life, as well as damage to infrastructure networks, such as water, power, gas, communication, and transportation. The degree of damage depends on many interrelated factors. Among these are the magnitude, focal depth, distance from the causative fault, source mechanism, duration of shaking, high rock accelerations, type of surface deposits or bedrock, degree of consolidation of surface deposits, presence of high groundwater, topography, and the design, type, and quality of building construction. The following analysis of seismic hazards from the Fresno County General Plan Background Report (2000) discusses some of these factors in more detail. Ground Shaking When movement occurs along a fault, the energy generated is released as waves, which cause ground shaking. Ground shaking intensity varies with the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the epicenter, and the type of rock or sediment through which the seismic waves move. The geological characteristics of an area thus can be a greater hazard than its distance to the earthquake epicenter. Although most of Fresno County is situated within an area of relatively low seismic activity, the faults and fault systems that lie along the eastern and western boundaries of Fresno County, as well as other regional faults, have the potential to produce high-magnitude earthquakes throughout the Fresno County 4.33 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan County. A high-magnitude earthquake on one of these faults could cause moderate intensity ground shaking in Fresno County. The valley portion of Fresno County is located on alluvial deposits, which tend to experience greater ground shaking intensities than areas located on hard rock. Therefore, structures in the valley areas would tend to suffer greater damage from ground shaking than those located in the foothill and mountain areas. Most of Fresno County, from approximately Interstate 5 east, is located in Seismic Zone 3, as defined by the most recent California Uniform Building Code. Areas in the Coast Range and foothills and a small area along the Fresno County-Inyo County boundary are located in Seismic Zone 4 (Figure 4.7). Fresno County 4.34 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.7 California Building Code Seismic Zones Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2017 Fresno County 4.35 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Seismic Structural Safety Older buildings constructed before building codes were established, and even newer buildings constructed before earthquake-resistance provisions were included in the codes, are the most likely to be damaged during an earthquake. Buildings one or two stories high of wood-frame construction are considered to be the most structurally resistant to earthquake damage. Older masonry buildings without seismic reinforcement (unreinforced masonry) are the most susceptible to the type of structural failure that causes injury or death. The susceptibility of a structure to damage from ground shaking is also related to the underlying foundation material. A foundation of rock or very firm material can intensify short-period motions, which affect low-rise buildings more than tall, flexible ones. A deep layer of water-logged soft alluvium can cushion low-rise buildings, but it can also accentuate the motion in tall buildings. The amplified motion resulting from softer alluvial soils can also severely damage older masonry buildings. Other potentially dangerous conditions include, but are not limited to, building architectural features that are not firmly anchored, such as parapets and cornices; roadways, including column and pile bents and abutments for bridges and overcrossings; and above-ground storage tanks and their mounting devices. Such features could be damaged or destroyed during strong or sustained ground shaking. Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is a process whereby soil is temporarily transformed to a fluid form during intense and prolonged ground shaking. Areas most prone to liquefaction are those that are water saturated (e.g., where the water table is less than 30 feet below the surface) and consist of relatively uniform sands that are loose to medium density. In addition to necessary soil conditions, the ground acceleration and duration of the earthquake must be of sufficient energy to induce liquefaction. Scientific studies have shown that the ground acceleration must approach 0.3g before liquefaction occurs in a sandy soil with relative densities typical of the San Joaquin alluvial deposits. Liquefaction during major earthquakes has caused severe damage to structures on level ground as a result of settling, titling, or floating. Such damage occurred in San Francisco on bay-filled areas during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, even though the epicenter was several miles away. If liquefaction occurs in or under a sloping soil mass, the entire mass may flow toward a lower elevation. Also of particular concern in terms of developed and newly developing areas are fill areas that have been poorly compacted. No specific countywide assessments to identify liquefaction hazards have been performed. Areas where groundwater is less than 30 feet below the surface are primarily in the valley. However, soil types in the area are not conducive to liquefaction, because they are either too coarse or too high in clay content. Areas subject to 0.3g acceleration or greater are located in a small section of the Sierra Nevada along the Fresno-Inyo border and along the Coast Range foothills in western Fresno County. However, the depth to groundwater in such areas is greater than in the valley, which would Fresno County 4.36 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan minimize liquefaction potential as well. Detailed geotechnical engineering investigations would be necessary to more accurately evaluate liquefaction potential in specific areas and to identify and map the areal extent of locations subject to liquefaction. Settlement Settlement can occur in poorly consolidated soils during ground shaking. During settlement, the soil materials are physically rearranged by the shaking to result in a less stable alignment of the individual minerals. Settlement of sufficient magnitude to cause significant structural damage is normally associated with rapidly deposited alluvial soils or improperly founded or poorly compacted fill. These areas are known to undergo extensive settling with the addition of irrigation water, but evidence is not available. The only urban area directly affected by settlement is the City of Coalinga. Fluctuating groundwater levels may have changed the local soil characteristics. Sufficient subsurface data is lacking to conclude that settlement would occur during a large earthquake; however, the data is sufficient to indicate that the potential exists. Other Hazards Earthquakes can also cause seiches, landslides, and dam failures. A seiche is a periodic oscillation of a body of water resulting from seismic shaking or other causes that can cause flooding. Earthquake-induced seiches are not considered a risk in Fresno County. Earthquakes may cause landslides, particularly during the wet season, in areas of high water or saturated soils. The most likely areas for earthquake-induced landslides are the same areas of high landslide potential discussed in Section 4.2.9 Landslide. Finally, earthquakes can cause dams to fail (see Section 4.2.3 Dam Failure). Faults An active fault is defined by the California Geological Survey as one that has had surface displacement within the last 11,000 years (Holocene). This does not mean, however, that faults having no evidence of surface displacement within the last 11,000 years are necessarily inactive. For example, the 1975 Oroville earthquake, the 1983 Coalinga earthquake, and the 1987 Whittier Narrows earthquake occurred on faults not previously recognized as active. Potentially active faults are those that have shown displacement within the last 1.6 million years (Quaternary). An inactive fault shows no evidence of movement in historic (last 200 years) or geologic time, suggesting that these faults are dormant. There are a number of active and potentially active faults within and adjacent to Fresno County. Faults within Fresno County and major active and potentially active faults in the region are illustrated in Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9. Fresno County 4.37 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.8 Fresno County Regional Faults Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2017 Fresno County 4.38 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.9 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault (Hazards) Zones Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2017 Fresno County 4.39 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Clovis Fault—The northwest-trending Clovis fault is believed to be approximately five to six miles east of the City of Clovis, extending from an area just south of the San Joaquin River to a few miles south of Fancher Creek. The Clovis fault is considered a pre-Quaternary fault or fault without recognized Quaternary displacement. This fault is not necessarily inactive. • Hartley Springs Fault, Silver Lake Fault (Parker Lake Fault), Unnamed Faults— Holocene and Quaternary faults are present in the vicinity of Duck Lake in the northeastern part of Fresno County, a few miles south of Mammoth Lakes. • Unnamed Inferred Faults—Relative or apparent upward and downward displacement, which are interpreted as inferred faults, occur in an area located a few miles south of Helm, extending southeast to approximately Lanare (between Fresno Slough and Crescent Ditch). As with the Clovis fault, there is no apparent Quaternary displacement; however, the possibility for fault movement in this area cannot be completely eliminated. • Nuñez Fault—The Nuñez fault is located approximately six to seven miles northwest of Coalinga. The Nuñez fault experienced surface rupture during the 1983 Coalinga earthquake and is designated an earthquake fault zone under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1994. No structure for human occupancy may be built within an earthquake fault zone until geologic investigations demonstrate that the site is free of fault traces that are likely to rupture with surface displacement. Special development standards associated with Alquist- Priolo requirements would be necessary for development in this area. • Ortigalita Fault—The Ortigalita fault zone is approximately 50 miles long, originating near Crow Creek in western Stanislaus County and extending southeast to a few miles north of Panoche in western Fresno County. Most of the fault is considered active due to displacement during Holocene time and is designated an earthquake fault zone under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1994. The southernmost extension of the fault lies in Fresno County. • The San Andreas Fault—The San Andreas fault lies to the west and southwest of Fresno County. In the southwestern part of the County, the fault is roughly parallel to and a few miles west of the County line. This fault is considered active and is of primary concern in evaluating seismic hazards throughout western Fresno County, although effects of earthquakes along the San Andreas fault could occur farther east as well. • Sierra Nevada Fault Zone (Owens Valley Fault Zone)—Approximately 12 miles east of the eastern Fresno County boundary lies the Owens Valley fault zone. This northwest-trending fault zone is a lengthy and complex system containing active and potentially active faults. Historically, this fault has been the source of seismic activity in Madera County to the north. • Foothills Fault System—The southern part of the Foothills Fault System, located approximately 70-80 miles north of the City of Fresno, includes the Bear Mountains fault and the Melones fault zone, as well as numerous smaller, but related faults. According to the California Geological Survey data, these faults have not shown any activity during the last 1.6 million years; however, geologic investigations of the seismic safety of the Auburn Dam site suggest these faults are potentially active. Therefore, the possibility exists that earthquakes could occur on these faults. Fresno County 4.40 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • White Wolf Fault—The White Wolf fault is located approximately 100 miles south of western Fresno County. The fault was not considered active until 1952, when movement along it generated a series of damaging earthquakes in the Bakersfield (Kern County) area. • Coast Range-Sierran Block Boundary—Recent evidence suggests that faults along the western boundary of the Central Valley may be more active than once believed. According to the California Geological Survey, asymmetrical folds have recently been identified on the eastern slopes of the Coast Range, which includes western Fresno County. Such folds can hide faults that show no surface rupture. These faults and folds, which are part of a large system called the Coast Range-Sierran Block Boundary, are similar to the faults/folds identified as the cause of the 1983 Coalinga earthquake. Therefore, faults beneath the Central Valley once believed to be inactive are now believed to be active and capable of generating large magnitude earthquakes. Figure 4.10 is an earthquake shaking map of Fresno County that is based on the 2% probability of occurrence in 50 years, based on analyses of these faults, soils, topography, groundwater, and the potential for earthquake shaking sufficiently strong to trigger landslide and liquefaction. It represents worst-case ground shaking and supports the conclusion that the Fresno County planning area is at risk to future damaging earthquake hazards, especially in the western and northeastern portions of the County. Fresno County 4.41 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.10 Earthquake Shaking Potential for Fresno County Fresno County 4.42 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Seismic risk is not limited to identified faults. A significant fraction of small to moderately large earthquakes occur on faults not previously recognized. Such earthquakes are characterized as “background seismicity” or “floating earthquakes,” which mean that the expected sources and locations of such earthquakes are unknown. Extent Figure 4.11 shows the location of faults and past earthquake epicenters in Southern California. Since earthquakes affect large areas the earthquake hazard extent within city limits is considered significant, potentially impacting 50-100% of the planning area. Figure 4.11 Southern California Earthquake and Fault Map Source: California Institute of Technology, Southern California Earthquake Data Center, 2017 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) issues National Seismic Hazard Maps as reports every few years. These maps provide various acceleration and probabilities for time periods. Figure 4.12 depicts the peak horizontal acceleration (%g) with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years for the planning region. The figure demonstrates that the city falls in the 3%g area. This data indicates that the expected severity of earthquakes in the region is fairly limited, as damage from earthquakes Fresno County 4.43 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan typically occurs at peak accelerations of 30%g or greater. However, as demonstrated by the HAZUS modeling documented earlier, the potential, though remote, does exist for damaging earthquakes. Figure 4.12 Peak Horizontal Acceleration with 10% Probability of Occurrence in 50 Years Source: USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps – 2014 Long-term Model. Fresno County 4.44 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.13 Peak Horizontal Acceleration with 2% Probability of Occurrence in 50 Years Source: USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps – 2014 Long-term Model. Fresno County 4.45 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The amount of energy released during an earthquake is usually expressed as a magnitude and is measured directly from the earthquake as recorded on seismographs. Seismologists have developed several magnitude scales; one of the first was the Richter Scale, developed in 1932 by the late Dr. Charles F. Richter of the California Institute of Technology. The Moment Magnitude Scale is used to quantify the magnitude or strength of the seismic energy released by an earthquake. Another measure of earthquake severity is Intensity. Intensity is an expression of the amount of shaking at any given location on the ground surface based on felt or observed effects. Seismic shaking is typically the greatest cause of losses to structures during earthquakes. Intensity is measured with the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale. The table below compares Magnitude and the felt effects associated with the MMI scale. Damage typically occurs in MMI VII or above, and some areas of the County are susceptible to this level of shaking. Table 4.12 Richter Scale Measurements and Associated Characteristics Magnitude Mercalli Intensity Effects Frequency Less than 2.0 I Microearthquakes, not felt or rarely felt; recorded by seismographs. Continual 2.0-2.9 I to II Felt slightly by some people; damages to buildings. Over 1M per year 3.0-3.9 II to IV Often felt by people; rarely causes damage; shaking of indoor objects noticeable. Over 100,000 per year 4.0-4.9 IV to VI Noticeable shaking of indoor objects and rattling noises; felt by most people in the affected area; slightly felt outside; generally, no to minimal damage. 10K to 15K per year 5.0-5.9 VI to VIII Can cause damage of varying severity to poorly constructed buildings; at most, none to slight damage to all other buildings. Felt by everyone. 1K to 1,500 per year 6.0-6.9 VII to X Damage to a moderate number of well-built structures in populated areas; earthquake-resistant structures survive with slight to moderate damage; poorly designed structures receive moderate to severe damage; felt in wider areas; up to hundreds of miles/kilometers from the epicenter; strong to violent shaking in epicentral area. 100 to 150 per year 7.0-7.9 VIII< Causes damage to most buildings, some to partially or completely collapse or receive severe damage; well- designed structures are likely to receive damage; felt across great distances with major damage mostly limited to 250 km from epicenter. 10 to 20 per year 8.0-8.9 VIII< Major damage to buildings, structures likely to be destroyed; will cause moderate to heavy damage to sturdy or earthquake-resistant buildings; damaging in large areas; felt in extremely large regions. One per year 9.0 and Greater VIII< At or near total destruction - severe damage or collapse to all buildings; heavy damage and shaking extends to distant locations; permanent changes in ground topography. One per 10-50 years Fresno County 4.46 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences Earthquakes have occurred in Fresno County in the past. Figure 4.14 illustrates areas of California damaged by earthquakes between 1800 and 1998. According to the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, the California Geological Survey has identified a minimum of four magnitude 5.0 or greater earthquakes that caused damaging shaking in Fresno County between 1800 and 1999. Details on some of these events follow. • 1983—In Coalinga, a surface rupture occurred along the Nuñez fault. The main shock was 6.7 on the Richter scale. The surface rupture was determined not to be the cause of the main shock; instead, a blind thrust fault concealed deep within a complex fold-and-thrust belt at the western end of the San Joaquin Valley was identified as the cause. Approximately 800 buildings were destroyed, and 1,000 people were left homeless. No deaths resulted, but 47 people were injured. Private homeowner losses exceeded $25 million. Public agency losses were roughly $6 million. The commercial section of Coalinga was heavily damaged; however, most schools and the hospital received only slight damage. Local, state, and federal declarations resulted. • August 4, 1985—A magnitude 6.0 earthquake occurred, centered about 10.5 kilometers east of Coalinga. It is unknown to what extent earthquakes occurring outside of the planning area were felt by Fresno County residents. Fresno County 4.47 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.14 Areas Damaged by Historical Earthquakes, 1800-1998 Source: California Geological Survey, www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/psha/ofr9608/index.htm#Faults%20in%20California Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—According to the Fresno County Operational Master Emergency Services Plan, the faults and fault systems that lie along the eastern and western boundaries of Fresno County, as well as other regional faults, have the potential to produce high magnitude earthquakes throughout the County. Based on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone chart, Fresno County would be affected by earthquake activity in the Alcalde Hills and Ortigalita Peak faults. There are also Fresno County 4.48 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan several faults in the vicinity of Coalinga that could cause problems in the future. These include the Nuñez fault, about ten kilometers northwest of Coalinga, the Coalinga fault, 5 kilometers northeast of Coalinga; and the New Idria fault, approximately 21 kilometers northwest of Coalinga. In addition, there are many faults in neighboring counties that could potentially affect Fresno County. Specifically, the U.S. Geological Survey is predicting an earthquake at the community of Parkfield in Monterey County, approximately 15 miles southwest of Coalinga. Climate Change Considerations While climate change is not expected to directly affect earthquake frequency or intensity; it could exacerbate indirect impacts of earthquakes (e.g., climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events, increasing the probability of landslides and liquefaction events during an earthquake). 4.2.6 Flood Hazard/Problem Description Floods are among the most frequent and costly natural disasters in terms of human hardship and economic loss and are usually caused by weather events. Floods can cause substantial damage to structures, landscapes, and utilities as well as life safety issues. Certain health hazards are also common to flood events. Standing water and wet materials in structures can become breeding grounds for microorganisms such as bacteria, mold, and viruses. This can cause disease, trigger allergic reactions, and damage materials long after the flood. When floodwaters contain sewage or decaying animal carcasses, infectious disease becomes a concern. Direct impacts, such as drowning, can be limited with adequate warning and public education about what to do during floods. Where flooding occurs in populated areas, warning and evacuation will be of critical importance to reduce life and safety impacts. The area adjacent to a channel is the floodplain. Floodplains are illustrated on inundation maps, which show areas of potential flooding and water depths. In its common usage, the floodplain most often refers to the area that is inundated by the 100-year flood, the flood that has a one percent chance in any given year of being equaled or exceeded. The 100-year flood is the national minimum standard to which communities regulate their floodplains through the National Flood Insurance Program. The 500-year flood is the flood that has a 0.2 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. In addition to the standard 100-year and 500-year flood maps, the California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR) has initiated a program that covers areas at risk of a 200-year flood. After propositions IE and 84 were passed in 2006, funding became available to support the Central Valley Floodplain Evaluation and Delineation (CVFED) program. To assist DWR with fulfilling new California code requirements, the CVFED Program provides new maps delineating the 100-year, 200-year and 500-year floodplains for areas receiving protection from the State federal flood protection system in the Central Valley. Fresno County 4.49 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The potential for flooding can change and increase through various land use changes and changes to land surface, which can result in a change to the floodplain. A change in environment can create localized flooding problems inside and outside of natural floodplains by altering or confining natural drainage channels. These changes are most often created by human activity. The Fresno County planning area is susceptible primarily to three types of flooding: localized, riverine, and dam failure flooding. • Localized flooding—Localized flooding problems are often caused by flash flooding, severe weather, or an unusual amount of rainfall. Flooding from these intense weather events usually occurs in areas experiencing an increase in runoff from impervious surfaces associated with development and urbanization as well as inadequate storm drainage systems. The term “flash flood” describes localized floods of great volume and short duration. This type of flood usually results from a heavy rainfall on a relatively small drainage area. Precipitation of this sort usually occurs in the winter and spring. Flash floods often require immediate evacuation within the hour. • Riverine flooding—Riverine flooding, defined as when a watercourse exceeds its “bank-full” capacity, generally occurs as a result of prolonged rainfall, or rainfall that is combined with already saturated soils from previous rain events. This type of flood occurs in river systems whose tributaries may drain large geographic areas and include one or more independent river basins. The onset and duration of riverine floods may vary from a few hours to many days. Factors that directly affect the amount of flood runoff include precipitation amount, intensity and distribution, the amount of soil moisture, seasonal variation in vegetation, snow depth, and water-resistance of the surface due to urbanization. In the Fresno County planning area, riverine flooding is largely caused by heavy and continued rains, sometimes combined with snowmelt, increased outflows from upstream dams, and heavy flow from tributary streams. These intense storms can overwhelm the local waterways as well as the integrity of flood control structures. The warning time associated with slow rise floods assists in life and property protection. • Dam failure flooding—Flooding from failure of one or more upstream dams is also a concern to the Fresno County planning area. A catastrophic dam failure could easily overwhelm local response capabilities and require mass evacuations to save lives. Impacts to life safety will depend on the warning time and the resources available to notify and evacuate the public. Major loss of life could result, and there could be associated health concerns as well as problems with the identification and burial of the deceased. Dam failure is further addressed in Section 4.2.3 Dam Failure. Eastern and Central Fresno County Eastern Fresno County extends from the Sierra Nevada foothills to the Great Western Divide. It is located primarily in the Sierra Nevada, where precipitation falls mainly as snow. The region is characterized by small local watersheds and draining to the reservoirs upstream of Millerton and Fresno County 4.50 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Pine Flat reservoirs. Flows originating in the mountains and foothills contribute to the drainage and flooding problems on the valley floor. Central Fresno County includes the area between the valley floor around Fresno Slough and eastward to the Sierra Nevada foothills, including Millerton Reservoir to Pine Flat Reservoir. The geographic area of central Fresno County runs along the Sierra Nevada foothills at elevations around 500 feet, and slopes down to the Fresno Slough on the valley floor, and drains gently to the north. This area is the population center of the County; thus, most storm drainage and flood control systems are largely designed to protect urban development. Average annual precipitation in the central Fresno County area varies from 6 inches near Mendota to about 70 inches upstream. The western slope of the Sierra Nevada drains into central Fresno County via the San Joaquin and Kings rivers and small creeks and stream systems. The Fresno Slough, also known as the North Fork of the Kings River, is connected to the San Joaquin River by the James Bypass, a manmade canal. It directs floodwater from the Kings River to the San Joaquin River. Three dams have been constructed to control flows on the rivers. These dams are Friant and Mendota dams on the San Joaquin River and Pine Flat Dam on the Kings River. Pine Flat Dam is operated primarily for flood control purposes. Friant Dam was constructed and is managed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as part of the Central Valley Project. Although Friant Dam does serve to reduce release volumes in the main San Joaquin River channel, it was not sited, designed, or engineered for the purpose of flood control. Mendota Dam is operated primarily for irrigation. In addition to the flood control facilities on the San Joaquin and Kings rivers, a number of reservoirs and detention basins have been constructed on streams east of the Fresno-Clovis area to prevent urban flooding. These facilities include Redbank Dam and the Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project. The Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project consists of two dams (Big Dry Creek Dam and Fancher Creek Dam), three detention basins (Redbank Creek, Pup Creek, and Alluvial Drain detention basins), and various canals to convey discharges around developed areas. The Friant-Kern Canal draws water from Millerton Reservoir at Friant Dam and flows south along the foothills toward Bakersfield. The rivers, streams, and flood control systems of eastern and central Fresno County are described in further detail below. Table 4.13 summarizes the location, capacity, and managing agency for each steam system and flood control facility in eastern and central Fresno County. San Joaquin River The San Joaquin River forms the boundary between Fresno and Madera counties. It flows from the Great Western Divide in the Sierra Nevada southwest along the northern border of Fresno County where it is joined by flows from the North Fork of the Kings River. From there, the river flows northwest up the San Joaquin Valley toward the Delta. Friant Dam, which serves to regulate river flows, is the most significant of the dams on the San Joaquin River. Several dams are located upstream of Friant Dam. Fresno County 4.51 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The storage capacity of Millerton Reservoir (formed by Friant Dam) is 520,500 acre-feet. The Central Valley Project Friant Unit consists of Friant Dam and Millerton Reservoir; the Friant-Kern Canal, which runs south to Kern County; and the Madera Canal, which runs northwesterly to Madera County. Releases from Friant Dam to the San Joaquin River and the Friant-Kern Canal provide service to water users within Fresno County. This storage capacity of Millerton Reservoir is inadequate for full flood protection during wet years, and emergency releases may result in flooding problems downstream. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) has evaluated the operational plans for all the dams in the San Joaquin River system to determine the possibility of coordinated releases to reduce the likelihood of coincident peak flows downstream with some success. However, in 1997, emergency releases from Friant Dam combined with large storm events and several levee breaks contributed to flooding along the San Joaquin River. Not designed for purposes of flood control, any flood control capability of the Friant Unit is incidental to its function as a diversion facility. The Madera Canal, also part of this unit, also serves to release runoff volumes from the San Joaquin River. The Friant-Kern Canal carries irrigation water from Millerton Reservoir southeast to Kern County. The average annual delivery from the canal is about one million acre-feet with a design capacity of 5,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). There is a spillway into the Kings River just upstream of a double barrel 24 ½-foot diameter siphon under the river. Although the canal was constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation and is normally managed by the Friant-Kern Water Users Authority, floodwater in the canal is managed by the Corps. During times of flooding, water from the Friant- Kern Canal may not be releasable to the Kings River since the Corps may not want additional flows on the river. Mendota Pool is a 5,000-acre-foot reservoir created by Mendota Dam located just outside City of Mendota on the San Joaquin River. The primary function of the dam is storage of irrigation water for agriculture; however, the water level in the pool also functions to maintain water levels in the Mendota Wildlife Management Area. Mendota Pool provides little or no flood protection. Mendota Dam contains flow from the San Joaquin River as well as discharge and releases from the Kings River via the Fresno Slough and James Bypass. The Delta-Mendota Canal conveys Delta water to Mendota Pool from the north, and several irrigation channels divert flows from it. The Bureau of Reclamation, in coordination with the Central California Irrigation District, manages this system, which is part of the Central Valley Project, and they have proposed replacing the existing dam with a new dam, which may raise the water level in the pool. Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric own and operate a number of dams and reservoirs on the San Joaquin River and its tributaries upstream of Friant Dam. The most notable of these are Edison Lake and Florence Lake. These upstream storage facilities are operated for the production of electric energy and have a combined capacity of about 609,530 acre-feet. Their operation does affect the flow of water into Millerton Reservoir and subsequently the timing and availability of releases to Friant Unit contractors. None of these storage facilities are designed or operated for flood control, and the Corps currently has no jurisdiction over releases from these Fresno County 4.52 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan structures. Cumulative flood releases from the upper San Joaquin River dams could overwhelm Friant Dam. From Friant to Gravelly Ford, the San Joaquin River is part of the Designated Floodway Program administered by the State Reclamation Board. Land use restrictions and river management practices allow the river to meander, flood the overbanks, and remain in a relatively natural state. Downstream of Gravelly Ford, the river is confined by levees. The design capacity of the San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to Chowchilla Bypass is in excess of 8,000 cfs, while the channel capacity downstream is reduced. The major San Joaquin River “choke point” in Fresno County is the reach near Mendota and Firebaugh, which has a channel capacity of 8,000 cfs. Beyond that point, San Joaquin River channel capacity continues to decrease for some distance due to lack of annual flooding and natural channel clearing since Friant Dam was constructed. Further downstream, the river channel has been deepened and widened by historical flows of the Merced and Tuolumne rivers and other tributaries. In addition to releases from Friant Dam, two uncontrolled streams, Cottonwood Creek and Little Dry Creek, add significantly to the river flows below Friant during heavy precipitation. Historically, large areas within the Central Valley were within the river’s floodplain. Development has encroached on the floodplain and the flow is now confined to a relatively narrow channel constrained by levees, which reduce the carrying capacity of the river. Most of the flow from Friant Dam is diverted to the Chowchilla Bypass, which branches off the San Joaquin River about 11 river miles upstream from Mendota Dam. Over time, encroachment of vegetation, substantial sedimentation, and land subsidence has considerably reduced channel capacity. Erosion, seepage, and prolonged high water compromise levee integrity. Downstream of the Chowchilla Bypass, the river is not confined by levees (within Fresno County) and generally carries no more than 2,500 cfs. Flood control measures constructed along the main stem of the river have impacted riparian and wetland wildlife habitat areas. Levee construction and sediment and vegetation removal can damage streamside vegetation, divert floodwater from wetlands and riparian areas, and reclaim natural wetlands for other uses. Kings River The Kings River originates high in the Sierra Nevada Mountains near the Inyo County line and flows southwest through the central part of Fresno County and into Tulare County at Reedley. It has a large drainage basin, which includes most of Kings Canyon National Park and most of the area between Shaver and Florence lakes in the north to the Fresno/Tulare County border in the south. North of Hanford, the river branches, and the south fork flows southward to the Tulare Lakebed. The north fork joins Fresno Slough, which conveys flows north to the San Joaquin River at Mendota Pool. Several sloughs and canals branch off the river and are used for water storage and to convey irrigation water. Fresno County 4.53 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The Kings River flows are regulated by Pine Flat Dam, completed in 1954 for flood control purposes. Pine Flat Reservoir has a storage capacity of approximately one million acre-feet. The flood control functions of the facility are managed by the Corps while the releases for irrigation diversion are managed by the Kings River Water Association. There are additional reservoirs upstream of Pine Flat that are owned and operated by Pacific Gas and Electric for the purpose of hydroelectric power generation. These facilities have a combined storage capacity of about 252,000 acre-feet. Two uncontrolled creeks, Hughes Creek and Mill Creek, flow into the Kings River below Pine Flat Dam. Pine Flat Reservoir has adequate storage capacity to avoid emergency releases in most storm events, but these downstream creeks can add significant flow to the river. Downstream of Pine Flat Dam, the Kings River is managed for flood control by the Kings River Conservation District in cooperation with the Corps, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and local irrigation districts. Releases from Pine Flat Dam and flows from Hughes Creek and Mill Creek provide the majority of the river’s flow. Numerous sloughs and irrigation canals branch off the Kings River. The capacity of the river is more than 13,000 cfs. The Kings River flood control facilities include many miles of levees in central Fresno County. There are three weirs on the river: Army Weir, Crescent Weir, and Stinson Weir. Army Weir is located where the north and south forks branch off the natural river just upstream from State Route 41. Crescent Weir is located at the Crescent Bypass southwest of 22nd and Excelsior Avenues. The Crescent Bypass flows to Fresno Slough. Stinson Weir is located near the confluence of Murphy Slough and Fresno Slough at Elkhorn Avenue. Normal flows are held by these weirs in the main channel. During storm events, as much as 4,750 cfs is diverted to the North Fork and the San Joaquin River. As much as 3,200 cfs can then be diverted to the Crescent Bypass. Any flow above approximately 10,000 cfs is divided equally between the north and south forks. In practice, the flow of the Kings River is carefully managed using analysis of anticipated weather, upstream flows, and ability of downstream users to receive the water. Significant adjustment may be necessary, and a variety of operations options are considered, including storing or routing water through alternate sloughs or requesting users to accept additional water. Fresno Slough and the James Bypass are normally dry except for groundwater seepage and irrigation returns. Flow is diverted to the South Fork only in very wet years. Sand and gravel extraction has occurred along both the San Joaquin River and the Kings River in Fresno County, although most of this aggregate mining has occurred outside of the main river channels. The hydrologic effect of the mining and subsequent reclamation activity has generally been to increase the overall hydraulic capacity of the rivers to accommodate major flood events. Eastern County Streams There are many creeks and lakes in the high Sierra Nevada within Fresno County, all of which eventually feed into either the Kings River or the San Joaquin River. In addition, several creeks drain the foothill areas and flow into developed areas in central Fresno County. Most of these streams (i.e., Redbank, Fancher, Dry, and Dog creeks) have been controlled by efforts of the Corps Fresno County 4.54 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District to protect the City of Fresno from damage of flooding from a 200-year storm. Other creeks, such as Wahtoke Creek, are uncontrolled. Some streams in foothill areas of southeastern Fresno County are tributaries to the Orange Cove Stream Group and to Sand Creek, which is a tributary to the Kaweah River. Flood control efforts along some of these eastern Fresno County streams include the following: • Redbank Reservoir—Redbank Reservoir, formed by Redbank Dam, is located on Redbank Creek north of Shaw Avenue. The reservoir has a gross pool capacity of 1,030 acre-feet, and receives water from the Redbank Creek watershed. The reservoir is operated for flood control by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. • Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project—This project consists of a system of two dams, three detention basins, and canals to protect developed areas in and around the City of Fresno from a 200-year storm. The project was built by the Corps and is managed and operated by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. Fancher Creek Reservoir has a capacity of 9,712 acre-feet and retains water from Fancher and Hog creeks and some flows from Redbank Creek. Fancher Dam diverts flows via canals around Fresno. Redbank Creek Detention Basin (940 acre-feet) contains local flows from Redbank Creek downstream from Redbank Dam. The Alluvial Drain and Pup Creek detention basins have capacities of 305 and 559 acre-feet, respectively, and can each regulate discharges into Dry Creek at 25 cfs. • Big Dry Creek Reservoir—Big Dry Creek Reservoir, with a capacity of 30,200 acre-feet, retains flows from Big Dry Creek and Dog Creek and diverts flows via Little Dry Creek to the San Joaquin River at a rate of up to 700 cfs. During a flood event, water is not typically released from Big Dry Creek Dam; however, during a severe flood event, it may be necessary to do so. Fresno County 4.55 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.13 Major Flood Control Facilities and Stream Systems in Eastern and Central Fresno County Facility/Water Body Location Capacity Managing Agency Millerton Reservoir* 17 miles northeast of SR 99 on the San Joaquin River in the north central part of the county 520,500 acre-ft1 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Pine Flat Reservoir 16 miles northeast of Sanger on the Kings River in the east central part of the county 1,000,000 acre-ft1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mendota Pool On the San Joaquin River at Mendota where the river turns north and Fresno Slough joins the river in the northwestern part of the country 5,000 acre-ft2 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Big Dry Creek Reservoir West of Friant-Kern Canal and north of Tollhouse Road on Big Dry Creek 30,200 acre-ft1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Redbank Reservoir 7 miles east of Clovis, 3 miles southwest of the Friant-Kern Canal between Dog Creek and Fancher Creek in the central part of the county 1,030 acre-ft Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fancher Creek Reservoir East of the Friant-Kern Canal at the confluence of Fancher and Hog creeks 9,712 acre-ft1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Redbank Creek Detention Basin On Redbank Creek north of McKinley Avenue and west of DeWolf Avenue 940 acre-ft1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Pup Creek Detention Basin On Pup Creek south of Herndon Avenue and east of Temperance Avenue 559 acre-ft1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Alluvial Drain Detention Basin On Alluvial Drain west of Temperance Avenue and north of Nees Avenue 305 acre-ft1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Eastern and Central Fresno County 1997 Flows from the Sierra Nevada southwest along the northern border of the county to Mendota where it turns to flow to the northwest. Forms the border between Fresno and Madera counties 8,000 cfs1** (Friant Dam to Chowchilla) 2,500 cfs1,4 (to Mendota) 4,500 cfs1,4 (Mendota Dam to Sand Slough) U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Local Irrigation Districts Kings River Flows from the Sierra Nevada to Sanger and Reedley and into Kings County boundary to Army Weir above Hwy 41 where the normal flow is diverted to the North Fork. Excess flows are diverted to Tulare Lakebed 13,000 cfs3** Kings River Conservation District Fresno Slough & James Bypass A seasonal waterway system which connects the Kings River near Laton and Lemoore NAS to the San Joaquin River at Mendota Pool during flood events 4,750 cfs1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Friant-Kern Canal Flows southeasterly from Millerton Lake through Orange Cove continuing on to Bakersfield. Crosses five feet below Kings River via a 24.5 ft diameter 3,000 ft siphon 5,000 cfs1 Friant-Kern Water Users’ Authority, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Millerton Reservoir* 17 miles northeast of SR 99 on the San Joaquin River in the north central part of the county 520,000 acre-ft1 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Holland Creek Diversion Channel South of the Friant-Kern Canal where it crosses Trimmer Springs Road Peak channel capacity is 1,044 cfs Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fresno County 4.56 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fancher Creek Detention Basin Southwest corner of McKinley Avenue and McCall Avenue Ultimate capacity is 1,802 ac/ft. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Pup-Enterprise Detention Basin East side of DeWolf Avenue, just south of Herndon Avenue Ultimate capacity is 200 ac/ft. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Big Dry Creek Detention Basin North of Freeway 168 and Dakota Avenue Ultimate capacity is 251 ac/ft. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Dry Creek Extension Basin Northwest corner of Annadale Avenue and Brawley Avenue Ultimate capacity is 854 ac/ft. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2017; Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Note: The numbers provided in this table are design capacity and actual river capacity may vary significantly *Friant Dam/Millerton Reservoir is not sited, designed, or operated to function as a flood control facility, and any such capability is incidental to its function as a diversion facility 1U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2Central California Irrigation District 3Kings River Conservation District 4River channel capacity is difficult to define due to significant changes in the river conditions over time, variance in channel conditions and geometry along a given river reach, and assumptions made in developing hydraulic models Western County Streams Western Fresno County consists of the Coast Range within which lies the County’s western boundary with San Benito and Monterey counties and the San Joaquin Valley area between the Range and the Fresno Slough. Interstate 5 and the California Aqueduct pass in a north-south direction through western Fresno County. A complex system of streams drains the eastern slope of the Coast Range into the valley and the Fresno Slough. Western Fresno County is significantly different from the rest of the County in climate and character. Western Fresno County is largely unpopulated. The major land uses are agriculture and grazing. The region is quite dry, with an average annual rainfall of only six to eight inches, yet the stream systems are prone to high flows and flooding because they drain very large watersheds. The soils in the Coast Range are subject to erosion. As a result, stormwater runoff typically carries large volumes of sediment and naturally occurring minerals, such as selenium, arsenic, boron, and asbestos, which is undesirable to downstream users. Western Fresno County contains five major stream systems that flow from the Coast Range as described further below. The location, capacity, and managing agency for each stream system and associated flood control facility is summarized in Table 4.13. • Little Panoche Creek—Little Panoche Creek, located in the northwestern corner of Fresno County, is managed for flood control purposes by the DWR. The DWR operates and maintains a detention dam and reservoir (Little Panoche Reservoir) on the creek. The facility was constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation to provide flood protection for the California Aqueduct. It was designed for a 100-year storm and has a storage capacity of 820 acre-feet. When storage levels in the reservoir exceed 820 acre-feet, the dam’s uncontrolled spillway releases water. The creek flows under Interstate 5 and the California Aqueduct. Little Panoche Creek ends at a retention basin on the eastside of the aqueduct. When the retention basin fills Fresno County 4.57 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan with stormwater during high flows, stormwater is pumped into the aqueduct. The reservoir also serves as a wildlife preserve. • Panoche Creek—Panoche Creek is located just south of Little Panoche Creek in northwestern Fresno County. It flows under Interstate 5and across the California Aqueduct. The estimated 100-year peak flow for Panoche Creek is 22,000 cfs. On the east side of the aqueduct, the water is not channelized and flows overland. During high creek flows, stormwater floods vast tracks of agricultural land and portions of the City of Mendota. • Tumey Gulch and Arroyo Ciervo—Tumey Gulch and Arroyo Ciervo are located in central western Fresno County and flow easterly from Ciervo Mountain. The estimated 100-year peak flow is 3,600 cfs for Tumey Gulch and is 900 cfs Arroyo Ciervo. No flood control facilities exist on the streams; however, the California Aqueduct obstructs their eastward flow. During periods of high stream flow, sediment laden floodwater may form ponds on the west side of the aqueduct. These ponds may spill stormwater and sediment into the aqueduct during storm events. • Cantua Creek System—This creek system includes Arroyo Hondo, Cantua Creek, Salt Creek, Martinez Creek, and Domegine Creek in central western Fresno County. These creeks drain the east side of Joaquin Ridge, crossing Interstate 5 between Kamm Road and Fresno-Coalinga Road. The estimated 100-year peak flow from the Cantua Creek system is 8,300 cfs. As with Tumey Gulch and Arroyo Ciervo, stormwater from the Cantua Creek system ponds on the east side of the California Aqueduct during periods of high flow, dumping large quantities of sediment and storm runoff into the aqueduct. Cantua Creek has inundated Interstate 5 during large storm events. • Arroyo Pasajero Stream System—The Arroyo Pasajero stream system encompasses the largest drainage area in the western San Joaquin Valley. The major creeks in the system are Los Gatos, Warthan, Jacalitos, and Zapato-Chino creeks. They flow through the City of Coalinga and under Interstate 5 to a small ponding basin on the west side of the California Aqueduct. Arroyo Pasajero carries large quantities of sediment containing naturally occurring asbestos. During flood events, the system may damage the aqueduct and Interstate 5. Floodwater may also wash asbestos fibers into the aqueduct. Major Sources of Flooding/Problem Areas Flooding is a natural occurrence in the Central Valley because it is a natural drainage basin for thousands of watershed acres of Sierra Nevada and Coast Range foothills and mountains. FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study for the County, effective January 20, 2016, describes several types of primary flood problems. General rainfall floods can occur in Fresno County during winter and spring months. This type of flood results from prolonged heavy rainfall over tributary areas and is characterized by high peak flows of moderate duration. Flooding is more severe when antecedent rain has resulted in saturated ground conditions; when the ground is frozen and infiltration is minimal; or when rain on snow in the high elevations on the east side adds snowmelt to rain flood runoff. Fresno County 4.58 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Snowmelt floods on the San Joaquin and Kings rivers and their higher elevation tributaries can be expected to occur any time from April through June. Although snowmelt flooding is of much larger volume and longer duration than rain flooding, it does not have the high peak flows characteristic of rain floods. Snowmelt flood runoff is sometimes augmented by late spring rains on the snowfields or lower elevation tributary watersheds. Cloudburst storms sometimes lasting as long as three hours can occur any time from late spring to early fall and may occur as an extremely severe sequence within a general rainstorm. Cloudbursts are high-intensity storms that can produce floods characterized by high peak flows, short duration of flood flows, and small volume of runoff. In some areas, especially where drainage basins are small, cloudbursts can produce peak flows substantially larger than those of general rainstorms. Cloudburst storms usually cover small areas and would not generally affect flood flows or flood stages on the San Joaquin or Kings rivers. Generally, only the upper reaches of the smaller streams are affected by cloudbursts. In urban areas, flood problems intensify because open land available to absorb rainfall and runoff is being used for new development, which increases the amount of paved areas (i.e., impervious surfaces). The decrease in the amount of open land increases the volume of water that must be carried away by waterways. Urban development in some areas of Fresno County has been substantial in recent years and is expected to continue. Eastern and Central Fresno County Flood Problem Areas Most flood issues in eastern and central Fresno County are associated with the San Joaquin River, Kings River, and several other stream systems. San Joaquin River System The San Joaquin River from Gravelly Ford to the Chowchilla Bypass outside Fresno County is confined by a levee system. The design capacity of the river is 5,000 cfs, which is considered a safe carrying capacity with three feet of allowable freeboard. Over time, encroachment of vegetation, substantial sedimentation, and land subsidence has considerably reduced channel capacity. Erosion, seepage, and prolonged high water compromise levee integrity. Levee maintenance is generally under the jurisdiction of local reclamation districts. Uncontrolled flooding from the San Joaquin River between the Chowchilla Bypass and Dos Palos tends to flow into Madera County north of Mendota. The Mendota Pool area has shown evidence of significant subsidence, possibly affecting levee height, river invert (i.e., bottom of low-flow channel), as well as the pool depth. The flooding hazards in the region are from Panoche Creek to the west into Madera County downstream from Mendota Pool. It was reported in 1997 (Fresno County General Plan Background Report) that the Mendota Dam is of limited usefulness for flood control purposes. Construction of a new dam at Mendota has been contemplated to improve flood control capabilities of the lower reaches of the San Joaquin. Fresno County 4.59 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The flooding potential from creeks and streams between the San Joaquin and Kings Rivers in the east has been substantially eliminated within the last few years by the completion of the Redbank- Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project. This has resulted in a decrease in the areas designated in the 100-year floodplain. However, as noted in the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, the 100-year storm event flows have increased from 18,000 cfs to 24,500 cfs in the San Joaquin River over last few decades (due to increasing intensity of storms and statistical analysis of the meteorologic/hydrologic database for the San Joaquin River). Kings River System Uncontrolled creeks within the Kings River system, notably Mill Creek, continue to challenge management of Pine Flat Dam and Kings River flood control during consecutive large storm events. In 1997, water was not released form Pine Flat due to large flows in Mill Creek, which pushed the limits of the system. If another large event had occurred before Pine Flat Reservoir releases could provide adequate storage space and the Mill creek watershed was still saturated, rapid runoff in Mill Creek and an emergency spill at Pine Flat would have overwhelmed the system. In the event of a major release from Pine Flat Dam, downstream flooding would occur over agricultural lands near the riverbanks and possibly within the Cities of Reedley and Kingsburg. Western Fresno County Flood Problem Areas Flood issues in western Fresno County are varied in scope and unique in nature. Many creeks prone to high flows and significant erosion are found in the area, but most of the region is unpopulated, so flooding in many areas poses little threat to life or personal property. Major facilities that are subject to flooding include Interstate 5 and the California Aqueduct. Urban areas subject to flooding include the communities of Coalinga, Huron, and Mendota. Important wetland habitat in the Mendota Wildlife Management Area is also subject to flooding and may be impacted by sediments carried by flood flows from these creeks. During large storm events, the California Aqueduct is flooded by high flows from Arroyo Pasajero. Consequently, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps, and the DWR are coordinating efforts to relieve the threat of flooding from this stream system. Other stream systems obstructed by the aqueduct may pose a flooding hazard during periods of high flow when ponds form on the west side of the aqueduct. The streams carry large amounts of sediment. When ponds fill with sediment, water and sediment spill into the aqueduct. Various stream systems also flood developed areas in western Fresno County during storm events. Creeks that feed into Arroyo Pasajero flow through the City of Coalinga, creating flood hazards and preventing development in impacted areas. Downstream, Arroyo Pasajero is prone to flooding the road into the City of Huron. After crossing the California Aqueduct, Panoche Creek flows overland and floods both agricultural land and portions of the City of Mendota. The Mendota Wildlife Management Area receives water from Panoche Creek, which drains into Mendota Pool. During storm events, the sediments carried in Panoche Creek contain high levels Fresno County 4.60 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan of selenium and arsenic, which may degrade the water quality in the Mendota Wildlife Management Area. Localized Flooding Problem Areas Localized flooding also occurs throughout the County with several areas of primary concern. According to the Fresno County Department of Public Works, numerous roads throughout the County are subject to flooding in heavy rains. In addition to flooding, damage to these areas during heavy storms includes pavement deterioration, washouts, landslides/mudslides, debris areas, and downed trees. The amount and type of damage or flooding that occurs varies from year to year, depending on the quantity of runoff. Flooding problems are tracked by road maintenance area (see Figure 4.15) and noted below. Figure 4.15 Fresno County’s Road Maintenance Areas Source: Fresno County Public Works and Planning Fresno County 4.61 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A-1 Firebaugh Area The following roads in Area #1 are subject to flooding in heavy rains and flooding signs are required. • Washoe at Delta Mendota Canal southeast of Bridge • Herndon at Russell • Belmont from San Diego to Fairfax • Shaw between Milux and Russell • Washoe .01 miles north of California • Shields at Fairfax southwest corner • Russell 1.9 miles south of Shields • Little Panoche, numerous areas 1.3 miles west of Interstate 5 to C/L • Milux at Bullard, west side • Bullard east of Milux numerous areas to Fairfax • Althea 1 mile west of Russell • Hudson at Merrill northeast corner • Fairfax at Valeria southwest corner • Fairfax .02 miles south of Valeria • Oxalis .04 miles west of Ormsby A-2 Tranquility Areas that flood east of James Road: • Butte, American to North • American, Denver to El Dorado • El Dorado, American to Colorado • Marin, Adams South .2 miles • Sumner, Colorado to Placer • Yuba, Manning to Colorado • Parilier, Placer to Yuba • Springfield, Colorado to Plumas • Springfield, Colusa to Sutter • Huntsman, Colorado to El Dorado • Floral, Colorado to Graham • Rose, Colorado to Trinity • Napa, at drain ditch crossing (Nebraska)? • Kamm, Placer to Yuba Areas that flood west of James Road: • San Mateo north of State Route 180 • Sante Fe at San Benteo • Jefferson Amador to Tuolumne • Lincoln James Rd. to Calaveras • Mt. View San Mateo to Monterey • Clarkson San Mateo to Amador • Amador Clarkson to Elkhorn • Elkhorn Amador to Sonoma • Sonoma Elkhorn to Mt. Whitney • Kamm State Route 33 to Interstate 5 • Manning Aqua Duct to Interstate 5 • Douglas south of Manning .1 mile • Douglas north of Manning 1 mile • San Diego Adams to American • Jensen San Diego to Washoe A-3 Coalinga • Mt. Whitney Fresno County 4.62 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Coalinga-Mendota Road • Parkfield • Collwell east and west • Boone • Alcalde Road A-4 Biola • Dickenson Avenue, Herndon to Barstow • Dickenson Avenue, south of North Avenue, east side • Belmont Avenue, Grantland to Howard Avenue, various locations • Shields Avenue, Westlawn to Bishop Avenue, various locations • Shields Avenue west of State Route 145, various locations • Shaw Avenue west of State Route 145, various locations • Dower Avenue, Shields Avenue to Shaw Avenue, various locations • Henderson north of South Avenue, east side • Brawley south of Lincoln • Elm Avenue between Morton and Clayton Avenue. • Adams-Clovis Avenue to State Route 99 • Central at Blyth to Cornelia • Grantland south of Shaw, east side • Grantland south of Belmont to RXR tracks, east side A-5 Caruthers • Floral west of Temperance • Fowler at Davis • McCall south of Clarkson • Fowler north of Elkhorn • Temperance south of Conejo • Dewolf north of Mt. View • Clovis north of Nebraska • Harlan between Maple and Chestnut A-7 Fresno-Clovis • Copper between Minnewawa and Fowler • Copper near Armstrong • Armstrong between Copper and International • International between Flower and Armstrong • Fowler between International and Shepherd • Behymer between Willow and Minnewawa • Behymer between Minnewawa and Fowler Fresno County 4.63 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Sunnyside between Teague and Nees • Teague between Fowler and Armstrong • Marion between Teague and Nees • Shaw between McCall and Leonard • Academy between Herndon and Shaw • Sierra between Academy and Del Rey • Herndon between Academy and Madsen • Madsen between Herndon and Shepherd • Shepherd between SH 168 and Academy • Shepherd between Fowler and Armstrong • Gettysburg between Van Ness and Wishon • Sierra between Forkner and Van Ness Extension • College between Swift and Santa Ana A-8 Fresno-Sanger This is not a complete list as there are many locations that pool at the shoulder or just onto the road. Large or back to back storms can change all. • Jensen at Sierra Vista • Shields/Locan • National east of Minnewawa • Monticeto/Rogers • Fowler at Princeton • Butler east of Locan • Gettysburg/Greenwood • McKinley west of Bethel • McKinley at Leonard • Indianola south of Highway 180 • Dewolf/Church • Bond/Mayfair Drive North • Griffith east of Clovis • Dakota east of Highland • Fowler at Olive • Walling north of Kings Canyon • Olive east of Hornet • Temperance north of Church • Temperance north of Jensen • Locan north of Church • Highland north of Jensen • Zediker south of Belmont • Tulare west of Zediker • Newmark north of Belmont • Macdonough north of Belmont • Newmark north of Highway 180 • California east of Dockery • McCall/Tulare • Tulare east of McCall • Indianola at Jensen • Olive/Zediker • Thompson north of Dakota • Rancho at Butler • Illinois west of Villa • Madison west of Clovis • Grant west of Clovis • Washington west of Clovis • Easterby Drive South west of Minnewawa • Easterby Drive North west of Minnewawa • Brown at Jackson Fresno County 4.64 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A-9 Sanger-Del Rey • American between Academy and Armstrong • Central between McCall and Willow • Bethel south of Adams 100-500 feet • Bethel between Manning and Rose • Willow between North and Jensen • Nebraska from Academy to city limits and at intersection of Bethel A-10 Reedley-Dunlap • Alta at Manning • Zediker south of Caruthers • South at Zediker • Reed at Floral • Reed at South • Adams between Zediker and Smith • Smith at Dinuba • Hill between Sumner and Adams • Monson south of Parlier (this might be the City of Orange Cove) Levee Failure A levee is a raised area that runs along the banks of a river or canal. Levees reinforce the banks and help prevent flooding. By confining the flow, levees can also increase the speed of the water. Levees can be natural or man-made. A natural levee is formed when sediment settles on the river bank, raising the level of the land around the river. To construct a man-made levee, workers pile dirt or concrete along the river banks, creating an embankment. This embankment is flat at the top, and slopes at an angle down to the water. For added strength, sandbags are sometimes placed over dirt embankments. Levees provide strong flood protection, but they are not failsafe. Levees are designed to protect against a specific flood level and could be overtopped during severe weather events. Levees reduce, not eliminate, the risk to individuals and structure behind them. A levee system failure or overtopping can create severe flooding and high water velocities. It’s important to remember that no levee provides protection from events for which it was not designed, and proper operation and maintenance are necessary to reduce the probability of failure. There are three primary risks to levee integrity in Fresno County: • Earthquake failure • High water failure • Dry weather failure. Fresno County 4.65 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Earthquake Failure Seismic risk in the Fresno area is characterized as moderate-to-high because of many active faults in the area. Figure 4.11 in Section 4.2.5 Earthquake, illustrates the locations of faults in and surrounding Fresno County. Seismic risk to levees stems from the risk of liquefaction, ground settlement, and cracking. High Water Failure High water in the County can overtop levees. High water also increases the hydrostatic pressure on levees and their foundations, causing instability. The risk of through-levee and under-levee seepage failures increases as well. Under-seepage refers to water flowing under the levee through the foundation materials, often emanating from the bottom of the landside slope and ground surface and extending landward from the landside toe of the levee. Through-seepage refers to water flowing through the levee prism directly, often emanating from the landside slope of the levee. Both conditions can lead to failure by several mechanisms, including excessive water pressures causing foundation heave and slope instabilities, slow progressing internal erosion, and piping leading to levee slumping. Figure 4.16 Through-Seepage and Under-Seepage During High Water Conditions Source: USACE Fresno County 4.66 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Overtopping failure occurs when the flood water level rises above the crest of a levee. The representation of the failure modes and the evaluation of the probability of levee failures for each mode are discussed in the remaining sections. Figure 4.17 Flooding from Levee Overtopping Source: Levees In History: The Levee Challenge. Dr. Gerald E. Galloway, Jr., P.E., Ph.D., Water Policy Collaborative, University of Maryland, Visiting Scholar, USACE, IWR. http://www.floods.org/ace-files/leveesafety/lss_levee_history_galloway.ppt Dry Weather Failures Dry weather, or sunny-day, failures are levee breaches that are not flood or seismic related. These failures typically occur between the end of the late snowmelt from the Sierras, in late May, and the beginning of the rainy season, in early October. Sunny-day failures are addressed separately from flood-induced failures to differentiate between winter and summer events. Aside from seismic events, factors that can cause levee failures in the County in the summer period are different than the factors that can cause winter failures. Burrowing animal activities and pre-existing weaknesses in the levees and foundation are the key weak links leading to levee failures. This is the case whether or not the failures occur during a high-tide condition. Burrowing animals can cause undue weaknesses by creating a maze of internal and interconnected galleries of tunnels. Tree growth on levees may cause weakness as well. Under-seepage and through-levee seepage are slow processes that tend to work through time by removing fines from levee and foundation material during episodes of high river levels. Cumulative deterioration through the years can lead to foundations ultimately failing in dry weather by means of uncontrollable internal erosion that leads to slumping and cracking of levees. Floodplain Mapping FEMA established standards for floodplain mapping studies as part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NFIP makes flood insurance available to property owners in participating communities adopting FEMA-approved local floodplain studies, maps, and Fresno County 4.67 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan regulations. Floodplain studies that may be approved by FEMA include federally funded studies; studies developed by state, city, and regional public agencies; and technical studies generated by private interests as part of property annexation and land development efforts. Such studies may include entire stream reaches or limited stream sections depending on the nature and scope of a study. A general overview of floodplain mapping is provided in the following paragraphs. Details on the NFIP and mapping specific to participating jurisdictions are in the jurisdictional annexes. Flood Insurance Study (FIS) The FIS develops flood-risk data for various areas of a community that is used to establish flood insurance rates and to assist the community in its efforts to promote sound floodplain management. The current Fresno County FIS is dated January 20, 2016. This study covers both the unincorporated and incorporated areas of the County. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) The FIRM is designed for flood insurance and floodplain management applications. For flood insurance, the FIRM designates flood insurance rate zones to assign premium rates for flood insurance policies. For floodplain management, the FIRM delineates 100- and 500-year floodplains, floodways, and the locations of selected cross sections used in the hydraulic analysis and local floodplain regulation. The County FIRMs are in the process of being replaced by new digital flood insurance rate maps as part of FEMA’s Map Modernization program, which is discussed further below. Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) and Map Amendment (LOMA) LOMRs and LOMAs represent separate floodplain studies dealing with individual properties or limited stream segments that update the FIS and FIRM data between periodic FEMA publications of the FIS and FIRM. Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) As part of their Map Modernization program, FEMA is converting paper FIRMS to digital FIRMs (DFIRMS). These digital maps: • Incorporate the latest updates (LOMRs and LOMAs), • Utilize community supplied data, • Verify the currency of the floodplains and refit them to community supplied base maps, • Upgrade the FIRMs to a GIS database format to set the stage for future updates and to enable support for GIS analyses and other digital applications, and • Solicit community participation. Levee Mapping Also as part of FEMA’s Map Modernization program, FEMA is mapping levees within communities, with a primary focus on maps determined to provide a 100-year level of flood Fresno County 4.68 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan protection. Most of the levees are privately owned, maintained, and operated. Because of the ownership and lack of enforcement for maintenance, most of the levee systems do not meet the current standards for flood protection and are mapped as such. In August of 2005, FEMA Headquarters’ issued Memo 34 Interim Guidance for Studies Including Levees. This memo recognizes the risk and vulnerability of communities with levees. The memo mandates the inclusion of levee evaluations for those communities that are undergoing map changes such as the conversion to DFIRMs. No maps can become effective without an evaluation of all levees within a community against the criteria set forth in 44 CFR 65.10 Mapping of Areas Protected by Levee Systems. Generally, these levee certification requirements include evaluations of freeboard, geotechnical stability and seepage, bank erosion potential due to currents and waves, closure structures, operations and maintenance, and wind wet and wave run-up. In short, these guidelines require certification of levees before crediting any levee with providing protection from the 1 percent annual event (e.g., the 100-year flood). In Fresno County, similar to other locations in California, levees and flood control facilities have been built and are maintained variously by public and private entities, including water, irrigation and flood control districts, other state and local agencies, and private interests. To best address the issue of levees in the DFIRM process, FEMA provided guidance for the issuance of PAL (provisionally accredited levee) agreements that would allow for identified levees to be provisionally accredited for purposes of mapping while communities/levee owners compile and submit data and documentation necessary for full accreditation. Communities have two years from the date of FEMA’s initial coordination to submit to FEMA final accreditation data for all PALs. Levees for which such agreements were signed are shown on the final effective FIRM as providing protection from the flood that has a 1-percent-chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year and labeled as a PAL. Following receipt of final accreditation data, FEMA will revise the FIS and FIRM as warranted. FEMA-designated 100-year and 500-year floodplains in Fresno County that were updated under the Map Modernization Program and became effective on January 20, 2016. The State of California (DWR) completed levee flood protection zone (LFPZ) maps in December 2008 of areas that may be inundated if a project levee fails (from water surface elevations at the top of the levee, which may be from a storm event even larger than the levee’s design storm). The LFPZ map of the San Joaquin River shows a considerable area within Fresno County that may be inundated if the project levees fail. For more information, refer to the 2017 Fresno County General Plan (Draft) for a comprehensive series of inundation maps. A relatively broad levee flood protection zone (LFPZ) is identified along the San Joaquin River, with depths less than three feet indicated west of the river, but greater than three feet all along the east side of the river. Several areas protected by project levees in the east county would also have inundation areas that are primarily less than three feet, but include some deeper areas. Fresno County’s levee system can be seen in Figure 4.18 Fresno County 4.69 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.18 Fresno County Levee System Fresno County 4.70 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood Hazard Extent Fresno County is large and geographically diverse. Water resources in the Fresno County planning area include a number of rivers and streams, artificial waterways, and groundwater sources located throughout the County. The mountainous eastern portion of Fresno County, located primarily in the Sierra Nevada, contains many small mountain lakes and streams that are tributaries to the San Joaquin and Kings rivers, which flow into the Central Valley. The arid western portion of Fresno County is characterized by larger watersheds in the Coast Range that drain stormwater eastward into the valley and the Fresno Slough. Flash floods with depths of several feet can occur in the valleys of the Sierras, while large areas of relatively shallow inundation can occur in the Central Valley. During winter and spring months, river systems in Fresno County swell with heavy rainfall and snowmelt runoff. To prevent flooding, a wide variety of storm drainage and flood control measures are used throughout the County. These include flood control reservoirs, levee systems, and watershed treatments. In rural areas, the management of reservoir releases, canals, and levee systems reduces the likelihood of flooding and reroutes stormwater around urban areas. In developed areas, storm drainage systems composed of street gutters, inlets, underground storm drains, ponds, pumping stations, and open channels are used to collect and control stormwater runoff. The storm drainage and flood control systems are discussed further in the sections that follow. Figure 4.19 illustrates natural and manmade waterways in the County. Information on the County’s more notable waterways and associated flood control facilities extracted from the Fresno County General Plan Background Report (2017) is included below by region. Fresno County 4.71 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.19 Waterways in Fresno County Fresno County 4.72 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.20 illustrates the city’s mapped flood hazard areas. Flood hazard areas periodically change to reflect improved and updated mapping techniques as well as areas that may have been altered by flood mitigation projects, typically reflected in the development of Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMR) or Letters of Map Revision (LOMR). More detailed flood hazard maps are included later in this Chapter, in Section 4.3.2. Fresno County 4.73 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.20 Fresno County Flood Hazards Fresno County 4.74 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Levee Failure Extent The geographic extent of the levee hazard is shown in Figure 4.18 and explained further in the Vulnerability portion of this plan. Past Occurrences Fresno County has a long history of flooding, but according to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, little definitive data is available for specific floods, particularly on the smaller streams. Historical records indicate that nine significant flood events occurred in Fresno County between the 1840s and 1900. A series of river floods during the 1980s and 1990s prompted FEMA to drastically revise its estimate of the 100-year flood flows in the San Joaquin River channel and to develop a new FIRM for the area. Construction of major detention structures in the eastern part of the County along the Fresno County Stream Group enabled FIRMs to be revised in the early 1990s to show a reduced 100-year flood risk from the San Joaquin River to the metropolitan area. The HMPC provided information on more recent flood events, which are detailed below. • December 1955—A rain on snow event caused local and downstream flooding in eastern Fresno County, ultimately affecting the entire valley region. Homes were lost and roads and bridges were damaged or destroyed. Damage to some dam facilities also resulted. • 1995—Beginning in January and continuing through the end of March 1995, a series of strong storms caused flooding that resulted in multiple road closures, destroyed a bridge on Interstate 5, displaced 300 to 400 people, damaged crops, and caused the deaths of seven people. Most flooding occurred in the western portion of the County. A local, state, and federal disaster was declared for the County. Twenty homes were damaged; 150 acres submerged. Losses to public facilities were estimated at $5 million. Agricultural damage and crop losses exceeded $8.6 million. There was an estimated $9 million in economic and other damage to businesses. Additionally, Huntington Lake Road and Highway 168 were closed due to snowfall, Highway 180 was closed due to a rock slide, an Interstate 5 bridge over Arroyo Pasajero drainage was washed out (causing the seven deaths), 15 to 20 other County roads were closed at least temporarily, 20 to 40 water systems were unable to serve potable water for various periods of time, and an estimated 300 to 400 people were displaced by flooding (the American Red Cross shelter was open from March 11-18, providing shelter for 57 to 70 people). • 1997—A regionwide rain on snow event in high elevations caused local flooding and flooding downstream in the valley. Homes, bridges, roads, and other infrastructure near waterways were damaged. A bridge on Interstate 5 over the Kings River was washed out. Losses to infrastructure were estimated in the hundreds of millions. Other impacts included damage to fisheries and wildlife. • 1998 (El Niño rain event)—Starting February 1, 1998, and continuing until June of 1998, Fresno County experienced extreme amounts of rain, resulting in local, state, and federal emergency declarations. Thirty-three days within a 42-day period experienced significant rainfall. Flooding damaged buildings and crops in the area. Property damage included major Fresno County 4.75 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan damage to five buildings and minor damage to six buildings for a cost of $378,000 and $80,000 in damage to public facilities. There was an estimated loss of $17 million to the farming industry. The primary damage was to tree fruit and row crops. Estimated economic impacts to the community were $38-48 million. An estimated 15,000 to 20,000 agricultural workers were out of work or on limited work schedules. • April 28, 2005 (Parlier Flood)—A cell of severe weather passed over the City of Parlier dropping up to three inches of rain in 20 minutes. The drainage system could not handle the flow, and approximately 25 homes and businesses were flooded. The City of Parlier declared a local disaster, as did Fresno County. Damage was estimated at $700,000. Home owners had little or no insurance coverage. In addition, J Street was closed for one day. • 2005-2006—Above average rainfall occurred between December 19, 2005, and January 1, 2006. This resulted in flooding of low lying areas throughout the County. Flood control basins were overflowing in several areas, including the Cities of Fresno and Clovis. Property damage included damage to approximately 180 businesses and homes estimated at $1.4 million within the unincorporated County. Damage to other jurisdictions was estimated at $611,307. Damage to crops was minimal due to the time of year. Flooding further resulted in a number of road closures, which were one to two weeks in duration. • April 5, 2006—Above average rainfall and snowmelt created excessive run off into the San Joaquin and Kings river drainages on the west side of the County. Levees and river channels were in jeopardy of failing, but held. The DWR sent a flood fight team to coordinate the effort to shore up the system. Construction crews and hand crews were used to shore up the system, make sandbags, and repair leaks. Property and crop damage was minimal due to limited flooding. The most notable damage to cropland was to 200 acres affected by a levee break in the Tranquillity Irrigation District. There was, however, extensive damage to the levee system, canal system, and river channel. Local and state disasters were declared for the County based on the potential damage if the levees, canals, or river channel failed. Extensive work was done on the system during the event by locals and the DWR. • July 2006—Flash floods from thunderstorms in drainages above the north end of Huntington Lake resulted in a variety of damage. This included an estimated $250,000 in damage to private boats and an estimated $200,000 in damage to local infrastructure (roads, boat docks, etc.). Other impacts included loss of power for three weeks in some areas, closure of a primary summer road for one week, and closure of Huntington Lake to recreational use for one week. Cleanup costs exceeded $150,000, and search and rescue costs were estimated at $25,000. • October 29, 2007-- Newspapers and broadcast meteorologists reported a number of roadways flooded in Northwest Fresno. Numerous vehicles were stranded and water rescues occurred. Heavy rain caused a roof to collapse at an industrial plant on the northwest side of the city. Damages were estimated at 250,000 to the roof structure alone. Total property damage associated with the event amounted to over $500,000. • December 2007—Heavy rain and snow storms ravaged central California, including the San Juaquin Valley and Fresno metropolitan area. The combination of locally heavy rains and poor drainage areas within the urban and suburban land lead to over $175,000 in property damage between December 18th and 19th. Fresno County 4.76 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • December 29, 2010-- On the morning of the 29th, heavy rain across the San Joaquin Valley caused widespread urban and poor drainage flooding. Especially hard hit were the metro areas of Fresno, Visalia, and Bakersfield, and the adjacent foothills. Fresno had a record rainfall of 0.92 inch on the 28th, breaking the old record of 0.72 inch, set in 2004. The two-day total at Fresno-Yosemite International Airport was 1.54 inch, which pushed the December rainfall to 5.92 inches for the second wettest December on record for Fresno; the wettest December was in 1955, with 6.73 inches. It was also the coldest low of the year for Fresno, with temperatures dropping below 32 degrees. Property damaged amounted to $125,000. • November 30, 2011-- Fresno set record high minimum temperatures on the last day of the month, establishing the total record for the sixth warmest November. This was also the fourth consecutive month that Fresno ranked in the top 10 warmest months. Fresno had a record rainfall on November 30th of 0.62 inch; the old record was 0.50 inch. As a result of the heavy rainfall, some rock and mud slides occurred as the moisture weakened the soil. Law enforcement reported a rock and mud slide on Highway 168 about 15 miles northeast of Clovis, which closed the road for several hours while authorities cleaned up the debris. • February 7, 2017-- Atmospheric river system brought heavy rainfall, flooding, debris flows, and high elevation snowfall to the central California region. Damages were over $100,000 and the California Highway Patrol reported road closure due to a bridge collapse from heavy rainfall near Sugarloaf Road and Auberry Road just northeast of Meadow Lakes. Localized Flooding In addition to the major historical flood events described above, as previously described, the Fresno County planning area remains at risk to annual localized flooding. Levee Failure Past Occurrence February 18, 2017—Dry weather debilitated a levee located in the Fresno Slough, where the San Joaquin River and Kings River meet. The levee experienced several small breaks for a few days, posing a danger to nearly 80 homes in the vicinity, forcing hundreds of people to evacuate. Repairs and monitoring lead by Fresno County Public Works and Emergency Management stopped the levee breach. June 22, 2017—A 15-foot wide breach opened along the Kings River, leading to mandatory evacuations. The Kings River began to flood 25 miles north of Fresno. The levee failure occurred after a prolonged period of warmer-than-average temperatures led to a surge in snowmelt from the nearby Sierra Nevada Mountains. Likelihood of Future Occurrences 100-Year Flood Occasional—The 100-year flood is the flood that has a one percent chance in any given year of being equaled or exceeded. Fresno County 4.77 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan <100-Year Flood/Outside the 100-Year Floodplain Highly Likely—Based on historical data, flooding events less severe than a 100-year flood and those outside of the 100-year floodplain occur frequently during periods of heavy rains. Climate Change Considerations Heavy precipitation events that lead to flooding occur at the short-term time scales of weather, rather than the multi-year time scales of climate that most climate models examine. However, extreme events are, by their very nature, uncommon. Quantifying trends at a given location is quite difficult, and no trends in the historical record of extreme climate events have been definitively detected in Fresno County. Globally, precipitation extremes and their hydrological impacts (e.g., the magnitude of 100-year floods) are expected to get larger because in most places, higher temperatures will result in increased atmospheric water vapor available to form precipitation. The 100-year flood of today might become a more frequent event in the future (i.e., a 50-year event), meaning that current design levels and regulatory practices might be less adequate in the future. 4.2.7 Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Hazard/Problem Description Epidemics occur when an infectious disease spreads beyond a local population, lasting longer and reaching people in a wider geographical area. When that disease reaches global proportions, it is considered a pandemic. Several factors determine whether an outbreak will explode into an epidemic or pandemic: the ease with which a microbe moves from person-to-person and the behavior of individuals and societies. A pandemic flu occurs when a new influenza virus emerges for which people have little or no immunity, and for which there is no vaccine. This disease spreads easily person-to-person, causes serious illness, and can sweep across the country and around the world in a very short time. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been working closely with other countries and the World Health Organization to strengthen systems to detect outbreaks of influenza that might cause a pandemic and to assist with pandemic planning and preparation. Most recently, health professionals are concerned by the possibility of an avian (or bird) flu pandemics associated with H5N1 and H7N9 viruses. Since 2003, rare human H5N1 infections have been reported in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Infections with H7N9 virus were first reported in China in 2013, and since then China has experienced 4 epidemics. China is currently experiencing their fifth H7N9 epidemic, and as of August 2017, there have been a total of 1,557 human infections with H7N9. Human infections with either virus usually occur after extended exposure to ill birds, and infections result in severe disease and death. No human cases of avian H5N1 or H7N9 have been reported by the CDC in the United States, and the viruses have yet to be detected in U.S. poultry. There has been no sustained human-to-human transmission of avian Fresno County 4.78 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H5N1 or H7N9, but the concern is the viruses will evolve and become capable of human-to- human transmission. An especially severe influenza pandemic could lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic loss. Impacts could range from school and business closings to the interruption of basic services such as public transportation, health care, and the delivery of food and essential medicines. Extent An especially severe influenza pandemic could lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic loss. Impacts could range from school and business closings to the interruption of basic services such as public transportation, health care, and the delivery of food and essential medicines. Since the hazard can affect 50-100% of the planning area it was given an extensive geographic extent rating. Past Occurrences There were three acknowledged pandemics in the twentieth century and one has occurred in the twenty-first century: • 1918-19 Spanish flu (H1N1)—This flu is estimated to have sickened 20-40 percent of the world’s population. Over 20 million people lost their lives. Between September 1918 and April 1919, 500,000 Americans died. The flu spread rapidly; many died within a few days of infection, others from secondary complications. The attack rate and mortality was highest among adults 20-50 years old; the reasons for this are uncertain. By late September 1918, over 35,000 people throughout California had contracted influenza. According to state officials, influenza was most prevalent in the southern part of California, but the death toll was high across the state. • 1957-58 Asian flu (H2N2)—This virus was quickly identified due to advances in technology, and a vaccine was produced. Infection rates were highest among school children, young adults, and pregnant women. The elderly had the highest rates of death. A second wave developed in 1958. In total, there were about 70,000 deaths in the United States. Worldwide deaths were estimated between 1 and 2 million. • 1968-69 Hong Kong flu (H3N2)—This strain caused approximately 34,000 deaths in the United States and more than 700,000 deaths worldwide. It was first detected in Hong Kong in early 1968 and spread to the United States later that year. Those over age 65 were most likely to die. This virus returned in 1970 and 1972 and still circulates today. • 2009 H1N1 flu—This new H1N1 virus was first detected in the United States and has genes not previously identified in people or animals. From April 2009 – April 2010, the CDC estimates about 60.8 million cases, 274,304 hospitalizations and 12,469 deaths in the United States. About 151,700 to 575,400 people worldwide are estimated to have died from the flu, Fresno County 4.79 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and most deaths occurred in people under age 65. This is because younger people were less likely to have had prior exposure to a similar H1N1 virus, unlike older generations. The 21st century has seen four major global disease outbreaks, with Severe Acute Respiratory System (SARS) in 2003, H1N1 in 2009, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2012, and Ebola in 2014-2016. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—According to historical data, four influenza pandemics have occurred between 1918 and 2017. This averages out to a pandemic every 25 years or a 4.04 percent chance of a pandemic outbreak in any given year. Although scientists cannot predict when the next influenza or other type of pandemic will occur or how severe it will be, wherever and whenever it starts, everyone around the world will be at risk. Climate Change Considerations Research into the impacts of climate change indicates that the greatest impact would be increased spread of disease vectors, especially mosquitoes and other insects. Drawing definitive conclusions about public health risk changes associated with vector-borne illnesses as a result of climate change are complicated by the need to also account for any associated changes in human behavior that would accompany the associated impacts to seasonal and daily weather conditions. For example, increased temperatures could result in more time spent indoors during extreme heat days, which could potentially reduce exposure to disease carrying vectors. 4.2.8 Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus Hazard/Problem Description The impact to human health that wildlife, and more notably, insects, can have on an area can be substantial. Mosquitoes transmit the potentially deadly West Nile virus to livestock and humans alike. West Nile virus first struck the western hemisphere in Queens, New York, in 1999 and killed four people. Since then, the disease has spread across the United States. In 2003, West Nile virus activity occurred in 46 states and caused illness in over 9,800 people. According to the CDC, 2012 was the worst year for West Nile Virus nationally, with 286 fatalities in 48 states attributed to the disease. In assessing this hazard, the HMPC also discussed Zika virus, which is recently invasive, with the first reported cases in the U.S. occurring in Florida during the summer of 2016, and 5102 Zika cases reported across all 50 states by the end of 2016. Most humans infected by the West Nile virus have no symptoms. A small proportion develop mild symptoms that include fever, headache, body aches, skin rash, and swollen lymph glands. Less than 1 percent of those infected develop more severe illness such as meningitis or encephalitis, Fresno County 4.80 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan symptoms of which include headache, high fever, neck stiffness, stupor, disorientation, coma, tremors, convulsions, muscle weakness, and paralysis. Of the few people who develop encephalitis, fewer than 1 out of 1,000 infected die as a result. People over 50 and those with compromised immune systems are the most vulnerable to the virus. Those with Zika virus are highly unlikely to develop serious illness requiring a hospital visit, however Zika virus can cause severe brain defects in infants such as microcephaly along with other morbidity including: miscarriage, stillbirth, and other types of birth defects. There is no specific treatment for Zika or West Nile virus infection, nor a vaccine to prevent the viruses. Treatment of severe illness includes hospitalization, use of intravenous fluids and nutrition, respiratory support, prevention of secondary infections, and good nursing care. Medical care should be sought as soon as possible for persons who have symptoms suggesting severe illness. People over 50 years of age appear to be at high risk for the severe aspects of the disease. West Nile virus is a concern in the Fresno County planning area in part because of the agricultural nature of the County and the large areas of standing water created through farming operations. Excess standing water provides a breeding area for mosquitoes. Also contributing to the mosquito population in the County are the beaver dams and ponds, which are large pools of standing water. Zika virus is of minimal concern to the County given that there is no record of Zika virus being transmitted in or near Fresno County. Within the Fresno County planning area, several mosquito abatement and control districts operate to prevent the spread of the virus through focused efforts on reducing the mosquito population and educating the public. Several types of preventive methods lower mosquito populations to levels that reduce chances for the spread of disease. The County also has an active surveillance program and maintains records for all identified cases of the virus. Extent An especially severe mosquito-borne illness outbreak could lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic loss. Impacts could range from school and business closings to the interruption of basic services such as public transportation, health care, and the delivery of food and essential medicines. Since the hazard can affect 50-100% of the planning area it was given an extensive geographic extent rating. Past Occurrences The virus first appeared in California in 2002 with the identification of one human case. In 2003, three human cases occurred in California, and the virus was detected in six southern California counties. By 2004, the virus was in all 58 counties in California; 830 human infections were identified. According to the California West Nile Virus Surveillance Information Center sponsored by the California Department of Health Services, 28 California residents died from the virus in 2004. Most of these deaths were in Southern California. Fresno County 4.81 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In 2014, 40 of the 58 California counties reported some West Nile virus activity and 801 human cases were reported, which included 31 deaths from 12 counties (no deaths occurred in Fresno County). In 2015, the number of human cases in California was 782, including 53 deaths from 10 counties (no deaths occurred in Fresno County). In 2016, there were 442 human cases in California, including 19 deaths (no deaths occurred in Fresno County). Table 4.14 summarizes reported West Nile virus cases in Fresno County for the years 2004 through 2017. While West Nile numbers in Fresno County (especially human infections) spiked in 2014, they have since settled back into recorded norms. Table 4.14 Summary of West Nile Virus in California and Fresno County, 2004-2017* Year Humans Birds Mosquitoes Horses Sentinel Flock CA Fresno County CA Fresno County CA Fresno County CA Fresno County CA Fresno County 2004 830 15 3,232 116 1,136 14 540 21 805 25 2005 935 68 3,046 97 1,242 71 456 33 1,053 85 2006 278 11 1,446 2 832 40 58 5 640 37 2007* 380 17 1,395 114 1,007 61 28 1 510 46 2008 445 3 2569 44 2,003 53 585 24 2009 112 13 515 62 1,063 132 443 17 2010 111 23 416 22 1,305 130 281 7 2011 158 9 688 15 2,087 123 391 0 2012 479 24 1,644 25 2,849 147 540 0 2013 379 7 1,251 12 2,528 66 485 0 2014 801 43 2,442 9 3,340 138 443 0 2015 782 8 1,349 3 3,329 108 449 0 2016 442 14 1,352 6 3,528 185 343 0 2017* 87 1 264 3 2,545 136 155 0 Source: California West Nile Virus Web Site, www.westnile.ca.gov/ *As of September 1, 2017 West Nile virus activity in California (and Fresno County) for 2017 is illustrated in Figure 4.21. Fresno County 4.82 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.21 West Nile Virus Activity in California Counties, 2017 Source: California Department of Public Health, www.westnile.ca.gov/ Fresno County 4.83 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan From 2015-2017 (as of August 25, 2017), 36 California counties reported 588 travel associated Zika virus cases and of these: 8 were due to sexual transmission, 147 were in pregnant women, and 8 infant cases had birth defects. During this time frame, Fresno County has contributed 8 travel associated cases to the California total. So far in California, Zika virus infections have only occurred in people who were infected during travel, during sexual intercourse with an infected person, or through maternal fetal-transmission. No local virus transmission by mosquitos has been reported in California. The risk of local virus transmission in California and Fresno County is illustrated in Figure 4.22. Figure 4.22 Zika Virus Transmission Risk in California Counties, 2017 Source: California Department of Public Health, https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/Zika.aspx Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—Based on historical data, the Fresno County planning area has experienced 255 human cases of West Nile virus between its discovery in California in 2003, and the end of 2016. This is an average of 20 cases per year. The agricultural nature of much of the planning area Fresno County 4.84 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan combined with the great potential for standing water to be present throughout the County puts the planning area at future risk of West Nile virus. Likelihood of Zika virus transmission is very low due to a number of factors, including mosquito abundance, number of travel associated cases, population, and distance from the U.S.-Mexico border. Taking these factors into consideration, CDPH concludes that current conditions in Fresno County present a very low risk for local transmission. As a result, vulnerability to Zika virus is not considered further. Climate Change Considerations Milder weather in the current “cold” seasons and warmer weather in the summer could make the county a more suitable habitat for new mosquito species, increasing the potential for additional cases of some mosquito-borne diseases that are already established in the county. At the same time, increases in the precipitation associated with extreme events could increase the habitat suitable for supporting mosquitoes. Drawing definitive conclusions about public health risk changes associated with vector-borne illnesses as a result of climate change are complicated by the need to also account for any associated changes in human behavior that would accompany the associated impacts to seasonal and daily weather conditions. For example, increased temperatures could result in more time spent indoors during extreme heat days, which could potentially reduce exposure to disease carrying vectors. 4.2.9 Landslide Hazard/Problem Description Landslides refer to a wide variety of processes that result in the perceptible downward and outward movement of soil, rock, and vegetation under gravitational influence. Common names for landslide types include slump, rockslide, debris slide, lateral spreading, debris avalanche, earth flow, and soil creep. Landslides may be triggered by both natural and human-induced changes in the environment that result in slope instability. The susceptibility of an area to landslides depends on many variables, including steepness of slope, type of slope material, structure and physical properties of materials, water content, amount of vegetation, and proximity to areas undergoing rapid erosion or changes caused by human activities. These activities include mining, construction, and changes to surface drainage areas. Landslides often accompany other natural hazard events, such as floods, wildfires, or earthquakes. Landslides can occur slowly or very suddenly and can damage and destroy structures, roads, utilities, and forested areas and cause injuries and death. Fresno County 4.85 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extent The Fresno County General Plan Background Report describes areas in Fresno County that are particularly prone to landslides. Landslide hazard areas include foothill and mountain areas where fractured and steep slopes are present (i.e., the Sierra Nevada), areas where less consolidated or weathered soils overlie bedrock (e.g., the Coast Range), and areas where inadequate ground cover accelerates erosion (e.g., along the San Joaquin River). According to the background report, areas where steep slopes are present are not generally heavily populated and most are located in federal or state lands. The report further identified State Route 168 in eastern Fresno County and State Route 198 in western Fresno County as areas that could be affected by landslides caused by earthquakes or heavy rains. It also concludes that there is no risk of large landslides in the valley area of the County due to its relatively flat topography. However, there is the potential for small slides and slumping along the steep banks of rivers and creeks. Figure 4.23 is a landslide hazard map from the background report. Figure 4.24 was developed for the State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. It indicates that the central and eastern portions of Fresno County are at low risk for landslides and the far west side of the County along the Coast Range is at moderate risk for landslides. Fresno County 4.86 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.23 Landslide Hazards and Areas of Subsidence in Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.87 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.24 California’s Landslide Risk Zones Source: State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, www.hazardmitigation.oes.ca.gov/ Red oval indicates Fresno County Past Occurrences There have been no disaster declarations associated with landslides in Fresno County. Notable landslides of record include the following: Fresno County 4.88 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • 1995—Following a large storm event, a fairly large landslide occurred on Los Gatos Road, a significant local access road west of Coalinga. State geologists determined that catastrophic failure was unlikely, but long-term road maintenance could be compromised due to undercutting of the slope by the creek below the road. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—Based on data provided by the HMPC, minor landslides have occurred in the past, probably over the last several hundred years, as evidenced both by past deposits exposed in erosion gullies and recent landslide events. With significant rainfall, additional failures are likely within the identified landslide hazard areas. Given the nature of localized problems identified within the County, minor landslides will likely continue to impact the area when heavy precipitation occurs, as they have in the past. Climate Change Considerations Climate change projections for more intense precipitation events has the potential to increase landslide incidence. 4.2.10 Soil Hazards: Erosion Hazard/Problem Description Erosion is the general process whereby rocks and soils are broken down, removed by weathering, or fragmented and then deposited in other places by water or air. The rate of erosion depends on many variables, including the soil or rock texture and composition, soil permeability, slope, extent of vegetative cover, and precipitation amounts and patterns. Erosion increases with increasing slope and precipitation and with decreasing vegetative cover, which includes areas where protective vegetation has been removed by fire, construction, or cultivation. Significant erosion can cause degradation and loss of agricultural land, degradation of streams and other water habitats, and rapid silting of reservoirs. Extent The Fresno County General Plan Background Report identifies those areas with moderately high to high erosion potential. These include areas of certain soil types in the Sierra Nevada and the foothills that generally coincide with slopes that exceed 30 percent (see Figure 4.25 and Figure 4.26). However, many of these identified areas are located within the boundaries of the Sierra National Forest, Sequoia National Forest, or Kings Canyon National Park, which limits their availability for intensive development. Fresno County 4.89 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.25 Steep Slope Areas in Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.90 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.26 Erosion Hazards in Eastern Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.91 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Erosion within the valley area is generally not problematic, with the exception of areas containing Rossi soil east of the Fresno Slough from approximately Mendota to Fish Slough near Helm. Severe erosion potential has also been identified along the San Joaquin River Bluff. Also, along the main bypass floodway of the Fresno Slough, widely spaced gullies in a trellis pattern have eroded the soils where subsiding floodwaters drain back into the deeper main flood channel. In western Fresno County, most soils associated with the Kettleman series appear to be subject to moderate to severe sheet and gully erosion potential. These include areas located primarily west of Interstate 5 in the Coast Range foothills. Also in the western portion of the County, Panoche and Panhill soils, which under natural conditions do not exhibit erosion potential, are susceptible to erosion as a result of human activity. These soils are located extensively throughout the western part of the County and are prevalent in areas on recent alluvial fans in the central part of the region (see Figure 4.27). Fresno County 4.92 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.27 Erosion Hazards in Western Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.93 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan One of the main concerns associated with erosion is related to wildfire; as a fire burns it destroys plant material. Plants such as shrubs, grasses, and trees provide roots that stabilize the soil. Fires destroy the soil protection, leading to increased vulnerability to erosion, in addition to increased risk of flood hazard. The amount of erosion after a burn is determined by the severity of the burn, the slope, soil type and condition of the watershed before the burn. Using information provided by Cal Fire, Figure 4.28 outlines the post fire erosion threat for Fresno County. Fresno County 4.94 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.28 Fresno County Post Fire Erosion Threat Fresno County 4.95 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences According to the HMPC and the County geologist, there have been no significant erosion events within the County. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Likely—Based on input from the HMPC, erosion does occur in the planning area. Given the nature of erosion problems identified within the County, erosion will continue to be an issue. Climate Change Considerations Global warming is expected to lead to a more vigorous hydrological cycle, including more total rainfall and more frequent high intensity rainfall events. Rainfall amounts and intensities increased on average in the United States during the 20th century, and according to climate change models they are expected to continue to increase during the 21st century. These rainfall changes, along with expected changes in temperature, solar radiation, and atmospheric C02 concentrations, will have significant impacts on soil erosion rates. The processes involved in the impact of climate change on soil erosion by water are complex, involving changes in rainfall amounts and intensities, number of days of precipitation, ratio of rain to snow, plant biomass production, plant residue decomposition rates, soil microbial activity, evapo-transpiration rates, and shifts in land use necessary to accommodate a new climatic regime. 4.2.11 Soil Hazards: Expansive Soils Hazard/Problem Description Expansive (swelling) soils or soft bedrock are those that increase in volume as they get wet and shrink as they dry. They are known as shrink-swell, bentonite, expansive, or montmorillinitic soils. Swelling soils contain high percentages of certain kinds of clay particles that are capable of absorbing large quantities of water, expanding up to 10 percent or more as the clay becomes wet. The force of expansion is capable of exerting pressures of 20,000 pounds per square foot or greater on foundations, slabs, and other confining structures. Soils composed only of sand and gravel have no potential for volume changes. Soils are generally classified into three expansive soils classes with low, moderate, and high potential for volume changes: • Low—This soils class includes sands and silts with relatively low amounts of clay minerals. Sandy clays may also have low expansion potential, if the clay is kaolinite. Kaolinite is a common clay mineral. • Moderate—This class includes silty clay and clay textured soils, if the clay is kaolinite, and includes heavy silts, light sandy clays, and silty clays with mixed clay minerals. • High—This class includes clays and clay with mixed montmorillonite, a clay mineral which expands and contracts more than kaolinite. Fresno County 4.96 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Damage can include severe structural damage, cracked driveways and sidewalks, heaving of roads and highway structures, and disruption of pipelines and other utilities. Destructive forces may be upward, horizontal, or both. Building in and on swelling soils can be done successfully, although more expensively, as long as appropriate construction design and mitigation measures are followed. Extent According to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, expansive soils within Fresno County generally occur in a northwest-trending belt approximately parallel to the Friant-Kern Canal foothills in Kings Canyon National Park in the Sierra Nevada, along the Fresno Slough from Madera County to Kings County, and roughly parallel to the San Luis Drain west of Tranquility and San Joaquin. Figure 4.29 from the Fresno County General Plan Background Report illustrates the areas most susceptible to expansive soils. Fresno County 4.97 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.29 Expansive Soils in Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.98 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences Expansive soils are present in the County. However, due to the ability to successfully mitigate the hazard by adhering to sound design and construction practices, the HMPC was unable to find examples of historical expansive soil problems in the planning area. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—Based on the soil types found in Fresno County, the potential exists for expansive soils to be a future issue in the Fresno County planning area. Climate Change Considerations There is potential for more severe wet and dry cycles in future climate, which may have an effect on the frequency and intensity of expansive soils in Fresno County. 4.2.12 Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence Hazard/Problem Description Land subsidence is defined as the vertical sinking of the land over manmade or natural underground voids. Subsidence, usually as a direct result of groundwater withdrawal or oil and gas withdrawal is common in several areas of California, including parts of the Central Valley. Weight, including surface developments such as roads, reservoirs, and buildings, and manmade vibrations from such activities as blasting and heavy truck or train traffic can accelerate the natural processes of subsidence. According to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, some areas of the Central Valley have subsided more than 20 feet during the past 50 years. Subsidence can result in serious structural damage to buildings, roads, irrigation ditches, canals, streams, underground utilities, and pipelines. It can disrupt and alter the flow of surface or underground water. Improper use of land subject to subsidence can result in excessive economic losses: direct economic losses as well as indirect losses (e.g., increased taxes and decreased property values). Extent According to the background report, in some areas along the valley trough and in parts of western Fresno County, groundwater pumping has caused subsidence of the land surface. Historically, this has occurred in areas where the groundwater basin has been subject to overdraft and long-term recharge is inadequate to maintain the water table elevation, leaving underground voids. There are two main subsidence bowls covering hundreds of square miles that grew wider and deeper between spring 2015 and fall 2016. The geographic extent and magnitude of subsidence in the san Joaquin Valley is displayed below in Figure 4.30. Fresno County 4.99 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.30 Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley, May 7, 2015 – September 10, 2016 Source: NASA, ESA’s Sentinel-1A and processed at JPL * Approximate Fresno County planning area denoted by white square Geospatial analysis indicates that subsidence risk is concentrated in the western portion of the County. While subsidence rates fall in the -4 to -1-inch range in the east, NASA’s survey technology shows subsidence reaching up to -16 inches in some pockets along the San Joaquin Valley corridor. Effected jurisdictions include Firebaugh, Mendota, Coalinga, and Huron. Fresno County 4.100 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Additionally, a significant area of concern is the Eastside Bypass, a system designed to carry flood flow off the San Joaquin River. Subsidence also intensified at a third area, near Tranquility, where the land surface has settled up to 20 inches in an area that extends seven miles. Specific areas where subsidence has been a problem include the Westlands Water District and the Pleasant Valley Water District. The increased subsidence rates have the potential to damage levees, bridges, and roads. Over time, subsidence can permanently reduce the underground aquifer’s water storage capacity. Past Occurrences Subsidence caused by groundwater pumping in the Central Valley has been a problem for decades. Long-term subsidence already has destroyed thousands of public and private groundwater well casings in the San Joaquin Valley. NASA has been using radar satellite maps to document rates of subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley since 2014. The NASA analysis evaluated the Eastside Bypass system and found that the land surface had fallen between 16 inches and 20 inches since May 2015 – on top of several feet of subsidence measured between 2008 and 2012. Though recent technology and resources has brought this problem to light, the San Joaquin Valley subsidence due to groundwater extraction was observed as early as the 1920s. Extensive monitoring and research related to subsidence in the Valley was carried out in the 1950s through the 1970s because of concerns about subsidence-related damage to the state and federal water projects. Figure 4.31 below documents 50-years of estimated subsidence rates in the San Joaquin Valley. Similar to estimates in Figure 4.31, the eastern portion of the County has historically seen the most subsidence, potentially reaching up to 30-feet in the north-east. Fresno County 4.101 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.31 Estimated Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley, 1949 – 2005 Source: USGS * Fresno County planning area denoted by black square Fresno County 4.102 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In 1963, DWR initiated construction of the State Water Project’s 444-mile-long California Aqueduct. Subsidence mitigation was integrated into the project design; however, subsidence has required repairs such as the raising of canal linings, bridges, and water control structures on the Aqueduct and on the Central Valley Project’s Delta-Mendota and Friant-Kern canals. In recent years, a five-mile reach of the Eastside Bypass was raised in 2000 because of subsidence, and DWR estimates that it may cost in the range of $250 million to acquire flowage easements and levee improvements to restore the design capacity of the subsided area. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—Land subsidence has been a constant issue effecting Fresno County for decades. This hazard is ongoing and is certain to continue in the future. However, legislation passed in 2014 requires local governments to regulate pumping and recharge to better manage groundwater supplies. Groundwater-dependent regions are required to halt overdraft and bring basins into sustainable levels of pumping and recharge by the early 2040s. Though occurrence may be inevitable, the magnitude of subsidence rates is dependent on the mitigation actions and pumping regulations initiated by Fresno County. Excess groundwater pumping is more likely to occur during times of drought. Climate Change Considerations The most likely impact that climate change will have on land subsidence risk is the potential for extended and severe drought, which could likely result in more groundwater pumping and human- induced subsidence. During periods of drought, water levels may be drawn too low, which results in an irreversible compaction of aquitards. The water cannot recharge the layers, causing permanent subsidence and diminishment of groundwater storage capacity 4.2.13 Severe Weather: General Severe weather is generally any destructive weather event, but usually occurs in the Fresno County planning area as localized thunderstorms that bring heavy rain, hail, lightning, and strong winds. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) has been tracking severe weather since 1950. Their Storm Events Database contains data on the following: all weather events from 1993 to 2017 (except from 6/1993-7/1993); and additional data from the Storm Prediction Center, which includes tornadoes (1950-1992), thunderstorm winds (1955-1992), and hail (1955-1992). This database contains 6,024 severe weather events that occurred in Fresno County between January 1, 1950, and September 30, 2017. The table below summarizes these events. Fresno County 4.103 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.15 NCEI Hazard Event Reports for Fresno County, 1950-2017* Type # of Events Property Loss ($) Crop Loss ($) Deaths Injuries Dense Fog* 1,135 21,350,000 0 24 72 Flash Floods 17 65,000 0 0 0 Floods 323 582,061,000 124,190,000 8 8 Funnel Clouds 36 0 0 0 0 Hail 69 1,020,000 100,500 0 4 Heavy Rain 127 2,079,000 65,690,000 0 0 High Winds** 30 2,470,000 30,000 1 0 Lightning 34 1,768,000 300,000 0 3 Severe Thunderstorms/Wind 57 3,586,500 43,035,000 2 15 Tornado** 26 5,440,050 26,000 0 3 Wildfires* 645 1,847,706,500 119,918,000 32 0 Totals 2,499 2,467,546,050 353,289,500 67 105 Source: National Center for Environmental Information Storm Events Database, www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ *Hazards with wide extents have losses which reflect larger zones that extend beyond Fresno County **Source is NOAA Storm Events Database GIS data The HMPC supplemented NCEI data with data from SHELDUS (Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States) when the plan was originally developed. SHELDUS is a county-level data set for the United States that tracks 18 types of natural hazard events along with associated property and crop losses, injuries, and fatalities for the period 1960-2005. Produced by the Hazards Research Lab at the University of South Carolina, this database combines information from several sources (including the NCEI). From 1960 to 1995, only those events that generated more than $50,000 in damage were included in SHELDUS. For events that covered multiple counties, the dollar losses, deaths, and injuries were equally divided among the affected counties (e.g., if four counties were affected, then a quarter of the dollar losses, injuries, and deaths were attributed to each county). From 1995 to 2005, all events that were reported by the NCEI with a specific dollar amount are included in SHELDUS. SHELDUS became a fee-for service database circa 2013, thus was NCEI data was used as the primary source for the update of this plan SHELDUS contains information on 201 severe weather events that occurred in Fresno County between 1960 and 2005. Table 4.16 summarizes these events. Table 4.16 SHELDUS Hazard Event Reports for Fresno County, 1960-2005* Type # of Events Property Loss ($) Crop Loss ($) Deaths Injuries Drought 1 86,207 8,620,690 .05 0 Earthquake 1 50,000 0 2 32 Flooding 13 33,296,405 189,605,958 23.38 226.14 Flooding, Severe Storm, Thunderstorm 2 66,250 13,000,000 0 0 Flooding, Wind 1 0 11,241,379 0 0 Flooding, Wind, Winter Weather 1 0 21,000,000 0 0 Fresno County 4.104 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Type # of Events Property Loss ($) Crop Loss ($) Deaths Injuries Flooding, Winter Weather 2 96,166,667 5,000,000 0.5 0 Fog 16 1,102,500 0 6.17 98.86 Hail 17 2,437,084 86,454,282 0.78 5.17 Hail, Severe Storm/ Thunderstorm 1 50,000 0 0 0 Hail, Wind 1 5,000 0 0 0 Heat 4 1,316 7,700,000 0.18 0 Landslide 2 0 22,100,000 0 0 Lightning 8 169,404 28,676 1.06 1.33 Lightning, Wind, Winter Weather 1 20,000 0 0 0 Severe Storm, Thunderstorm 23 6,883,517 2,492,779 2.48 2.32 Severe Storm, Thunderstorm, Wind 21 1,103,636 58,892,468 0.02 20.1 Severe Storm, Thunderstorm, Winter Weather 1 5,000 0 0 0 Tornado 9 2,536,086 20,862 0.2 0 Wildfire 9 1,531,730 438 0.16 0.34 Wind 41 38,736,053 188,412 1.91 27.82 Winter Weather 26 73,000 26,311,400 0 3.86 Totals 201 184,372,355 452,767,760 32.89 328.08 Source: SHELDUS, Hazards Research Lab, University of South Carolina, www.sheldus.org/ *Events may have occurred over multiple counties, so damage may represent only a fraction of the total event damage and may not be specific to Fresno County The NCEI and SHELDUS tables above summarize severe weather events that occurred in Fresno County. Only a few of the events actually resulted in state and federal disaster declarations. It is further interesting to note that different data sources capture different events during the same time period, and often different information specific to the same events. While the HMPC recognizes these inconsistencies, they see the value this data provides in depicting the County’s “big picture” hazard environment. As previously mentioned, all of Fresno County’s state and federal disaster declarations have been a result of severe weather. For this plan, severe weather is broken down as follows: • Extreme Temperatures (Extreme Cold/Freeze and Extreme Heat) • Fog • Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning/Wind • Winter Storm • Tornado Due to size of the County and changes in elevation and climate, weather conditions can vary greatly across the County. The profiles that follow provide information, where possible, from three Fresno County 4.105 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan weather stations in different parts of the County: Huntington Lake (elevation: 7,000 feet) in east Fresno County, Fresno WSO AP (elevation: 33 feet) in central Fresno County, and Coalinga (elevation: 66 feet), in west Fresno County. 4.2.14 Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures Hazard/Problem Description Extreme temperature events, both cold and hot, can have severe impacts on human health and mortality, natural ecosystems, and agriculture and other economic sectors. Extreme Cold/Freeze Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm or is left in its wake. Prolonged exposure to cold can cause frostbite or hypothermia and can be life-threatening. Infants and the elderly are most susceptible. Pipes may freeze and burst in homes or buildings that are poorly insulated or without heat. Freezing temperatures can cause significant damage to the agricultural industry. The effects of freezing temperatures on agriculture in Fresno County are discussed further in Section 4.2.1 Agricultural Hazards. In 2001, the National Weather Service implemented an updated Wind Chill Temperature index (see Figure 4.32). This index was developed to describe the relative discomfort/danger resulting from the combination of wind and temperature. Wind chill is based on the rate of heat loss from exposed skin caused by wind and cold. As the wind increases, it draws heat from the body, driving down skin temperature and eventually the internal body temperature. Figure 4.32 National Weather Service Wind Chill Chart Source: National Weather Service Forecast Office, San Joaquin Valley/Hanford, California, www.wrh.noaa.gov/hnx/ Fresno County 4.106 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extreme Heat According to information provided by FEMA, extreme heat is defined as temperatures that hover 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature for the region and last for several weeks. Heat kills by taxing the human body beyond its abilities. In a normal year, about 175 Americans succumb to the demands of summer heat. According to the NWS, among natural hazards, only the cold of winter—not lightning, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or earthquakes—takes a greater toll. In the 40-year period from 1936 through 1975, nearly 20,000 people were killed in the United States by the effects of heat and solar radiation. In the heat wave of 1980, more than 1,250 people died. Extreme heat can also affect the agricultural industry. Extreme heat, as it affects agriculture in Fresno County, is discussed further in the section on agricultural hazards. Heat disorders generally have to do with a reduction or collapse of the body’s ability to shed heat by circulatory changes and sweating or a chemical (salt) imbalance caused by too much sweating. When heat gain exceeds the level the body can remove, or when the body cannot compensate for fluids and salt lost through perspiration, the temperature of the body’s inner core begins to rise, and heat-related illness may develop. The elderly, small children, chronic invalids, those on certain medications or drugs, and people with weight and alcohol problems are particularly susceptible to heat reactions. Extent The NWS has in place a system to initiate alert procedures (advisories, watches, and warnings) when high temperatures are expected to have a significant impact on public safety. The expected severity of the heat determines which type of alert is issued. A common guideline for the issuance of excessive heat alerts in Fresno County is when the maximum daytime high is expected to equal or exceed 110°F and a nighttime minimum high of 80°F or above is expected for two or more consecutive days. Fresno County begins to experience hot weather in May or June of each year, and the heat continues throughout the summer months. The Fresno County Heat Emergency Contingency Plan provides a two-phase approach to mitigate and reduce the effects of extreme heat. Phase I calls for a heat awareness campaign to be initiated at the beginning of the heat season. Phase II calls for an operational area response to a heat emergency. The County Health Officer may determine that a Heat Emergency exists based on the threat to public health and safety. This may include: • Excessive Heat Warning or Heat Wave issued by the NWS. • Heat-related illnesses and deaths are above average. • Abnormal amounts of heat related deaths occur in local animal populations. • Successive days when daytime temperature exceeds normal ranges and the nighttime heat index does not drop below 80 degrees. • The California Independent System Operator (CALISO) issues a Stage 3 Electrical Emergency. • High heat is accompanied by electrical blackouts or rotating power outages. Fresno County 4.107 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Two or more jurisdictions within the County “declare” heat emergencies. • The state “declares” a heat emergency. Overall, extreme temperature impacts would likely be limited in the planning area, with 10 to 25 percent of the planning area affected. Extreme cold can occasionally cause problems with communications facilities and utility transmission lines. Danger to people is highest when they are unable to heat their homes and when water pipes freeze. Extreme cold and extreme heat can also impact livestock and even crops if the event occurs during certain times of the year. Past Occurrences Information from the three representative weather stations introduced in Section 4.2.13 Severe Weather: General is summarized below and in Figure 4.33 through Figure 4.35 Fresno County—East (Huntington Lake Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2007) In the eastern portion of Fresno County, monthly average maximum temperatures in the warmest months (May through October) range from the mid-50s to the mid-70s. Monthly average minimum temperatures from November through April range from the low to high 20s. The highest recorded daily extreme was 88°F on September 3, 1955, August 7, 1981, and July 18, 1988. The lowest recorded daily extreme was -10°F on February 13, 1949, and January 27, 1957. In a typical year, maximum temperatures do not exceed 90°F and may be less than 32°F on 16.2 days, and minimum temperatures fall below 32°F on 169.3 days and below 0°F on .8 days. Fresno County 4.108 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.33 Fresno County—East Daily Temperature Averages and Extremes Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County—Central (Fresno WSO AP Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2007) In the central portion of Fresno County, monthly average maximum temperatures in the warmest months (May through October) range from the high 70s to the high 90s. Monthly average minimum temperatures from November through April range from the high 30s to the high 40s. The highest recorded daily extreme was 113°F on July 23, 2006. The lowest recorded daily extreme was 18°F on January 10, 1949, and December 23, 1990. In a typical year, maximum temperatures exceed 90°F on 106.3 days and are less than 32°F on 21.3 days, and minimum temperatures fall below 32°F on 169.4 days. Fresno County 4.109 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.34 Fresno County—Central Daily Temperature Averages and Extremes Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County—West (Coalinga Weather Station, Period of Record 1942 to 2007) In the western portion of Fresno County, monthly average maximum temperatures in the warmest months (May through October) range from the low 80s to the high 90s. Monthly average minimum temperatures from November through April range from the mid-30s to the high 40s. The highest recorded daily extreme was 114°F on July 4, 1991. The lowest recorded daily extreme was 11°F on December 22, 1990. In a typical year, maximum temperatures exceed 90°F on 115.5 days and do not fall below 32°F, and minimum temperatures fall below 32°F on 32.8 days. Fresno County 4.110 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.35 Fresno County—West Daily Temperature Averages and Extremes Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ The HMPC identified the following events related to extreme temperatures in the Fresno County planning area: Events of Note Extreme Cold/Freeze • 1990—This freeze event is on record as the most economically devastating freeze event to date due to the loss of production citrus trees, not just the loss of the fruit crop. • December 20-28, 1998—Extreme low temperatures adversely affected agricultural crops in the County. Citrus crops were impacted the most, but winter vegetables were also damaged. Total crop damage was estimated at $74 million. The loss to crops also resulted in unemployment and loss of income to small towns and industry throughout the planning area. An estimated 14,000 or more agricultural workers were out of work. Estimated economic impacts to the community were $220 million. This freeze resulted in local, state, and federal declarations (2/9/99). The County also incurred $223,700 in damage to government facilities and roads. Statewide, $2.5 million was paid out in claims. • January 2007—Freezing temperatures destroyed citrus crops and put a large number of people out of work. Within the agricultural citrus belts, temperatures ranged from 19-24°F during the morning. Damage to County facilities was estimated at $15,000. Crop damage was estimated at roughly $128 million. Residual effects from loss of sales and resulting unemployment were considered to be three times the cost of the crop damage ($383 million). Local, state, and Fresno County 4.111 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan federal disasters were declared. The state provided monies for mortgage and rental assistance. Federal and state donations to local food banks were increased. Unemployment insurance benefits were also increased. Central and South Valley estimated combined property damage was $250,000, and agricultural damage was $710 million. Extreme Heat • July 16-22, 2006—The planning area experienced six days of triple digit temperatures. The state declared a heat emergency for Fresno County. Cooling centers were opened by the state and some local jurisdictions. 24 people died between July 14 and August 1. 16,500-25,000 dairy cattle died in the Central Valley, and up to 700,000 poultry died. Milk production was down 30 percent, with dairy losses estimated to exceed $80 million. Residual effects from loss of sales and resulting unemployment were considered to be three times the cost to the livestock industry. A local declaration was also declared to dispose of dead livestock at the County landfill. Federal/state disaster relief included $16 million for lost milk production. Federal loans were made available to farmers. • July 2007—Extreme, prolonged heat caused a mass die-off of farm animals such as dairy cattle and poultry. An estimated 50,000 turkeys, weighing up to 40 pounds each, died, which created a disposal issue. Zacky Farms was hit hardest, but other losses were incurred at various locations throughout the County. A local emergency was declared to legally dispose of these animals at the local landfill. • July 2008—An extreme heat event developed on July 8 across Interior Central CA as a strong ridge of high pressure setup across the region. This weather pattern promoted progressively increasing temperatures for several days with excessive heat warning criteria met in some locations beginning the night of July 8, and continuing in most locations through July 11. Maximum temperatures on the 9th and 10th were generally between 105-112 degrees. Unusually humid conditions resulted in heat index values of 110 degrees or higher in many locations. Nighttime relief was very limited, especially in cities, where minimum heat index values failed to drop below 80 degrees. In addition, very poor air quality occurred coincident with the heat event due to wildfires across CA. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, in cooperation with NWS Hanford, issued several Air Quality Alerts, Health Advisories, and other air quality statements, in response to the poor air quality. NWS Hanford has a well-developed agreement to assist the Air District with air quality information dissemination. Temperature records have been broken at several locations. The low temperature at Bakersfield on July 10th was 86 degrees. This breaks the record highest minimum temperature at Bakersfield for the date of 82 degrees, set in 2002. The low temperature at Fresno on July 10th was 82 degrees. This breaks the record for the highest minimum temperature at Fresno for the date of 80 degrees, set in 1896. The low temperature at Bakersfield on July 9th was 84 degrees. This was 7 degrees warmer than the record high minimum temperature at Bakersfield for the date of 77 degrees, set in 1975. The low temperature at Fresno on July 9th was 81 degrees. Fresno County 4.112 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This was 2 degrees warmer than the record high minimum temperature at Fresno for the date of 79 degrees, set in 1896. Two fatalities occurred during this extreme heat event. Both fatalities were in Kern County near Maricopa. The victims were both farm workers working during the heat event. The first fatality occurred of a 42-year-old male vineyard worker in Kern County. He was found in his truck along a highway and vineyard. The second fatality was a man of unknown age, also working in the vineyard near Maricopa. The combination of very hot weather of very poor air quality created a situation very dangerous for those individuals sensitive to poor conditions, such as the elderly, young, and those with chronic health problems. Kings County Government reported extensive poultry losses on July 10, dollar estimates were unavailable. An estimated 150 tons of dead poultry came into a local rendering plant. Kings County declared a local state of emergency. • August 2011—Strong high pressure developed over southeast California during late August, and led to excessive heat across Joshua Tree National Park beginning on Monday August 22nd. High temperatures across the east end of the park climbed well in excess of 100 degrees Monday, and peaked above 110 Tuesday through Saturday. The excessive heat led to the deaths of a 44-year-old Dutch man and a 38-year-old German woman on Monday afternoon. According to Lt. Tingle of the Sheriff's Indio station, the bodies were found near Black Eagle Mine road. The dead man was found on the edge of the road, about a mile and a half east of Pinto Basin Road, north of the Cottonwood Visitor's Center. The dead woman was found about one mile east of the man's body. Captain Raymond Gregory of the Sheriff's Indio station reported that the pair entered the park shortly before noon, and that they abandoned their vehicle in an area deemed impassable to passenger vehicles. Evidence indicated that they both succumbed to exposure to the elements. • July 2013—A record-setting ridge of high pressure (600 dm over northern New Mexico) built in over the Great Basin and desert Southwest, beginning around June 29th, lasting through approximately July 7, when it hit another peak in temperatures. This resulted in extreme high temperatures, well above normal across the region during this period. The hottest days in July were the 1st through the 3rd, during which several record high minimums were set, as well as highs well over 100 degrees. Prolonged heat in the higher terrain was a significant impact, like in San Diego County. • June 2016—Strong high pressure over the four corners region retrograded westward over southern and central California bringing a period of high temperatures over the 110-degree mark to locations in the Kern County Desert. • June 2017—A strong ridge of high pressure and a dry airmass helped temperatures soar in inland areas from the 16th through the 27th. The heat was most intense in the deserts on the 20th, 24th, and 25th with Palm Springs reaching 122 degrees on all three days. Temperatures Fresno County 4.113 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan peaked in the 100-110 degree range over the San Diego County Valleys and Inland Empire on the 20th, 24th and 25th. Flex Alerts were issued asking customers to conserve power. Mechanical and operational issues which slowed processing at a local rendering facility, combined with seasonal high temperatures, resulted in the inability to process accumulated livestock carcasses in a timely manner. A local emergency was proclaimed to allow other methods of safe and orderly disposal of dead livestock, as determined by the Fresno County Department of Public Health and the Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner. • August 2017—Upper level high pressure brought record heat to the area. A plume of subtropical moisture promoted the growth of isolated afternoon thunderstorms with large hail. A 13-year-old was hospitalized Tuesday after suffering heat stroke during tryouts for the freshman football team at Lincoln High School on August 1. Temperatures at Lincoln Airport reached 100 degrees between 4 and 7 pm PDT. • September 2017—A persistent large upper ridge centered over the Great Basin provided the area with an extended period of much warmer than normal temperatures between August 26 and September 3. High temperatures ranged mainly from 106 to 112 degrees at many locations each day between August 26 and September 3 across the San Joaquin Valley, the southern Sierra foothills and the Kern County Deserts while morning lows ranged from the mid 70's to the lower 80's. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—Temperature extremes are likely to continue to occur annually in the Fresno County planning area. Climate Change Considerations Although heat waves will likely become more frequent, there is also the potential for continued cold outbreaks in winter, even in an overall warmer climate. This could have direct impacts on human health in terms of heat related illness. With the general trend of increased warming of average temperatures, extreme high temperatures will likely increase as well. Cascading impacts include increased stress on water quantity and quality, degraded air quality, and increased potential for more severe or catastrophic natural events such as heavy rain, droughts, and wildfire. Another cascading impact includes increased duration and intensity of wildfires with warmer temperatures. 4.2.15 Severe Weather: Fog Hazard/Problem Description Fog results from air being cooled to the point where it can no longer hold all of the water vapor it contains. For example, rain can cool and moisten the air near the surface until fog forms. A cloud- free, humid air mass at night can lead to fog formation, where land and water surfaces that have warmed up during the summer are still evaporating water into the atmosphere. This is called Fresno County 4.114 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan radiation fog. A warm moist air mass blowing over a cold surface also can cause fog to form, which is called advection fog. The interior California valleys have a unique fog problem called the tule fogs. The tule fog is a radiation fog, which condenses when there is a high relative humidity, typically after a heavy rain, calm winds, and rapid cooling during the night. The longer nights during the winter months create this rapid ground cooling and results in a pronounced temperature inversion at a low altitude, creating a thick ground fog. Above the cold, foggy layer, the air is typically warm and dry. Once the fog has formed, turbulent air is necessary to break through the inversion. Daytime heating can also work to evaporate the fog in some areas. The tule fogs get their name from the tule reeds, which grew around the swamps and deltas of the great Tulare Lake that once covered the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. The tule fog season in Fresno County is typically in the late fall and winter (November through March) but can occur as late as May. Fog typically forms rapidly in the early morning hours. Tule fogs can last for days, sometimes weeks. Fog can have devastating effects on transportation corridors in the County. Nighttime driving in the fog is dangerous and multi-car pileups have resulted from drivers using excessive speed for the conditions and visibility. The San Joaquin Valley is hemmed in on three sides by mountain ranges, with resulting inversion layers trapping cooler air on the valley floor. This predisposes the Fresno area to severe episodes of fog in winter months, when barometric pressures are high, humidity is increased, and ambient temperatures are low. The table below notes the average number of days with dense fog by month. Table 4.17 Average Number of Days in Fresno with Dense Fog Month Number of Days January 12 February 6 March 2 April ≤.5 May ≤.5 June 0 July 0 August ≤.5 September ≤.5 October 1 November 6 December 12 Annual 41.0 Source: Western Regional Climate Center Fog contributes to transportation accidents and is a significant life safety hazard. These accidents can cause multiple injuries and deaths and could have serious implications for human health and the environment if a hazardous or nuclear waste shipment were involved. Other disruptions from fog include delayed emergency response vehicles and school closures. Fresno County 4.115 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extent Tule fog forms on clear nights when the ground is moist and the wind is near calm. On nights like this, the ground cools rapidly. In turn, the moist air above it cools and causes water vapor to condense. Once it has formed, the air must be heated enough to either evaporate the fog or lift it above the surface so that visibilities improve. Common areas for tule fog to form include foothills and valleys. Visibility in tule fog is usually less than an eighth of a mile (about 600 ft or 200 m), but can be much lower. Visibility can vary rapidly; in only a few feet, visibility can go from 10 feet (3.0 m) to near zero. Figure 4.36 Traffic Accident Caused by Fog, November 2007 Source: Donavan, California Highway Patrol Most of these notable fog-related accidents occurred on Highway 99. In addition to these events, other, less notable collisions occurred on other roads during foggy conditions. Records provided by the HMPC indicated that from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2006, 22 collisions occurred during foggy weather on multiple roads, resulting in five injuries. The only fatal accident due to fog noted previously. It is unclear the extent that fog played in many of these accidents as there were other contributing factors, such as driver negligence. Fresno County 4.116 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences According to the HMPC, severe fog is a recurring problem within the planning area, and most damage results from automobile accidents. Most of these incidents occurred between November and March; one was in October. Notable fog incidents reported by the HMPC include the following: • February 1991—A series of accidents involving 74 vehicles occurred along a three-mile, fog- shrouded stretch of Highway 99 south of Fresno. Three people were killed and 30 were injured. • January 16, 1994—Dense fog caused a 56-vehicle pileup on Highway 99 near Selma, killing two people and injuring 42 others. • November 1998—Dense fog caused a chain-reaction accident involving 74 vehicles along a one-mile stretch on Highway 99 near Kingsburg. Two people were killed, 51 others injured. • February 2002—Fog was a factor in a string of crashes on Highway 99 near Selma that killed two people. More than 30 others were injured in the accident, which involved 87 cars, trucks, and big rigs over a four-mile stretch. • November 20, 2002—Fog was a major factor in a 50-vehicle collision on Highway 99 near Merced that resulted in 32 injuries. • February 7, 2006—Fog was a factor in a 20-vehicle collision on Highway 99 near Tulare that resulted in one death and multiple injuries. • November 3, 2007—Dense fog contributed to the worst traffic accident in Fresno County on Highway 99 just south of Fresno. At least two people were killed in the 108-car chain-reaction crash, which involved 18 big rigs, and 39 individuals were sent to local hospitals. Drunk driving was also cited as a contributing factor. • February 2008- Two nights of dense fog resulted in a 10-15 car pileup on the morning of the 11th near Kerman west of Fresno, where there were no injuries, and newspaper accounts of only minor property damages. However, the fog was a major factor in a series of chain-reaction accidents on Highway 99 near Kingsburg during the morning of February 12th. At least four separate accidents occurred, involving at least 40 vehicles and resulting in at an estimated 10 people being injured. • November 2012-Despite the lack of rainfall from the storm on November 20th-21st on the San Joaquin Valley floor, patchy dense fog developed during the morning of the 22nd. Initially the fog formed in the Los Banos area, but this patch of fog eroded from the north. Later, a larger patch of fog developed in the Reedley-Visalia area, and then spread northward and westward, lingering through much of the morning. At the same time, clouds banked up over the San Joaquin Valley. This narrow band of fog drifted over the Valley floor, causing visibilities at most airports to fluctuate from near zero to a couple of miles. Widespread dense fog continued through November 27th across most of the San Joaquin Valley. On the morning of the 27th, dense fog contributed to a chain reaction crash involving two big rigs and one vehicle. Three people were killed in this crash. The crash occurred on Highway 152 about two miles south of Chowchilla in adjacent Madera County. Fresno County 4.117 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • January 2013-January began with the central and southern San Joaquin Valley under a cold, dry airmass that moved into the region. Dense fog continued its reputation as the main winter weather hazard for the central and southern San Joaquin Valley, as a fatal collision occurred 3 miles southeast of Chowchilla in dense fog during the morning of January 4th. These conditions continued through the morning of the 5th, and then a strong upper-level low brought the first precipitation of the year that evening. • January 2017-High pressure with clearing skies over the region coupled with recent heavy precipitation created ideal conditions for dense nighttime and morning radiational fog to develop. Fresno police and California Highway Patrol reported a 2-vehicle accident during dense fog causing one fatality at Jensen Avenue and Chateau Fresno Avenue in the city of Fresno in Fresno County. It also appeared alcohol was a factor. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Likely—Based on the NCEI and SHELDUS data, 21 major fog incidents over a 58-year period equates to a major fog event every 2.8 years and a 36.2 percent chance of a major fog event in any given year. Based on input from the HMPC, it is likely that minor fog events will continue to occur annually in the Fresno County planning area. Climate Change Considerations California’s winter tule fog has declined dramatically over the past three decades, raising a red flag for the state’s multibillion dollar agricultural industry, according to researchers at UC Berkeley. Crops such as almonds, pistachios, cherries, apricots and peaches go through a necessary winter dormant period brought on and maintained by colder temperatures. Tule fog, a thick ground fog that descends upon the state’s Central Valley between late fall and early spring, helps contribute to this winter chill. “The trees need this dormant time to rest so that they can later develop buds, flowers and fruit during the growing season,” said biometeorologist and study lead author Dennis Baldocchi. “An insufficient rest period impairs the ability of farmers to achieve high quality fruit yields.” The findings have implications for the entire country since many of these California crops account for 95 percent of U.S. production, the authors noted. The researchers paired NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellite records with data from a network of University of California weather stations, covering 32 consecutive winters. There was a great deal of variability from year to year, but on average, the researchers found a 46 percent drop in the number of fog days between the first of November and the end of February. Climate forecasts suggest that the accumulation of winter chill will continue to decrease in the Central Valley. Tule fog was also less prevalent in recent years in part due to the multi-year drought. Fresno County 4.118 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.2.16 Severe Weather: Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning/Wind Hazard/Problem Description Storms in the Fresno County planning area are generally characterized by heavy rain often accompanied by strong winds and sometimes lightning and hail. Approximately 10 percent of the thunderstorms that occur each year in the United States are classified as severe. A thunderstorm is classified as severe when it contains one or more of the following phenomena: hail that is three- quarters of an inch or greater, winds in excess of 50 knots (57.5 mph), or a tornado. Hail is formed when water droplets freeze and thaw as they are thrown high into the upper atmosphere by the violent internal forces of thunderstorms. Hail is usually associated with severe storms within the Fresno County planning area. Hailstones are usually less than two inches in diameter and can fall at speeds of 120 miles per hour (mph). Severe hailstorms can be quite destructive, causing damage to roofs, buildings, automobiles, vegetation, and crops. Lightning is defined as any and all of the various forms of visible electrical discharge caused by thunderstorms. Thunderstorms and lightning are usually (but not always) accompanied by rain. Cloud-to-ground lightning can kill or injure people by direct or indirect means. Objects can be struck directly, which may result in an explosion, burn, or total destruction. Or, damage may be indirect, when the current passes through or near an object, which generally results in less damage. High winds, often accompanying severe thunderstorms, can cause significant property and crop damage, threaten public safety, and have adverse economic impacts from business closures and power loss. Windstorms in Fresno County are typically straight-line winds. Straight-line winds are generally any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with rotation (i.e., is not a tornado). It is these winds, which can exceed 100 mph, that represent the most common type of severe weather and are responsible for most wind damage related to thunderstorms. These winds can overturn mobile homes, tear roofs off houses, topple trees, snap power lines, shatter windows, and sandblast paint from cars. Other associated hazards include utility outages, arcing power lines, debris blocking streets, dust storms, and an occasional structure fire. Tornadoes (see Section 4.2.18 Tornado) and funnel clouds can also occur during these types of storms. Downslope Winds occur when warm/dry air descends rapidly down a mountain side. These types of winds may commonly occur just west of the Sierras. These winds can blow over 40 mph, and can occur in sudden gusts that are even stronger, which can make driving hazardous. In addition, their dry conditions increase the risk of wildfires in the area. Santa Ana Winds occur when air from a region of high pressure over the dry, desert region of the southwestern U.S. flows westward towards low pressure located off the California coast. This creates dry winds that flow east to west through the mountain passages in Southern California closer to Los Angeles and San Diego, but may occasionally influence Fresno County. These winds Fresno County 4.119 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan are most common during the cooler months of the year, occurring from September through May. Santa Ana winds typically feel warm (or even hot) because as the cool desert air moves down the side of the mountain, it is compressed, which causes the temperature of the air to rise. These strong winds can cause major property damage. They also increase wildfire risk because of the dryness of the winds and the speed at which they can spread a flame across the landscape. Extent The National Weather Service classifies hail by diameter size, and corresponding everyday objects to help relay scope and severity to the population. Table 4.18 indicates the hailstone measurements utilized by the National Weather Service. Table 4.18 Hail Measurements Average Diameter Corresponding Household Object .25 inch Pea .5 inch Marble/Mothball .75 inch Dime/Penny .875 inch Nickel 1.0 inch Quarter 1.5 inch Ping-pong ball 1.75 inch Golf-Ball 2.0 inch Hen Egg 2.5 inch Tennis Ball 2.75 inch Baseball 3.00 inch Teacup 4.00 inch Grapefruit 4.5 inch Softball Source: National Weather Service The largest hailstones recorded in Fresno County had a diameter of 1.75 inches in 1957. Lightning is measured by the Lightning Activity Level (LAL) scale, created by the National Weather Service to define lightning activity into a specific categorical scale. The LAL is a common parameter that is part of fire weather forecasts nationwide. The LAL is reproduced in Table 4.19. Fresno County 4.120 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.19 Lightning Activity Level Scale * LIGHTNING ACTIVITY LEVEL LAL 1 No thunderstorms LAL 2 Isolated thunderstorms. Light rain will occasionally reach the ground. Lightning is very infrequent, 1 to 5 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period LAL 3 Widely scattered thunderstorms. Light to moderate rain will reach the ground. Lightning is infrequent, 6 to 10 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period. LAL 4 Scattered thunderstorms. Moderate rain is commonly produced. Lightning is frequent, 11 to 15 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period. LAL 5 Numerous thunderstorms. Rainfall is moderate to heavy. Lightning is frequent and intense, greater than 15 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period. LAL 6 Dry lightning (same as LAL 3 but without rain). This type of lightning has the potential for extreme fire activity and is normally highlighted in fire weather forecasts with a Red Flag warning. Source: National Weather Service Table 4.20 outlines the Beaufort scale, describing the damaging effects of wind speed. Table 4.20 Beaufort Wind Scale Wind Speed (mph) Description—Visible Condition 0 Calm; smoke rises vertically 1-4 Light air; direction of wind shown by smoke but not by wind vanes 4-7 Light breeze; wind felt on face; leaves rustle; ordinary wind vane moved by wind 8-12 Gentle breeze; leaves and small twigs in constant motion; wind extends light flag 13-18 Moderate breeze; raises dust and loose paper; small branches are moved 19-24 Fresh breeze; small trees in leaf begin to sway; crested wavelets form on inland water 25-31 Strong breeze; large branches in motion; telephone wires whistle; umbrellas used with difficulty 32-38 Moderate gale whole trees in motion; inconvenience in walking against wind 39-46 Fresh gale breaks twigs off trees; generally, impedes progress 47-54 Strong gale slight structural damage occurs; chimney pots and slates removed 55-63 Whole gale trees uprooted; considerable structural damage occurs 64-72 Storm very rarely experienced; accompanied by widespread damage 73+ Hurricane devastation occurs Source: NOAA Fresno County is at risk to experience lightning in any of these categories. Fresno County 4.121 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences Heavy rains and severe storms occur in the Fresno County planning area primarily during the late fall, winter, and spring, but have been documented in every month of the year. According to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, the majority of precipitation is produced by storms during the winter months. Precipitation during the summer months is in the form of convective rain showers and is rare. Fresno County receives about 10 inches of rain per year. Snowstorms, hailstorms, and ice storms occur infrequently in the San Joaquin Valley and severe occurrences of any of these are very rare. Damaging winds often accompany winter storm systems moving through the area. Although summer winds are a frequent occurrence, with afternoon winds of 10 to 20 mph being common, it is the winds experienced during the winter storms that result in the most wind-related damage. According to the HMPC, short-term, heavy storms can cause both widespread flooding as well as extensive localized drainage issues. With the increased growth of the area, the lack of adequate drainage systems has become more of an issue. In addition to the flooding that often occurs during these storms, strong winds, when combined with saturated ground conditions, can down very mature trees. Information from the three representative weather stations introduced in Section 4.2.13 Severe Weather: General is summarized below and in Figure 4.37 through Figure 4.42. Fresno County—East (Huntington Lake Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2017) Average annual precipitation in the eastern portion of Fresno County is 41.35 inches per year. The highest recorded annual precipitation is 82.90 inches in 1982; the highest recorded precipitation for a 24-hour period is 7.28 inches on December 23, 1955. The lowest recorded annual precipitation is 19.38 inches in 1953. Fresno County 4.122 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.37 Fresno County—East’s Monthly Average Total Precipitation Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Figure 4.38 Fresno County—East’s Daily Precipitation Average and Extreme Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County 4.123 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County—Central (Fresno WSO AP Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2017) Average annual precipitation in the central portion of Fresno County is 10.90 inches per year. The highest recorded annual precipitation is 21.61 inches in 1983; the highest recorded precipitation for a 24-hour period is 2.38 inches on March 10, 1995. The lowest recorded annual precipitation is 6.07 inches in 1966. Figure 4.39 Fresno County—Central’s Monthly Average Total Precipitation Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County 4.124 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.40 Fresno County—Central’s Daily Precipitation Average and Extreme Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County—West (Coalinga Weather Station, Period of Record 1942 to 2017) Average annual precipitation in the western portion of Fresno County is 7.69 inches per year. The highest recorded annual precipitation is 16.03 inches in 1998; the highest recorded precipitation for a 24-hour period is 3.74 inches on March 10, 1995. The lowest recorded annual precipitation is 1.98 inches in 1947. Fresno County 4.125 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.41 Fresno County—West’s Monthly Average Total Precipitation Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Figure 4.42 Fresno County—West’s Daily Precipitation Average and Extreme Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County 4.126 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan High Wind Events Also related to severe weather is the issue of dust storms caused by blowing dust during high wind events. Similar to fog conditions, blowing dust can cause extreme visibility problems resulting in traffic accidents. Given the agricultural nature of much of the planning area, recently plowed fields can create the potential for blowing dust and debris. The HMPC provided the following information on a deadly dust-related traffic accident: • November 29, 1991—The day after Thanksgiving, furious winds stoked a huge dust storm on Interstate 5 in western Fresno County, reducing visibility to zero and causing multiple traffic collisions. At least 164 vehicles were involved in 33 collisions clustered along a two- mile segment of the highway. A total of 349 people were involved in the collisions; 17 were killed and 151 were injured. • April 14, 2009-- Another short-lived upper-level ridge built into California on April 11th-12th, then gave way to a mostly dry system that reached California on the 13th. This cold front brought strong winds to the west side of the San Joaquin Valley on April 14th, with dust storms occurring near Coalinga and Avenal. Both dust storms produced areas of near-zero visibility. Winds gusted to 41 mph at Meadows Field Bakersfield and to 35 mph at Fresno-Yosemite International Airport. The gusts at Meadows Field were only 4 mph less than the ASOS-era record for April of 45 mph, set on April 3rd, 1999. (Because the ASOS measures winds in a different manner than older anemometers, wind records for ASOS sites only go back to the date the ASOS was commissioned). On the 14th at 1425 PDT, the California Highway Patrol reported blowing dust at Avenal cutoff on I-5 with near-zero visibility. The CHP determined it caused a traffic collision along Interstate 5. No fatalities were reported although several people were injured. Winds continued to gust to 35 mph through the morning of April 15th, and spread across the central Valley to the cities of Merced and Atwater. The winds then abated a bit, but increased again the next day. A gust to 40 mph was measured at Fresno-Yosemite International Airport on April 16th, only 1 mph less than the ASOS-era record gust for April of 41 mph on April 14th, 2002. The storm brought only a trace of rain to Fresno and Bakersfield. The highest reported rainfall was only 0.06 inch at Mariposa Grove in the Southern Sierra Nevada southeast of Wawona. • June 4, 2012-- Wind gusted up to 40 mph on the San Joaquin Valley floor, and to around 50 mph in the Kern County mountains and deserts. The strongest gust at Fresno-Yosemite International Airport 40 mph tied the record for the strongest gust for the month of June, last set on June 10th, 2008. Blowing dust reduced visibilities to a quarter mile or less at times, and occasionally to near zero, on the Valley floor. A haboob (significant dust storm) accompanying a cold front occurred across the eastern side of the San Joaquin Valley causing near-zero visibility and reports of power outages (6000 customers without power in Fresno county) and downed trees in Fresno, Hanford, and Visalia. A 10-car pileup occurred on CA-99 near Delano (Kern County) at 1700 PDT. Fresno County 4.127 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The storm moved east of the central California interior on June 5th. Behind the upper-level trough, northwest winds aloft aligned with the passes and canyons of the Kern County mountain to generate strong wind gusts during the afternoon of June 5th. Winds gusted to 61 mph at the mouth of Jawbone Canyon and to 51 mph on the desert floor north of Mojave. The strongest winds occurred at Bird Springs Pass (elevation 7400 feet) about 10 miles southeast of Weldon in the Tehachapi Mountains. Here winds gusted up to 85 mph between 2 and 3 am on the 5th. • April 14, 2015-- An upper level trough of low pressure moved onshore on April 14th resulting in wind gusts of 45-60 MPH. An area of dust and dirt was lifted into the atmosphere, reducing visibility to near zero across Highway 180 near Fresno. The reduced visibility lead to a seven- car crash causing minor injuries and a closure of the roadway for a few hours. Blowing dust reduced visibility to nearly zero along Highway 180, near Fresno, causing two multi-car accidents. Figure 4.43 Fresno County Wind Events Map Fresno County 4.128 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.21 Fresno County Wind Events Table Date Jurisdiction Magnitude (mph) Fatality Injury Property Loss Crop Loss 1958-04-03 Fresno 0 0 0 $0 $0 1958-07-28 Fresno 0 0 0 $0 $0 1958-07-28 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $0 $0 1984-05-29 Fresno 0 0 0 $0 $0 1994-05-30 Fresno 0 1 0 $0 $0 1995-05-01 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $500,000 $0 1995-05-01 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $500,000 $0 1995-05-13 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $0 $0 1995-06-15 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $500,000 $0 1996-10-30 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $10,000 $0 1998-02-14 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 1998-02-23 Fresno 0 0 0 $100,000 $0 2001-04-20 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 2002-05-31 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $50,000 $0 2002-05-31 Unincorporated 0 0 0 $50,000 $0 2006-07-21 Unincorporated 69 0 0 $0 $0 2007-10-29 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $30,000 $0 2007-10-29 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $50,000 $0 2007-10-29 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $10,000 $0 2008-01-27 Unincorporated 64.4 0 0 $50,000 $0 2008-03-15 Mendota 57.5 0 0 $10,000 $0 2009-05-28 Fresno 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 2009-05-28 Reedley 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 2009-05-28 Sanger 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 2009-05-28 Unincorporated 57.5 0 0 $60,000 $0 2009-05-28 Unincorporated 57.5 0 0 $0 $0 2009-06-05 Unincorporated 59.8 0 0 $0 $0 2009-06-05 Unincorporated 59.8 0 0 $0 $0 2012-04-13 Kerman 57.5 0 0 $50,000 $30,000 2014-02-28 Unincorporated 64.4 0 0 $500,000 $0 Total 1 0 $2,470,000 $30,000 Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—Heavy rain, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, and wind are well-documented seasonal occurrences that will continue to occur annually in the Fresno County planning area. Fresno County 4.129 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Climate Change Considerations Pacific Northwest National Laboratory researchers found that atmospheric rivers will reach the West Coast more frequently if greenhouse gas pollution continues to rise sharply. Currently, the West receives rain or snow from these atmospheric rivers between 25 and 40 days each year. By the end of this century, days on which the atmospheric rivers reach the coast could increase by a third this century, between 35 and 55 days a year. Meanwhile, the number of days each year on which the atmospheric rivers bring “extreme” amounts of rain and snow to the region could increase by more than a quarter. 4.2.17 Severe Weather: Winter Storm Hazard/Problem Description Winter snow storms can include heavy snow, ice, and blizzard conditions. Heavy snow can immobilize a region, stranding commuters, stopping the flow of supplies, and disrupting emergency and medical services. Accumulations of snow can collapse roofs and knock down trees and power lines. In rural areas, homes and farms may be isolated for days, and unprotected livestock may be lost. The cost of snow removal, damage repair, and business losses can have a tremendous impact on cities and towns. Heavy accumulations of ice can bring down trees, electrical wires, telephone poles and lines, and communication towers. Communications and power can be disrupted for days until damage can be repaired. Even small accumulations of ice may cause extreme hazards to motorists and pedestrians. Some winter storms are accompanied by strong winds, creating blizzard conditions with blinding wind-driven snow, severe drifting, and dangerous wind chills. Strong winds with these intense storms and cold fronts can knock down trees, utility poles, and power lines. Blowing snow can reduce visibilities to only a few feet in areas where there are no trees or buildings. Serious vehicle accidents can result and cause injuries and deaths. The central and western portions of the Fresno County planning area generally do not experience snowfall on a seasonal basis; however, the higher elevations in the eastern portion of the County receive an abundance of snow, mostly between the months of November through April. Winter snow storms in this part of the County, including strong winds and blizzard conditions, can result in localized power and phone outages and closures of streets, highways, schools, business, and nonessential government operations. People can also become isolated from essential services in their homes and vehicles. Snow removal costs can impact budgets significantly. Heavy snowfall during winter can also lead to flooding or landslides during the spring if the area snowpack melts too quickly. Fresno County 4.130 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extent The extent of winter storms and cold that cause issues in Fresno County includes storms forecasted to be Winter Storm Warnings, Wind Chill Warnings or Blizzard Warnings. These storms would be confined to the Sierra Mountains within Fresno County. Heavy snows, or a combination of snow, freezing rain or extreme wind chill due to strong wind, may bring widespread or lengthy road closures and hazardous travel conditions, plus threaten temporary loss of community services such as power and water. Deep snow and additional strong wind chill or frostbite may be a threat to even the appropriately dressed individual or to even the strongest person exposed to the frigid weather for only a short period. Past Occurrences Information from the three representative weather stations introduced in Section 4.2.13 Severe Weather: General is summarized below. Fresno County—East (Huntington Lake Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2007) Average annual total snowfall for the eastern portion of Fresno County is 183.2 inches. The snowiest months include December, January, February, and March, with 29.4, 35.2, 36.9, and 38.6 average inches of snow, respectively. April follows close behind with an average snowfall of 23.2 inches. The highest annual snowfall on record was 488 inches in 1968-69. The highest recorded monthly snowfall for the period of record was 191 inches in February 1969. The average snow depth ranges from 3 inches in November and May to 40 inches in February. Figure 4.44 illustrates the Daily Snowfall Average and Extreme for the Huntington Lake Weather Station in eastern Fresno County. Fresno County 4.131 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.44 Fresno County—East’s Daily Snowfall Average and Extreme Source: Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu/ Fresno County—Central (Fresno WSO AP Weather Station, Period of Record 1948 to 2007) Snow in central Fresno County is quite rare. During the period of record, snow fell only four times: 0.10 inches in January 1957, 2.2 inches in January 1962, 1.2 inches in December 1968, and 0.5 inches in December 1998. Fresno County—West (Coalinga Weather Station, Period of Record 1942 to 2007) Snow in western Fresno County is even rarer than in central Fresno County. During the period of record, snow fell only once: five inches were recorded in January of 1957. The Fresno County Office of Emergency Services is not aware of any incidents where snow caused enough damage to declare a countywide emergency. According to the HMPC, the following winter snow event impacted the eastern portion of the Fresno County planning area: • January 2005—Heavy wet snow fell in eastern Fresno County above 4,000 feet resulting in a regionwide closure of roads and loss of power for up to three weeks in three communities. Eight injuries were reported due to vehicle accidents from poor road conditions. Property damage was estimated at $3.5 million from trees falling on homes, cabins, and out buildings. Infrastructure damage was estimated at $2.5 million to the power distribution grid and $250,000 to the road system. An estimated 10-15,000 merchantable trees were damaged or Fresno County 4.132 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan destroyed. Most roads in the area were closed for three weeks; schools were closed for two weeks. • March 2011- The last major storm of the month arrived on March 24th. This storm brought gusts to 45 mph to the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, and gusts to 65 mph in the Kern County mountains and deserts. Convective activity was limited to near Merced, with several reports of road flooding due to the already saturated ground. Thunderstorms and showers moved east into the foothills of Madera and Mariposa Counties, where the heavy rains triggered rock and mud slides. Mainly light showers occurred southward. The trough moved east of the region on the 25th, with residual light showers in its wake. Additional light snow fell in the Southern Sierra Nevada measuring around 5 inches or less. Local media reported that the roof of a vacant store at Shaver Lake collapsed on March 26th due to 6 feet of snow accumulation on the roof. • April 2012- An upper-level short-wave moved into California on April 10th, flattening the ridge. This set the stage for back-to-back strong storms to move through the central California interior on the 11th, 12th, and 13th. Each storm triggered severe thunderstorms over the central and southern San Joaquin Valley with hail up to 1.75 inches in diameter. Tallies of agricultural and crop loss approached 100 million dollars due to the extensive hail damage across Kings, Tulare, Fresno, and Merced counties. Funnel clouds were observed, although none touched down. The first storm brought up to a foot of snow to the Southern Sierra Nevada, and the second colder storm dropped up to 30 inches of snow at Lodgepole in Sequoia National Park. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—Snow in the eastern region of the County is a well-documented seasonal occurrence that will continue to occur annually. Climate Change Considerations Climate change has the potential to exacerbate the severity and intensity of winter storms, including potential heavy and intense amounts of snow. A warming climate may also result in warmer winters, the benefits of which may include lower winter heating demand, less cold stress on humans and animals, and a longer growing season. However, these benefits are expected to be offset by the negative consequences of warmer summer temperatures. 4.2.18 Severe Weather: Tornado Hazard/Problem Description Tornadoes are another severe weather hazard that can affect the Fresno County planning area, primarily during the rainy season. Tornadoes form when cool, dry air sits on top of warm, moist air. Tornadoes are rotating columns of air marked by a funnel-shaped downward extension of a cumulonimbus cloud whirling at destructive speeds of up to 300 mph, usually accompanying a thunderstorm. Tornadoes are the most powerful storms that exist. They can have the same pressure Fresno County 4.133 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan differential that fuels 300-mile-wide hurricanes across a path only 300-yards wide or less. Figure 4.45 illustrates the potential impact and damage from a tornado. With additional heat in the atmosphere storms are projected to become more severe in the future, and thus lightning may become more prevalent. Figure 4.45 Potential Impact and Damage from a Tornado Prior to February 1, 2007, tornado intensity was measured by the Fujita (F) scale. This scale was revised and is now the Enhanced Fujita scale. Both scales are sets of wind estimates (not measurements) based on damage. The new scale provides more damage indicators (28) and associated degrees of damage, allowing for more detailed analysis and better correlation between damage and wind speed. It is also more precise because it takes into account the materials affected and the construction of structures damaged by a tornado. Table 4.22 shows the wind speeds associated with the original Fujita scale ratings and the damage that could result at different levels of intensity. Table 4.23 shows the wind speeds associated with the Enhanced Fujita Scale ratings. The Enhanced Fujita Scale’s damage indicators and degrees of damage can be found online at www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/ef-scale.html. Fresno County 4.134 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.22 Original Fujita Scale Fujita (F) Scale Fujita Scale Wind Estimate (mph) Typical Damage F0 < 73 Light damage. Some damage to chimneys; branches broken off trees; shallow- rooted trees pushed over; sign boards damaged. F1 73-112 Moderate damage. Peels surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or overturned; moving autos blown off roads. F2 113-157 Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars overturned; large trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off ground. F3 158-206 Severe damage. Roofs and some walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest uprooted; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown. F4 207-260 Devastating damage. Well-constructed houses leveled; structures with weak foundations blown away some distance; cars thrown and large missiles generated. F5 261-318 Incredible damage. Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away; automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 meters (109 yards); trees debarked; incredible phenomena will occur. Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Prediction Center, www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/f-scale.html Table 4.23 Enhanced Fujita Scale Enhanced Fujita (EF) Scale Enhanced Fujita Scale Wind Estimate (mph) EF0 65-85 EF1 86-110 EF2 111-135 EF3 136-165 EF4 166-200 EF5 Over 200 Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Prediction Center, www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/ef-scale.html Tornadoes can cause damage to property and loss of life. While most tornado damage is caused by violent winds, most injuries and deaths result from flying debris. Property damage can include damage to buildings, fallen trees and power lines, broken gas lines, broken sewer and water mains, and the outbreak of fires. Agricultural crops and industries may also be damaged or destroyed. Access roads and streets may be blocked by debris, delaying necessary emergency response. Extent The majority of tornadoes in the past in Fresno County have been F0 and F1. Large tornadoes are possible, however. Should the County be hit by an EF-4 or EF-5 tornado, it can be extrapolated that because of its relative size and the potential size and length of a tornado’s path a significant portion of the County could be impacted, resulting in property and crop damage and loss of life. Fresno County 4.135 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Past Occurrences Based on data from 1950 to1995, California ranks 32nd among the 50 states for frequency of tornadoes, 36th for injuries, and 31st for cost of damage. When compared to other states by the frequency per square mile, California ranks 44th for frequency and injuries per area and 40th for cost of damage per area. Figure 4.46 shows tornados that have affected the County using NOAA data from 1950 to 2016. Figure 4.46 Fresno County Tornadoes, 1950-2016 According to the HMPC, during the rainy season, the Fresno County planning area is prone to relatively strong thunderstorms, sometimes accompanied by funnel clouds and tornadoes. While tornadoes do occur occasionally, most often they are of F0 or F1 intensity. Documented incidents of tornadoes in the Fresno County planning area from the NCEI Storm Events Database are listed in Table 4.24. Fresno County 4.136 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.24 Fresno County’s Tornadoes, 1950-2017 Type # of Events Property Loss ($) Deaths Injuries Tornado: F0 18 230,000 0 0 Tornado: F1 7 5,205,050 0 3 Tornado: F2 1 5,000 0 0 Totals 26 5,440,050 0 0 Source: National Center for Environmental Information Storm Events Database Likelihood of Future Occurrences Occasional—Twenty-six tornadoes occurred in Fresno County over 68 years of record keeping, which equates to one tornado every 2.6 years, on average, and a 38.2 percent chance of a tornado occurring in any given year. Historical tornadic activity within the planning area indicates that the area will likely continue to experience the formation of funnel clouds and low intensity tornadoes during adverse weather conditions. The actual risk to the County is dependent on the nature and location of any given tornado. Climate Change Considerations There presently is not enough data or research to quantify the magnitude of change that climate change may have related to tornado frequency and intensity. NASA’s Earth Observatory has conducted studies which aim to understand the interaction between climate change and tornadoes. Based on these studies meteorologists are unsure why some thunderstorms generate tornadoes and others don’t, beyond knowing that they require a certain type of wind shear. Tornadoes spawn from approximately one percent of thunderstorms, usually supercell thunderstorms that are in a wind shear environment that promotes rotation. Some studies show a potential for a decrease in wind shear in mid-latitude areas. Because of uncertainty with the influence of climate change on tornadoes, future updates to the mitigation plan should include the latest research on how the tornado hazard frequency and severity could change. The level of significance of this hazard should be revisited over time. 4.2.19 Volcano Hazard/Problem Description Of the almost 70 active and potentially active volcanoes in the United States, more than 50 have erupted one or more times in the past 200 years. Volcano hazards are the greatest in five western states: Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, and Washington. Volcanoes create a wide variety of hazards that can kill people and destroy property. Populations living near volcanoes are most vulnerable to volcanic eruptions and lava flows; although, large explosive eruptions can endanger people and property hundreds of miles away and even affect global climate. Volcanic ash can also travel and affect populations many miles away. The ash from the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens in Washington fell over a large area of the Fresno County 4.137 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan western United States. Heavy ash fall can collapse buildings, and even minor ash fall can damage crops, electronics, and machinery. Some volcanic hazards, such as landslides, can occur even when a volcano is not erupting. Figure 4.47 depicts a volcano typical of those found in the western United States. Figure 4.47 Typical Wester U.S. Volcano Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs002-97/ The State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies volcanoes as one of the hazards that can adversely impact the state. However, there have been few losses in California from volcanic eruptions. Of the approximately 20 volcanoes in the state, only a few are active and pose a threat. Extent The Fresno County General Plan Background Report identifies the Mono Lake-Long Valley area located adjacent to the north and east of the northernmost areas of Fresno County as the only known volcanic hazard to Fresno County. The Long Valley area is considered to be an active volcanic region of California and includes features such as the Mono-Inyo Craters, Long Valley Caldera, and numerous active and potential faults. Figure 4.48 shows volcanoes in or near California and the location of the Long Valley area relative to the Fresno County planning area. Fresno County 4.138 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.48 Volcanoes In or Near California Populations living near volcanoes are most vulnerable to volcanic eruptions and lava flows, although volcanic ash can travel and affect populations many miles away and cause problems for aviation. Based on information in the background report, the Fresno County planning area is susceptible to various hazards associated with its proximity to the Long Valley area as further described below. Volcanic Flows Two mildly explosive volcanic vents are located three to four miles from northernmost Fresno County, northwest of Duck Lake. In the event of an eruption, flows or debris from the vents would likely flow predominantly southwest approximately parallel to the North Fork of the San Joaquin River in Madera County. Lava flows, steam blasts, or base surges could occur in the northernmost tip of Fresno County. The northern portions of the Silver Divide (including Duck Lake and Fish Creek) could be subject to lava flows. However, this area of the County is mostly unpopulated and not easily developable as it is situated in the high peaks of the Sierra Nevada. Thus, potential safety hazards would be limited to backcountry visitors. Fresno County 4.139 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Ash With most volcanic eruptions, a significant amount of ash is released into the atmosphere. The location and thickness of ash in any given area is generally a function of the volume erupted and wind speed and direction. Based on historical wind directions and wind speeds, most volcanic ash from a volcanic eruption of Long Valley would be deposited east of the volcano. Looking at historical data from past ash falls, the majority of ash beds from volcanic eruptions in California lie east of their source vents. Other studies of Mount Rainier and Mount St. Helens show that more than 90 percent of the ash beds deposited from volcanic eruptions during the last 10,000 years lie to the east of those volcanoes. This data suggests that most ashfall from future eruptions, including those from Long Valley, would also be deposited to the east of the source. According to a worst-case scenario provided in the background report, geologists estimate that the South Fork of the San Joaquin River, Mono Creek, Margaret Lakes, Duck Lake, Fish Creek, Lake Thomas A. Edison, Bear Creek, Lake Italy, and the town of Mono Hot Springs could be subject to eight inches or more of compacted ash from an eruption at Long Valley. It only takes up to five inches of ash to stop an automobile engine. These areas, in addition to Kaiser Creek and Three Island Lake, could also be affected by hot pyroclastic flows. It is further estimated that up to two inches of ash could fall within a 50-mile radius of the eruption, potentially affecting the areas of Auberry, Prather, Meadow Lakes, Pine Ridge, Tollhouse, Dinkey Creek, Humphreys Station, Courtright Reservoir, Pine Flat Reservoir, and numerous small lakes, creeks, and streams. Resulting Floods and Mudflows An eruption on the western slope of Mammoth Mountain (on the rim of the Long Valley Caldera) in the winter could also cause hot mudflows to mix with melting snow and rock debris, creating the possibility of severe flood conditions in the San Joaquin River drainage system, endangering people, dams, and other property as it moves downstream. Figure 4.49 illustrates areas subject to potential volcanic hazards from future eruptions in California and supports the conclusion that the planning area is potentially at risk to volcanic activity from the Long Valley area. The ash dispersion map that follows (Figure 4.50) also illustrates the extent to which the planning area may be affected by ash fallout in the event of renewed volcanic activity in the area. Fresno County 4.140 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.49 Areas Subject to Potential Volcanic Hazards from Future Eruptions in California Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Cascades Volcano Observatory, http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/California/ Fresno County 4.141 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.50 Volcanic Hazards Ash Dispersion Map for the Long Valley Caldera Past Occurrences During the past 1,000 years there have been at least 12 volcanic eruptions in the Long Valley area. Volcanoes in the Mono-Inyo Craters volcanic chain, which extends from just south of Mammoth Mountain to the north shore of Mono Lake, have erupted often over the past 40,000 years. Over the past 5,000 years, small to moderate eruptions have occurred at various sites along the Mono- Inyo Craters volcanic chain at intervals ranging from 250 to 700 years (see Figure 4.51). Fresno County 4.142 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.51 Volcanic Activity in the Mono-Inyo Craters Volcanic Chain of the Past 5,000 Years Source: U.S. Geological Survey, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs073-97/eruptions.html In 1980, four large earthquakes (greater than magnitude 6 on the Richter Scale) and numerous relatively shallow earthquakes occurred in the area. Since then, earthquakes and associated uplift and deformation in the Mammoth Lakes Caldera have continued. Because such activities are common precursors of volcanic eruptions, the U.S. Geological Survey closely monitors the unrest in the region. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Unlikely—According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the pattern of volcanic activity over the past 5,000 years suggests that the next eruption in the Long Valley area will most likely happen somewhere along the Mono-Inyo volcanic chain. However, the probability of such an eruption Fresno County 4.143 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan occurring in any given year is less than 1 percent. Most likely, the next eruption will be small and similar to previous eruptions along the Mono-Inyo volcanic chain during the past 5,000 years (see Figure 4.51 above). Based on available data and the location of the County relative to the Long Valley area, there is a remote potential for volcanic activity of sufficient magnitude to adversely impact the Fresno County planning area. Climate Change Considerations There presently is not enough data or research to quantify the magnitude of potential change that climate change may have on volcanic activity. 4.2.20 Wildfire Hazard/Problem Description Three classes of fires exist in the planning area: understory fires, crown fires, and ground fires. Naturally-induced wildfires burn at relatively low intensities, consuming grasses, woody shrubs, and dead trees. These understory fires often play an important role in plant reproduction and wildlife habitat renewal and self-extinguish by low fuel loads or precipitation. Crown fires, which consist of fires consuming whole living tress, are low probability but high consequence type events. Crown fires typically match perceptions of wildfires. In areas with high concentrations of organic materials in the soil, ground fires may burn, sometimes persisting undetected for long periods until the surface is ignited. Wildfire is an ongoing concern for the Fresno County planning area. Historically, the fire season extends from June through October of each year during the hot, dry months. Since 2010 the fire season throughout California and Fresno County has been getting longer, typically starting in May and extending into November, but wildfires can occur any time of year. Fire conditions arise from a combination of high temperatures, intense sunlight, low rainfall and humidity, dry vegetation, and high winds. Down slope winds, such as the Santa Ana winds of southern California which can gust to 80 mph, are often associated with the most destructive wildfires. Since they usually occur in the fall and winter after the summer dry season when there is ample dry vegetation for fuel, they can cause small fires to quickly burn out of control. These Santa Ana winds have been associated with some of the state’s largest fires, including in October 2003 and October 2007, when more than 800,000 and 1,000,000 acres burned, respectively (Source: https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ca). In December 2017 and January 2018, the Thomas Fire northwest of Los Angeles became one of the largest fires in the State’s history at 291,893 acres which was also exacerbated by Santa Ana winds. Throughout California, communities are increasingly concerned about wildfire safety as increased development in the foothills and mountain areas and subsequent fire control practices have affected the natural cycle of the ecosystem. While wildfire risk is predominantly associated with wildland- urban interface (WUI) areas, significant wildfires can also occur in heavily populated areas and across non WUI landscapes in the forest. The wildland-urban interface is a general term that Fresno County 4.144 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan applies to development adjacent to or within large watershed landscapes that support wildfire. Wildfires affect grass, forest, and brush lands, as well as any structures located within them. Where there is human access to wildland areas, such as the Sierra Nevada and Coast Range foothills, the risk of fire increases due to a greater chance for human carelessness as 90% of wildland fires are human caused. Within the County there are three principal areas that have large damaging fire history: West of Interstate 5, the San Joaquin River Watershed and the Kings River Watershed. Each of these areas have unique vegetation and topography types, fire weather and communities. West of Interstate 5 is best described as an area with low rainfall (average of less than 10 inches) and a vegetation type consisting of annual grass, oak woodlands and brush. This area is predominantly used as rangeland for livestock grazing, mining, oil and gas production and underground transportation. The San Joaquin River and the Kings River Watersheds have a diverse vegetation type ranging from annual grasslands, oak woodlands, brush and timber. These vegetation types transition from the valley floor to the Sierra Nevada’s. The topography ranges from rolling foothills, steep river canyons to high sierra mountains. This area has numerus communities and homes on small parcels intermixed within the larger landscape. The San Joaquin river and Kings River have numerous hydroelectric facilities and critical power infrastructure located from the foothills to the high sierra. Recreation in the Sierra and Sequoia National Forests areas along with group camps increases the population and ignition potential during fire season. The drought that started in 2012 has left an abundance of dead brush, oaks and timber in the upper elevations of these watersheds. The impacts to the vegetation will carry on for many years into the future making fire suppression more difficult and increasing the chance for large catastrophic fires across the landscape. Figure 4.52 illustrates Fresno County’s wildfire threat. Fresno County 4.145 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.52 Fresno County’s Wildfire Severity Zones Fresno County 4.146 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Potential losses from wildfire include human life, structures, critical infrastructure, natural and cultural resources, quality and quantity of water supplies, cropland, timber, and recreational opportunities. Economic losses could also result due to damages to natural resources, grazing lands, tourism and local businesses not mention the loss of revenue to businesses during a wildfire event. Smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a severe health hazard to local communities and the greater San Joaquin Valley air basin. In addition, catastrophic wildfire can create favorable conditions for other hazards such as flooding, landslides, and erosion during the rainy season impacting communities and downstream reservoirs. Generally, there are three major factors that sustain wildfires and predict a given area’s potential to burn. These factors are fuel, topography, and weather. • Fuel—Fuel is the material that feeds a fire and is a key factor in wildfire behavior. Fuel is generally classified by type and by volume. Fuel sources are diverse and include everything from dead tree leaves, twigs, and branches to dead standing trees, live trees, brush, and cured grasses. Also, to be considered as a fuel source are manmade structures, such as homes and other associated combustibles. The type of prevalent fuel directly influences the behavior of wildfire. Fuel is the only factor that is under human control. Fuel types within the Fresno County planning area include annual grasses, deciduous oaks, and heavy brush in the Coast Range of western Fresno County; seasonal grasses, deciduous and evergreen oaks, brush and grass in the lower and mid-elevations of central and eastern Fresno County, and conifers in the higher elevations of eastern Fresno County. • Topography—An area’s terrain and slopes affect its susceptibility to wildfire spread. Both fire intensity and rate of spread increase as slope increases due to the tendency of heat from a fire to rise via convection. The arrangement and types of vegetation throughout a hillside can also contribute to increased fire activity on slopes. • Weather—Weather components such as temperature, relative humidity, wind, and lightning also affect the potential for wildfire. High temperatures and low relative humidity dry out fuels that feed wildfires, creating a situation where fuel will more readily ignite and burn more intensely. Thus, during periods of drought, the threat of wildfire increases. Wind is the most influential weather factor of the three and its influence can increase rates of spread regardless of temperature and relative humidity. The Fresno County planning area has a diverse normal wind pattern. The western side of the planning area is influenced more by the coastal range and weather patterns along the coast. The east side of the valley is more influenced by the normal heating and cooling of the valley floor and the influence along the river drainages, this area is also susceptible to foehn winds from the high sierra. Lightning during the summer monsoonal moisture season also ignites wildfires, often in difficult-terrain with limited access for firefighters. Extent In terms of geographic extent, the wildfire hazard potentially impacts the entire planning area, but the most intense fires will be in the forested areas of the county. While the wildfire threat map Fresno County 4.147 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Figure 4.52) depicts potential severity across the planning area, the history of occurrence map (Figure 4.53) indicates that even moderate and low risk areas have experienced wildfires, and potentially will continue to do so. However, with regard to the severity or potential impact of the wildfire hazard two facts should be considered: first, both maps demonstrate that the areas of greatest risk correspond to the locations with the greatest number of historical events; second, the Medium, High, and Very High hazard areas correspond to heavily forested areas and urban wildland interface areas, where fuel loads for wildfire are highest, are periodically exacerbated by drought conditions, and further complicated by a widespread incidence of tree mortality adding additional fuel load risk (see Section 4.2.4 for discussion of drought and tree mortality). Finally, in order to understand the extent of wildfire severity, the variable risk (Low, Medium, High, Very High) across the planning area identified on the wildfire risk map (Figure 4.54) must be viewed in relation to the location of each jurisdiction participating in the plan. The majority of the risk is in the unincorporated areas and on the fringes of municipalities that include Coalinga, Fresno, and Firebaugh. The Sierra Resource Conservation District has considerable area at risk to wildfires. For additional information on each jurisdiction’s wildfire risk, please consult the jurisdictional Annexes and the Vulnerability Section 4.3.2. The Fire Rating System defined in Table 4.25 describes the characteristics and potential intensity of fires, including the effect on the ability to manage and suppress fires. Such characteristics should be understood in light of the wildfire risks and history of occurrence in Fresno County, as identified on Figure 4.54 through Figure 4.55, and in the narrative descriptions of wildfire history previously discussed. Fire conditions up through Class 5 are possible in Fresno County, primarily in the unincorporated areas. Table 4.25 Fire Danger Rating System rating basic description detailed description CLASS 1: Low Danger (L) COLOR CODE: Green fires not easily started Fuels do not ignite readily from small firebrands. Fires in open or cured grassland may burn freely a few hours after rain, but wood fires spread slowly by creeping or smoldering and burn in irregular fingers. There is little danger of spotting. CLASS 2: Moderate Danger (M) COLOR CODE: Blue fires start easily and spread at a moderate rate Fires can start from most accidental causes. Fires in open cured grassland will burn briskly and spread rapidly on windy days. Woods fires spread slowly to moderately fast. The average fire is of moderate intensity, although heavy concentrations of fuel – especially draped fuel -- may burn hot. Short-distance spotting may occur, but is not persistent. Fires are not likely to become serious and control is relatively easy. CLASS 3: High Danger (H) COLOR CODE: Yellow fires start easily and spread at a rapid rate All fine dead fuels ignite readily and fires start easily from most causes. Unattended brush and campfires are likely to escape. Fires spread rapidly and short-distance spotting is common. High intensity burning may develop on slopes or in concentrations of fine fuel. Fires may become serious and their control difficult, unless they are hit hard and fast while small. CLASS 4: Very High Danger (VH) COLOR CODE: Orange fires start very easily and spread at a very fast rate Fires start easily from all causes and immediately after ignition, spread rapidly and increase quickly in intensity. Spot fires are a constant danger. Fires burning in light fuels may quickly develop high-intensity characteristics - such as long-distance spotting - and fire whirlwinds, when they burn into heavier fuels. Direct attack at the head of such fires is rarely possible after they have been burning more than a few minutes. Fresno County 4.148 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan CLASS 5: Extreme (E) COLOR CODE: Red fire situation is explosive and can result in extensive property damage Fires under extreme conditions start quickly, spread furiously and burn intensely. All fires are potentially serious. Development into high-intensity burning will usually be faster and occur from smaller fires than in the Very High Danger class (4). Direct attack is rarely possible and may be dangerous, except immediately after ignition. Fires that develop headway in heavy slash or in conifer stands may be unmanageable while the extreme burning condition lasts. Under these conditions, the only effective and safe control action is on the flanks, until the weather changes or the fuel supply lessens. Source: http://www.wfas.net Past Occurrences Wildfires are of significant concern throughout California. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), vegetation fires occur within their jurisdiction on a regular basis; most are controlled and contained early with limited damage. For those ignitions that are not readily contained and become major incidents, damage can be extensive. There are many causes of wildfire, from naturally caused lightning fires to human-caused fires linked to activities such as smoking, campfires, debris burning, equipment use, and arson. Recent studies conclude that the greater the population density in an area, the greater the chance of an ignition. With population continuing to grow throughout California and the Fresno County planning area, the risk posed by wildfire also continues to grow. According to the 2005 Prefire Management Plan for CAL FIRE’s Fresno-Kings Unit, an ignition analysis for 2004 was determined to be very similar to that of years past. The four primary ignition sources continue to be other and undetermined (535 fires), arson (311 fires), equipment use (315 fires), and debris burning (158 fires). The remaining causes, which are almost insignificant in number, are lightning, campfires, smoking, vehicles, electrical power, and playing with fire. The unit, which encompasses all of Fresno and Kings counties, experiences 120 to 200 fires a year in the state responsibility area and 1,400 to 1,600 fires in the local responsibility area is a fire history map for the Fresno-Kings Unit. During the drafting of the 2009 Fresno County HMP, the Unit, which encompasses all of Fresno and Kings counties, experienced 120 to 200 fires a year in the state responsibility area and 1,400 to 1,600 fires in the LRA. Figure 4.53 is a fire history map for the Fresno-Kings Unit, which depicts the majority of occurrences as being located within the Very High risk area as identified on the Fresno County Fire Risk Map (Figure 4.54). Additionally, Figure 4.53 details the extent of previous fire incidents occurring between 1900 and 2017. However, in 2017, the Fresno County Fire Protection District reports a dramatic increase in fire incidents, with 1,283 reported as of July 31, 2017. (Source: https://www.fresnocountyfire.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/08/incident-summary.pdf). That said, of the total number, 470 were categorized as Vegetation fires (wildfires), while the remaining fires related to vehicles (221), structures (197), refuse (331), industrial (33), improvement/controlled burns (21), and agricultural products (10). However, as has been noted previously, wildfires occur from both natural and human-made causes. Therefore, given the recent frequency increase in vegetation fires, and the Fresno County 4.149 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan fact that other types of fires have the potential to spread into a wildfire scenario, the wildfire hazard risk seems to be growing, and the LHMPC will remain vigilant in its efforts to mitigate the risks, although an increase in frequency does not necessarily translate to an increase in the extent (range) of wildfires or their severity. Fresno County 4.150 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.53 Fresno County Fire History Fresno County 4.151 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The HMPC identified the following as notable wildfires in the Fresno County planning area: • 1933: The Tollhouse Fire started when a local resident was burning brush in late August. The fire got out of hand and burned across fields and grazing lands and encircled the Town of Tollhouse, a large hub for the timber industry in eastern Fresno County. It burned portions of the flume that carried logs and boards from Shaver Lake to the valley floor. The fire raced up the hill and burned into Jose Basin and over Burrough Mountain into Blue Canyon. The fire burned very hot, destroying conifers in the area, which never grew back. Tollhouse was evacuated for safety, but no losses were incurred. • 1987: The state declared a disaster for Fresno County and 32 other counties during the 1987 wildfires. Collectively, the fires resulted in 3 deaths, 76 injuries, and $18 million in damage. The eastern side of Fresno County was primarily affected. Property damage was estimated at $1 million. Damage to roads, bridges, and power distribution also occurred. Timber production in the area was also impacted. • August 2-21, 1989: The Powerhouse Fire started near the Fresno and Madera county line on the Fresno side of the San Joaquin River. Arson was suspected as the cause. The fire raced up the canyon skirting Powerhouse road in Auberry, traveling mid-slope behind the settlement of Jose Basin. Fingers of the fire touched New Auberry and Auberry. It burned across the front of Bald Mountain in to Mile High and it threatened Meadow Lakes and all homes in its path. An assault by air and ground stopped the fire at Sugarloaf Road at the 3,800-foot elevation. It took a multi-agency effort to put out the fire, which burned an estimated 21,000 acres. No deaths were reported, and only minor injuries were experienced by firefighters. No homes were burned, but several out buildings were lost. Other losses included damage to power poles, fences, and automobiles. Overall, the fire was devastating to the watershed, wildlife, and residents. • August 24, 1994: The Big Creek Wildland Fire occurred in eastern Fresno County in the area of Big Creek, between Shaver and Huntington Lakes, which is used extensively for recreation and has numerous summer homes. The Big Creek area is part of an extensive hydroelectric project (Southern California Edison) that produces electricity for the area. 9,000 acres of national forest land burned. Although 300-500 homes were threatened, no structures burned. Highway 168 and Huntington Lake Road were temporarily closed. The local school closed and the community of Big Creek was evacuated for 1 ½ weeks. Estimated cost of infrastructure damage included $2 million to roads and miscellaneous improvements on national forest land and $500,000 to power distribution. An estimated cost to recover forest land was $2 million. Twelve firefighters were injured. Fighting the fire cost more than $50 million. A post-fire mudslide caused an estimated $50,000 in damage. • September 21, 2000: The Millwood Fire burned 283 acres; 363 personnel responded. Highway 180 was closed until 8:00 p.m. that evening. A shelter was prepared in the City of Orange Cove, but was not used. • August 17, 2001: The Highway fire located near the community of Dunlap, burned 4,152 acres and destroyed five out buildings, a cabin, two travel trailers, and a miscellaneous number of cars. Fresno County 4.152 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • August 17, 2001: The Musick Fire, located between Shaver Lake and Big Creek, burned 193 acres. No structures were damaged in this fire caused by downed power lines. The cost was estimated at $800,000. • July 2013: The Aspen Fire took place in the Kaiser Wilderness area of the Sierra National Forest, North of Huntington Lake. The fire burned over 150,000 acres with a suppression cost of $22.8 million dollars. The fire posed imminent danger to people within the National Forest, resulting in the evacuation of multiple campsites. • July 30, 2015: The Rough Fire was ignited by a lightning strike in the Sierra National Forest, North of Hume Lake, and then spread to Sequoia National Forest, Kings Canyon National Park, as well as state and private-owned lands. The fire consumed approximately 151,000 acres with significant impacts including a significant decrease in air quality, damage to one commercial building, three outbuildings, the temporary closure of 2 schools, several summer camps, and parts of the Sequoia – Kings Canyon National Forest, and the evacuation of multiple communities and campgrounds. Secondary impacts included a drastic drop in revenue from tourism and other visitors to the communities and park lands in the affected area, and a cost of $119 million dollars to suppress the fire. • July 1, 2016: The Curry Fire was a major wildland fire that burned 2,944 acres in Coalinga, CA. Though no crop, property or infrastructure damage or personal injury occurred, it did result in several road closures. • July 2016: The Goose Fire began at or around the intersection of Gooseberry Lane and Morgan Canyon Road, South of the town of Prather. The fire consumed 2,241 acres, and destroyed 4 residences and 5 outbuildings. The fire posed an imminent threat to 400 homes, and residents were issued evacuation orders. • August 8, 2016: The Mineral Fire was a major wildland fire which burned 7,05 acres in Coalinga, CA. Though no crop, property or infrastructure damage or personal injury occurred, it did result in several road closures. • July 9, 2017: The Garza Fire was a major wildland fire igniting in Monterey County (Coalinga, CA), and spreading to Kings and Fresno Counties. Although the fire burned 48,888 acres, no personal injuries or damage to crops, buildings or infrastructure were reported. However, it did result in several road closures. • The Sacata Fire and Turkey Fire, burning 2,099 and 2,530 acres respectively, both occurred in Fresno County. Likelihood of Future Occurrences Highly Likely—Within the Fresno-Kings Unit, fire occurrences range from 120 to 200 fires a year in the SRA and 1,400 to 1,600 fires in the LRAs. Fires will continue to occur on an annual basis in the Fresno County planning area. Other statistical measures to be considered in assessing the extent of the wildfire hazard include data on frequency (and severity): According to the Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), having compiled and analyzed a variety of measures for fire activity, such as the influence Fresno County 4.153 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan of time and fuel types, although fire activity across the state varies from year to year, the annual average since 2000 is 598,000 acres, or almost twice that of the preceding 50-year period from 1950-2000 (264,000 acres). It should be noted that many ecosystems in the state that previously adapted to frequent low to moderate severity fires have seen shifts in reduced fire frequency (missed fire cycles), associated fuel build-up, and subsequent increases in fire severity when wildfires eventually occur. That said, other ecosystems appear to be burning too frequently – a situation facilitated by exotic invasive species that cause fundamental changes to post-fire fuel dynamics. These changes facilitate early seral phases to re-burn within a matter of only a couple years, and may reduce or eliminate native species that require time to develop to maturity and assure regeneration. And, in areas such as Fresno County, where ecosystems are commingled across various regimes, there is more uniformity of mixed-and high-severity effects that are not as clearly linked to basic ecosystem function. Therefore, in many mixed conifer systems, while the modern trend indicates an increase in fire rates, the type of fire and its typical interval are still significantly departed from the frequent low and mixed-severity fires that dominated low and mid-elevation confer forests throughout California (Source: 2010 Assessment Chapter 2.1: Wildfire Threat to Ecosystem Health and Community Safety, p.102;(http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/assessment2010)). Climate Change Due to higher emissions, historically unprecedented warming is projected by the end of the 21st century (See Figure 4.54 below), and in 2015 and 2016, California has experienced the highest number of days over 100 degrees since the 1930’s. Even under a pathway of lower greenhouse gas emissions, average annual temperatures are projected to most likely exceed historical record levels by the middle of the 21st century. 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 Fresno County 4.154 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.54 California Observed and Projected Temperature Change Source: https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ca Figure 4.55 California Observed Number of Extremely Hot Days Source: https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ca Fresno County 4.155 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Finally, it should be noted that Fresno County potentially has less capacity to address future wildfire risk related to climate change due to shortages in water, vital to combating wildfires. In California, rising temperatures are projected to increase the average lowest elevation at which snow falls, reducing water storage in the snowpack. 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of the types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B): [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of an] estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C): [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of] providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. With Fresno County’s hazards identified and profiled, the HMPC conducted a vulnerability assessment to describe the impact that each hazard would have on the County. The vulnerability assessment quantifies, to the extent feasible using best available data, assets at risk to natural hazards and estimates potential losses. This section focuses on the risks to the County as a whole. Data from the individual participating jurisdictions was also evaluated and is integrated here and in the jurisdictional annexes and noted where the risk differs for a particular jurisdiction within the planning area. This vulnerability assessment followed the methodology described in the FEMA publication Understanding Your Risks—Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses, as well as Tasks 5 and 6 of the 2013 FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook. The vulnerability assessment first describes the total vulnerability and values at risk and then discusses vulnerability by hazard. Data used to support this assessment included the following: • County GIS data (hazards, base layers, and assessor’s data) • Statewide GIS datasets compiled by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services to support mitigation planning Fresno County 4.156 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection GIS datasets including tree mortality data • FEMA’s HAZUS-MH for earthquake modelling • Written descriptions of inventory and risks provided by participating jurisdictions • A refined flood loss estimation by jurisdiction with the use of geospatial analysis 1% and 0.2% annual chance flooding as well as the 200-year floodplain. • Existing plans and studies • Personal interviews with planning team members and staff from the County and participating jurisdictions 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk As a starting point for analyzing the planning area’s vulnerability to identified hazards, the HMPC used a variety of data to define a baseline against which all disaster impacts could be compared. This section describes significant assets at risk in the planning area. Data used in this baseline assessment included: • Total values at risk • Critical facility inventory • Historic, cultural, and natural resources • Growth and development trends • Social vulnerability Total Values at Risk The following data from the Fresno County Assessor’s Office is based on the certified roll values for 2017. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the County, as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties within the County. It is also important to note, in regard to a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table 4.26 shows the building values for the entire Fresno County planning area (e.g., the total values at risk) by jurisdiction. The values for unincorporated Fresno County are provided in Table 4.27 by property type. For more information on building exposure for each jurisdiction, see the appropriate annex. Fresno County 4.157 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.26 Fresno County Exposure by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Clovis 31,568 41,565 $7,130,096,545 $4,158,423,181 $11,288,519,726 Coalinga 3,271 3,797 $393,744,248 $232,224,345 $625,968,593 Firebaugh 1,559 2,024 $190,892,252 $145,901,471 $336,793,723 Fowler 1,802 2,003 $331,505,557 $240,388,754 $571,894,311 Fresno 129,037 203,846 $24,434,591,987 $16,375,186,070 $40,809,778,057 Huron 805 1,085 $83,013,224 $50,216,784 $133,230,008 Kerman 3,167 4,520 $512,764,662 $318,872,167 $831,636,829 Kingsburg 3,626 4,003 $636,380,099 $425,477,080 $1,061,857,179 Mendota 1,764 2,400 $186,949,712 $113,187,887 $300,137,599 Orange Cove 1,534 1,816 $156,857,250 $87,111,922 $243,969,172 Parlier 2,474 2,938 $289,602,563 $177,506,477 $467,109,040 Reedley 5,678 9,894 $865,266,269 $550,731,018 $1,415,997,287 San Joaquin 687 1,246 $60,346,713 $40,082,400 $100,429,113 Sanger 6,343 8,354 $817,023,618 $491,412,710 $1,308,436,328 Selma 5,789 7,449 $770,773,863 $491,867,089 $1,262,640,952 Unincorporated 60,371 68,147 $11,373,573,733 $8,721,106,775 $20,094,680,508 Total 259,475 365,087 $48,233,382,295 $32,619,696,128 $80,853,078,423 Source: Amec Foster Wheeler based on information from Fresno County Assessor 2017 Table 4.27 Building Exposure for Unincorporated County, by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 7,151 7,143 $1,244,142,066 $1,244,142,066 $2,488,284,132 Commercial 936 1,873 $330,979,055 $330,979,055 $661,958,110 Exempt 383 763 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 810 1,112 $685,043,441 $1,027,565,162 $1,712,608,603 Multi-Residential 358 875 $73,852,860 $36,926,430 $110,779,290 Open Space 10,498 8,263 $3,120,718,551 $3,120,718,551 $6,241,437,102 Residential 40,224 48,105 $5,916,124,497 $2,958,062,249 $8,874,186,746 Unknown 11 13 $2,713,263 $2,713,263 $5,426,526 Total 60,371 68,147 $11,373,573,733 $8,721,106,775 $20,094,680,508 Source: Amec Foster Wheeler based on information from Fresno County Assessor 2017 Critical Facility Inventory Of significant concern with respect to any disaster event is the location of critical facilities in the planning area. Critical facilities are often defined as those services and facilities essential during a major emergency and that, if damaged, would result in severe consequences to public health and safety or facilities that, if unusable or unreachable because of a major emergency, would seriously Fresno County 4.158 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Critical facilities include, but are not limited to: • Schools and other publicly owned facilities; • Hospitals, nursing homes, and housing likely to have occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid injury or death during a major disaster; • Police stations, fire stations, vehicle and equipment storage facilities, and emergency operations centers that are needed for response activities before, during, and after an event; • Public and private utility facilities that are vital to maintaining or restoring normal services to damaged areas before, during, and after an event; and • Structures or facilities that produce, use, or store highly volatile, flammable, explosive, toxic, and/or water-reactive materials. An updated inventory of critical facilities in the planning area based on data from a combination of Fresno County GIS and the Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data (HIFLD 2017) is provided in Table 4.28. A noted limitation is the lack of facilities for water and power which was not available in the County or HIFLD datasets. Critical facilities in the County are illustrated in Figure 4.56, with more detail shown in Figure 4.57, Figure 4.58, and Figure 4.59. More information on critical facilities in the participating jurisdictions can be found in the jurisdictional annexes. Table 4.28 Fresno County Planning Area’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Unincorporated All Cities County Totals Airport 8 7 15 Behavioral Health 6 6 CalARP 87 69 156 Colleges & Universities* 24 24 Communications 4 4 County Government 4 4 Courthouse 3 3 Daycare 155 155 Department of Agriculture 1 3 4 Department of Public Health 1 4 5 Department of Public Works 11 2 13 Department of Social Services 11 11 Detention Center 4 4 District Attorney 2 2 Fire Station* 36 42 78 General Services 3 3 Health Care 18 18 Nursing Home* 3 36 39 Police* 24 24 School 127 334 461 Sheriff 2 5 7 Fresno County 4.159 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Critical Facilities Type Unincorporated All Cities County Totals Supplemental College* 4 4 Urgent Care* 7 7 Wastewater Treatment Plant* 2 2 Total 278 771 1,049 Source: Fresno County GIS and *HIFLD 2017 Power and water utilities are not mapped Fresno County 4.160 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.56 Critical Facilities in Fresno County Fresno County 4.161 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.57 Critical Facilities in Western Fresno County Fresno County 4.162 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.58 Critical Facilities in Central Fresno County Fresno County 4.163 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.59 Critical Facilities in Eastern Fresno County Fresno County 4.164 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic, Cultural, and Natural Resources Assessing the vulnerability of Fresno County to disaster also involves inventorying the historic, cultural, and natural assets of the area. This step is important for the following reasons: • The community may decide that these types of resources warrant a greater degree of protection due to their unique and irreplaceable nature and contribution to the overall economy. • If these resources are impacted by a disaster, knowing so ahead of time allows for more prudent care in the immediate aftermath, when the potential for additional impacts are higher. • The rules for reconstruction, restoration, rehabilitation, and/or replacement are often different for these types of designated resources. • Natural resources can have beneficial functions that reduce the impacts of natural hazards, for example, wetlands and riparian habitat help absorb and attenuate floodwaters. Historic and Cultural Resources Fresno County has a large stock of historically significant homes, public buildings, and landmarks. To inventory these resources, the HMPC collected information from a number of sources. The California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) was the primary source of information. The OHP is responsible for the administration of federally and state mandated historic preservation programs to further the identification, evaluation, registration, and protection of California’s irreplaceable archaeological, and historical resources. OHP administers the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Historical Landmarks, and the California Points of Historical Interest programs. Each program has different eligibility criteria and procedural requirements. • The National Register of Historic Places is the Nation’s official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation. The National Register is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect historic and archeological resources. Properties listed include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of the Interior. • The California Register of Historical Resources program encourages public recognition and protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological and cultural significance; identifies historical resources for state and local planning purposes; determines eligibility for state historic preservation grant funding; and affords certain protections under the California Environmental Quality Act. The register is the authoritative guide to the state’s significant historical and archeological resources. • California Historical Landmarks are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of statewide significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific, technical, religious, experimental, or other value. Landmarks #770 and above are automatically listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. Fresno County 4.165 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • California Points of Historical Interest are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of local (city or county) significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific, technical, religious, experimental, or other value. Points designated after December 1997 and recommended by the State Historical Resources Commission are also listed in the California Register. Historical resources included in the programs above are identified in Table 4.29. Table 4.29 Fresno County’s Historical Resources Name (Landmark Plaque Number) National Register State Landmark Point of Intere st Date Listed City Arroyo De Cantua (344) X 8/8/1939 Coalinga Bank of Italy (N1140) X 10/29/1982 Fresno Birdwell Rock Petroglyph Site (N2193) X 3/12/2003 Coalinga Brix, H.H., Mansion (N1235, P438) X X 9/15/1983 (N) 10/1/1975 (P) Fresno Coaling Station A (P7) X 12/16/1966 Coalinga Coalinga Polk Street School (N1099) X 5/6/1982 Coalinga Dinkey Creek Bridge (N1957) X 9/5/1996 Dinkey Creek Einstein House (N554, P440) X X 1/31/1978 (N) 10/1/1975 (P) Fresno Fig Garden Woman’s Club (P799) X 7/18/1994 Fresno Forestiere Underground Gardens (N524, 916) X X 10/28/1977 (N) 1/31/1978 Fresno Fort Miller (584) X 5/22/1957 Friant Fowler’s Switch (P299) X 5/2/1973 Fowler Fresno Bee Building (N1158) X 11/1/1982 Fresno Fresno Brewing Company Office and Warehouse (N1260) X 1/5/1984 Fresno Fresno City (488) X 8/7/1951 Tranquillity Fresno Memorial Auditorium (N1867) X 5/10/1994 Fresno Fresno Republican Printery Building (N738) X 1/2/1979 Fresno Fresno Sanitary Landfill (N2140) X 8/7/2001 Fresno Gamlin Cabin (N471) X 3/8/1977 Wilsonia Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church (N1450) X 7/31/1986 Fresno Hotel Californian (N2235) X 4/21/2004 Fresno Kearney, M. Theo, Park and Mansion (N335, P5) X X 3/13/1975 (N) 8/5/1966 (P) Fresno Kindler, Paul, House (N1141) X 10/29/1982 Fresno Kingsburg Railroad Depot (P694) X 3/30/1988 Kingsburg Knapp Cabin (N727) X 12/20/1978 Cedar Grove Maulbridge Apartments (N1100) X 5/6/1982 Fresno Meux House (N324, P437) X X 1/13/1975 (N) 10/1/1975 (P) Fresno Milwood Townsite (P4) X 8/5/1966 Miramonte Fresno County 4.166 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Name (Landmark Plaque Number) National Register State Landmark Point of Intere st Date Listed City Old Administration Building, Fresno City College (N282) X 5/1/1974 Fresno Old Fresno Water Tower (N114) X 10/14/1971 Fresno Orange Cove Santa Fe Railway Depot (N658) X 8/29/1978 Orange Cove Pantages, Alexander, Theater (N559) X 2/23/1978 Fresno Physicians Building (N701) X 11/20/1978 Fresno Reedley National Bank (N1344) X 2/28/1985 Reedley Reedley Opera House Complex (N1276) X 4/5/1984 Reedley Rehorn House (N982) X 1/8/1982 Fresno Romain, Frank, House (N986) X 1/11/1982 Fresno San Joaquin Light & Power Corporation Building (N2310) X 1/3/2006 Fresno Santa Fe Hotel (N1673) X 3/14/1991 Fresno Santa Fe Passenger Depot (N443) X 11/7/1976 Fresno Settlement of Academy (P45) X 9/22/1967 Toll House Shorty Lovelace Historic District (N555)* X 1/31/1978 Pinehurst Site of First Junior College in California (803) X 6/28/1965 Fresno Site of the Fresno Free Speech Fight of the Industrial Workers of the World (873) X 7/19/1974 Fresno Southern Pacific Passenger Depot (N561) X 3/21/1978 Fresno Stoner House (N1390) X 10/17/1985 Sanger Sycamore Point (P226) X 10/5/1971 Friant Temporary Detention Camps for Japanese Americans-Fresno Assembly Center (934) X 5/13/1980 Fresno Temporary Detention Camps for Japanese Americans-Pinedale Assembly Center (934) X 5/13/1980 Pinedale Tollhouse (P145) X 11/3/1969 Toll House Tower Theatre (N1795) X 9/24/1992 Fresno Twining Laboratories (N1681) X 3/26/1991 Fresno Warehouse Row (N564)* X 3/24/1978 Fresno YWCA Building (N673, P439) X X 9/21/1978(N) 10/1/1975 (P) Fresno Source: California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation, http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ *Historic district The National Park Service administers two programs that recognize the importance of historic resources, specifically those pertaining to architecture and engineering. While inclusion in these programs does not give these structures any sort of protection, they are valuable historic assets. Note: Since these structures are not protected, it is possible that they no longer exist. • The Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) documents America’s architectural heritage. The following are the HABS structures in Fresno County: − Burnett Nurse’s Home, 120 North Howard Street, Fresno − Camp Barbour Blockhouse, Millerton vicinity − Fort Miller Bakery, Lake Millerton, Millerton − Fort Miller Ford, Lake Millerton, Millerton Fresno County 4.167 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan − Fort Miller Hospital, Lake Millerton, Millerton − Fort Miller Mess Hall, Lake Millerton, Millerton − Fort Miller Officer’s Quarters, Lake Millerton, Millerton − Fort Miller, Lake Millerton, Millerton − Ira H. Brooks House, 350 North Fulton Avenue, Fresno − Shelter Cabin, Muir Pass, Big Pine vicinity • The Historic American Engineering Record documents historic sites and structures related to engineering and industry. The following are the HAER structures in Fresno County: − Big Creek Hydroelectric System, Big Creek Town, Operator House Garage, Orchard Avenue south of Huntington Lake Road, Big Creek vicinity − Big Creek Hydroelectric System, Big Creek Town, Operator House, Orchard Avenue south of Huntington Lake Road, Big Creek vicinity − Big Creek Hydroelectric System, Powerhouse 3 Penstock Standpipes, Big Creek, Big Creek vicinity − Big Creek Hydroelectric System, Powerhouse 8, Operator Cottage, Big Creek, Big Creek vicinity − Hume Lake Dam, Sequoia National Forest, Hume The Fresno County General Plan Background Report identifies the following, some of which are already mentioned above, as historic properties in Fresno County: 1.O.O.F. Hall Academy Alamo/Helm House Alexander Home American Self Storage (denied by city) Anderson Home Arioto, Thomas; Home Armenian Presbyterian Church (demolished) Arroyo De Cantua Aten Residence Back (Beck) Home Baker Valley Historic District Bank of America Building Bank of Italy (Fresno) Bank of Italy (Reedley) Barkdale Home Barton Opera House (non extent) Basque Hotel Bauder Home Bean Home Beeler/Thorton Shop (denied by City) Bekins Van & Storage Bernhauer House Berry Home Berven Rug Mills Besaw Home Bethel Lutheran Church Bing Kong Tong Asso. Building Black Market (denied by city) Bonsel/Rush/Hunt Home (relocated) Booker House Boole Tree Bow On Ton Asso. Building Brix Apartments (removed from city list) Brix Home Burks, Drs.; Home Caldwell Home California Products Company Camp Barbour Blockhouse Campbell’s Store Cardwell Home Carlson Home Carmel Saddlery Carnegie Library Centennial Stump Centerville Central Packaging/Supply Chicago Stump Chorbajian Home (demolished) City Fire Alarm Station City Fire Alarm Station Clements Service Station Clovis Carnegie Library Clovis Cole Home Cobb Home Collins Residence Converse Basin Grove Converse Hoist Site Cowdrey Home Craycroft Home Davidson Home Einstein Home El Camino Viejo Elkhorn Springs Fresno County 4.168 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Euless Home (denied by city) Evinger Home Ewing Home (denied by city) Eymann, A.C. Home Eymann, J.J. Home Farr Residence Fassett Home (demolished) Fig Garden Women’s Club Firebaugh’s Ferry First Church of Christian Science First Congressional Church First Fresno Store First Mexican Baptist Church First Presbyterian Church (proposed) First Store in Fresno First Store, James Pager 1872 First United Methodist Church (proposed) Forestiere Underground Gardens Forkner Home Fort Miller Blockhouse Fort Miller Site Fort Washington Site Forthcamp Home Fowler’s Switch Frank Dusy Home Site Frankenau Home (proposed) Free Speech Fight Site Freemont, John C.; Kearney Park Fresno Bee Building Fresno Brewery Company Fresno Buddhist Temple Fresno City College Library Fresno City Hall Fresno Copper Mine Fresno County Hall of Records Fresno County Seat Fresno Fire Alarm Station Fresno Irrigation District/Moses J. Church Fresno Junior College Fresno Memorial Auditorium Fresno Planning Mill Fresno Republican/Print Building Fresno Temple Church of God Fresno Traction Company Fresno Trolley Cars Gamlin Cabin Gemer Home Gerlitz Home Gibbs Home Giffen Home (denied by city) Gilbert Residence (denied by city) Goodman Residence Graff Home Grant House Grant Tree/Nations Christmas Tree Green Bush Spring Plaque Gregory Home Griffen Home; Blackstone Ave Groundwater Irrigation Plaque Guarantee Savings Building Gundelfinger, Henry, Home Gundelfinger, Herbert, Home Gundelfinger, Louis, Home Hanger Home Hansen House Hansen, Jens; House Hare, Drs., Home Hayhurst Home Hays Home Helm Building Hero Home Hewitt Residence Hines Home Hines Home; Blackstone Ave Hobbs Parsons Produce Co. Holt Lumber Company Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church Hoover Residence Hotel California Hotel Fresno Hotel Virginia Howard, Dr. Oliver, Home Hughes Home Hume Lake Dam Hunt/Bonsel Home (relocated) Huntington/Douglas Stump Ingmire, Ovid; Home J.C. Penny Store Jamieson Home Japanese American Detention Site Jensen Home Johnson Home Johnson Home; Illinois Ave Johnson, N.M., Home Kearney Boulevard Kearney Mansion Kerman Union High School Kern Kay Hotel Kindler, Paul House King Solomon Lodge Kings River Irrigation Plaque Kingsburg Railroad Depot Knapp Cabin; Cedar Grove Kutner Home La Libertad Laguna de Tache Land Office (burned) Laton Library Building Legler Residence Leslie House Letcher Liberty Theatre/Hardys Long/Black Home Main Home Main Post Office Maracci, Joseph, Home Mason Building Masonic Hall Mattel Building Maubridge Apartments McAlpine Home McCollum Home McKay Home Mclndoo/Phillips Home Meux Home, Museum Meux, John, Home (burned) Mill Ditch Miller Home Millerton Site Millwood Site Mink Home Mosgrove Home Mundroff Home National Warehouse Nestel Home Neverman Home Fresno County 4.169 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Newman Home Nye, Judge, Home Ohannesian Home Oil City Okamoto’s Dept. Store Okonogi Home Old Administration Building Old Barn "M" Street Old Clovis Courthouse Old Fresno City Site Old Fresno Unified School Building Old Fresno Water Tower Old St. Agnes Hospital Orangedale Odd Fellow’s Lodge 211 (proposed) Owen Home P.G.kE. Building Pantages, Alexander; Theater Parret Home Patterson, T.W., Building Pattison House Peden Home Peterson Home Phelan, James, Building Physicians Building Pine Flat Dann Plaque Pinedale Elementary Plaque Pollasky Railroad Poole’s Ferry Porteous Home Posa de China Site Post Office Substation; Inyo Prescott, F.K. Home Post Office; Tulare Prescott, F.K. Home Pueblo de las Juntas Radin-Kamp Dept. Store Railroad Anniversary Plaque; 100 Anniversary Rainbow Ballroom Ramona Apartments (demolished) Reedley National Bank Reedley Opera House Rehorn Residence Reyburn Home Rheingans Home Riverview Ranch House Robinson Home Roessler Home Roessler Winery Romain Home Rowell Building Rowell Home Rustigan Building Rutherford Home (not extant) Saddler Office Supply San Joaquin Grocers Wholesale San Joaquin Valley Coal Mine San Joaquin Valley Railroad Sanger Depot Museum Sanger Lodge #316 (proposed) Sanger Womens Club Santa Fe Depot, Fresno Santa Fe Depot; Orange Cove Santa Fe Motel Saroyan Home; El Monte Way Saroyan Home; Griffith Way Schmidt Home Schutz Residence (non extant) Scottish Rite Temple Scottsburg Site Security Bank Building Selma Flouring Mill Selma, Townsite Sharer Home Shipp Home Shorty Lovelace Hist. District Shuttera Home Solorio Residence Southern Pacific Depot Spencer Home Squaw Leap Archeological Dit. St. Alphonsus Catholic Church St. Ansgar’s Lutheran Church St. Genevieve’s Catholic St. John’s Cathedral St. John’s Hall School St. John’s Rectory St. Paul’s Armenian Church Staley House Station “A” Postal Service Steinwand Home Stone Home Stoner House Sun Maid Raisin Growers (demolished) Sun Stereo Warehouse Swedish Methodist Church Swift Home Sycamore Bend Teilrnan Home Temple Beth Israel Theatre 3 Thomas, Montgomery; Home Thompson Residence Tinkler Mission Chapel Tollhouse Grade Towne Apartments Tranquillity Site Traveler’s Hotel Turner Building Turpin Home Twin Sisters/McVey House Twining Laboratories Van Ness Gate Van Volkenburgh Home Vartanian Home Vincent Home Vincent Home; San Pablo Ave Warehouse Row Warehouse Row Packing Warehouse Row Storehouse Warrior’s/Pantages Theater Water Works Assoc. Webb House Weems House Welsh Home Wilson Theater Building Wishon Home Wishon, A.G.; Home Wishon, A.G.; Home, Fulton St Woolfolk Home YWCA Residence Hall Yost & Webb Mortuary Yost Sr Webb Mortuary/Martin Young Home Zacky Farm Grain Elevator Fresno County 4.170 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A 1988 publication from the state’s Office of Historical Preservation identified 16 “ethnic historic sites” in Fresno County. Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California was originally conceived to broaden the spectrum of ethnic community participation in historic preservation activities and to provide better information on ethnic history and associated sites. The 16 sites are as follows: • Burr Ranch/Smith Brothers Ranch (Black American) • Fowler City Park (Black American) • Gabriel Moore Ranch (Black American) • Young’s Place (Black American) • First Mexican Baptist Church (Mexican American) • Fresno Buddhist Church (Japanese American) • Fresno Nihonmachi (Japanese American) • H. Sumida Company (Japanese American) • Iseki Labor Camp (Japanese American) • Kamikawa Brothers (Japanese American) • Nihin Byoin-Hashiba Sanitarium (Japanese American) • Okonogi Hospital Site (Japanese American) • Reedley Kyogi -Kai Hall (Japanese American) • Bowles (Japanese American) • Selma Japanese Mission Church (Japanese American) • KGST (Mexican American) The Fresno County General Plan Background Report also identifies 13 museums in Fresno County, most of which are located in the City of Fresno. They are all privately owned and operated nonprofit organizations. • African-American Museum, Fresno (city) • Centro Bellas Artes, Fresno (city) • Clovis-Big Creek Historical Museum, Clovis • Discovery Center, Fresno (city) • Forestiere Underground Gardens, Fresno (city) • Fresno Art Museum, Fresno (city) • Fresno Metropolitan Museum, Fresno (city) • German Museum, Fresno (city) • Kearney Mansion Museum, Fresno (city) • Meux Home Museum, Fresno (city) • R.C. Baker Memorial Museum, Coalinga • Reedley Museum, Reedley • Sanger Depot Museum, Sanger Fresno County 4.171 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan It should be noted that these lists may not be complete, as they may not include those properties currently in the nomination process and not yet listed. Additionally, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), any property over 50 years of age is considered a historic resource and is potentially eligible for the National Register. Thus, in the event that the property is to be altered, or has been altered, as the result of a major federal action, the property must be evaluated under the guidelines set forth by CEQA and NEPA. Structural mitigation projects are considered alterations for the purpose of this regulation. Natural Resources Natural resources are important to include in benefit-cost analyses for future projects and may be used to leverage additional funding for mitigation projects that also contribute to community goals for protecting sensitive natural resources. Awareness of natural assets can lead to opportunities for meeting multiple objectives. For instance, protecting wetlands areas protects sensitive habitat as well as stores and reduces the force of floodwaters. Central Coast Range Region Only a small portion of the far western edge of Fresno County lies in the central Coast Range region. This area supports a mosaic of summer dry grassland, blue oak and blue oak-foothill pine woodland, and chaparral habitat types. Western Fresno County transitions from the grasslands and agriculture of the Central Valley to the inner coast region. Mostly intermittent streams flow from the inner Coast Range to the valley floor. Some can support riparian habitat that provides additional value to both resident and migratory wildlife. San Joaquin Valley Floor Region More than 50 percent of Fresno County lies in the southern San Joaquin Valley subregion of the Central Valley. This southern subregion is generally hotter and drier than the subregion to the north and supports some desert elements. The valley floor region has undergone extensive conversion of native habitats that existed before European settlement of the state. Presently, this region supports extensive amounts of agriculture and urban development around the Fresno, Clovis, and Sanger areas. In the few remaining areas not converted to urban or agriculture use, unique biological features persist. Mixed in with areas of grassland habitat are freshwater and alkaline vernal pools that support unique native flora and fauna. A few small isolated areas of sodic vernal pools occur in the northwestern part of the County, primarily at the Kerman reserve. Concentrations of freshwater vernal pools occur in a belt along the northeast edge of the valley floor region north of the Kings River. In the highly modified Central Valley, vernal pool areas are often grazed but remain a unique biological relic of native California species in the natural landscape. The rivers and streams that flow from the mountains in the east historically meandered through broad floodplain. Because of urbanization and agriculture, these broad floodplains have been Fresno County 4.172 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan restricted to narrower belts along the rivers and streams or otherwise modified for flood control. In the upper San Joaquin River, the floodplains are naturally constrained by high bluffs bordering the river. Within this modified landscape, the remaining riparian habitat provides corridors and linkages to and from the biotic regions of the County and is of great value to resident and migratory wildlife. The San Joaquin and Kings river systems and the Fresno Slough are the major waterways in the County. Central Southern Sierra Nevada Foothills Fresno County includes a portion of the central and southern subregions of the Sierra Nevada Mountains that can be further divided into a central/southern Sierra Nevada foothill and central/southern high Sierra Nevada district. The foothill district is best differentiated from the high Sierra and the San Joaquin Valley areas by habitat types that change with topography. The foothills that are the transition from the valley floor to the high Sierra can be characterized by blue oak and blue oak-foothill pine woodlands and chaparral habitats dotted with areas of serpentine soils. Density and canopy coverage of tree species is highly variable depending on natural conditions such as soils, topography, slope and aspect, and human influences from grazing, hardwood harvesting, and other land clearing activities. Moderate gradient perennial and intermittent streams and rivers support a varied amount of riparian habitat that provide valuable habitat for wildlife. Central/Southern High Sierra Nevada The transition from the foothills to the high Sierra Nevada can be characterized by the addition of ponderosa pine at the low elevations into the dominant plant species composition (from around 2,000 feet). The foothills to high Sierra biotic regions make a transition through a mixed hardwood conifer habitat to those habitats dominated by conifers, such as ponderosa pine, white fir, and giant sequoia. In the higher elevations, Jeffrey pine, lodgepole pine, and treeless alpine communities dominate. Rivers and streams are at a higher gradient than their foothill or valley floor reaches and support a montane riparian habitat that, like the others, provides valuable habitat for resident and migratory wildlife. The majority of the high Sierra region in Fresno County is included in the Sequoia and Sierra National Forests and Kings Canyon National Park and managed by their respective federal agencies for recreational, timber, tourism, and wilderness values. Fresno County 4.173 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.60 Fresno County’s Generalized Biotic Regions and Habitat Mosaic Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.174 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Each region hosts specific habitats that together support a wide variety of vegetation and wildlife (see Table 4.30), and each region has different susceptibilities to hazards such as wildfire, flood, and drought. Fresno County recognizes the importance of protecting, preserving, conserving, and restoring this biodiversity. Table 4.30 Fresno County Habitat Types by Biotic Region Central Coast Range San Joaquin Valley Floor Central/Southern Sierra Nevada Foothills Central/Southern High Sierra Nevada • Annual/Ruderal Grassland • Valley Oak Woodland • Pasture • Cropland • Valley-Foothill Riparian/Riverine • Fresh Emergent Wetland • Larustrine • Blue Oak Woodland • Blue Oak-Foothill Pine Woodland • Mixed Chaparral • Chamise-Redshank Chaparral • Annual/Ruderal Grassland • Vernal Pool • Alkali Scrub • Pasture • Cropland • Orchard-Vineyard • Urban • Valley-Foothill Riparian • Fresh Emergent Wetland • Lacustrine • Annual/Ruderal Grassland • Pasture • Cropland • Orchard-Vineyard • Urban • Valley-Foothill Riparian • Fresh Emergent Wetland • Larustrine • Blue Oak Woodland • Blue Oak Foothill Fine Woodland • Mixed Chaparral • Chamise-Redshank Chaparral • Montane Chaparal • Montane Hardwood-Conifer • Montane Riparian • Sierran Mixed Conifer • Ponderosa Pine • Jeffrey Pine • White Fir • Red Fir • Lodgepole Pine • Subalpine Conifer • Alpine Dwarf Scrub • Wet Meadow • Bitterbrush • Juniper Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Approximately one third of the County lies within land under federal jurisdiction. The USDA Forest Service and National Parks Service manage these lands for recreation, biology, wilderness, tourism, timber, and mining under federal guidelines, policies, and laws. The biotic regions that are outside of federal ownership and, therefore, most subject to development are the Central Coast Range, San Joaquin Valley Floor, and the lower Sierra Nevada foothills. For purposes of this plan, natural resources include special-status species, sensitive habitats, wetlands, and other natural resources identified by the HMPC. Figure 4.61 further illustrates Fresno County’s environmental features. Fresno County 4.175 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.61 Fresno County’s Environmental Features Fresno County 4.176 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Special-Status Species To further understand natural resources that may be particularly vulnerable to a hazard event, as well as those that need consideration when implementing mitigation activities, it is important to identify at-risk species (i.e., endangered species) in the planning area. An endangered species is any species of fish, plant life, or wildlife that is in danger of extinction throughout all or most of its range. A threatened species is a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Both endangered and threatened species are protected by law and any future hazard mitigation projects are subject to these laws. Candidate species are plants and animals that have been proposed as endangered or threatened but are not currently listed. Information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Natural Diversity Data Base, a program that inventories the status and locations of rare plants and animals in California, was combined to create an inventory of special-status species in Fresno County. The full inventory, along with information about habitat requirements and distribution where available from the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, is available in Appendix B: Special-Status Species in Fresno County. Table 4.31 lists national and state endangered, threatened, rare, and candidate species in Fresno County by species type. Table 4.31 Endangered, Threatened, Rare, and Candidate Species in Fresno County Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status California Status Amphibians California red-legged frog Rana aurora draytonii Threatened None California tiger salamander* Ambystoma californiense Threatened None Sierra Madre (=mountain) yellow-legged frog Rana muscosa Endangered None Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog Rana sierrae Candidate None Yosemite toad Bufo canorus Candidate None Birds Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Delisted Endangered Bank swallow Riparia None Threatened California condor Gymnogyps californianus Endangered Endangered Great gray owl Strix nebulosa None Endangered Swainson's hawk Buteo swainsoni None Threatened Western yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Candidate Endangered Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii None Endangered Fish Central Valley steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss Threatened None Lahontan cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) clarkii henshawi Threatened None Paiute cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) clarkii seleniris Threatened None Invertebrates Valley elderberry longhorn beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Threatened None Vernal pool fairy shrimp* Branchinecta lynchi Threatened None Fresno County 4.177 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status California Status Vernal pool tadpole shrimp* Lepidurus packardi Endangered None Mammals California wolverine Gulo None Threatened Fresno kangaroo rat* Dipodomys nitratoides exilis Endangered Endangered Giant kangaroo rat Dipodomys ingens Endangered Endangered Nelson's antelope squirrel Ammospermophilus nelsoni None Threatened Pacific fisher Martes pennanti (pacifica) DPS Candidate None San Joaquin kit fox Vulpes macrotis mutica Endangered Threatened Sierra Nevada (=California) bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis sierrae (=californiana) Endangered Endangered Sierra Nevada red fox Vulpes necator None Threatened Tipton kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides Endangered Endangered Plants Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop Gratiola heterosepala None Endangered California jewel-flower Caulanthus californicus Endangered Endangered Congdon's lewisia Lewisia congdonii None Rare Greene's tuctoria Tuctoria greenei Endangered Rare Hairy Orcutt grass* Orcuttia pilosa Endangered Endangered Hartweg's golden sunburst Pseudobahia bahiifolia Endangered Endangered Hoover's eriastrum Eriastrum hooveri Delisted None Keck's checkerbloom (=checker-mallow)* Sidalcea keckii Endangered None Mariposa pussypaws Calyptridium pulchellum Threatened None Palmate-bracted bird's-beak Cordylanthus palmatus Endangered Endangered San Benito evening-primrose Camissonia benitensis Threatened None San Joaquin adobe sunburst Pseudobahia peirsonii Threatened Endangered San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass* Orcuttia inaequalis Threatened Endangered San Joaquin woollythreads Monolopia congdonii (=Lembertia congdonii) Endangered None Slender moonwort Botrychium lineare Candidate None Succulent (=fleshy) owl's-clover Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta Threatened Endangered Tompkins' sedge Carex tompkinsii None Rare Tree-anemone Carpenteria californica None Threatened Reptiles Blunt-nosed leopard lizard Gambelia (=Croataphytus) sila Endangered Endangered Giant garter snake Thamnophis gigas Threatened Threatened Sources: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento Office, www.fws.gov/sacramento/; California Natural Diversity Data Base, www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/ *According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, critical habitat is designated for this species Sensitive Habitats The California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base identifies 12 sensitive habitat types in Fresno County: • Big tree forest • Coastal and valley freshwater marsh • Great Valley mesquite scrub Fresno County 4.178 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Great valley mixed riparian forest • Monvero residual dunes • Northern basalt flow vernal pool • Northern claypan vernal pool • Northern hardpan vernal pool • Northern vernal pool • Sycamore alluvial woodland • Valley needlegrass grassland • Valley sink scrub Wetlands Wetlands are habitats in which soils are intermittently or permanently saturated or inundated. Wetland habitats vary from rivers to seasonal ponding of alkaline flats and include swamps, bogs, marshes, vernal pools, and riparian woodlands. Wetlands are considered to be waters of the United States and are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as well as the California Department of Fish and Game (CDF&G). Where the waters provide habitat for federally endangered species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may also have authority. Wetlands are a valuable natural resource for communities due to their benefits to water quality, wildlife protection, recreation, and education and play an important role in hazard mitigation. Wetlands provide drought relief in water-scarce areas where the relationship between water storage and streamflow regulation are vital and reduce flood peaks and slowly release floodwaters to downstream areas. When surface runoff is dampened, the erosive powers of the water are greatly diminished. Furthermore, the reduction in the velocity of inflowing water as it passes through a wetland helps remove sediment being transported by the water. Notable categories of wetlands found in Fresno County include wet meadows in the mountainous region, vernal pools in the foothills, marshes in the valley trough, and reclaimed agricultural lands in western Fresno County. The CDF&G manages several of the major identified wetlands in Fresno County, including the Mendota Wildlife Management Area, Kerman Ecological Reserve, Alkali Sink Ecological Reserve, and smaller wetlands management units along the San Joaquin River. While these lands are currently being adequately protected, environmental concern is primarily focused on wetlands that are not yet identified and protection of remaining vernal pools. Several vernal pool complexes are located near Friant between Friant Road and the Friant-Kern Canal and in the area south of Academy and east of Red Mountain. A large concentration of very high quality vernal pools is found in these areas, and they are considered to be some of the best examples of vernal pools in the state. The County’s vernal pools are threatened by urban development and conversion to intensive agriculture. Other Natural Resources While some of these resources are not owned or managed by the County, they are important assets for the County (see Figure 4.62). Fresno County 4.179 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Sierra National Forest—Managed by the USDA Forest Service, makes up much of the eastern portion of the County north of the Kings River • Sequoia National Forest—Managed by the USDA Forest Service, makes up a small portion of the County south of the Kings River • Kings Canyon National Park—Managed by the National Park Service, encompasses a portion of southeastern Fresno County • John Muir, Ansel Adams, Monarch, Kaiser, and Dinkey Lake Wilderness Areas— Managed by the Bureau of Land Management, located in the eastern portion of the County • Mendota Wildlife Area—Operated by the California Department of Fish and Game, located three miles south of Mendota • Kerman Ecological Preserve—Operated by the California Department of Fish and Game • Alkali Sink Ecological Reserve—Operated by the California Department of Fish and Game • Allen Ranch—640 acres operated by the California Department of Fish and Game • Millerton Lake State Recreational Area—Administered by the California Department of Parks and Recreation Fresno County 4.180 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.62 National Forests and Parks in Fresno County Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.181 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Growth and Development Trends As part of the planning process, the HMPC looked at changes in growth and development, both past and future, and examined these changes in the context of hazard-prone areas, and how the changes in growth and development affect loss estimates and vulnerability. Information from the Fresno County General Plan Housing Element, the draft 2007 Fresno County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan, and the California Department of Finance form the basis of this discussion. More specific information on growth and development for each participating jurisdiction can be found in the jurisdictional annexes. Current Status and Past Development The 2016 estimated population of Fresno County was 979,915. This was an increase of 5.09 percent from the 2010 census population of 932,450. In terms of population, Fresno County is the 10th largest county in California (and the 53rd largest in the United States). Table 4.32 through Table 4.35 illustrate past growth in Fresno County in terms of population, housing units, and density. Table 4.32 Fresno County’s Population Growth 1960-2016 1960’s 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016* Total 365,945 413,329 514,621 667,490 799,407 932,450 979,915 Change -- 47,384 101,292 152,869 131,917 133,043 47,465 Percent Change (%) -- 12.95 24.51 29.71 19.76 16.64 5.09 Sources: Social Science Data Analysis Network, www.censusscope.org/; California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Research/ *Estimate Fresno County 4.182 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.33 Population Growth for Jurisdictions in Fresno County, 2010-2016 Jurisdiction 2010 2016* % Change # Change % of County % of Total Growth Clovis 93,631 106,583 13.83% 12,952 10.88% 27.29% Coalinga 13,380 16,598 24.05% 3,218 1.69% 6.78% Firebaugh 7,549 8,311 10.09% 762 0.85% 1.61% Fowler 5,682 6,348 11.72% 666 0.65% 1.40% Fresno 494,665 522,053 5.54% 27,388 53.28% 57.70% Huron 6,754 6,941 2.77% 187 0.71% 0.39% Kerman 13,544 14,594 7.75% 1,050 1.49% 2.21% Kingsburg 11,382 11,807 3.73% 425 1.20% 0.90% Mendota 11,014 11,418 3.67% 404 1.17% 0.85% Orange Cove 9,078 9,586 5.60% 508 0.98% 1.07% Parlier 14,494 15,179 4.73% 685 1.55% 1.44% Reedley 24,194 25,582 5.74% 1,388 2.61% 2.92% San Joaquin 4,001 4,024 0.57% 23 0.41% 0.05% Sanger 24,270 25,007 3.04% 737 2.55% 1.55% Selma 23,219 24,597 5.93% 1,378 2.51% 2.90% All Cities 758,867 808,628 6.56% 49,761 82.52% 105% Unincorporated 173,583 171,287 -1.32% -2,296 17.48% -4.84% County Totals 932,450 979,915 5.09% 47,465 100% 100% Source: US Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/ *Estimate based on 2010 Census Table 4.34 Growth in Housing Units for Jurisdictions in Fresno County, 2010-2016 Jurisdiction 2010 2016 % Change # Change % of County % of Total Growth Clovis 35,306 36,704 4% 1,398 11% 17% Coalinga 4,344 4,453 3% 109 1% 1% Firebaugh 2,096 2,189 4% 93 1% 1% Fowler 1,842 1,803 -2% -39 1% 0% Fresno 171,288 175,978 3% 4,690 54% 56% Huron 1,602 1,815 13% 213 1% 3% Kerman 3,908 4,025 3% 117 1% 1% Kingsburg 4,069 3,938 -3% -131 1% -2% Mendota 2,556 2,872 12% 316 1% 4% Orange Cove 2,231 2,407 8% 176 1% 2% Parlier 3,494 3,845 10% 351 1% 4% Reedley 6,867 7,484 9% 617 2% 7% San Joaquin 934 1085 16% 151 0% 2% Sanger 7,104 7,079 0% -25 2% 0% Selma 6,813 7,014 3% 201 2% 2% All Cities 254,454 262,691 3% 8,237 81% 99% Unincorporated 61,077 61,166 0.1% 89 19% 1% County Totals 315,531 323,857 3% 8,326 100% 100% Source: US Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/ *Estimate based on 2010 Census Fresno County 4.183 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.35 Population and Housing Unit Density for Jurisdictions in Fresno County, 2010-2016 Jurisdiction Area in Square Miles 2010 Population Density 2010 Housing Unit Density 2016 Population Density* 2016 Housing Unit Density* Clovis 17.12 5,469 2,062 6,226 2,144 Coalinga 5.96 2,245 729 2,785 747 Firebaugh 2.91 2,594 720 2,856 752 Fowler 2.03 2,799 907 3,127 888 Fresno 104.8 4,720 1,634 4,981 1,679 Huron 1.34 5,040 1,196 5,180 1,354 Kerman 2.16 6,270 1,809 6,756 1,863 Kingsburg 2.34 4,864 1,739 5,046 1,683 Mendota 1.87 5,890 1,367 6,106 1,536 Orange Cove 1.54 5,895 1,449 6,225 1,563 Parlier 1.62 8,947 2,157 9,370 2,373 Reedley 4.49 5,388 1,529 5,698 1,667 San Joaquin 0.99 4,041 943 4,065 1,096 Sanger 4.75 5,109 1,496 5,265 1,490 Selma 4.34 5,350 1,570 5,668 1,616 All Cities 158.26 4,795 1,608 5,109 1,660 Unincorporated 5,859.16 30 10 29 10 County Totals 6,017.42 155 52 163 54 Source: US Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/ *Estimate based on 2010 Census Current Status and Past Development Summary • 171,287 individuals, 17.48 percent of Fresno County’s residents live in the unincorporated portion of the County. • 808,628 individuals, 82.52 percent, of Fresno County’s residents live within the County’s incorporated areas. • Population growth between 2010 and 2016 was greatest in the incorporated areas of Coalinga (24.05%), Clovis (13.83%), Fower (11.72%) and Firebaugh (10.09%). • Numerically, the greatest population growth occurred in the Cities of Fresno (27,388) and Clovis (12,952). The combined population of the contiguous cities is 628,636, 64.15 percent of the County’s total population. • Population between 2010 and 2016 decreased by 1.32% (2,296 individuals) in the unincorporated county. Among the incorporated areas, growth was slowest in the City of San Joaquin (0.57%), Huron (2.77%), Sanger (3.04%), and Mendota (3.67%). • Population growth in the City of Fresno was 57.7 percent of the County’s total population growth. The City’s housing unit growth was 56.3 percent of the County’s total housing unit growth. Fresno County 4.184 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Fresno County’s population growth outstripped the increase in housing units by 2.5 percent, suggesting an increasing unmet housing need, larger household sizes (with potential overcrowding), or both. • With 9,370 people per square mile, Parlier has the highest population density in the County, followed by Kerman (6,756), and Clovis (6,225). Clovis and Kerman displaced Orange Cove since the 2012 update of this plan. • With 2,373 housing units per square mile, Parlier has the highest housing unit density in the County, followed by Clovis (2,143) and Kerman (1,863). Future Development As indicated in the previous section, Fresno County has been steadily growing over the last four decades, and this growth is projected to continue through the middle of the century. Table 4.36 shows the population projections for the County as a whole through 2050. Table 4.36 Population Projections for Fresno County, 2000-2050 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Population 804,508 983,478 1,201,792 1,429,228 1,670,542 1,928,411 Percent Change (%) 22.25 22.20 18.92 16.88 15.44 Source: California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Research/ Table 4.37 shows the population projections for each jurisdiction and the unincorporated area through 2050. Table 4.37 Detailed Population Projections for Fresno County, 2015-2050 Jurisdiction 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Clovis 114,770 123,780 132,830 141,110 149,150 156,860 164,130 171,740 Coalinga 16,530 17,350 18,170 18,920 19,650 20,350 21,010 21,700 Firebaugh 7,780 8,600 9,430 10,180 10,920 11,620 12,280 12,980 Fowler 6,580 7,240 7,890 8,490 9,070 9,630 10,160 10,710 Fresno 574,590 627,190 679,970 728,280 775,190 820,140 862,570 906,950 Huron 6,820 6,990 7,160 7,310 7,460 7,610 7,740 7,890 Kerman 14,880 15,900 16,930 17,860 18,770 19,650 20,470 21,330 Kingsburg 12,750 13,670 14,590 15,440 16,260 17,050 17,790 18,570 Mendota 11,210 12,030 12,850 13,610 14,340 15,040 15,700 16,390 Orange Cove 9,360 9,540 9,710 9,880 10,030 10,190 10,330 10,480 Parlier 15,100 16,100 17,110 18,040 18,940 19,800 20,610 21,460 Reedley 25,570 26,700 27,830 28,870 29,880 30,850 31,760 32,720 Sanger 26,310 27,990 29,680 31,230 32,730 34,170 35,520 36,940 San Joaquin 4,040 4,310 4,580 4,830 5,070 5,310 5,520 5,750 Selma 26,680 28,280 29,870 31,330 32,750 34,110 35,400 36,740 Subtotal Cities 872,970 945,670 1,018,600 1,085,380 1,150,210 1,212,380 1,270,990 1,332,350 Unincorporated 99,330 101,770 104,220 106,460 108,630 110,720 112,680 114,740 Total County 972,300 1,047,440 1,122,820 1,191,840 1,258,840 1,323,100 1,383,670 1,447,090 Fresno County 4.185 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Future Development Summary • According to the projections in Table 4.37, all areas of the County will continue to grow, but the percentage of growth will decrease over time, through 2050. • The Fresno County General Plan assumes that 92.6 percent of the population growth experienced in Fresno County through the year 2020 will be directed to incorporated cities and 7.4 percent will be absorbed in the unincorporated area. • In evaluating the residential growth potential based on development on vacant sites in the unincorporated areas, Fresno County recognizes the governmental, environmental, and economic influences that may impact the provision of new housing or maintenance of existing housing. • The Land Resources Inventory verifies that there is no shortage of potentially developable land in Fresno County. Consistent with the County’s urban development policy, intensive housing development will be directed to residentially zoned urban areas and established communities where infrastructure and services are available. This policy reflects the commitment to conserve natural and managed resources and to minimize the loss of valuable agriculture land and open space. Social Vulnerability Certain demographic and housing characteristics may amplify or reduce overall vulnerability to hazards. These characteristics, such as age, race/ethnicity, income levels, gender, building quality, and public infrastructure, all contribute to social vulnerability. A Social Vulnerability Index compiled by the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute in the Department of Geography at the University of South Carolina measures the social vulnerability of U.S. counties to environmental hazards for the purpose of examining the differences in social vulnerability among counties. Based on national data sources, primarily the 2000 census, it synthesizes 42 socioeconomic and built environment variables that research literature suggests contribute to reduction in a community’s ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from hazards (i.e., social vulnerability). Eleven composite factors were identified that differentiate counties according to their relative level of social vulnerability: personal wealth, age, density of the built environment, single-sector economic dependence, housing stock and tenancy, race (African American and Asian), ethnicity (Hispanic and Native American), occupation, and infrastructure dependence. Fresno County ranks in the top 20 percent in the nation and in the state on the vulnerability index, which indicates highest social vulnerability. Fresno County is the 8th most socially vulnerable County (out of 58 counties) in California. To better understand the characteristics behind this ranking, the HMPC researched information from the 2000 census on four factors of social vulnerability: gender, age, language spoken in home, and wealth/poverty. These factors were analyzed for Fresno County as a whole and individually for each of the incorporated and unincorporated communities. One characteristic of social Fresno County 4.186 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan vulnerability is differential access to resources and greater susceptibility to hazards. All factors considered here are related to this characteristic. Table 4.38 displays these variables and compares them to the same variables for California and the United States. These factors of social vulnerability hold many implications for disaster response and recovery and are important considerations when identifying and prioritizing mitigation actions and overall goals and objectives of the plan. Gender Women may have a more difficult time recovering from disaster than men because of sector- specific employment, lower wages, and family care responsibilities. The percentage of men and women in the County is approximately equal: Fresno County is 50.1 percent female. This is generally true for the incorporated and unincorporated areas; however, Coalinga has a higher proportion of men to women, with 56.3 percent men, as well as Firebaugh (52.5%), and Fowler (51.1%). Some jurisdictions have higher proportions of women, including Huron (52.3%) and Sanger (52.2%). Age Age can affect the ability of individuals to move out of harm’s way and take care of themselves. The HMPC analyzed two variables for age, percentage of population age 65 and over and percentage under age 18. According to the Fresno County General Plan, the percentage of children in Fresno County decreased from 30.2 percent in 2010 to 29.3 percent in 2014. Fresno County as a whole has higher percentage of children than the state average, 29.3 percent and 24.2 percent respectively. Some cities have between 35 and 45 percent of their population under the age of 18 (San Joaquin, Orange Cove, Huron, Parlier). Fresno County’s children population grew at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent while the statewide population of children declined at an average annual rate of -0.3 percent. The incorporated areas of the county, especially Coalinga, Fowler, and Kerman, the population of children grew rapidly over the period. The unincorporated county had a slight increase in the population of children between 2010 and 2014, an average annual growth rate of 0.4 percent. Although the low proportion of elderly residents in many areas lowers vulnerability; some of these areas have a high percentage of children, which heightens vulnerability Fresno County has a slightly smaller percentage of seniors (10.6 percent) than California (12.1 percent). Fresno County’s senior population grew at an average annual rate of 2.9 percent, compared to 3.3 percent for California. Unincorporated Fresno County has a higher percentage of seniors (14.9 percent) than the whole of Fresno County (10.6 percent), and higher than any of the individual incorporated cities. Huron experienced the highest average annual growth in the senior population, at a rate of 27.3 percent. The incorporated cities of Kerman, Reedley, and San Joaquin were the only cities to experience a negative average annual growth rate among the senior population. The percent of the population age 65 and over is particularly high in Kingsburg (10.4%), and Reedley (13.2%). Fresno County 4.187 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Language Spoken at Home Language barriers can affect communication of warning information and access to post-disaster funding. In California, 39.5 percent of the population speaks a language other than English in the home. This is much higher than for the United States as a whole, which is 17.9 percent. Fresno County has a slightly higher percentage than the state: 40.8 percent. In more than half of Fresno County’s cities and census-designated places, more than half of the populations speak languages other than English at home. In a number of communities, this percentage exceeds 75 percent: San Joaquin (89.8 percent), Huron (86.9 percent), Cantua Creek (83.3 percent), Parlier (82.9 percent), Mendota (82 percent), Calwa (81.8 percent), Orange Cove (77.9 percent), Firebaugh (77.1 percent), and Biola (76.8 percent). While this does not mean these populations do not speak English (20.7 percent of the County’s population speaks English less than “very well”), these figures are indicative of cultural differences that may affect receipt of and response to disaster information. Wealth and Poverty Wealth and poverty are also indicators of social vulnerability. Low income and impoverished populations have fewer resources available for recovery and are more likely to live in structures of greater physical vulnerability. Wealthier communities often have greater capabilities to mitigate hazards and greater access to funds for recovery. To compare wealth and poverty, the HMPC analyzed the percentage of individuals below the poverty level and the median home value in each city and census-designated place in Fresno County. Fresno County overall has a higher percentage of people living below the poverty level, 22.9 percent, than California (14.2 percent) or the nation (12.4 percent). Poverty is highest in the unincorporated areas of Orange Cove (44.5 percent) and Mendota (41.9 percent). The median value of single-family, owner-occupied homes in Fresno County in 2000 was $104,900 compared to $211,500 in California. Home values are lowest (below $80,000) in Cantua Creek, Lanare, Biola, Del Rey, Calwa, Tranquillity, Huron, and Laton. Fresno County 4.188 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.38 Measures of Fresno County’s Social Vulnerability Total Population Total Housing Units % Females % Under Age 18 % Age 65 and Over % Speak Language Other than English in Home** % Individuals Below Poverty Level** Median Value ($), Single-Family Owner-Occupied Homes** United States 308,745,538 133,351,840 50.9 24.0 13 17.9 15.5 178,600 California 37,253,956 13,845,790 50.3 28.1 12.5 39.5 16.3 385,500 Fresno County 930,450 321,955 49.9 28.2 6.1 40.8 26.8 194,600 Clovis 95,630 36,270 51.6 25.4 5.7 17.1 13.8 247,700 Coalinga* 13,380 4,472 43.7 33.0 5.9 42.2 23.2 154,600 Firebaugh 7,550 2,248 47.5 32.3 9.0 77.1 33.5 121,600 Fowler 5,570 154,600 48.9 29.6 9.0 53.7 25.3 204,500 Fresno 494,670 174,593 50.8 37.9 2.4 39.5 29.8 177,500 Huron 6,750 1,861 52.3 36.0 9.4 86.9 35.8 122,900 Kerman 13,540 3,975 50.5 26.4 10.4 62.4 25.6 174,300 Kingsburg 11,380 3,900 51.5 33.5 4.2 23.7 17.9 223,000 Mendota 11,010 2,951 47. 38.1 6.1 82 46.5 108,100 Orange Cove 9,080 2,460 51.6 35.4 5.7 77.9 53.0 116,300 Parlier 14,490 3,844 49.2 30.1 13.2 82.9 42.3 113,300 Reedley 24,190 7,240 49.7 30.8 9.2 58.8 26.7 164,200 San Joaquin 4,000 1,044 52.2 42.5 5.6 89.8 54.2 103,100 Sanger 24,270 7,350 50.7 29.9 9.4 65 23.0 161,800 Selma 23,220 6,984 49.8 28.2 6.1 55.6 24.3 164,100 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010, American Community Survey 2015 estimates, www.census.gov *Population count revised **Based on sample data Fresno County 4.189 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards The Disaster Mitigation Act regulations require the HMPC to evaluate the risks associated with each of the hazards identified in the planning process. This section summarizes the possible impacts and quantifies, where data permits, the County’s vulnerability to each of the hazards. Where specific hazards vary across the County vulnerability is broken out by jurisdiction where feasible; additional information can be found in the jurisdictional annexes. The hazards evaluated further as part of this vulnerability assessment include, in alphabetical order: • Agricultural Hazards • Avalanche • Dam Failure • Drought − Tree Mortality • Earthquake • Flood − Levee Failure • Human Health Hazards − Epidemic/Pandemic − West Nile Virus • Landslide • Soil Hazards − Erosion − Expansive Soil − Land Subsidence • Severe Weather − Extreme Temperatures Extreme Cold/Freeze Extreme Heat − Fog − Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning − Windstorm − Snowstorm − Tornado • Volcano • Wildfire Fresno County 4.190 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A summary of the vulnerability of the County to each identified hazard is provided in each of the hazard-specific sections that follow. Vulnerability generally reflects the hazard significance rating which is also summarized in Section 4.1.1 Table 4.1. Vulnerability/Significance is measured in is a summary of the potential impact based on past occurrences, spatial extent, likelihood of future occurrences and impacts (damage and casualty potential). It is categorized into the following classifications: • Low—Minimal potential impact. The occurrence and potential cost of damage to life and property is minimal. • Medium—Moderate potential impact. This ranking carries a moderate threat level to the general population and/or built environment. The potential damage is more isolated and less costly than a more widespread disaster. • High—Widespread potential impact. This ranking carries a high threat to the general population and/or built environment. The potential for damage is widespread. Hazards in this category may have occurred in the past. Vulnerability to Avalanches (Low) People Although future avalanches are likely to occur, the spatial extent is limited and the magnitude is low. Therefore, avalanches are a low significance hazard in the County. No known critical facilities or cultural resources were located in avalanche paths at the time this plan was written. It is public safety that is most threatened by this hazard. Outdoor recreationalists who travel into backcountry areas are most at risk. Additionally, while road closures help to mitigate impacts to travelers in avalanche-prone areas, snowplow drivers can still be exposed while clearing roads of snow or avalanche debris. Property In general, structures located below an area at high risk to avalanches are likely to be exposed to the impacts of an avalanche, but no instances of this were known based on available data. Critical Facilities There are not any known critical facility likely to be exposed to the impacts of an avalanche. Natural Environment Avalanches can erode topsoil, cover the environment with debris, and damage surrounding vegetation. For the most part the environment is resilient and would be able to rebound from whatever damages occurred, though this process could take years. Fresno County 4.191 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Future Development Avalanche vulnerability could increase somewhat with future development and population growth as there will be a higher number of people driving on roadways and taking part in backcountry recreation. It is unlikely that risk to structures will increase as long as future development is planned outside of mapped or suspected avalanche hazard zones. Vulnerability to Agricultural Hazards (High) Given the importance of agriculture to Fresno County, agricultural hazards continue to be an ongoing concern. The primary causes of agricultural losses are severe weather events, such as drought and freeze and, to a limited extent, insect infestations and livestock disease. According to the HMPC, agricultural losses occur on an annual basis throughout the County and are usually associated with these severe weather events. People The largest impact to people from a widespread crop loss is pressure on the food supply. Some animal diseases can be transmitted to people which could pose a public health concern. Property The greatest impact to property from an agricultural hazard is crop damage and loss. Loss of livestock and poultry can also be significant. The economic value of total damaged or lost crops could range in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Natural Environment Critical Facilities Agricultural hazards would most likely not have an impact on critical facilities. Mass mortality of animals could stress local rendering plants. Future Development Vulnerability to Dam Failure (High) A dam failure can range from a small, uncontrolled release to a catastrophic failure. Vulnerability to dam failures is confined to the areas subject to inundation downstream of the facility. Secondary losses would include loss of the multi-use functions of the dam itself and associated revenues that accompany those functions. People Persons located underneath or downstream of a dam are at risk of a dam failure, though the level of risk can be tempered by topography, amount of water in the reservoir and time of day of the breach. Injuries and fatalities can occur from debris, bodily injury and drowning. Once the dam has breached, standing water presents all the same hazards to people as floodwater from other Fresno County 4.192 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan sources. People in the inundation area may need to be evacuated, cared for, and possibly permanently relocated. Specific population impacts are noted in the following section. Property In general, communities located below a dam and along a waterway are potentially exposed to the impacts of a dam failure. Specific inundation maps and risk information are included in the dam- specific emergency action plans. Due to the sensitive nature of this information, it is not included in this plan. Inundation maps that identify anticipated flooded areas (which may not coincide with known floodplains) are produced for all high hazard dams and are contained in the Emergency Action Plan (EAP) required for each dam. However, the information contained in those plans is considered sensitive and is not widely distributed. For reference, high hazard dams threaten lives and property, significant hazard dams threaten property only. The potential impacts from a dam failure in the County and its municipalities are largely dependent on the specific dam or area in question. Generally, any buildings or other infrastructure located in a dam inundation area is vulnerable to the impacts from rising waters. Dam failure flooding can occur as the result of partial or complete collapse of an impoundment. Dam failures often result from prolonged rainfall and flooding causing overtopping of the structure. The primary danger associated with dam failure is the high velocity flooding of those properties downstream of the dam. According to the Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan, of the 23 dams with a potential to impact the planning area four of them pose the greatest threat should a failure occur: Big Dry, Fancher Creek, Friant, and Pine Flat. According to the plan, a catastrophic failure of any of these dams could have a significant impact on Fresno County. Some jurisdictions are more at risk to dam failure than others. The City of Clovis and the City of Fresno are the most vulnerable, with three and five high hazard dams respectively. Centerville, Firebaugh, Friant, and Sanger also have a high hazard dam located within their boundaries. The failure of any of these dams would cause downstream flooding and would likely result in loss of life and property. The potential magnitude of a dam failure depends on the time of year and the base flow of the river when the failure occurs. During the winter months, when the river flows are higher, the impact to the area would be much greater and evacuation times much less. Table 4.39 Major Dams with Potential to Impact the Fresno County Planning Area Dam Stream Capacity (Acre-Feet) Population Threatened Balch Afterbay North Fork Kings River 318 20 Balch Diversion North Fork Kings River 1,295 20 Balsam Meadow West Fork Balsam Creek 2,040 319 Big Creek No. 4 Big Creek 100 244 Big Creek No. 6 San Joaquin River 993 104 Fresno County 4.193 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Dam Stream Capacity (Acre-Feet) Population Threatened Big Creek No. 7 San Joaquin River 35,000 713 Big Dry 1017 Big Dry Creek/ Dog Creek 30,200 266,502 Courtright Helms Creek 123,300 20 Crane Valley North Fork Willow Creek 45,410 142 Fancher Creek Fancher Creek & Hog Creek 9,600 134,775 Florence Lake South Fork San Joaquin River 64,406 822 Friant San Joaquin River 520,500 75,184 Giffen Reservoir Tributary Holland Creek 900 98 Hume Lake Ten Mile Creek 1,410 57 Huntington Lake Big Creek 88,834 1,018 Little Panoche Little Panoche Creek 5,580 459 Mammoth Pool San Joaquin River 123,000 817 Pine Flat Kings River 1,000,000 143,678 Redbank Redbank Creek 1,100 947 Sequoia Lake Mill Flat Creek 1,370 27 Shaver Lake Stevenson Creek 135,283 863 Vermilion Valley Mono Creek 125,000 822 Wishon North Fork Kings River 118,000 20 Source: Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan, 2003 Dam failure flooding would vary by community depending on which dam fails and the nature and extent of the dam failure and associated flooding. Based on the risk assessment, it is apparent that a major dam failure could have a devastating impact on the planning area. Dam failure flooding presents a threat to life and property, including buildings, their contents, and their use. Large flood events can affect crops and livestock as well as lifeline utilities (e.g., water, sewerage, and power), transportation, jobs, tourism, the environment, and the local and regional economies. Natural Environment Dam failure effects on the environment would be similar to those caused by flooding from other causes. Water could erode stream channels and topsoil and cover the environment with debris. For the most part the environment is resilient and would be able to rebound from whatever damages occurred, though this process could take years. Critical Facilities A total dam failure can cause catastrophic impacts to areas downstream of the water body, including critical infrastructure. Any critical asset located under the dam in an inundation area would be susceptible to the impacts of a dam failure. Of particular risk would be roads and bridges that could be vulnerable to washouts, further complicating response and recovery by cutting off impacted areas. Risk to specific facilities is considered sensitive information but is detailed in the Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan. Fresno County 4.194 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Future Development Areas slated for future development should take into consideration potential impacts from dam failure risk upstream. In the case of a dam failure, inundation would likely follow some existing FEMA mapped floodplains, which contains development restrictions for areas in the 1% annual chance floodplain, but it could exceed those floodplains and affect areas that are not regulated for flood hazards. Also of note is that development below a low hazard dam could increase its hazard rating, though there are not any low hazard dams in the County. Vulnerability to Drought (High) People The historical and potential impacts of drought on populations include agricultural sector job loss, secondary economic losses to local businesses and public recreational resources, increased cost to local and state government for large-scale water acquisition and delivery, and water rationing and water wells running dry for individuals and families. As drought is often accompanied by prolonged periods of extreme heat, negative health impacts such as dehydration can also occur, where children and elderly are most susceptible. Air quality often declines in times of drought which can affect those with respiratory ailments. In particular, Fresno County’s tree mortality risk and fallen tree occurrences has resulted in the closure of numerous roads most notably in parks, forest land, and outdoor recreation areas: In 2016, 20 to 30 campgrounds were closed as well as Kings Canyon National Park due to tree mortality risks to public safety. The risk is especially high between May and October, due to a dramatic influx of campers and other outdoor enthusiasts. Property The historical and potential impacts of drought on property include crop loss, injury and death of livestock and pets, and damage to infrastructure, homes and other buildings resulting from the secondary drought impact of land subsidence. As a related drought impact, tree mortality has resulted in potentially vulnerable critical infrastructure property as these trees become more susceptible to falling with time. Table 4.40 through Table 4.43 show the results of analysis for tree mortality related to property exposure. As depicted in Table 4.40, in both the incorporated and unincorporated parts of the county, there are 4,819 structures, valued at close to $657 million, with $337 million in contents located within the Tier I tree mortality hazard area. Most of the exposed buildings (90%) are residential and located in the unincorporated area, with total exposure (improved value and contents) for residentially zoned parcels equal to over $957 million. Tier II tree mortality only effects the unincorporated parts of Fresno County, with $8,688 buildings and $1.1billion in exposure. Fresno County 4.195 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.40 Tier I Tree Mortality Hazard by Property Type Jurisdiction Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Coalinga Commercial 4 2 $177,515 $177,515 $355,030 Exempt 1 1 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 1 1 $122,400 $61,200 $183,600 Residential 5 6 $479,443 $239,722 $719,165 Total 11 10 $779,358 $478,437 $1,257,795 Unincorporated Agricultural 34 43 $2,642,571 $2,642,571 $5,285,142 Commercial 67 124 $12,989,552 $12,989,552 $25,979,104 Exempt 28 71 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 1 2 $121,255 $60,628 $181,883 Open Space 17 18 $2,064,361 $2,064,361 $4,128,722 Residential 3,365 4,551 $638,314,167 $319,157,084 $957,471,251 Total 3,512 4,809 $656,131,906 $336,914,195 $993,046,101 Grand Total 3,523 4,819 656,911,264 337,392,632 994,303,896 Table 4.41 Tier I Tree Mortality Hazard Summary Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Coalinga 11 10 $779,358 $478,437 $1,257,795 Unincorporated 3,512 4,809 $656,131,906 $336,914,195 $993,046,101 Total 3,523 4,819 $656,911,264 $337,392,632 $994,303,896 Table 4.42 Tier II Tree Mortality Hazard by Property Type Jurisdiction Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Unincorporated Agricultural 172 219 $21,474,268 $21,474,268 $42,948,536 Commercial 147 297 $59,402,148 $59,402,148 $118,804,296 Exempt 55 166 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 10 16 $1,772,934 $2,659,401 $4,432,335 Multi-Residential 2 3 $159,849 $886,467 $1,046,316 Open Space 215 237 $24,307,614 $159,849 $24,467,463 Residential 5,923 7,750 $943,017,235 $12,153,807 $955,171,042 Total 6,524 8,688 $1,050,134,048 $96,735,940 $1,146,869,988 Fresno County 4.196 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.43 Tier II Tree Mortality Hazard Summary Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Unincorporated 6,524 8,688 $1,050,134,048 $96,735,940 $1,146,869,988 Total 6,524 8,688 $1,050,134,048 $96,735,940 $1,146,869,988 In addition to tree mortality hazards, several examples of agricultural impacts shape drought vulnerability and potential losses. When it comes to farm-gate values, Fresno County used to lead the nation in farm-gate crop values, but this has not been the case since 2012; reductions in the water supply being the primary factor. The value of the nearly 400 different crops produced in Fresno County has continued to fall since it peaked at just over $7 billion in 2014. The 2016 figure of $6.18 billion provided by the County Agricultural Commissioner was not only lower than the previous year’s figure by over 7.2 percent, it is off more than 12.5 percent from its 2014 record. In raw numbers, Fresno County farmers and ranchers received $885 million fewer dollars in 2016 than they did in 2014. These producers also had 10 percent fewer acres of land in 2016 for the production of food and fiber compared to 2012. In 2016, the county had nearly 973,000 acres of irrigated farmland, a reduction of 12 percent over the same period. Overall, water availability and prices, along with general commodity prices, account for the slump in the county’s overall farm value. At no time since at least 1997 has the farm gate value fallen as steep in Fresno County as it has since 2014. Additionally, for West side growers, this included a third straight year of no surface water allocation. Moreover, for those jurisdictions where allocations were available, during the most recent drought some municipalities in Fresno County had to pay more for their surface water allocations. This impacted the smaller water districts and cities of Huron, Coalinga and Orange Cove that mostly rely on surface water. Officials also noted that a number of wells went dry, and drilling deeper was expensive and cost prohibitive. Together, such constraints on surface water allocations and groundwater supplies greatly impacts agricultural commodity growth, health, farm values and drought recovery efforts throughout the planning area. Natural Environment The historical and potential impacts of drought on the natural environment are widespread throughout public and private lands within the County, including tree mortality, impacts to all flora and fauna, and destabilization (erosion, subsidence) of land along streams and rivers, and within watersheds. One of the core issue shaping the impact of drought in Fresno County and throughout California is water supply and demand. Several factors play into the issue including groundwater basins, surface water run-off, public and agricultural demand, and surface water storage water sheds. As such, an analysis was conducted through the 2010 Forest and Rangeland Assessment to identify threats and assets in order to select Priority Landscapes (PL) where water supply would benefit Fresno County 4.197 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan from forest management designed to protect or enhance water resources, the key effort which, in part, both defines and mitigates the severity of drought risk and vulnerabilities. With regard to overall threat and asset findings shaping the potential severity of drought for Fresno County, the analysis determined that the Sierra bioregion (where Fresno County contains portions of the southern Sierra) has the greatest concentration of high priority landscape. The watersheds in this region contribute greatly to the state’s water supply. They are under threat from climate change, wildfire and development. In addition, groundwater basins in the San Joaquin Valley and Sacramento Valley bioregions are an abundant resource that is heavily threatened by over pumping. Given that the extent of the drought hazard is, in part, determined by the extent of ground and surface water over-pumping in Fresno County, it should also be pointed out that such over- pumping is part of a broader context of water supply and demand trends with related impacts to agriculture: (and the secondary hazard impacts from land subsidence resulting from groundwater withdrawal). See also the discussion and maps showing Fresno County Wildfire Priority Landscapes based on threats to water supply and water quality in the wildfire vulnerability section. Trends in landscape characteristics indicate high threats to water quality and supply in the eastern portion of the County, in the Sierra Nevada region. Critical Facilities Drought impacts to critical facilities include water shortfalls for facility operations and critical functions, and potential structural destabilization and damage resulting from land subsidence. As a related drought impact, tree mortality has resulted in potentially vulnerable critical infrastructure as these trees become more susceptible to falling with time. The unincorporated county is the only area with critical facilities at risk to tree mortality. Table 4.44 below summarizes the types of facilities at-risk while Table 4.45 provides more details. In addition to the schools and fire stations in Tier I, there is one public works facility and two buildings of the Sheriff’s Office located in the Tier II hazard areas. Table 4.44 Critical Facilities within the Tree Mortality Tier I Summary Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Unincorporated Fire Station 8 School 7 Total 15 Fresno County 4.198 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.45 Critical Facilities within the Tree Mortality Tier I in the Unincorporated County Jurisdiction Facility Type Name Unincorporated Fire Station Bald Mountain Volunteer Fire Department Fire Station Big Creek Volunteer Fire Department Fire Station Fresno County Fire Protection District - Shaver Lake Fire Station Hume Lake Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company Fire Station Huntington Lake Volunteer Fire Department Fire Station Huntington Lake Volunteer Fire Department Station 2 Fire Station Pine Ridge Volunteer Fire Department Fire Station Shaver Lake Volunteer Fire Department School Big Creek Elementary School Hammer Mountain School School Hume Lake Charter School Pine Ridge Elementary School Pole Corral Elementary School Table 4.46 Critical Facilities within the Tree Mortality Tier II Summary Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Unincorporated School 19 Fire Station 13 Department of Public Works 1 Sheriff 2 Total 35 Future Development Because future development encompasses all forms of property, buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and all related populations and their functions, drought impacts to future development align with the historical and potential impacts to populations, property, natural environment, and critical facilities discussed (above). Vulnerability to Earthquake (Medium) People and Property Earthquake vulnerability is primarily based on population and the built environment. Urban areas in high seismic hazard zones are the most vulnerable, while uninhabited areas are less vulnerable. Fresno County 4.199 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The California Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey have done considerable work using GIS to identify populations in high seismic hazard zones in every California County. Ground shaking is the primary earthquake hazard. Many factors affect the survivability of structures and systems from earthquake-caused ground motions. These factors include proximity to the fault, direction of rupture, epicentral location and depth, magnitude, local geologic and soils conditions, types and quality of construction, building configurations and heights, and comparable factors that relate to utility, transportation, and other network systems. Ground motions become structurally damaging when average peak accelerations reach 10 to 15 percent of gravity, average peak velocities reach 8 to 12 centimeters per second, and when the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale is about VII (18-34 percent peak ground acceleration), which is considered to be very strong (general alarm; walls crack; plaster falls). Fault rupture itself contributes very little to damage unless the structure or system element crosses the active fault. In general, newer construction is more earthquake resistant than older construction because of improved building codes and their enforcement. Manufactured housing is very susceptible to damage because rarely are their foundation systems braced for earthquake motions. Locally generated earthquake motions, even from very moderate events, tend to be more damaging to smaller buildings, especially those constructed of unreinforced masonry, as was seen in the Oroville, Coalinga, Santa Cruz, and Paso Robles earthquakes. Common impacts from earthquakes include damage to infrastructure and buildings (e.g., crumbling of unreinforced masonry, failure of architectural facades, rupturing of underground utilities, and road closures). Earthquakes also frequently trigger secondary hazards, such as dam failures, landslides and rock falls, explosions, and fires that can become disasters themselves. Estimating Potential Losses Earthquake losses will vary across the Fresno County planning area depending on the source and magnitude of the event. The Coalinga earthquake provides a good estimate of loss to the planning area based on a realistic earthquake scenario. To further evaluate potential losses associated with earthquake activity in the planning area, a HAZUS-MH probabilistic earthquake scenario was run with the latest version of HAZUS-MH. The methodology used probabilistic seismic hazard contour maps developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the 2014 update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps that are included with HAZUS-MH. The USGS maps provide estimates of potential ground acceleration and spectral acceleration at periods of 0.3 second and 1.0 second, respectively. The 2,500-year return period analyzes ground shaking estimates from the various seismic sources in the area with a 2 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years. The International Building Code uses this level of ground shaking for building design in seismic areas and is more of a worst-case scenario. The results of the scenario are captured in Table 4.47. Key losses included the following: Fresno County 4.200 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Total economic loss estimated for the earthquake was $7.3 billion, which includes building losses and lifeline losses based on the HAZUS-MH inventory. • Building-related losses, including direct building losses and business interruption losses, totaled $6.7 billion. • 49,107 buildings (18% of total) were at least moderately damaged. 2,858 buildings were completely destroyed. • Over 57 percent of the building- and income-related losses were residential structures. • 15 percent of the estimated losses were related to business interruptions. • The mid-day earthquake caused the most casualties: 2,205. • 62,906 households experienced a loss of potable water the first day after the earthquake. Table 4.47 HAZUS-MH Earthquake Loss Estimation: 2,500-Year Scenario Results Type of Impact Impacts to County Total Buildings Damaged Slight: 93,173 Moderate: 37,607 Extensive: 8,642 Complete: 2,858 Building and Income Related Losses $6.74 billion 57 percent of damage related to residential structures 15 percent of loss due to business interruption Total Economic Losses (Includes building, income and lifeline losses) $7.3 billion Casualties (Based on 2 a.m. time of occurrence) Without requiring hospitalization: 1,212 Requiring hospitalization: 216 Life threatening: 19 Fatalities: 36 Casualties (Based on 2 p.m. time of occurrence) Without requiring hospitalization: 2,205 Requiring hospitalization: 521 Life threatening: 77 Fatalities: 144 Casualties (Based on 5 p.m. time of occurrence) Without requiring hospitalization: 1,498 Requiring hospitalization: 351 Life threatening: 80 Fatalities: 91 Damage to Transportation Systems 0 highway bridges, complete damage 61 highway bridges, moderate damage 2 airport facilities, moderate damage 2 bus facility, moderate damage Damage to Essential Facilities 0 schools, 0 police stations, 0 fire station at least moderately damaged Damage to Utility Systems 4 wastewater systems, moderate damage 1 oil system, moderate damage 10 electrical power systems, moderate damage 36 communication systems, moderate damage Potable water breaks: 1,863 Waste water breaks: 1,335 Natural gas breaks: 383 Households without Power/Water Service (Based on 289,391 total households) Power loss, Day 1: 21,540 Power loss, Day 3: 13,819 Power loss, Day 7: 6,195 Power loss, Day 30: 1,375 Fresno County 4.201 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Type of Impact Impacts to County Power loss, Day 90: 30 Water loss, Day 1: 62,906 Water loss, Day 3: 60,182 Water loss, Day 7: 54,726 Water loss, Day 30: 24,665 Water loss, Day 90: 0 Displaced Households 3,985 Shelter Requirements 3,828 Debris Generation 1.41 million tons Source: HAZUS-MH A map showing the peak ground accelerations by census tract is shown in Figure 4.10, with warm color tones indicate damaging levels of shaking. The western portion of the County would experience the greatest shaking levels and damage due to its proximity to the San Andreas fault and other faults. Natural Environment An earthquake could cause cascading effects, including dam failure or rockslide that would impact the natural environment in different ways, depending on the scope of the cascading hazard. Other types of ground deformation could result as well. Critical Facilities An earthquake could have major impacts on critical infrastructure. HAZUS estimates impacts to critical facilities including hospitals, schools, Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs), police stations and fire stations. The following table shows the estimates for 2500-year scenario. Table 4.48 Expected Damage to Critical Facilities Classification Total Number of Facilities At Least Moderate Damage > 50% Complete Damage > 50% With Functionality > 50% on Day 1 Hospitals 13 0 0 13 Schools 367 0 0 222 EOCs 2 0 0 2 Police Stations 28 0 0 23 Fire Stations 29 0 0 22 Total 439 0 0 282 Source: HAZUS-MH In addition to the exposure analysis generated through Hazus, information provided by the California Geological Survey, and USGS was utilized to generate estimates of critical facilities within the 55% g or greater ground shaking potential area. Table 4.49 Critical Facilities in Earthquake Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Facility Type County Coalinga Airport 1 Fresno County 4.202 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Facility Type County Colleges & Universities 2 Communications 1 Department of Public Works 1 Fire Station 3 Health Care 1 Police 3 School 10 Total 22 Firebaugh Airport 1 CalARP 2 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 9 Urgent Care 1 Total 15 Huron CalARP 7 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 3 Total 12 Mendota Airport 1 CalARP 1 Fire Station 1 School 7 Total 10 San Joaquin CalARP 1 School 2 Sheriff 1 Total 4 Unincorporated County Airport 5 CalARP 35 Department of Agriculture 1 Department of Public Works 2 Fire Station 5 Nursing Home 1 School 17 Total 66 Grand Total 129 Source: California Geological Survey, USGS Future Development Future development in the county is not anticipated to significantly affect vulnerability to earthquakes, but will result in a slight increase in exposure of the population and building stock Fresno County 4.203 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Vulnerability to Flood/Levee Failure (High) People The total number of residential properties in each floodplain was multiplied by the average household size of 3.17 persons for the County (2010 census), and that total was multiplied by the County Occupancy Factor (95%) to estimate resident population. Based on this analysis, which accounts for residents only and not workers, there are 6,662 residents living in the 100-year flood zone throughout Fresno County. Of all study areas, the unincorporated county has the most residents living in the 1% annual chance flood area, followed by the City of Firebaugh. Table 4.50 below details population estimates by jurisdiction, followed by similar tables for the 200-year and 500-year floodplains. Table 4.50 Population Living in 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone Jurisdiction Population Clovis 409 Coalinga 330 Firebaugh 1,385 Fowler 152 Fresno 342 Huron 3 Kerman - Kingsburg - Mendota 165 Orange Cove 583 Parlier 101 Reedley - San Joaquin - Sanger 346 Selma 51 Unincorporated 2,796 Total 6,662 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA, US Census Bureau The same analysis was conducted for the 500-year floodplain, indicating that there are 143,481 residents living in the 500-year flood zone throughout Fresno County. The majority of people living in this floodplain are residents of the City of Fresno, with 107,400 people representing 75% of the total. This population distribution is shown in Table 4.51. Table 4.51 Population Living in 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone Jurisdiction Population Clovis 18,741 Coalinga 1,797 Fresno County 4.204 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Firebaugh 2,143 Fowler 51 Fresno 107,400 Huron 1,880 Kerman - Kingsburg - Mendota 38 Orange Cove 127 Parlier - Reedley 428 San Joaquin - Sanger 155 Selma - Unincorporated 10,721 Total 143,481 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA, US Census Bureau Population estimates were also generated for the 200-year floodplain using data provided by the USACE Comprehensive Study and the CA DWR. This flood hazard area does not cover as many jurisdictions as the 1% or 0.2% annual chance flood zones, with 3,294 residents at-risk. Table 4.52 shows the communities and number of residents effected, with a large concentration located in the City of Firebaugh. Table 4.52 Population Living in 200-Year Flood Hazard Zone Jurisdiction Population Clovis - Coalinga - Firebaugh 2,729 Fowler - Fresno 57 Huron - Kerman - Kingsburg - Mendota 222 Orange Cove - Parlier - Reedley - San Joaquin - Sanger - Selma - Unincorporated 285 Total 3,294 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; USACE Comprehensive Study Fresno County 4.205 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Property Flooding is a natural occurrence in the Central Valley because it is a natural drainage basin for thousands of watershed acres of Sierra Nevada and Coast Range foothills and mountains. Historically, the Fresno County planning area has been at risk to flooding primarily during the winter and spring months when river systems in the County swell with heavy rainfall and snowmelt runoff. Normally, storm floodwaters are kept within defined limits by a variety of storm drainage and flood control measures. But, occasionally, extended heavy rains result in floodwaters that exceed normal high-water boundaries and cause damage. Flooding has occurred in the past: within the 100-year floodplain and in other localized areas. Recent draft digital flood insurance rate maps (DFIRMs) dated January 2016 placed additional areas within the 100-year or greater floodplain. This is primarily due to the inability of the old and inadequate levees to be certified in accordance with current FEMA standards. As such, these levees no longer provide protection from the 100-year flood. It should be noted, however, that all levees, whether certified or not, provide some level of protection to the planning area and remain a critical factor in floodplain management for the communities. The continued need to rely on these flood control structures is an ongoing concern. The history of the area, beginning with hydraulic gold mining techniques and through the continuing conversion of agricultural lands to commercial and residential uses, makes it impossible to reverse the planning area’s dependence on structural flood control protection. Levee maintenance is a continuous effort due to erosion and scour brought on by the channelization itself. Additional improvements to strengthen the levees and make them less susceptible to seepage induced failures are a priority of local and state agencies. Once these improvements are made, certification may be possible. Nevertheless, while these improvements may mitigate the impacts of flooding due to levee failure, the levees will remain subject to overtopping by flood events larger than their design capacity. The likelihood of flooding increases with the heavy rains that occur annually between November and May. In addition to damage to area infrastructure, other problems associated with flooding include erosion, sedimentation, degradation of water quality, loss of environmental resources, and certain health hazards. Methodology A flood vulnerability assessment was performed for Fresno County using GIS. The county’s parcel layer and associated assessor’s building improvement valuation data were provided by the county and were used as the basis for the inventory. Fresno County’s effective DFIRM was used as the hazard layer. DFIRM is FEMA’s flood risk data that depicts the 1% annual chance (100-year) and the 0.2% annual chance (500-year) flood events. Fresno County’s effective FEMA DFIRM, dated January 20, 2016, was determined to be the best available floodplain data. Table 4.53 summarizes the flood zones included on these maps. Fresno County 4.206 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.53 Fresno County’s Flood Zones Flood Zone Definition Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) Subject to Inundation by 100-Year Flood Zone A No base flood elevations determined Zone AE Base flood elevations determined Zone AH Flood depths of 1-3 feet (usually areas of ponding); base flood elevations determined Zone AO Flood depths of 1-3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain); average depths determined; for areas of alluvial fan flooding, velocities also determined Zone AR SFHA formerly protected from the 1 percent annual chance flood by a flood control system that was subsequently decertified; zone AR indicates that the former flood control system is being restored to provide protection from the 1 percent annual chance or greater flood Zone A99 Area to be protected from 1 percent annual chance flood by a federal flood protection system under construction; no base flood elevations determined Other Flood Areas Zone X (with color coding) Areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood (i.e., 500-year flood); areas of 1 percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1 percent annual chance flood Other Areas Zone X (with no shading) Areas determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain Zone D Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible Source: 2016 Draft Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Fresno County GIS was used to intersect the parcel boundaries with a master address point layer to obtain number of buildings per parcel. The parcel layer was then converted into a centroid, or point, representing the center of each parcel polygon. Only parcels with improvement values greater than zero and address points were used in the analysis, this method assumes that improved parcels have a structure of some type. The DFIRM flood zones were overlaid in GIS on the address points and parcel centroid data to identify structures that would likely be inundated during a 1% annual chance and 0.2% annual chance flood event. These overlays can be seen graphically in the regional maps in Figure 4.63, Figure 4.64, and Figure 4.65, and in more detail in the jurisdictional annexes. Fresno County 4.207 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.63 Eastern Fresno County Flood Hazards Fresno County 4.208 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.64 Central Fresno County Flood Hazards Fresno County 4.209 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.65 Western Fresno County Flood Hazards Fresno County 4.210 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.66 Fresno County USACE Comprehensive Study 200-Year Floodplain Fresno County 4.211 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Building improvement values and counts for those points were then extracted from the parcel/assessor’s data and summed for the unincorporated county and jurisdictions. Results of the overlay analysis area shown in Table 4.54 for the 1% annual chance flood and Table 4.55 for 0.2% annual chance flood. The jurisdictional annexes provide more detailed information based on property type. Property type refers to the land use of the parcel and includes agricultural, commercial, exempt, industrial, multi-residential, open space and residential. Building loss is the number of impacted structures divided by the total number of structures in the jurisdiction. A loss estimate analysis was also performed based on depth damage functions developed by the Corp of Engineers and applied in FEMA’s BCA software. The loss curves depict the expected flood losses associated with the depth of flooding at a structure. Contents values were estimated as a percentage of building value based on their occupancy type, using FEMA/HAZUS estimated content replacement values. This includes 100% of the structure value for agricultural, commercial, exempt, and open space structures, 50% for multi-residential and residential structures and 150% for industrial structures. Building and contents values were totaled to obtain total exposure. There are different curves for structure and content losses. For the purposes of this planning level analysis, an average flood depth of 2 feet is assumed. A depth damage ratio of 25% was used for structural loss, based on the FEMA damage curves for a 2-foot flood. The results are shown in the loss estimate columns in Table 4.54 for the 1% annual chance flood, Table 4.55 for the 0.2% annual chance flood and Table 4.56 for areas protected by levee. It is important to note that there could be more than one structure or building on an improved parcel (i.e., condo complex occupies one parcel but might have several structures). Parcel and structure count were separated in the analysis to help better identify this issue. The end result is an inventory of the number and types of parcels and buildings subject to the hazards. Results are presented by unincorporated county and incorporated jurisdictions. Detailed tables show counts of parcels by jurisdictions and land use type (agricultural, commercial, exempt, industrial, multi- residential, open space and residential) within each flood zone. This flood loss analysis does not account for business disruption, emergency services, environmental damages, or displacement costs, thus actual losses could exceed the estimate shown. Fresno County 4.212 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.54 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 1% Annual Chance Floodplain by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Clovis 170 232 $46,561,472 $30,660,891 $77,222,363 $19,305,591 Coalinga 109 221 $10,100,954 $5,627,905 $15,728,859 $3,932,215 Firebaugh 464 542 $54,041,713 $41,117,441 $95,159,154 $23,789,789 Fowler 53 57 $6,251,558 $4,204,757 $10,456,315 $2,614,079 Fresno 231 556 $62,764,109 $65,204,716 $127,968,825 $31,992,206 Huron 1 0 $4,125,000 $2,062,500 $6,187,500 $1,546,875 Kerman - - - - - - Kingsburg - - - - - - Mendota 54 46 $10,235,064 $5,257,341 $15,492,405 $3,873,101 Orange Cove 251 313 $22,644,434 $13,891,997 $36,536,431 $9,134,108 Parlier 43 53 $2,846,336 $2,038,897 $4,885,233 $1,221,308 Reedley 3 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Joaquin - - - - - - Sanger 134 351 $21,812,438 $19,633,372 $41,445,810 $10,361,453 Selma 16 18 $1,953,999 $977,000 $2,930,999 $732,750 Unincorporated 2,364 2,303 $665,119,669 $588,852,859 $1,253,972,528 $313,493,132 Total 3,893 4,695 $908,456,746 $779,529,675 $1,687,986,421 $421,996,605 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA Table 4.55 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Clovis 6,129 9,544 $1,468,015,418 $850,310,253 $2,318,325,671 $579,581,418 Coalinga 583 666 $100,974,088 $98,146,277 $199,120,365 $49,780,091 Firebaugh 749 877 $78,569,006 $75,471,573 $154,040,579 $38,510,145 Fowler 16 5 $1,449,011 $1,449,011 $2,898,022 $724,506 Fresno 37,849 64,728 $5,358,755,572 $5,114,818,267 $10,473,573,839 $2,618,393,460 Huron 674 858 $61,211,332 $56,966,997 $118,178,329 $29,544,582 Kerman - - - - - - Kingsburg - - - - - - Mendota 13 24 $1,704,421 $1,704,421 $3,408,842 $852,211 Orange Cove 43 51 $10,402,925 $8,631,773 $19,034,698 $4,758,674 Parlier - - - - - - Reedley 137 186 $29,706,099 $29,706,099 $59,412,198 $14,853,050 San Joaquin - - - - - - Sanger 49 50 $7,767,763 $7,767,763 $15,535,526 $3,883,882 Selma - - - - - - Fresno County 4.213 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Unincorporated 3,921 4,553 $566,971,666 $594,425,493 $1,161,397,159 $290,349,290 Total 50,163 81,542 $7,685,527,301 $6,839,397,924 $14,524,925,225 $3,631,231,306 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA Looking at the flood risk for the entire Fresno County planning area, in general, Clovis, Firebaugh, Coalinga, Fresno, and Reedley are predominantly inundated by the 500-year flood. Orange Cove, San Joaquin, and Sanger are predominantly inundated by the 100-year flood. Fowler, Huron, Mendota, Parlier, and Selma are just barely affected by the floodplain. Kerman and Kingsburg are not in floodplains. This analysis does not take localized flooding into account Table 4.56 Fresno County Flood Loss Estimates—Fresno County Planning Area Flood Hazard Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate 1% Annual Chance 3,893 4,695 $908,456,746 $779,529,675 $1,687,986,421 $421,996,605 0.2% Annual Chance 50,163 81,542 $7,685,527,301 $6,839,397,924 $14,524,925,225 $3,631,231,306 Leveed Area 54 61 $8,644,969 $4,781,060 $13,426,029 $3,356,507 Total 54,110 86,298 $8,602,629,016 $7,623,708,659 $16,226,337,675 $4,056,584,419 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA *Includes 500-year and 100-year flood data According to this information, the Fresno County planning area has 3,893 parcels valued at roughly $908.4 million in the 100-year floodplain. An additional 50,163 parcels valued at roughly $7.7 billion fall within the 500-year floodplain, plus the 54 parcels ($8.6million value) in the leveed areas. As a result, total structural exposure is approximately $8.6 billion. When factoring the content values within these areas in addition to the structures and contents in leveed areas the total combined value of exposure is $16.2 billion. The end of this section provides more discussion on vulnerability in leveed areas. In addition to the analysis of the 100- and 500-year floodplains, Table 4.57 describes the property located in the 200-year floodplain. There are significantly fewer parcels and buildings located in this area, and only three related jurisdictions. The majority of parcels in the 200-year flood hazard layer are located in the City of Firebaugh, with 1,362 buildings representing over half of all at-risk structures. In total, there is $446 million in combined structural and content value in this floodplain throughout the Fresno County planning area. Table 4.57 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 200-Year Floodplain by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Clovis - - - - - - Coalinga - - - - - - Fresno County 4.214 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Firebaugh 985 1,362 $97,678,429 $57,792,254 $155,470,683 $38,867,671 Fowler - - - - - - Fresno 27 163 $16,486,935 $10,435,182 $26,922,117 $6,730,529 Huron - - - - - - Kerman - - - - - - Kingsburg - - - - - - Mendota 78 76 $8,931,543 $9,493,886 $18,425,429 $4,606,357 Orange Cove - - - - - - Parlier - - - - - - Reedley - - - - - - San Joaquin - - - - - - Sanger - - - - - - Selma - - - - - - Unincorporated 558 564 $124,258,595 $121,876,254 $246,134,849 $61,533,712 Total 1,648 2,165 $247,355,502 $199,597,576 $446,953,078 $111,738,269 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; USACE Comprehensive Study Table 4.58, Table 4.59, and Table 4.60 below provides a detailed analysis that shows the count and improved value of parcels that fall in a floodplain by property type for the 100- and 500-year annual chance flood zones. Additionally, these tables include information on loss estimates by flood based on guidance from FEMA. Based on this guidance, contents value is estimated at 50 percent of the improved value. Estimated losses assume that a flood is unlikely to cause total destruction. Losses are related to a variety of factors, including flood depth, flood velocity, building type, and construction. Using FEMA’s recommendations, average damage is estimated to be 20 percent of the total building value. Refer to the annexes for these results specific to each jurisdiction. While there are several limitations to this model, it does allow for potential loss estimation. It should be noted that the model may have included structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, it is important to remember that the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Table 4.58 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 1% Annual Chance Floodplain by Property Type—Unincorporated Fresno County Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 448 381 $77,195,934 $77,195,934 $154,391,868 $38,597,967 Commercial 23 60 $8,486,419 $8,486,419 $16,972,838 $4,243,210 Exempt 20 30 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 37 43 $22,608,533 $33,912,800 $56,521,333 $14,130,333 Fresno County 4.215 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Multi-Residential 1 1 $35,404 $17,702 $53,106 $13,277 Open Space 953 519 $380,879,678 $380,879,678 $761,759,356 $190,439,839 Residential 881 1,267 $175,106,750 $87,553,375 $262,660,125 $65,665,031 Unknown 1 2 $806,951 $806,951 $1,613,902 $403,476 Total 2,364 2,303 $665,119,669 $588,852,859 $1,253,972,528 $313,493,132 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA *Includes Zones A, AE, AH, and AO **Includes Shaded Zone X (500-year) and all 100-year flood zones Table 4.59 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain by Property Type—Unincorporated Fresno County Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 167 123 $23,370,188 $23,370,188 $46,740,376 $11,685,094 Commercial 34 47 $11,634,321 $11,634,321 $23,268,642 $5,817,161 Exempt 18 20 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 170 224 $71,751,039 $107,626,559 $179,377,598 $44,844,399 Multi-Residential 102 206 $16,843,386 $8,421,693 $25,265,079 $6,316,270 Open Space 150 104 $32,509,380 $32,509,380 $65,018,760 $16,254,690 Residential 3,280 3,829 $410,863,352 $410,863,352 $821,726,704 $205,431,676 Total 3,921 4,553 $566,971,666 $594,425,493 $1,161,397,159 $290,349,290 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA *Includes Zones A, AE, AH, and AO **Includes Shaded Zone X (500-year) and all 100-year flood zones Table 4.60 Count and Improved Value of Parcels in 200-Year Floodplain by Property Type—Unincorporated Fresno County Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 122 126 $13,927,928 $13,927,928 $27,855,856 $6,963,964 Commercial 6 13 $968,584 $968,584 $1,937,168 $484,292 Exempt 8 19 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 3 6 $3,525,545 $5,288,318 $8,813,863 $2,203,466 Open Space 329 226 $97,546,311 $97,546,311 $195,092,622 $48,773,156 Residential 90 174 $8,290,227 $4,145,114 $12,435,341 $3,108,835 Total 558 564 $124,258,595 $121,876,254 $246,134,849 $61,533,712 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; USACE Comprehensive Study Fresno County 4.216 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses Unincorporated Fresno County joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on December 12, 1982, and the Community Rating System (CRS) on October 1, 1991. According to the CRS listing of eligible communities dated October 1, 2007, the County is currently a Class 7, which is lower than the 2007 rating (8). Lower ratings are preferable and a Class 7 provides a 15 percent discount on flood insurance for those located within the special flood hazard area (SFHA) and a 5 percent discount for those located in non-SFHA areas. In the unincorporated County, there are 840 policies in force, of which there are 746 single family units, 11 2-4 family, 4 all other residential, and 79 nonresidential. 423 policies were located in an A zone (80 in zone A01-30 & AE, 193 in zone A, 119 in AO, 31 AH). The remaining policies are split between standard B, C, & X zone (146) and preferred B, C, & X Zone (271). 462 policies are pre-FIRM, leaving 378 as post-FIRM structures. There are two repetitive loss buildings in the unincorporated County. On repetitive loss structure is located in A zone, with three total payments equaling $19,385. The other repetitive loss building is located in zone B, C, and X, with two payments totaling $36,570. There are 35 paid losses in the unincorporated county, equal to $529,973. Of these losses, 17 were parcels in A zones and 18 parcels were in the B, C, and X zones. Of the 35 claims, 28 claims were associated with pre-FIRM structures and 7 with post- FIRM structures. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the unincorporated county. NFIP data indicates that there are 1,709 insurance policies in Fresno County representing $435.053 million of insurance coverage in force. There have been 151 paid losses, totaling $1.55 million. Table 4.61 provides more details on NFIP participation for each individual jurisdiction. Table 4.61 Fresno County NFIP Information Jurisdiction Policies Insurance in Force No. of Paid Losses Total Losses Paid Clovis 103 $31,999,500 14 $134,920 Coalinga 60 $12,902,300 Firebaugh 159 $31,729,100 Fowler 22 $5,787,700 1 $3,197.94 Fresno Unincorporated 840 $208,980,000 39 $537,282.62 Fresno City 323 $93,791,300 81 $765,183.27 Huron 9 $4,320,000 Kerman No SFHA/Not Participating/Not Required Kingsburg 10 $3,220,000 Mendota 17 $4,630,900 3 $2,572.00 Orange Cove 96 $23,078,500 6 $78,052 Parlier 8 $1,337,000 Reedley 8 $2,345,000 Fresno County 4.217 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Policies Insurance in Force No. of Paid Losses Total Losses Paid San Joaquin 3 $10,720.38 Sanger 54 $10,931,700 4 $16,288.44 Selma Not Participating - Sanctioned Total 1709 $435,053,000 151 $1,548,217 Source: FEMA National Flood Insurance Program Community Information System Historic, Cultural, and Natural Resources at Risk The Fresno County planning area has significant historic, cultural, and natural resources located throughout the County as previously described. Risk analysis of these resources was not possible due to data limitations. However, natural areas within the floodplain often benefit from periodic flooding as a naturally recurring phenomenon. These natural areas often reduce flood impacts by allowing absorption and infiltration of floodwaters. Overall Community Impact Floods and their impacts will vary by location and severity and will likely only affect certain areas of the County at any one time. Based on the risk assessment, it is evident that floods will continue to have potentially devastating economic impacts to certain areas of the County. However, many of the floods in the County are minor, localized flood events that are more of a nuisance than a disaster. Impacts that are not quantified, but can be anticipated in large future events, include: • Injury and loss of life; • Commercial and residential structural damage; • Disruption of and damage to public infrastructure; • Health hazards associated with mold and mildew; • Damage to roads/bridges resulting in loss of mobility; • Significant economic impact (jobs, sales, tax revenue) upon the community; • Negative impact on commercial and residential property values; and • Significant disruption to students and teachers as temporary facilities and relocations would likely be needed. Natural Environment Natural resources are generally resistant to flooding except where natural landscapes and soil compositions have been altered for human development or after periods of previous disasters such as drought and fire. Wetlands, for example, exist because of natural flooding incidents. Areas that are no longer wetlands may suffer from oversaturation of water, as will areas that are particularly impacted by drought. Areas recently suffering from wildfire damage may erode because of flooding, which can permanently alter an ecological system. Fresno County 4.218 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Critical Facilities Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. An analysis was performed using GIS software to determine critical facilities in Fresno County’s floodplain. The DFIRM flood layer previously discussed was used to identify the 100- and 500-year floodplains. For more information on the spatial distribution and location of critical facilities, see the Critical Facility overview. The impact to the community could be great if these critical facilities were damaged or destroyed during a flood event. Similar data is available for the other participating jurisdictions in the jurisdictional annexes. As described earlier, critical facilities are located throughout Fresno County. Critical facilities in the floodplain are summarized in Table 4.62 and Table 4.63 for the 100 and 500-year flood zones. In total, there are 34 facilities in the 100-year flood zone, 209 facilities in the 500-year flood zone, and 9 critical facilities in the 200-year floodplain. Information regarding critical facilities in the floodplain for each jurisdiction is outlined in the jurisdictional annexes. Table 4.62 Critical Facilities in the 100-Year Floodplain Jurisdiction Facility Type Building Count Coalinga Colleges & Universities 1 Department of Public Works 1 Total 2 Firebaugh CalARP 1 School 7 Total 8 Fresno CalARP 1 Total 1 Mendota Fire Station 1 Total 1 Orange Cove Fire Station 1 Total 1 Parlier CalARP 1 School 1 Total 2 Sanger CalARP 2 School 1 Total 7 Unincorporated Airport 1 CalARP 9 Fire Station 1 School 1 Total 12 Grand Total 34 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA Fresno County 4.219 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.63 Critical Facilities in the 500-Year Floodplain Jurisdiction Facility Type Building Count Clovis Colleges & Universities 1 Nursing Home 1 School 6 Total 8 Coaling Health Care 1 Total 1 Firebaugh Airport 1 CalARP 1 School 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 4 Fresno Airport 1 Behavioral Health 1 CalARP 12 Colleges & Universities 5 Communications 1 County Government 2 Daycare 52 Department of Agriculture 2 Department of Public Health 2 Department of Social Services 6 District Attorney 1 Fire Station 7 General Services 3 Health Care 1 Nursing Home 12 Police 5 School 68 Urgent Care 2 Total 183 Huron CalARP 4 School 2 Total 6 Unincorporated CalARP 4 Fire Station 1 School 2 Total 7 Grand Total 209 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; National Flood Hazard Layer Effective date 01/20/2016, FEMA Fresno County 4.220 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.64 Critical Facilities in the 200-Year Floodplain Jurisdiction Facility Type Building Count Firebaugh Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 3 Urgent Care 1 Total 6 Mendota Airport 1 CalARP 1 Total 2 Unincorporated Nursing Home 1 Total 1 Grand Total 9 Source: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; USACE Comprehensive Study Future Development Flooding and floodplain management are significant issues for Fresno County. The potential or likelihood of a flood event in the city increases with the annual onset of heavy rains in April combined with snowmelt runoff from May through June. Much of the historical growth in the Problems connected with flooding and stormwater runoff include erosion, sedimentation, degradation of water quality, losses of environmental resources, and certain health hazards. Future annexations of unincorporated areas could significantly add to the number of flood-prone structures in Fresno County. For NFIP participating communities, floodplain management practices implemented through local floodplain management ordinances should mitigate the flood risk to new development in floodplains. The development trend in the Fresno County planning area is steady, significant growth. Much of this growth is occurring in the urban areas, which causes a significant increase in peak flow and stormwater runoff. Census projections from the California Department of Finance expect the County’s population to grow to 1,201,792 by 2020. This is an increase of 271,342 people from the 2010 census estimate of 930,450. Such growth will consume previously undeveloped acres, and the impacts may overwhelm existing drainage and flood control facilities. The potential for flooding may increase as stormwater is channelized due to land development. Such changes can create localized flooding problems inside and outside of natural floodplains by altering or confining natural drainage channels. Floodplain modeling and master planning should be based on buildout land use to ensure that all new development remains safe from future flooding. While local floodplain management, stormwater management, and water quality Fresno County 4.221 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan regulations and policies address these changes on a site-by-site basis, their cumulative effects can have a negative impact on the floodplain. Local floodplain management ordinances require that new construction be built with the lowest floor elevated a minimum of one foot above the base flood (100-year) elevation. New development that adheres to the elevation requirements in addition to other requirements for maintaining elevation certificates and implementing stormwater program elements and erosion or sediment controls for all new development in the floodplain should help protect development from 100-year floods. The amount of growth in the County and nearby communities can also strain the limits of the entire water management system, which includes water supply in addition to water control. When flood control structures are overwhelmed, the result is not only severe flooding. Significant losses to the water supply system may also occur. Vulnerability to Levee Failure A levee failure can range from a small, uncontrolled release to a catastrophic failure. Vulnerability to levee failures is generally confined to the areas subject to inundation downstream of the facility. Secondary losses would include loss of the multi-use functions of the facility and associated revenues that accompany those functions. Vulnerability to Human Health: Epidemic/Pandemic (Medium) Based on historical occurrences, the risk to the Fresno County planning area is occasional, but the vulnerability is medium. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the risk from avian influenza is generally low to most people, because the viruses do not usually affect humans. However, H5N1 and H7N9 are some of the few avian influenza viruses to have crossed the species barrier to infect humans, and infection commonly results in severe disease. Most human cases of H5N1 and H7N9 influenza have resulted from contact with infected poultry, and the spread of these viruses from person to person has been limited. Nonetheless, because all influenza viruses have the ability to change, scientists are concerned that the H5N1 and H7N9 viruses, or another influenza virus, could one day be able to infect humans and spread easily from one person to another. If this were to happen, a pandemic could begin and everyone would be at risk. Other communicable diseases of this nature could result in a similar type of epidemic/pandemic and become a significant concern for the Fresno County planning area. People Disease spread and mortality is affected by a variety of factors, including virulence, ease of spread, aggressiveness of the virus and its symptoms, resistance to known antibiotics and environmental factors. While every pathogen is different, diseases normally have the highest mortality rate among the very young, the elderly or those with compromised immune systems. As an example, the unusually deadly 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic had a mortality rate of 20%. If an influenza Fresno County 4.222 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan pandemic does occur, it is likely that many age groups would be seriously affected. The greatest risks of hospitalization and death—as seen during the last two pandemics in 1957 and 1968 as well as during annual outbreaks of influenza—will be to infants, the elderly, and those with underlying health conditions. However, in the 1918 pandemic, most deaths occurred in young adults. Few people, if any, would have immunity to a new virus. Property For the most part, property itself wouldn’t be impacted by a human disease epidemic or pandemic. As concerns about contamination increase, property may be quarantined or destroyed as a precaution against spreading illness. Natural Environment A widespread pandemic would not have an impact on the natural environment unless the disease was transmissible between humans and animals. Critical Facilities Agricultural hazards would most likely not have an impact on critical facilities. Future Development Future development would not be impacted by a pandemic. Vulnerability to Human Health: West Nile Virus (Low) While the likelihood of occurrence of West Nile virus in the Fresno County planning area is likely, the County’s vulnerability is low, based on the percentage of total population that actually comes down with the disease. Since the discovery of West Nile virus in California in 2003, Fresno County has had 255 confirmed human cases. Although the potential for exposure does exist in Fresno County, the vulnerability should be considered in terms of adverse effects due to exposure. The County already has an active vector control program in place for mosquitoes, and protective measures to prevent exposure are relatively simple and cost-effective. Given the nature of protective measures, such as wearing long- sleeved clothing and using bug spray, the responsibility for protection can and should be an individual responsibility. Fresno County’s current public education program should give the community the knowledge as well as access to resources to effectively counter the risk and impact from the virus. People Approximately twenty percent of people exposed to West Nile Virus through a mosquito bite develop symptoms related to the virus; it is not transmissible from one person to another. Preventive steps can be taken to reduce exposure to mosquitos carrying the virus; these include Fresno County 4.223 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan insect repellent, covering exposed skin with clothing and avoiding the outdoors during twilight periods of dawn and dusk, or in the evening when the mosquitos are most active. Property Property would not be affected by West Nile Virus. Natural Environment While birds are the species primarily affected by West Nile Virus, bats, horses, cats, dogs, chipmunks, skunks, squirrels, domestic rabbits and alligators can all be infected with the virus. Critical Facilities Should a widespread outbreak of West Nile Virus occur, medical facilities could be stressed. Future Development Future development would not be impacted by West Nile Virus. Vulnerability to Landslide (Low) People People are susceptible if they are caught in a landslide or rockfall; falling debris can cause injury or death. There is also a danger to drivers operating vehicles, as rocks and debris can strike vehicles passing through the hazard area or cause dangerous shifts in roadways. Property Landslide risk is minimal in the highly developed valley area of the County due to the relatively flat topography, and most structures concentrated in the central and eastern portion of the County are not at risk to landslides. However, the Fresno County General Plan identifies State Route 168 in eastern Fresno County and State Route 198 in western Fresno County as areas that could be affected by landslides caused by earthquakes or heavy rains. Current data is limited and future studies should evaluate the geologic conditions throughout the planning area. Natural Environment Landslides and rockfalls have minimal impacts to the natural environment; these impacts would be confined to a small area. There is a slight chance that a rockfall or landslide in the drainages above the City could cause blockage and water backup from temporary landslide dams. Critical Facilities There is not enough available data to determine whether or not there are any critical facilities located in landslide susceptible areas Fresno County 4.224 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Future Development The severity of landslide problems is directly related to the extent of human activity in hazard areas. Human activities such as property development and road construction can also exacerbate the occurrence of landslides. Future development should be done carefully to prevent landslide damage to property or people. Adverse effects can be mitigated by early recognition and avoiding incompatible land uses in these areas or by corrective engineering. Improving mapping and information on landslide hazards and incorporating this information into the development review process could prevent siting of structures and infrastructure in identified hazard areas. Vulnerability to Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures (Extreme Cold/Freeze and Extreme Heat) (Low) People Traditionally, the very young and very old are considered at higher risk to the effects of extreme temperatures, but any populations outdoors in the weather are exposed, including otherwise young and healthy adults and homeless populations. While everyone is vulnerable to extreme temperature incidents, some populations are more vulnerable than others. Extreme temperatures pose the greatest danger to outdoor laborers, such as highway crews, police and fire personnel, and construction. The elderly, children, people in poor physical health, and the homeless are also vulnerable to exposure. Arguably, the young-and-otherwise-healthy demographic may experience a higher vulnerability of exposure, due to the increased likelihood that they will be out in the extreme temperatures, whether due to commuting for work or school, conducting property maintenance such as snow removal or lawn care, or for recreational reasons. It is difficult to isolate the County’s specific vulnerability to this hazard, as the impacts from extreme temperatures can be spread across an entire state or region. In general, all the population of the County can be considered at-risk to this hazard. Property Recent research indicates that the impact of extreme temperatures, particularly on populations, has been historically under-represented. The risks of extreme temperatures are often profiled as part of larger hazards, such as severe winter storms or drought. However, as temperature variances may occur outside of larger hazards or outside of the expected seasons but still incur large costs, it is important to examine them as stand-alone hazards. Extreme heat may overload demands for electricity to run air conditioners in homes and businesses during prolonged periods of exposure and presents health concerns to individuals outside in the temperatures. Extreme heat may also be a secondary effect of droughts, or may cause temporary drought-like conditions. For example, several weeks of extreme heat increases evapotranspiration and reduces moisture content in vegetation, leading to higher wildfire vulnerability for that time period even if the rest of the season is relatively moist. Extreme heat can cause infrastructure damage to roads. Extreme cold impacts structures when pipes or water mains freeze and burst, causing damage. Fresno County 4.225 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extreme cold may also lead to higher electricity and natural gas demands to maintain appropriate indoor heating levels combined with damages caused to the delivery infrastructure such as frozen lines and pipes. Cold may impact transportation as well. Exposed populations may be at risk while waiting for public transportation, particularly when combined with wind-chill, and some vehicles may not start which impacts the commute of the workforce and, in worst case scenarios, the movement of emergency services personnel. Natural Environment Extreme heat may cause temporary drought-like conditions. For example, several weeks of extreme heat increases evapotranspiration and reduces moisture content in vegetation, leading to higher wildfire vulnerability for that time period even if the rest of the season is relatively moist. Extreme cold has the same impacts on exposed wildlife as it does on exposed people. Changing heating and cooling patterns globally can have destructive secondary impacts, intensifying a variety of weather-related disasters that directly impact jurisdictions. Critical Facilities Extreme temperatures can impact pipe (extreme cold) and road infrastructure (extreme heat), but direct impacts to critical infrastructure is expected to be minimal. Critical infrastructure that relies on public utility systems that could be overloaded may see impacts during extreme temperature events. Future Development Since structures are not usually directly impacted by severe temperature fluctuations, continued development is less impacted by this hazard than others in the plan. However, pre-emptive cautions such as construction of green buildings that require less energy to heat and cool, use of good insulation on pipes and electric wirings, and smart construction of walkways, parking structures, and pedestrian zones that minimize exposures to severe temperatures may help increase the overall durability of the buildings and the community to the variations. Continued development also implies continued population growth, which raises the number of individuals potentially exposed to variations. Public education efforts should continue to help the population understand the risks and vulnerabilities of outdoor activities, property maintenance, and regular exposures during periods of extreme heat and cold. Vulnerability to Severe Weather: Fog (Medium) Fog issues are well documented in the Fresno County planning area. In recent years, there have been several large-scale accidents during periods of heavy fog. However, it should be noted that while fog is present, usually driver error is a significant contributory factor to these accidents. Fog is driven by weather patterns in the Central Valley that will continue to occur annually. As such, Fresno County 4.226 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan until people can learn to take appropriate precautions during fog events, fog-related accidents will also continue to occur. People Reduced visibility is the greatest risk to people when heavy fog is prevalent. Particularly when fog is dense, it can be hazardous to drivers, mariners and aviators and contributes to numerous accidents each year. To reduce injury and harm, people should avoid driving when dense fog is prevalent, if possible. If driving is pertinent, emergency services advise driving with lights on low beam, watching for CHP pace vehicles to guide through fog, avoiding stopping on highways, and avoiding crossing traffic lanes. Property Based on historic information, the primary effect of fog has not resulted in significant damages to property, or the losses are typically covered by insurance. Natural Environment As referred to in the Climate Change Considerations section of the Fog hazard profile, California’s winter tule fog has declined dramatically over the past three decades, raising a red flag for the state’s multibillion dollar agricultural industry. Crops such as almonds, pistachios, cherries, apricots and peaches go through a necessary winter dormant period brought on and maintained by colder temperatures. Tule fog, a thick ground fog that descends upon the state’s Central Valley between late fall and early spring, helps contribute to this winter chill. Critical Facilities Fog can have devastating effects on transportation corridors in the County. Multi-car pileups have resulted from drivers using excessive speed for the conditions and visibility. These accidents can cause multiple injuries and deaths and could have serious implications for human health and the environment if a hazardous or nuclear waste shipment were involved. Other disruptions from fog include delayed emergency response vehicles and school closures. Future Development Population and commercial growth in the County will increase the potential for complications with traffic accidents and commerce interruptions associated with dense fog. Fresno County 4.227 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Vulnerability to Severe Weather: Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning/Wind (Low) People Exposure is the greatest danger to people from severe thunderstorms. People can be hit by lightning, pelted by hail, and caught in rising waters. Serious injury and loss of human life is rarely associated with hailstorms. While national data shows that lightning causes more injuries and deaths than any other natural hazard except extreme heat, there doesn’t seem to be any trend in the data to indicate that one segment of the population is at a disproportionately high risk of being directly affected. Anyone who is outside during a thunderstorm is at risk of being struck by lightning. Aspects of the population who rely on constant, uninterrupted electrical supplies may have a greater, indirect vulnerability to lightning. As a group, the elderly or disabled, especially those with home health care services relying on rely heavily on an uninterrupted source of electricity. Resident populations in nursing homes, residential facilities, or other special needs housing may also be vulnerable if electrical outages are prolonged. If they do not have a back-up power source, rural residents and agricultural operations reliant on electricity for heating, cooling, and water supplies are also especially vulnerable to power outages. Thunderstorms have the potential energy and strong winds to topple dead trees and injure people. Property Based on historic information, the primary effect of these storms has not resulted in significant injury or damages to people and property, or the losses are typically covered by insurance. It is the secondary hazards caused by weather, such as floods, that have had the greatest impact on the County. Natural Environment Severe thunderstorms are a natural environmental process. Environmental impacts include the sparking of potentially destructive wildfires by lightning and localized flattening of plants by hail. As a natural process, the impacts of most severe thunderstorms by themselves are part of the overall natural cycle and do not cause long-term consequential damage. Critical Facilities Because of the unpredictability of severe thunderstorm strength and path, most critical infrastructure that is above ground is equally exposed to the storm’s impacts. Due to the random nature of these hazards, a more specific risk assessment was not conducted for this plan. Future Development New critical facilities, such as communication towers should be built to withstand heavy rain, monsoon, and hail damage. Future development projects should consider severe weather hazards Fresno County 4.228 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan at the planning, engineering and architectural design stage with the goal of reducing vulnerability. Stormwater master planning and site review should be considered for all new development. Thus, development trends in the County are not expected to increase overall vulnerability to the hazard, but population growth will increase potential exposure to hazards such as lightning. Vulnerability to Severe Weather: Winter Storm (Medium) People While virtually all aspects of the population are vulnerable to severe winter weather, there are segments of the population that are more vulnerable to the potential indirect impacts of a severe winter storm than others, particularly the loss of electrical power. If they do not have a back-up power source, rural residents reliant on electricity for heating and water supplies are also especially vulnerable to power outages. As a group, the elderly or disabled, especially those with home health care services that rely heavily on an uninterrupted source of electricity. Resident populations in nursing homes, residential facilities, or other special needs housing may also be vulnerable if electrical outages are prolonged. Public education efforts may help minimize the risks to future populations by increasing knowledge of appropriate mitigation behaviors, clothing, sheltering capacities, and decision making regarding snow totals, icy roads, driving conditions, and outdoor activities (all of which are contributors to decreased public safety during severe winter storms.) New establishments or increased populations who are particularly vulnerable to severe winter storms (such as those with health concerns or those who live in communities that may be isolated for extended periods of time due to the hazard) should be encouraged to maintain at least a 72-hour self-sufficiency as recommended by FEMA. Encouraging contingency planning for businesses may help alleviate future economic losses caused by such hazards while simultaneously limiting the population exposed to the hazards during commuting or commerce-driven activities. Property While virtually all aspects of the population are vulnerable to severe winter weather, there are segments of the population that are more vulnerable to the potential indirect impacts of a severe winter storm than others, particularly the loss of electrical power. If they do not have a back-up power source, rural residents reliant on electricity for heating and water supplies are also especially vulnerable to power outages. As a group, the elderly or disabled, especially those with home health care services that rely heavily on an uninterrupted source of electricity. Resident populations in nursing homes, residential facilities, or other special needs housing may also be vulnerable if electrical outages are prolonged. Public education efforts may help minimize the risks to future populations by increasing knowledge of appropriate mitigation behaviors, clothing, sheltering capacities, and decision making regarding snow totals, icy roads, driving conditions, and outdoor activities (all of which are contributors to decreased public safety during severe winter storms.) New establishments or Fresno County 4.229 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan increased populations who are particularly vulnerable to severe winter storms (such as those with health concerns or those who live in communities that may be isolated for extended periods of time due to the hazard) should be encouraged to maintain at least a 72-hour self-sufficiency as recommended by FEMA. Encouraging contingency planning for businesses may help alleviate future economic losses caused by such hazards while simultaneously limiting the population exposed to the hazards during commuting or commerce-driven activities. Natural Environment Natural resources may be damaged by the severe winter weather, including broken trees and death of wildlife. Unseasonable storms may damage or kill plant and wildlife, which may impact natural food chains until the next growing season. Most of these impacts would be short-term. Critical Facilities Because of the unpredictability of severe winter storm strength and path, most critical infrastructure that is above ground is equally exposed to the storm’s impacts. Roads are especially susceptible to the effects of a winter storm. A more specific risk assessment was not conducted for this plan. Future Development Future residential or commercial buildings in locations that receive large amounts of snow each year should be built to be able to withstand snow loads from severe winter storms. Jurisdictions within Sierra National Forest like Lakeshore, Big Creek, Cedar Grover and Rock Haven may benefit from taking these precautions. Population growth in these areas and growth in visitors will increase problems with road, business, and school closures, and increase the need for snow removal and emergency services related to severe winter weather events. Development in the County will increase the number of vehicles and persons vulnerable to this hazard. Vulnerability to Severe Weather: Tornadoes People Populations are the most vulnerable to tornados. The availability of sheltered locations such as basements, buildings constructed using tornado-resistant materials and methods, and public storm shelters, all reduce the exposure of the population. However, there are also segments of the population that are especially exposed to the indirect impacts of tornadoes, particularly the loss of electrical power. These populations include the elderly or disabled, especially those with medical needs and treatments dependent on electricity. Nursing homes, Community Based Residential Facilities, and other special needs housing facilities are also vulnerable if electrical outages are prolonged, since backup power generally operates only minimal functions for a short period of time. Fresno County 4.230 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Property General damages are both direct (what the tornado physically destroys) and indirect, which focuses on additional costs, damages and losses attributed to secondary hazards spawned by the tornado, or due to the damages caused by the tornado. Depending on the size of the tornado and its path, a tornado is capable of damaging and eventually destroying almost anything. Construction practices and building codes can help maximize the resistance of the structures to damage. Secondary impacts of tornado damage often result from damage to infrastructure. Downed power and communications transmission lines, coupled with disruptions to transportation, create difficulties in reporting and responding to emergencies. These indirect impacts of a tornado put tremendous strain on a community. In the immediate aftermath, the focus is on emergency services. Natural Environment Tornadoes can cause massive damage to the natural environment, uprooting trees and other debris. This is part of a natural process, however, and the environment will return to its original state in time. Critical Facilities Public gathering places including (but not limited to) schools, community centers, shelters, nursing homes and churches, may have increased impacts at certain times of day if struck by a tornado. Due to the random nature of these hazards, a more specific risk assessment was not conducted for this plan. Future Development As the County continues to add population, the number of people and housing developments exposed to the hazard increases. Proper education on building techniques and the use of sturdy building materials, basements, attached foundations, and other structural techniques may minimize the property vulnerabilities. Public shelters at parks and open spaces may help reduce the impacts of tornadoes on the recreational populations exposed to storms. Vulnerability to Soil Hazards: Erosion (Low) People Erosion generally only damage structures, with no direct impacts on people. Property While impacts are slow to accumulate, costly damages to residences, facilities, roads, and other infrastructure could occur. Erosion occurs over a long period of time, though weather and other climatic factors can catalyze the magnitude of impact. Properties near construction sites are the Fresno County 4.231 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan most vulnerable to erosion, followed by structures on/near steep slopes, disturbed pits/quarries, and runoff channels. Natural Environment There are generally no significant impacts to the natural environment associated with erosion. Critical Facilities Roads, pipelines and facilities can be impacted but significant impacts are not anticipated. Future Development Erosion controls such as silt fences, netting, and vegetative coverage can be utilized to minimize soil erosion around at-risk properties. During construction, erosion risk can be reduced through the use of paved roads and runoff control features, while vegetation removal should be minimized and drainage ditches constructed only where necessary. Vulnerability to Soil Hazards: Expansive Soils (Low) People No direct impacts on people are anticipated. Should an impact occur, it is anticipated to be localized. Property While impacts are slow to accumulate, costly damages property could occur. The majority of the hazard’s significance is drawn from the exposure of existing development to this hazard. Older construction may not be resistant to the swelling soil conditions and, therefore, may experience expensive and potentially extensive damages. This includes heaving sidewalks, structural damage to walls and basements, the need to replace windows and doors, or dangers and damages caused by ruptured pipelines. Newer construction may have included mitigation techniques to avoid most damage from the hazard, but the dangers continue if mitigation actions are not supported by homeowners. For example, the maintenance of grading away from foundations and the use of appropriate landscaping near structures must be continued to prevent an overabundance of water in vulnerable soils near structures. While continued public education efforts may help increase compliance for landscaping and interior finishing mitigation actions, physical reconstruction of foundations is probably not feasible in all but the most heavily impacted of existing development. Therefore, damages may be expected into the future for existing structures. Critical Facilities Roads, pipelines and facilities can be impacted but significant impacts are not anticipated. Natural Environment No significant impacts are anticipated. Fresno County 4.232 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Future Development The recognition of expansive soils typically allows it to be mitigated in future development. Vulnerability to Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence (Medium) People Typically, this hazard results in property damage, not risk to human life. Property Subsidence may result in serious structural damage to buildings, roads, irrigation ditches, underground utilities, and pipelines. It can disrupt and alter the flow of surface or underground water. Weight, including surface developments such as roads, reservoirs, and buildings and manmade vibrations from such activities as blasting or heavy truck or train traffic can accelerate natural processes of subsidence, or incur subsidence over manmade voids. Fluctuations in the level of underground water caused by pumping or by injecting fluids into the earth can initiate sinking to fill the empty space previously occupied by water or soluble minerals. Available data prevented further estimation of loss potential. Critical Facilities Linear infrastructure (roads, buried pipelines) tends to have the most risk to land subsidence. Infrastructure at risk includes levees (which can lower their ability to contain flood flows), the California Aqueduct, and Interstate 5. Other buried infrastructure on the west side of the Valley could be at risk as well. Natural Environment Typically, there is little impacts to the natural environment from this hazard. Future Development The areas with the highest susceptibility to subsidence include the western edge of the Central Valley, where development trends have been slower than the more urbanized areas of the County. As such, vulnerability to this hazard is not anticipated to increase with new development, provided that land use planning and engineering practices are followed. Increased efforts to monitor and manage groundwater pumping, increased accuracy of mapping, and emphasis on appropriate grading and ground compaction during development will help alleviate vulnerability for future development in unknown areas of risk Vulnerability to Volcanoes (Low ) The Mono Lake-Long Valley area located adjacent to the north and east of the northernmost areas of Fresno County is the only known volcanic hazard to Fresno County. Because of the limited Fresno County 4.233 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan area affected and remote potential of an eruption, the significance is rated low. A more likely scenario would involve ash from a regional event. People While a remote possibility for Fresno, volcanoes could have significant impacts on people. These include ash accumulation on the ground and in the air, that can affect the ability to breathe. More significant, though remote, could be the need to evacuate the area entirely, and a temporary or permanent relocation of large segments of the population. Property Volcanoes can cause two major types of impacts to the built environment. One type of impact has to do with the accumulation of ash and eruption debris on infrastructure, which needs to be removed. The other type of impact is direct impacts from lava flows and lahars, which can destroy buildings and infrastructure in their path. Due to the remote possibility of occurrence damage is not anticipated to be significant in the near future. Natural Environment Volcanoes can have significant impacts on the natural environment. The direct impacts of volcanoes can also destroy the landscape around the eruption – flattening trees, starting fires, moving debris and contaminating water sources. Volcanic eruptions can even affect the global climate. According to research conducted by NASA, after Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines erupted in 1991, strong winds spread the aerosol particles from the plume around the globe. The result was a measurable cooling of the Earth’s surface for a period of almost two years. Critical Facilities Due to the low probability of this hazard, a more specific assessment of critical infrastructure risk was not conducted for this plan. Future Development The Mono Lake-Long Valley area located adjacent to the north and east of the northernmost areas of Fresno County is the only known volcanic hazard to Fresno County. Development in close proximity to the Valley is more at risk to volcanic flow hazards, however, the destructive impacts of a volcanic eruption cannot be easily mitigated by building codes or smart construction. Vulnerability to Wildfire (High) Fresno County planning area’s wildfire risk and vulnerability is of significant concern, with some areas of the planning area being at greater risk than others as described further in this section. High fuel loads in the planning area, along with geographical and topographical features create the potential for both natural and human-caused fires that can result in loss of life and property. These factors, combined with natural weather conditions common to the area, including periods of Fresno County 4.234 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan drought, low relative humidity, and periodic winds, can result in frequent and sometimes catastrophic fires. Even the relatively flat and more urbanized area of central Fresno is not immune from fire. During the fire season, the dry vegetation and hot and sometimes windy weather combined with a denser population results in an increase in the number of ignitions. Fresno County’s wildfire vulnerability is the result of increased development encroaching into forested and annual grassland areas, typically referred to as the wildland-urban interface. As development continues throughout the planning area, especially in the interface, the risk and vulnerability to wildfires will likely increase. Two fire safe councils have been created to address this increased wildfire threat in the wildland-urban interface: Highway 168 and Oak to Timberline fire safe councils. People The historical and potential impacts of wildfire on populations include threat of injury or death, possible agricultural sector job loss, secondary economic losses to businesses located in the wildland-urban interface and within or near wildland resources like parks and national forests, and loss of public access to recreational resources. Fire suppression may also require increased cost to local and state government for water acquisition and delivery, especially during periods of drought when water resources are scarce. The data and mapping demonstrates variations in vulnerability (population, population growth and density) across jurisdictions, and enables the analysis to identify the location of each jurisdiction relative to its risk zone on the wildfire risk map. Other at-risk populations include the location of the County’s wildland recreational areas where persons might be located during a wildfire event, such as state and national parks and forests. Wildfire risk is of greatest concern to populations residing in the moderate, high, and very high wildfire threat zones. GIS was used to estimate populations within the hazard zones, based on the residential parcels with improvements in the wildfire threat zones. Results are shown by jurisdiction in the table below. Table 4.65 Populations at Risk to Wildfire: Fresno County Planning Area Jurisdiction Very High High Moderate Nonwildland/ Nonurban Urban Unzoned Total Clovis 0 0 0 17,968 77,713 95,680 Coalinga 0 751 1,756 431 6,464 9,402 Firebaugh 0 0 666 593 3,075 4,333 Fowler 0 0 0 1,407 3,775 5,183 Fresno 0 0 2,450 30,242 345,365 378,057 Huron 0 0 0 0 2,197 2,197 Kerman 0 0 0 2,295 7,180 9,475 Kingsburg 0 0 0 593 10,154 10,746 Fresno County 4.235 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Very High High Moderate Nonwildland/ Nonurban Urban Unzoned Total Mendota 0 0 0 894 4,232 5,126 Orange Cove 0 0 0 155 4,394 4,549 Parlier 0 0 0 1,167 6,258 7,424 Reedley 0 0 0 1,480 15,096 16,576 San Joaquin 0 0 0 0 1,975 1,975 Sanger 0 0 0 3,119 15,701 18,820 Selma 0 0 0 973 15,860 16,833 All Cities 0 751 4,872 61,317 519,436 586,377 Unincorporated 10,981 12,325 8,033 19,502 77,804 128,645 County Totals 10,981 13,076 12,905 80,819 597,241 715,022 Sources: Amec Foster Wheeler analysis of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and Fresno County data In another assessment of community vulnerability, the 2010 FRAP assessment utilized the Priority Landscape unit of analysis and defined it as the convergence of areas with high wildfire threat and human infrastructure assets. The analytical framework follows the same pattern of aligning threats with key assets to define the priority landscape. In this case, the threat is specific to the nature of fire that can cause significant losses to human infrastructure, personal property and pose a risk to public safety. These risk areas are shown on the map below. GIS Analysis of population within this area yielded the following estimates, all of which are in unincorporated areas. • Population in High: 3,072 • Population in Medium: 8,125 • Population in Low: 11,041 Fresno County 4.236 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.67 Fresno County Preventing Wildfire Threats for Community Safety Fresno County 4.237 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Property The historical and potential impacts of wildfire on property include crop loss, injury and death of livestock and pets, and damage to infrastructure, homes and other buildings located throughout the wildfire risk area, with greatest potential impact on property, buildings and infrastructure located within high and very high hazard zones including the urban-wildland interface, and buildings and infrastructure located within forested lands, including (but not limited to) national forests and parks. Methodology Using CAL FIRE’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), an assessment of wildfire risk in the Fresno County planning area. GIS was used to create a centroid, or point, representing the center of each parcel polygon, which was overlaid on the wildfire layer. For the purposes of this analysis, the wildfire hazard zone that intersected the centroid was assigned as the hazard zone for the entire parcel. For purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that every parcel with an improved value greater than zero was developed in some way. Only improved parcels and the value of their improvements were analyzed. The wildfire data was acquired from the CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program; the layer used was the Fire Hazard Severity Zones, Very High zones in LRA (Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/projects/wui/525_CA_wui_analysis.pdf and http://frap. fire.ca.gov/projects/hazard/fhz.html). The County’s parcel layer was used as the basis for the inventory of developed parcels. The results are summarized in the tables and maps that follow. The Community Wildfire Threat used in this analysis was derived from a new and unique spatial dataset, Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). This dataset was explicitly built for adopting new ignition-resistant building code standards and adopted by the California Building Commission in 2007. It is constructed to describe the nature and probability of fire exposure to structures, including those lands that are highly urbanized, but in close proximity to open wildlands (WUI). Details of the FHSZ mapping project are available on the FRAP website (http://frap.fire.ca.gov/projects/hazard/fhz.html ). As the following illustrates, there is a significant fire hazard in the eastern and far western portions of the County. The majority of the structures in the WUI are in the Sierra foothills region. Fresno County 4.238 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.68 Structures at Risk to Wildfire Fresno County 4.239 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Once the number of parcels and their values were determined, contents values were estimated (based on 50 percent of the assessed value) to determine total values at risk by hazard zone. Overlaying the fire hazard severity zone map with the County parcel layer, it is evident that the Fresno County planning area has significant assets at risk to wildfire as detailed in Table 4.66 through Table 4.68. Table 4.66 Values at Risk from Wildfire Summary by Severity Fire Severity Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Very High 3,659 4,999 $724,565,578 $386,663,834 $1,111,229,412 High 4,830 6,042 $552,079,230 $322,941,866 $875,021,096 Moderate 5,096 5,730 $1,189,769,652 $787,321,643 $1,977,091,295 Total 13,585 16,771 $2,466,414,460 $1,496,927,342 $3,963,341,802 Sources: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Table 4.67 Values at Risk from Wildfire by Property Type—Unincorporated County Fire Severity Type Property Type Parcels Building Count Improved Value ($) Contents Value ($) Total Value ($) Moderate Agricultural 353 324 $177,961,972 $177,961,972 $355,923,944 Commercial 64 106 $21,887,626 $21,887,626 $43,775,252 Exempt 29 80 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 13 23 $1,516,713 $2,275,070 $3,791,783 Multi-Residential 1 2 $40,189 $20,095 $60,284 Open Space 509 319 $147,552,400 $147,552,400 $295,104,800 Residential 2,533 3,128 $538,399,955 $269,199,978 $807,599,933 Total 3,502 3,982 $887,358,855 $618,897,140 $1,506,255,995 High Agricultural 236 298 $27,321,155 $27,321,155 $54,642,310 Commercial 85 325 $28,173,191 $28,173,191 $56,346,382 Exempt 29 55 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 9 15 $1,703,010 $2,554,515 $4,257,525 Multi-Residential 3 2 $345,207 $172,604 $517,811 Open Space 341 355 $33,417,902 $33,417,902 $66,835,804 Residential 3,885 4,624 $430,444,222 $215,222,111 $645,666,333 Total 4,588 5,674 $521,404,687 $306,861,478 $828,266,165 Very High Agricultural 54 65 $3,803,132 $3,803,132 $7,606,264 Commercial 74 133 $41,254,672 $41,254,672 $82,509,344 Exempt 28 95 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 1 2 $121,255 $60,628 $181,883 Open Space 39 34 $3,704,286 $3,704,286 $7,408,572 Residential 3,463 4,670 $675,682,233 $337,841,117 $1,013,523,350 Total 3,659 4,999 $724,565,578 $386,663,834 $1,111,229,412 Sources: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fresno County 4.240 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.68 Values at Risk from Wildfire—Fresno County Incorporated Cities Fire Severity Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Moderate Agriculture 3 17 $289,793 $289,793 $579,586 Commercial 17 111 $26,502,121 $26,502,121 $53,004,242 Exempt 18 18 0 0 0 Industrial 20 20 $3,886,103 $5,829,155 $9,715,258 Multi-Residential 16 37 $15,868,751 $7,934,376 $23,803,127 Residential 1,521 1,561 $255,989,940 $127,994,970 $383,984,910 Total 1,595 1,764 $302,536,708 168,550,414 $471,087,122 High Agricultural 1 1 $66,463 $66,463 $132,926 Commercial 4 118 $1,419,770 $1,419,770 $2,839,540 Multi-Residential 3 5 $151,816 $75,908 $227,724 Residential 234 244 $29,036,494 $14,518,247 $43,554,741 Total 242 368 $30,674,543 $16,080,388 $46,754,931 Grand Total 1,837 2,132 $333,211,251 $184,630,802 $517,842,053 Sources: 2017 Certified Roll Values, Fresno County Assessor’s Office; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Natural Environment: Wildfire Potential Impact to Ecosystems Natural resources are important to include in benefit-cost analyses for future projects and may be used to leverage additional funding for mitigation projects that also contribute to community goals for protecting natural resources. Awareness of natural assets can lead to opportunities for meeting multiple objectives. For instance, protecting watersheds will help maintain the quantity and quality of water, timber production and promote carbon sequestration. Given the previous discussion on wildfire frequency and severity, research conducted as part of the 2010 FRAP Assessment brings to light the factors that shape the potential impact of wildfire events, namely the vulnerability characteristics of ecosystems, populations, buildings and infrastructure that lie within wildfire risk areas within the planning area and beyond. As such, the 2010 Assessment analyzed a variety of factors according to a set of criteria in order to identify what it terms, Priority Landscapes and Priority Communities most vulnerable to wildfire. With regard to ecosystems, Figure 4.69 shows the analytical framework for identifying the Priority Landscape to assess the risk and feed the mitigation strategy for dealing with preventing damage to ecosystems as a result of wildfire. Fresno County 4.241 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.69 Defining Wildfire Priority Landscapes In analyzing the threats, the Assessment defined a particular small area as a Stand-Level threat and is derived from FRAP’s fire threat data compiled in 2004. It is based on fuel conditions, observed fire frequency and expected fire weather conditions. The Landscape-Level wildfire threat attempts to capture the threat of damage to ecosystems at the landscape scale. This is derived by calculating the percentage of each vegetation type in each unique tree seed zone that is “unhealthy”, based on being in a condition class that indicates significant deviation from historical fire regimes–specifically the proportion of a given ecosystem that is in either condition class two or three. This approach recognizes that stand-level threats have elevated importance if cumulatively they have potential to damage broader landscape-level ecosystems. A detailed discussion of the metrics can be found on the FRAP website (http://frap.fire.ca.gov/assessment2003/Chapter3_Quality/wildfire.html ). Overall, results of the Assessment indicate that Priority Landscape identifies priority areas within ecosystems that have high levels of threat from future fires, and should be viewed as a basic assess- ment of need for strategies and adoption of tools to protect these key areas in the future. It is constructed by combining stand- and landscape-level threats to create a composite threat map, and classifying the final product into low, medium, and high priority landscapes. The following maps depict the Assessment findings, showing Fresno County Wildfire Priority Landscapes based on threats to water supply and water quality. Trends in landscape characteristics indicate high threats to water quality and supply in the eastern portion of the County, in the Sierra Nevada region. Fresno County 4.242 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.70 Fresno Wildfire Priority Landscape- Water Supply Fresno County 4.243 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.71 Fresno Wildfire Priority Landscape- Water Quality Fresno County 4.244 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.72 Fresno County Preventing Wildfire Threats to Maintain Ecosystem Health Fresno County 4.245 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The Fresno County planning area has substantial cultural and natural resources located throughout the County as previously described. Wildfires also cause watershed and ecosystem losses. These losses include impacts to water supplies and water quality as well as air quality. Another loss is to the aesthetic value of the area. Major fires that result in visible damage detract from that value. Other natural resources at risk from wildfire include wildland recreation areas, wildlife and habitat areas, rangeland, and timber resources. The loss to these natural resources would be significant. The historical and potential impacts of wildfire on the natural environment are widespread throughout public and private lands within the County, exacerbated by drought and tree mortality, with impacts to all flora and fauna, and the destabilization (erosion, subsidence) of land dependent on healthy plants and trees for stability. The data and mapping captures the full range of vulnerable species, habitat types, biotic regions, parks and forests, and other environmental features within Fresno County. Also provided is each jurisdiction’s location within these natural areas, and the location of both jurisdictions and natural areas/species relative the wildfire risk zones on the wildfire risk map. It should be noted that those species and natural zones most greatly affected by drought appear to be most vulnerable to wildfire - The history of drought and (pine) tree mortality locations (section 4.2.4, p. 25, 26) in the County highly correlates with the Very High hazard zone on the Wildfire Severity Map (Figure 4.52) (Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/projects/projects_drought). Critical Facilities Wildfire impacts to critical facilities include structural damage or destruction, risk to persons located within facilities, and interruption of facility operations and critical functions. Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described in Section 4.3.1. An analysis was performed using GIS software to determine where critical facilities are located within the wildfire threat zones. Table 4.69 lists the critical facilities in the different wildfire hazard zones for the entire Fresno County planning area. Fresno County 4.246 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.69 Critical Facilities at Risk to Wildfire by Hazard Class: Fresno County Planning Area Fire Severity Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Very High Unincorporated Fire Station 8 School 7 Total 15 High Unincorporated Fire Station 7 School 15 Sheriff 1 Total 23 Moderate Coalinga Department of Public Works 1 Fire Station 2 Total 3 Firebaugh Airport 1 Total 1 Fresno Daycare 1 Total 1 Unincorporated CalARP 3 Department of Public Works 1 Fire Station 3 School 2 Sheriff 1 Total 10 Grand Total 15 Sources: Fresno County GIS, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Amec Foster Wheeler analysis 2018 Future Development Given that large, destructive fires continue to plague California communities (and Fresno County), recent research points out that such impacts are related to growth/land-use development and federal, state and local policy makers continue to expand the demarcations of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Because future development encompasses all forms of property, buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and all related populations and their functions, drought impacts to future development align with the historical and potential impacts to populations, property, natural environment, and critical facilities discussed (above). Population growth and development in Fresno County is on the rise. Additional growth and development within the WUI interface will continue to increase the risk and vulnerability of the planning area to damaging wildfires. Fresno County 4.247 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.73 Localized Development Threat Source: http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/assessment2010/pdfs/1.1population_growth.pdf In general, continuing past trends, much development in Fresno County is projected on land currently used for agriculture. Figure 4.73 (above) shows high risk of development across large extents of the San Joaquin Valley. Fresno County 4.248 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Overall Community Impact The overall impact to the community from a severe wildfire includes: • Injury and loss of life; • Commercial and residential structural damage; • Decreased water quality in area watersheds; • Increase in post-fire hazards such as flooding, sedimentation, and mudslides; • Damage to natural resource habitats and other resources, such as timber and rangeland; • Loss of water, power, roads, phones, and transportation, which could impact, strand, and/or impair mobility for emergency responders and/or area residents; • Economic losses (jobs, sales, tax revenue) associated with loss of commercial structures; • Negative impact on commercial and residential property values; • Loss of churches, which could severely impact the social fabric of the community; • Loss of schools, which could severely impact the entire school system and disrupt families and teachers, as temporary facilities and relocations would likely be needed; and • Impact on the overall mental health of the community. 4.4 Human-Caused Hazards This risk assessment differs from the risk assessment for natural hazards in that it does not include an assessment of potential losses from human-caused hazards. Such an assessment is very difficult, primarily because of how unpredictable and complex such events are. Human-caused hazard events are often measured in terms such as human lives and economic disruption as well as the value of the facilities actually impacted. The value of impacted facilities is often negligible as compared to the emotional value and the economic impact of affected local, regional, national, and world markets. The unpredictability of human-caused hazard events creates a level of complexity in modeling potential losses which is often covered in other planning mechanisms and is well beyond the scope of this DMA planning effort. The risk assessment process for human-caused hazards identifies the areas most susceptible to potential hazard events by evaluating which populations and facilities are most vulnerable to human-caused hazards. It is presented in two sections: Hazard Identification and Profiles: Human Caused-Hazards and Asset Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment. 4.4.1 Hazard Identification and Profiles: Human-Caused Hazards Natural hazards, while essentially uncontrollable events, do follow the fundamental laws of earth science and physics. Therefore, the types, frequencies, and locations of many natural hazards can be identified and often predicted with a certain level of confidence. For example, within floodplains, it can be stated that in any given year there is a 1 percent chance of a flood event at a given discharge and flood depth that will be equaled or exceeded. These predictions are based on Fresno County 4.249 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan historical flood records combined with hydrologic and hydraulic modeling. In many cases, warning systems are in place to notify the public of a pending natural event. The same is not usually true for human-caused hazards. With human-caused hazards, the recurrence interval cannot be predicted and human behaviors, such as incompetence, carelessness or malice cannot be forecast with any level of accuracy. While some warning systems have been established to notify at risk populations of impending threats from human-caused hazards, these types of hazards usually do not follow a predictable pattern. The potential exists for most types of human-caused hazards to occur anywhere at any time. Due to their unpredictability, human-caused hazards can pose great danger to public health and safety. Education, warning, and response capability are particularly important in preparing for human- caused incidents. Human-caused hazards are hazards that directly result from human activity. These hazards can be accidental or intentional. FEMA guidance generally separates human-caused hazards into two broad categories: technological hazards (accidental) and terrorism hazards (intentional). The HMPC chose to only address technological hazards associated with a hazardous materials release in this plan. Hazardous Materials Incidents Hazardous Material Incidents usually result from accidents or system failures. These hazards are largely unforeseen and therefore are difficult to predict with any level of accuracy. Hazards of concern in Fresno County include fixed facility incidents and transportation incidents (these are discussed further below); in other words, facilities and operations that produce, transport, store, and/or use hazardous materials. Hazardous materials are substances that are flammable or combustible, explosive, toxic, noxious, corrosive, reactive, an oxidizer, an irritant, carcinogenic, or radioactive. These materials can harm people through skin contact, inhalation, ingestion, or pharmaceutical action. Hazardous materials have the potential to be released into the environment during use, processing, storage, and transport or when improperly disposed. A release of a hazardous material can pose a risk to life safety, public health, and property and can result in the evacuation of a few people, a portion of a facility, or an entire area. Other concerns include impacts to air quality, water quality, and other short- and long-term impacts to the natural environment. As a result of these risks, the use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials is highly regulated at the federal, state, and local levels. Hazardous materials are everywhere, and spills or releases occur in this nation on a daily basis. According to FEMA, the impact to life and property from any given release depends on a number of factors: • Application Mode describes the human act(s) or unintended event(s) necessary to cause the hazard to occur. Fresno County 4.250 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Duration is the length of time the hazard is present on the target. • The dynamic/static characteristic of a hazard describes its tendency, or that of its effects, to either expand, contract, or remain confined in time, magnitude, and space. • Mitigating conditions are characteristics of the target and its physical environment that can reduce the effects of a hazard. • Exacerbating conditions are characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a hazard Additional factors contribute to the impact of hazardous materials releases from a fixed facility or transportation incident: Cal A • Solid, liquid, and/or gaseous hazardous materials can be released from fixed or mobile containers either accidentally or on purpose (see Table 4.70). • The resulting release can last for hours or for days. • The substances released may be corrosive or otherwise damaging over time, and they may cause an explosion and/or fire. • Contamination may be carried out of the incident area by people, vehicles, water, and/or wind. • Weather conditions will directly affect how the hazard develops. • The micrometeorological effects of buildings and terrain can alter travel and duration of agents. • Shielding in the form of sheltering in place can protect people and property from harmful effects. • Noncompliance with fire and building codes as well as failure to maintain existing fire protection and containment features can substantially increase the damage from a hazardous materials release. Table 4.70 Potential Human-Caused Actions Resulting in Technological Hazard Events Industrial (Fixed Facility) Industrial (Transportation Accidents) Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Failure to adhere to procedures Tanker truck spills Failure of automated systems Leaks Truck accidents Sabotage/intrusion Failure of equipment Railway accidents Failure of safety systems Source: Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning, FEMA 386-7, 2003; HMPC Fixed Facility Incidents Industrial accidents occur due to inadequate human oversight or the failure of systems used to move or store materials, such as pipes and storage tanks. Numerous facilities in the Fresno County region have been identified as sites that store hazardous materials as part of their daily operations. The threat that these sites pose to the region depends on the type of material present and the proximity of these facilities to populations and whether or not these materials are transported. Fresno County 4.251 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In order to identify those facilities with the greatest potential for a hazardous materials release that could adversely impact communities within the Fresno County planning area, the HMPC took an initial inventory of potential sites by utilizing data from the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP). The program was implemented on January 1, 1997 and replaced the California Risk Management and Prevention Program (RMPP). The purpose of the CalARP program are to prevent accidental releases of substances that can cause serious harm to the public and the environment, to minimize the damage if releases do occur, and to satisfy community right- to-know laws. This is accomplished by requiring businesses that handle more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance listed in the regulations to develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP). An RMP is a detailed engineering analysis of the potential accident factors present at a business and the mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this accident potential. The RMP contains: • Safety information • A hazard review • Operating procedures • Training requirements • Maintenance requirements • Compliance audits • Incident investigation procedures The CalARP program is implemented at the local government level by Unified Program Agencies (UPAs). Of benefit to the HMPC’s efforts to address hazardous materials incidents is the fact that the CalARP program is designed so that UPA’s work directly with regulated facilities. Figure 4.74 (below) identifies the all CalARP regulated facilities within the planning area, as well as the location and density of such facilities in relation to jurisdictions (at risk population centers), and critical infrastructure such as railways and major transportation routes. The mapped sites below represent those most critical (CalARP) sites as determined by the HMPC for the purposes of the plan update. Fresno County 4.252 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.74 Fresno County CalARP Facilities • In addition to the Cal ARP sites mapped (above), the following sites are identified in the Fresno County 2040 General Plan (2017 public review draft): • As of February 1, 2016, there are 70 active Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) sites and 28 Superfund sites, including five National Priorities List (NPL) listed sites, in Fresno County. • There are 1,678 small quantity hazardous waste generators and 150 large quantity hazardous waste generators in Fresno County. • There are three hazardous waste disposal facilities in Fresno County: A collection facility and a recycling facility, both operated by Safety Kleen Corporation, and a Regional Permanent Household Hazardous Waste Facility operated by Fresno County to accommodate the disposal of hazardous household waste. The Safety Kleen recycling facility handles immersion cleaners and mineral spirits. • Agriculture operations in proximity to urbanized areas, particularly near residential uses, present some risks associated with agricultural chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers). As more residential development is built close to existing agricultural uses, risks associated with Fresno County 4.253 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan agricultural chemicals may increase (Source: Fresno County 2040 General Plan, (2017 Public Review Draft, p. 8.67). The following table (Source: CalARP) identifies the number of hazardous materials facilities within each jurisdiction and in unincorporated Fresno County. It is useful as a cross-reference to illustrate how the risk varies by jurisdiction. Table 4.71 Hazmat Facilities by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Counts Clovis 2 Firebaugh 2 Fowler 3 Fresno 28 Huron 7 Kerman 2 Kingsburg 5 Mendota 1 Orange Cove 1 Parlier 2 Reedley 8 San Joaquin 1 Sanger 5 Selma 2 Unincorporated 87 Total 156 Source: CalARP Transportation Incidents (e.g., Rail, Highway) Transportation incidents can occur during the transportation of hazardous materials to and from storage facilities. The most likely routes for the transportation of hazardous materials are major roadways and railroads. Two major north-south roadways are located in Fresno County. Highway 99 runs through the central part of the County and provides a north-south corridor through several counties. Most of the County’s industrial and residential activity is positioned along Highway 99. In western Fresno County, Interstate 5 traverses the County at the base of the Coast Range foothills. State Routes 33, 41, 43, 63, 145, 168, 180, 198, and 269 provide local service to urban and rural areas in the County. A network of County roads connects the various communities to these major arteries. Major rail lines include Union Pacific, Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Company, Port Railroads, Inc., and San Joaquin Valley Railroad. The major transportation corridors and rail lines are listed in Table 4.72 and illustrated in Figure 4.75 and Figure 4.76. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) has established nine hazardous materials classifications: explosive, compressed gases, flammable/combustible liquids, flammable Fresno County 4.254 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan solids, oxidizers, poisons, corrosive, radioactive, and miscellaneous. Transporters of such materials must adhere to routing requirements that are enforced by the California Highway Patrol. Transportation must take the most direct route, utilizing State or interstate highways whenever possible, and only roadways with sufficient width and load bearing capacity. All nine classes of hazardous materials, including hazardous waste, may be transported on Interstate 5. Materials that are poisonous by inhalation, explosives or high level radioactive may be transported on certain State Routes, including SR 33, 41, 63, 99, 180, and 198, but are subject to restrictions (Source: Fresno County 2040 General Plan, (2017 Public Review Draft). Table 4.72 Major Fresno County Transportation Corridors Major Roadways Rail Lines/Operators Highway 99 * Union Pacific Railways Interstate 5* Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Company State Route 33 Port Railroads Inc. State Route 41 San Joaquin Valley Railroad State Route 43 State Route 63 State Route 145 State Route 168 State Route 180 State Route 198 State Route 269 Golden State Boulevard* Manning Avenue Jensen Avenue* Source: Fresno County General Plan *Indicates corridor experiences truck traffic in excess of 2,000 vehicles per day Fresno County 4.255 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.75 Fresno County’s Transportation System Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2017 Fresno County 4.256 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.76 Fresno County’s Rail Network Source: Fresno County General Plan, 2000 Fresno County 4.257 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Of the County’s transportation corridors, Interstate 5, Highway 99, and State Route 41 are the most significant because they provide direct links between the County transportation system, the surrounding regions, and beyond. The other corridors identified in Table 4.72 connect cities and communities in Fresno County with each other. According to the Fresno County General Plan Background Report, truck transportation, followed by rail, air, and pipeline, provides the majority of goods movement in Fresno County, including the transportation of hazardous materials. Fresno County has considerable long-distance trucking activity due to the presence of Interstate 5 and Highway 99. According to the background report, Highway 99 carries the greatest volume of truck traffic in Fresno County (between 7,800 and 22,100 vehicles per day); Interstate 5 also experiences large volumes of truck traffic (between 5,500 and 6,500 vehicles per day). Other routes with significant truck traffic (i.e., more than 2,000 vehicles per day) include Golden State Boulevard and Jensen Avenue. There are two mainline rail lines that run north-south through Fresno County. The first, owned by the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Company, connects the County to Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and Bakersfield to the south. The second, owned by Union Pacific Railways, parallels the Highway 99 corridor and connects the County to Sacramento and the Bay Area to the north and Bakersfield to the south. Both lines service the City of Fresno. Other lines provide rail service primarily to communities within the County and to adjacent counties. According to the HMPC, approximately 40 trains travel through the City of Fresno each day, and sometimes the trains carry hazardous materials very close to schools and residential areas. Past Occurrences Hazardous materials incidents in Fresno County are frequent events. Statistics from the National Response Center, which serves as the sole national point of contact for reporting all oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories, indicate that between 2009 and the end of 2016, 337 incidents were reported in Fresno County. Of these, 64 included fatalities, 61 included injuries, 38 included hospitalizations. The incidents required 1,874 people to be evacuated, and caused $353,888 in property damage. Figure 4.77 shows the breakdown of the types of incidents that occurred in Fresno County in this time period. Of the incidents, 50 percent were fixed, 26 percent were railroad non-release, 11 percent were mobile (transportation on land), 3 percent were pipeline and 2 percent were railroad. Fresno County 4.258 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 4.77 Reports of Hazardous Materials Incidents in Fresno County, 2009-2016 Source: National Response Center, www.nrc.uscg.mil/ Table 4.73 NRC-Reported Hazardous Materials Incidents in Fresno County, 2009-2016 Incident Type Number of Incidents Fixed site (e.g. incident at a building) 168 Railroad non-release incident 87 Wheeled vehicle (car or truck) accident 38 Storage tank incident 20 Pipeline incident 9 Railroad incident 7 Aircraft accident 5 Continuous release 1 Unknown sheen on water 1 Water vessel (ship or boat) accident 1 Drilling platform incident 0 Unknown 0 Left Blank 0 Source: National Response Center, www.nrc.uscg.mil/ 50% 26% 11% 6% 3% 2%2% 0% 0% 0% Fixed site (e.g. incident at a building) Railroad non-release incident Wheeled vehicle (car or truck) accident Storage tank incident Pipeline incident Railroad incident Aircraft accident Continuous release Unknown sheen on water Water vessel (ship or boat) accident Fresno County 4.259 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Trend data between 2009 and 2016 shows a high of 65 incidents reported to the NRC per year (2009, 2010), and a low of 23 incidents per year (2014). The data shows a gradual decline in number of incidents per year. Figure 4.78 Reports of Hazardous Materials Incidents in Fresno County, 2009-2016 Source: National Response Center, www.nrc.uscg.mil/ NRC data shows that a majority of incidents occurred in Fresno, with 197 reported; the following table shows total number of incidents reported to the NRC for Fresno County by jurisdiction. 65 65 48 27 31 23 41 37 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Fresno County 4.260 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.74 NRC-Reported Hazardous Materials Incidents by Jurisdiction 2009-2016 Cities Incidents Fresno* 197 Sanger* 19 Auberry 11 Old Fig Garden 11 Clovis* 10 Big Creek 7 Fowler* 7 Selma* 7 Reedley* 6 Coalinga* 5 Firebaugh* 5 Not Identified 5 Helm 4 Kingsburg* 4 Conejo 3 Del Rey 3 Laton 3 Shaver Lake 3 Cantua Creek 2 Huron* 2 Kerman* 2 Lemoore 2 Squaw Valley 2 Tranquility 2 Canejo 1 Caruthers 1 Corcoran 1 Five Points 1 Hammond 1 Mendota* 1 NAS Lemoore 1 North Fork 1 Pickley 1 Pitdria 1 Riverdale 1 Sigarden 1 Sunmaid 1 Fresno County 4.261 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cities Incidents Traver 1 Trigo 1 Note: Municipalities are noted with an * Source: National Response Center, www.nrc.uscg.mil/ The County’s emergency response team receives numerous calls each year related to hazardous materials releases. Since 2004, the team has received over 1,000 reports. The majority of incidents in Fresno County were fuel spills and characterized as relatively minor. As such, it is just a response/cleanup issue that generally does not pose a significant impact to the community. However, other incidents can and have occurred in the County. The HMPC provided details about some of the hazardous materials incidents that have occurred in Fresno County (see Table 4.75 and Table 4.74. Table 4.75 Hazardous Materials Fixed Facility Incidents in Fresno County Date Location Incident Type Damage/Exposures 7/7/2004 Sun West Fruit Company, 755 E. Manning Avenue, Parlier Anhydrous ammonia (approximately 50 pounds) leaked 86 people were employees, 28 were taken to the hospital Source: Fresno County HMPC Table 4.76 Hazardous Materials Transportation Incidents in Fresno County Date Location Incident Type Damage/Exposures 6/5/2000 Interstate 5 in Fresno County Pressurized anhydrous ammonia released (truck was hauling 19,500 pounds) in accident Employees of nearby business affected, one person hospitalized, Interstate 5 was closed for 29 hours 4/28/2006 Southbound Freeway 41 at Highway 99 Automotive fluid released (20 gallons) onto the roadway and into a culvert as a result of an overturned big rig Spill contained and cleaned up 1/22/2007 Northbound Highway 99 North of Ashlan Avenue Sodium hydroxide (up to 5 gallons) Methanol, Alkanolamine, and Tolad resulting from a motor vehicle accident Spill contained and cleaned up, northbound Highway 99 was closed for 9 ½ hours 6/19/2007 Blackstone and McKinley Avenue Suspected propane resulting from train derailment Due to potential danger, Fresno City College campus was closed for the evening; no actual release occurred 6/28/2007 Southbound State Route 41 below the Jensen Avenue overpass Diazinon 50W (insecticide, 10 gallons) occurring when products shifted in a truck and containers fell onto the freeway and were struck by an oncoming truck Two people exposed and decontaminated; Spill contained and cleaned up 11/3/2007 Highway 99 and Clovis Avenue Small amount of diesel fuel spilled due to numerous car accidents Spill contained and cleaned up Source: Fresno County HMPC Fresno County 4.262 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.4.2 Asset Inventory and Vulnerability Assessment The probability and potential losses of human-caused technological hazards are difficult to quantify due to the “human” element. These hazards can occur at any time and virtually any place with little or no warning. However, they can often be inventoried because they typically occur in conjunction with a particular facility/business that produces, transports, stores, or uses substances that present a specific hazard to the local community or environment, or the hazard is present due to the shipment of potentially harmful substances from outside the region across various transportation arteries that bisect Fresno County communities. The facilities and transportation corridors identified in Table 4.72 and Figure 4.75 and Figure 4.76 are those that the HMPC has identified as potential sites for hazardous materials releases that may adversely affect the Fresno County planning area. Asset Inventory Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment and the jurisdictional annexes identify the total assets at risk in the Fresno County planning area to both natural and human-caused hazards. Also included in those sections are inventories of critical facilities. These critical facilities, as previously defined, are considered vital to the daily continuity of life, unobstructed flow of commerce, and the continued health and welfare of the planning area as a whole. Vulnerability Assessment As previously stated, it is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While the facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified assets will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific technological hazard event. Given the difficulty in quantifying the losses associated with technological hazards, this section focuses on analyzing key assets and populations relative to the hazardous materials sites identified previously. Fixed Facility Incidents As discussed above, there are over 157 fixed facilities (CalARP sites) identified in the Fresno County planning area with the potential to cause a hazardous materials release of sufficient type and magnitude to adversely impact surrounding areas. These sites are regulated and most have emergency action plans in place. The impact to surrounding areas would depend on the nature and quantity of any release as well as the time of the event and prevailing weather conditions. Fresno County 4.263 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Critical Facilities at Risk The following table is derived from a GIS analysis on the CalARP data, and focuses on the number and types of critical facilities within each jurisdiction that are located within a half-mile of a hazardous materials facility. The analysis indicates the City of Fresno having the highest number of critical facilities within a half-mile mile of CalARP designated facilities. Table 4.77 Critical Facilities Within a ½ Mile Buffer from Hazmat Facilities Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Clovis Fire Station 1 School 2 Total 3 Firebaugh Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 4 Urgent Care 1 Total 7 Fowler Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 1 Total 3 Fresno Colleges & Universities 1 Communications 1 County Government 4 Courthouse 1 Daycare 11 Department of Public Health 2 Department of Social Services 4 Detention Center 4 District Attorney 2 Fire Station 4 Health Care 3 Nursing Home 4 Police 1 School 17 Sheriff 1 Supplemental College 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 62 Huron Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 3 Fresno County 4.264 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Total 5 Kerman Police 1 Total 1 Kingsburg Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 2 Total 4 Mendota Airport 1 Total 1 Orange Cove Fire Station 1 School 2 Total 3 Parlier Police 1 School 1 Total 2 Reedley Colleges & Universities 1 Communications 1 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 8 Total 12 San Joaquin School 2 Total 2 Sanger Behavioral Health 1 Department of Agriculture 1 Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 School 9 Total 14 Selma Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 Sheriff 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 5 Unincorporated Department of Public Works 3 Fire Station 3 Nursing Home 1 School 11 Total 18 Fresno County 4.265 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Facility Type Counts Grand Total 142 Source: Amec Foster Wheeler Analysis of County, CalARP, and Federal Data Fresno County 4.266 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.5 Fresno County’s Mitigation Capabilities Thus far, the planning process has identified the hazards posing a threat to Fresno County and described, in general, the vulnerability of the County to these risks. The next step is to assess what loss prevention mechanisms are already in place. This part of the planning process is the mitigation capability assessment. Combining the risk assessment with the mitigation capability assessment results in the County’s “net vulnerability” to disasters and more accurately focuses the goals, objectives, and proposed actions of this plan. As such, this section presents Fresno County’s mitigation capabilities: programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. It also identifies select state and federal departments/agencies that can supplement the County’s mitigation capabilities. This assessment is divided into three sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, and fiscal mitigation capabilities. Information about capabilities specific to the other participating jurisdictions can be found in the jurisdictional annexes. The HMPC used a two-step approach to originally conduct this assessment for the County. First, an inventory of common mitigation activities was made through the use of a matrix. The purpose of this effort was to identify policies and programs that were either in place, needed improvement, or could be undertaken, if deemed appropriate. Second, the HMPC reviewed existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses or if they inadvertently contributed to increasing such losses. During the 2017-2018 update this section was reviewed by County and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable. This included revising sections to align with changes that will be reflected in the updated General Plan. This update process afforded the County and its participating jurisdictions the opportunity to review their previous capabilities and note the ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded since the adoption of the previous plan. Additionally, in summarizing their current capabilities and identifying gaps, plan participants also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy includes mitigation actions aimed at improving community capability to reduce hazard risk and vulnerability. 4.5.1 Fresno County’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table 4.78 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Fresno County. Excerpts from applicable policies, regulations, and plans and program descriptions follow to provide more detail on existing mitigation capabilities. Fresno County 4.267 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4.78 Fresno County’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool (ordinances, codes, plans) Yes/No Comments General plan Yes Adopted October 2000; in process of update 2017-2018 Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (e.g., stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) Yes See ordinance discussion that follows Building code Yes 2016 California Building Code Fire department ISO rating No Erosion or sediment control program Yes Via grading permits Stormwater management program No See Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District/Drainage of Land Ordinance Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Policies in County’s documents Local emergency operations plan Yes Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan Other special plans Yes Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016, via floodplain administrator Elevation certificates Yes As indicated in the table above, Fresno County has several plans and programs that guide the County’s development in hazard-prone areas. Starting with the Fresno County General Plan, which is the most comprehensive of the County’s plans when it comes to mitigation, some of these are described in more detail below. Fresno County General Plan The Fresno County General Plan consists of multiple documents: the countywide General Plan Background Report, the countywide General Plan Policy Document, and over 40 regional, community, and specific plans. This discussion is derived primarily from the Fresno County General Plan Policy Document, from which the text that follows is largely extracted. The Fresno County General Plan is a comprehensive, long-term framework for the protection of the county’s agricultural, natural, and cultural resources and for development in the county. Designed to meet state general plan requirements, it outlines policies, standards, and programs and sets out plan proposals to guide day-to-day decisions concerning Fresno County’s future. It is a legal document that serves as the County’s “blue print” or “constitution” for land use and development. Fresno County 4.268 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The General Plan Policy Document is organized into the following seven elements, which generally correspond with the content requirements specified in State Planning Law: • Economic Development • Land Use • Transportation and Circulation • Public Facilities and Services • Open Space and Conservation • Health and Safety • Housing Each of these elements includes goal statements relating to different aspects of the issues addressed in the element. Under each goal statement, the plan sets out policies that amplify the goal statement. Implementation programs are listed in a separate Administration and Implementation Section and describe briefly the action proposed by the program, the County agencies or departments with primary responsibility for carrying out the program, and the time frame for accomplishing the program. The County is conducting a comprehensive review of its current General Plan. Based on the review, County staff has proposed revisions to the Plan’s goals, policies, and programs. These revisions will be subject to review and deliberation by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors prior to adoption, which is expected to occur by the end of 2018. Following is an element-by-element summary of the General Plan goals and policies that are most relevant to the Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. The summary tracks the organization of each element, with topically-focused goals followed by related policies. Note that the summaries reflect to policies as proposed by the County as a result of its ongoing review, including deletions and revisions. Health and Safety Element Planning for growth and development requires the consideration of a wide range of public safety issues. Many of the health and safety risks associated with development, including risks to buildings and infrastructure, can be avoided through siting decisions made at the planning stages of development, while others may be lessened through the use of mitigation measures in the planning and land use review process. This element outlines Fresno County’s strategy for ensuring the maintenance of a healthy and safe physical environment. Applicable goals and policies are presented below. Emergency Management and Response Policies in this section seek to create an effective emergency response and management system by ensuring that vital public infrastructure is designed to remain operational during and after a major disaster event, by siting critical emergency response facilities as far from potential disaster impact Fresno County 4.269 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan areas as is practical, and through continuing public education and outreach on emergency preparedness and disaster response programs. Goal HS-A: To protect public health and safety by preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the effects of natural or technological disasters. Policy HS-A.2 In coordination with cities, special districts, and other State and Federal agencies, the County shall maintain the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan to identify and mitigate, to the extent feasible, natural and human-made hazards within the county. Policy HS-A.3: The County shall, within its authority and to the best of its ability, ensure that emergency dispatch centers, emergency operations centers, communications systems, vital utilities, and other essential public facilities necessary for the continuity of government are designed in a manner that will allow them to remain operational during and following an earthquake or other disaster. Policy HS-A.4: The County shall ensure that the siting of critical emergency response facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, sheriff’s offices and substations, dispatch centers, emergency operations centers, and other emergency service facilities and utilities are sited and designed to minimize their exposure and susceptibility to flooding, seismic and geological effects, fire, avalanche, and explosions as required by state regulations. Policy HS-A.5 The County shall maintain coordination with other local, State, and Federal agencies to provide coordinated disaster response. Policy HS-A.6: The County shall continue to conduct programs to inform the general public of emergency preparedness and disaster response procedures. Policy HS-A.7 The County shall review the design of all buildings and structures to ensure they are designed and constructed to State and local regulations and standards as part of the building permit plan check process. Fire Hazards Policies in this section are designed to ensure that new development is constructed to minimize potential fire hazards, minimize the risk of fire in already developed areas, and to provide public education concerning fire prevention. Goal HS-B: To minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, and damage to property and natural resources resulting from fire hazards. Policy HS-B.1: The County shall review project proposals to identify potential fire hazards and to evaluate the effectiveness of preventive measures to reduce the risk to life and property. Policy HS-B.2: The County shall ensure that development in high fire hazard areas is designed and constructed in a manner that minimizes the risk from fire hazards and meets all applicable state and County fire standards. Special consideration shall be given to the use of fire-resistant construction in the underside of eaves, balconies, unenclosed roofs and floors, and other similar horizontal surfaces in areas of steep slopes. Policy HS-B.3: The County shall require that development in high fire hazard areas have fire- resistant vegetation, cleared fire breaks separating communities or clusters of structures from native vegetation, or a long-term comprehensive vegetation and fuel management program. Fire hazard reduction measures shall be incorporated into the design of development projects in fire hazard areas. Policy HS-B.4: The County shall require that foothill and mountain subdivisions of more than four parcels provide for safe and ready access for fire and other emergency equipment, for routes of escape that will safely handle evacuations, and for roads and streets designed to be compatible with topography while meeting fire safety needs. Policy HS-B.5: The County shall require development to have adequate access for fire and emergency vehicles and equipment. All major subdivisions shall have a minimum of two points of ingress and egress. Policy HS-B.6: The County shall work with local fire protection agencies, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and the U.S. Forest Service to promote the maintenance of existing fuel Fresno County 4.270 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal HS-B: To minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, and damage to property and natural resources resulting from fire hazards. breaks and emergency access routes for effective fire suppression and in managing wildland fire hazards. Policy HS-B.7: The County shall require that community fire breaks be coordinated with overall fire break plans developed by the foothill and mountain fire agencies. Firebreak easements in subdivisions of more than four parcels or in built-up areas shall include access for firefighting personnel and motorized equipment. Easements shall be dedicated for this purpose. Policy HS-B.8: The County shall refer development proposals in the unincorporated County to the appropriate local fire agencies for review of compliance with fire safety standards. If dual responsibility exists, both agencies shall review and comment relative to their area of responsibility. If standards are different or conflicting, the more stringent standards shall apply. Policy HS-B.9: The County shall require that provisions for establishing year-round fire protection in foothill and mountain areas are developed where concentrations of population are such that structural fire protection is needed. Policy HS-B.10: The County shall ensure that existing and new buildings of public assembly incorporate adequate fire protection measures to reduce potential loss of life and property in accordance with state and local codes and ordinances. Policy HS-B.11: The County shall require new development to have water systems that meet County fire flow requirements. Where minimum fire flow is not available to meet County standards, alternate fire protection measures, including sprinkler systems, shall be identified and may be incorporated into development if approved by the appropriate fire protection agency. Policy HS-B.12: The County shall promote installation and maintenance of smoke detectors in existing residences and commercial facilities that were constructed prior to the requirement for their installation. Policy HS-B.13: The County shall work with local fire agencies to develop high-visibility fire prevention programs, including education programs and voluntary home inspections. Flood Hazards Policies in this section are designed to minimize flood hazards by restricting development in flood- prone areas, requiring development that does occur in floodplains to be designed to avoid flood damage, and through public education about flood hazards. Goal HS-C: To minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, and damage resulting from flood hazards. Policy HS-C.1 The County shall coordinate with the cities in Fresno County to develop and maintain a countywide flood emergency plan that is consistent with the Fresno County General Plan and city general plans. Policy HS-C.2 The County shall prohibit new development in existing undeveloped areas (i.e., areas devoted to agriculture or open space that are not designated for development) protected by a State flood control project without appropriately considering significant known flooding risks and taking reasonable and feasible action to mitigate the potential property damage to the new development resulting from a flood. Policy HS-C.3 The County shall not enter into a development agreement, approve any building permit or entitlement, or approve a tentative or parcel map unless it finds one of the following: a. The flood control facilities provides 200-year level of protection in urban and non-urban areas consistent with the current Central Valley Flood Protection Plan; b. Conditions imposed on the development will protect the property at a 200-year level of protection in urban and non-urban areas consistent with the current Central Valley Flood Protection Plan; or c. The local flood management agency has made “adequate progress” on the construction of a flood protection system which will result in protection equal or greater than the 200-year flood event in urban and non-urban areas consistent with the current Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. Policy HS-C.4 The County shall require new flood control projects or developments within areas subject to 100- and 200-year frequency floods are designed and constructed in a manner that will not cause Fresno County 4.271 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal HS-C: To minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, and damage resulting from flood hazards. floodwaters to be diverted onto adjacent property or increase flood hazards to property located elsewhere. Policy HS-C.5 The County shall encourage all agencies that operate public facilities, such as wastewater treatment plants, gas, electrical, and water systems, located within areas subject to 100- and 200- year frequency floods to locate and construct facilities to minimize or eliminate potential flood damage. Policy HS-C.6 The County shall encourage expansion of stormwater and flood protection infrastructure capacity in order to accommodate changes in precipitation and extreme weather events. Policy HS-C.7 The County shall support State and local flood management agencies to provide relocation assistance or other cost-effective strategies for reducing flood risk to existing economically- disadvantaged communities located in non-urbanized areas. Policy HS-C.8 The County shall work with local, regional, State, and Federal agencies to maintain an adequate information base, prepare risk assessments, and identify strategies to mitigate flooding impacts. Policy HS-C.9: The County shall encourage the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District to control stormwater flows originating in the streams of the Fresno County Stream Group and the stormwater resulting from urban development by means of construction of dams or joint-use flood control and recharge facilities at appropriate locations. Policy HS-C.10: The County shall require that the design and location of dams and levees be in accordance with applicable design standards and specifications and accepted design and construction practices. Policy HS-C.11: The County shall promote a floodplain management approach in flood hazard areas that are presently undeveloped by giving priority to regulation of land uses over development of structural controls as a method of reducing flood damage. Policy HS-C.12: The County shall encourage the performance of appropriate investigations to determine the 200- year water surface elevations for the San Joaquin River, taking into account recent storm events and existing channel conditions, to identify the potential extent and risk of flooding. New development, including public infrastructure projects, shall not be allowed along the river until the risk of flooding at the site has been determined and appropriate flood risk reduction measures identified. Policy HS-C.13: Where existing development is located in a flood hazard area, the County shall require that construction of flood control facilities proceed only after a complete review of the environmental effects and a project cost benefit analysis. Policy HS-C.14: The County shall promote flood control measures that maintain natural conditions within the 200- year floodplain of rivers and streams and, to the extent possible, combine flood control, recreation, water quality, and open space functions. Existing irrigation canals shall be used to the extent possible to remove excess stormwater. Retention-recharge basins should be located to best utilize natural drainage patterns. Policy HS-C.15: The County shall continue to participate in the Federal Flood Insurance Program by ensuring compliance with applicable requirements. Policy HS-C.16: The County shall continue to implement and enforce its Floodplain Management Ordinance. During the building permit review process, the County shall ensure project compliance with applicable Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) standards pertaining to residential and non-residential development in the floodplain, floodway, or floodway fringe. Policy HS-C.17: The County shall prohibit the construction of essential facilities (e.g., hospitals, police and fire facilities) in the 100- and 200-year floodplains, unless it can be demonstrated that the facility can be safely operated and accessed during flood events. Policy HS-C.18: The County shall require that all placements of structures and/or flood proofing be done in a manner that will not cause floodwaters to be diverted onto adjacent property, increase flood hazards to other property, or otherwise adversely affect other property. Policy HS-C.19: The County shall encourage open space uses in all flood hazard areas. Land Conservation contracts and open space and scenic easements should be made available to property owners. Policy HS-C. 20: The County shall consider dam failure inundation maps of all reservoirs in making land use and related decisions. Policy HS-C.21: The County shall continue public awareness programs to inform the general public and potentially affected property owners of flood hazards and potential dam failure inundation. Fresno County 4.272 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Seismic and Geological Hazards Policies in this section seek to ensure that new buildings and facilities are designed to withstand seismic and geologic hazards. Goal HS-D: To minimize the loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards. Policy HS-D.1: The County shall continue to support scientific geologic investigations that refine, enlarge, and improve the body of knowledge on active fault zones, unstable areas, severe groundshaking, avalanche potential, and other hazardous geologic conditions in Fresno County. Policy HS-D.2: The County shall ensure that the General Plan and/or County Ordinance Code is revised, as necessary, to incorporate geologic hazard areas formally designated by the state geologist (e.g., earthquake fault zones and seismic hazard zones). Development in such areas, including public infrastructure projects, shall not be allowed until compliance with the investigation and mitigation requirements established by the state geologist can be demonstrated. Policy HS-D.3: The County shall require that a soils engineering and geologic-seismic analysis be prepared by a California-registered engineer or engineering geologist prior to permitting development, including public infrastructure projects, in areas prone to geologic or seismic hazards (i.e., fault rupture, ground shaking, lateral spreading, lurchcracking, fault creep, liquefaction, subsidence, settlement, landslides, mudslides, unstable slopes, or avalanche). Policy HS-D.4: The County shall require all proposed structures, additions to structures, utilities, or public facilities situated within areas subject to geologic-seismic hazards as identified in the soils engineering and geologic-seismic analysis to be sited, designed, and constructed in accordance with applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) and other relevant professional standards to minimize or prevent damage or loss and to minimize the risk to public safety. Policy HS-D.5: Pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code, Chapter 7.5), the County shall not permit any structure for human occupancy to be placed within designated earthquake fault zones unless the specific provisions of the act and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations have been satisfied. Policy HS-D.6: The County shall ensure compliance with state seismic and building standards in the evaluation, design, and siting of critical facilities, including police and fire stations, school facilities, hospitals, hazardous material manufacture and storage facilities, bridges, large public assembly halls, and other structures subject to special seismic safety design requirements. Policy HS-D.7: The County shall require a soils report by a California-registered engineer or engineering geologist for any proposed development, including public infrastructure projects, that requires a County permit and is located in an area containing soils with high “expansive” or “shrink-swell” properties. Development in such areas shall be prohibited unless suitable design and construction measures are incorporated to reduce the potential risks associated with these conditions. Policy HS-D.8: The County shall seek to minimize soil erosion by maintaining compatible land uses, suitable building designs, and appropriate construction techniques. Contour grading, where feasible, and revegetation shall be required to mitigate the appearance of engineered slopes and to control erosion. Policy HS-D.9: The County shall require the preparation of drainage plans for development or public infrastructure projects in hillside areas to direct runoff and drainage away from unstable slopes. Policy HS-D.10: The County shall not approve a County permit for new development, including public infrastructure projects where slopes are over 30 percent unless it can be demonstrated by a California-registered civil engineer or engineering geologist that hazards to public safety will be reduced to acceptable levels. Policy HS-D.11: In known or potential landslide hazard areas, the County shall prohibit avoidable alteration of land in a manner that could increase the hazard, including concentration of water through drainage, irrigation, or septic systems, undercutting the bases of slopes, removal of vegetative cover, and steepening of slopes. Policy HS-D.12: The County shall not approve a County permit for new development, including public infrastructure projects, in known or potential avalanche hazard areas unless it can be demonstrated by a California-registered engineer or engineering geologist that the structures will be safe under anticipated snow loads and avalanche conditions. Fresno County 4.273 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal HS-D: To minimize the loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards. Policy HS-D.13: Whenever zoning is employed to restrict the use of land subject to severe geologic hazards (e.g., landslides), the County shall designate parcels so restricted for open space uses. Hazardous Materials Policies in this section are designed to ensure that development projects minimize public risks associated with both intended and unintended exposure to hazardous materials and wastes. Goal HS-F: To minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, serious illness, and damage to property resulting from the use, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Policy HS-F.1: The County shall require that facilities that handle hazardous materials or hazardous wastes be designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with applicable hazardous materials and waste management laws and regulations. Policy HS-F.2: The County shall require that applications for discretionary development projects that will use hazardous materials or generate hazardous waste in large quantities include detailed information concerning hazardous waste reduction, recycling, and storage. Agriculture and Land Use Element Applicable goals and policies from the Agriculture and Land Use Element are presented below. Resource Lands This section addresses land that will remain primarily open in character. The goals, policies, and implementation programs for these topics reflect a basic commitment to preserve the existing open rural character of the County and its natural and managed resources. While necessarily protective and restrictive, the policies also recognize the need to maintain economic productivity and allow for urban growth. The intent of the policies is not to preclude intensive development but to direct it to minimize loss of valuable open space. Agriculture Policies in this section seek to sustain agriculture by protecting agricultural activities from incompatible land uses, promoting agricultural land preservation programs, developing programs to preserve or maintain soil conditions or improve soil productivity, facilitating agricultural production by supplying adequate land for support services, and controlling expansion of nonagricultural development onto productive agricultural lands. Goal LU-A: To promote the long-term conservation of productive and potentially- productive agricultural lands and to accommodate agricultural-support services and agriculturally- related activities that support the viability of agriculture and further the County’s economic development goals. Policy LU-A.13: The County shall protect agricultural operations from conflicts with nonagricultural uses by requiring buffers between proposed non-agricultural uses and adjacent agricultural operations. Policy LU-A.14: The County shall ensure that the review of discretionary permits includes an assessment of the conversion of productive agricultural land and that mitigation be required where appropriate. Fresno County 4.274 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal LU-A: To promote the long-term conservation of productive and potentially- productive agricultural lands and to accommodate agricultural-support services and agriculturally- related activities that support the viability of agriculture and further the County’s economic development goals. Policy LU-A.20: The County shall adopt and support policies and programs that seek to protect and enhance surface water and groundwater resources critical to agriculture. Westside Rangelands Policies in this section seek to preserve rangelands by maintaining their open space character, minimizing grading and erosion, maintaining grazing and agricultural operations, accommodating mineral resource recovery, and protecting biological resources from development. Goal LU-B: To preserve the unique character of the Westside Rangelands, which includes distinctive geologic and topographic landforms, watersheds, important agricultural activities, and significant biological resources, while accommodating agriculture, grazing, recreation, resource recovery, and other limited uses that recognize the sensitive character of the area. Policy LU-B.12: The County shall require a preliminary soils report for discretionary development projects when the project site is subject to moderate or high risk landslide potential and has slopes in excess of 15 percent. If the preliminary soil report indicates soil conditions could be unstable, a detailed geologic report by a registered geologist and registered civil engineer, or a registered engineering geologist, shall be required indicating the suitability of any proposed or additional development. River Influence Areas Policies in this section seek to preserve and enhance the County’s river influence areas by avoiding adverse impacts from development and encouraging environmentally friendly recreational and agricultural activities. Goal LU-C: To preserve and enhance the value of the river environment as a multiple use, open space resource; maintain the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the area; protect the quality and quantity of the surface and groundwater resources; provide for long term preservation of productive agricultural land; conserve and enhance natural wildlife habitat; and maintain the flood-carrying capacity of the channel at a level equal to the 1 percent flood event (100-year flood). Policy LU-C.7: Fresno County shall take into consideration the presence of the regulatory floodway or other designated floodway, the FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain, estimated 250-year floodplain, the Standard Project Flood, and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) Riverine Floodplain Policy in determining the location of future development within the San Joaquin River Parkway area. Any development sited in a designated 100-year floodplain shall comply with regulatory requirements at a minimum and with the FMFCD Riverine Floodplain Policy criteria, or requirements of other agencies having jurisdiction, where applicable. Rural Development This section guides development in areas designated Rural Residential, Rural Settlement Area, and Planned Rural Community. The policies provide for the continued development of areas within these designations in a manner that minimizes environmental impacts and public infrastructure investments, but generally limits expansion of these designations. Fresno County 4.275 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Nonagricultural Rural Development Policies in this section provide for appropriate development in rural areas by directing development away from productive and potentially productive agricultural areas, limiting expansion of existing designated rural residential areas, and minimizing the environmental and service impacts of continued development within areas already designated for rural development. Goal LU-E: To provide for the continued development of areas already designated for nonagricultural rural-residential development in a manner that minimizes environmental impacts and public infrastructure and service costs while restricting designation of new areas for such development. Policy LU-E.6: The County shall allow planned residential developments in areas that are currently designated for rural residential development subject to the following conditions: f. The size and configuration of the buildable portion of the lot shall be based on sufficient geological and hydrological investigations. Policy LU-E.8 The County shall not allow further parcelization of uncommitted rural residential areas lying northeast of the Enterprise Canal due to potential groundwater supply problems. These areas shall be zoned to a limited agricultural zone district. However, rezoning and development for rural residential use may be permitted subject to established criteria. Policy LU-E.10 The County shall require new subdivisions within areas designated rural residential be designed to use individual on-site sewer and water systems. All proposals shall be reviewed by the County to determine the appropriate minimum lot size based on local hydrogeological conditions. Policy LU-E.11 The County shall require subdividers of rural residential lots to install, provide, or participate in an effective means for utilization of available surface water entitlements for the area included in the subdivision. Policy LU-E.12 The County shall ensure through discretionary permit approvals and other development regulations that development within areas designated rural residential does not encroach upon natural water channels or restrict natural water channels in such a way as to increase potential flooding damage. Land divisions shall not render inoperative any existing canal. Policy LU-E.22 The County shall allow development within the designated Quail Lakes Planned Rural Community to proceed in accordance with the Specific Plan adopted at the time the designation was granted by the County. The County may grant amendments to the Specific Plan provided the overall density of development is not increased and the plan continues to demonstrate the following: a. The development will have no significant adverse impacts on groundwater. c. Impacts on Fresno County for the provision of services including, but not limited to, police, fire protection, schools, and other essential public services are adequately mitigated. f. Provide for monitoring of mitigation measures established by the required environmental impact report. Public Facilities and Services Element Applicable goals and policies from the Public Facilities and Services Element are presented below. Water Supply and Delivery Policies in this section seek to ensure an adequate water supply for both domestic and agricultural users by providing necessary facility improvements, ensuring water availability, and utilizing water conservation measures. Fresno County 4.276 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal PF-C: To ensure the availability of an adequate and safe water supply for domestic and agricultural consumption. Policy PF-C.1: The County shall engage in and support the efforts of others within Fresno County to retain existing water supplies and develop new water supplies. Policy PF-C.2: The County shall actively engage in efforts and support the efforts of others to import flood, surplus, and other available waters for use in Fresno County. Policy PF-C.3: To reduce demand on the County’s groundwater resources, the County shall encourage the use of surface water to the maximum extent feasible. Policy PF-C.4: The County shall support efforts to expand groundwater and/or surface water storage that benefits Fresno County. Policy PF-C.5: The County shall support water banking when the program has local sponsorship and involvement and provides new benefits to the County. Policy PF-C.6: The County shall recommend to all cities and urban areas within the County that they adopt the most cost-effective urban best management practices published and updated by the California Urban Water Agencies, California Department of Water Resources, or other appropriate agencies as a means of meeting some of the future water supply needs. Policy PF-C.7: The County shall require preparation of water master plans for areas undergoing urban growth. Policy PF-C.8: The County shall work with local irrigation districts to preserve local water rights and supply. Policy PF-C.10: The County shall actively participate in the development and implementation of Sustainable Groundwater Management Plans to ensure an on-going water supply to help sustain agriculture and accommodate future growth. Policy PF-C.11: The County shall approve new development only if an adequate sustainable water supply to serve such development is demonstrated. Policy PF-C.12: In those areas identified as having severe groundwater level declines or limited groundwater availability, the County shall limit development to uses that do not have high water usage or that can be served by a surface water supply. Policy PF-C.13: The County shall require that water supplies serving new development meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Department of Public Health and other water quality standards. Policy PF-C.15: If the cumulative effects of more intensive land use proposals are detrimental to the water supplies of surrounding areas, the County shall require approval of the project to be dependent upon adequate mitigation. The County shall require that costs of mitigating such adverse impacts to water supplies be borne proportionately by all parties to the proposal. Policy PF-C.16: The County shall, prior to consideration of any discretionary project related to land use, undertake a water supply evaluation. Policy PF-C.17: In the case of lands entitled to surface water, the County shall approve only land use-related projects that provide for or participate in effective use of the surface water entitlement. Policy PF-C.21: The County shall promote the use of surface water for agricultural use to reduce groundwater table reductions. Policy PF-C.22: The County supports short-term water transfers as a means for local water agencies to maintain flexibility in meeting water supply requirements. The County shall support long-term transfer, assignment, or sale of water and/or water entitlements to users outside of the county only under circumstances identified in the General Plan. Policy PF-C.23: The County shall regulate the transfer of groundwater for use outside of Fresno County. The regulation shall extend to the substitution of groundwater for transferred surface water. Policy PF-C.24: The County shall encourage the transfer of unused or surplus agricultural water to urban uses within Fresno County. Policy PF-C.25: The County shall require that all new development within the county use water conservation technologies, methods, and practices as established by the County. Policy PF-C.26: The County shall encourage the use of reclaimed water where economically, environmentally, and technically feasible. Policy PF-C.27: The County shall maintain and recommend to all cities and community water system providers that they also adopt, the most cost-effective urban best water conservation management practices circulated and updated by the California Urban Water Agencies, California Department of Water Resources, or other similar authoritative agencies and organizations. Fresno County 4.277 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal PF-C: To ensure the availability of an adequate and safe water supply for domestic and agricultural consumption. Policy PF-C.28 The County shall participate in integrated Regional Water Management Planning efforts with other local and regional water stakeholders to plan for the efficient use, enhancement, and management of surface and groundwater supplies. Policy PF-C.29: The County shall encourage agricultural water conservation where economically, environmentally, and technically feasible. Policy PF-C.30: The County shall, in order to reduce excessive water usage, require tiered water pricing within County service areas and County waterworks districts. Policy PF-C.31: The County shall not approve land use-related projects that incorporate a manmade lake or pond that will be sustained by the use of groundwater. Storm Drainage and Flood Control Policies in this section seek to ensure safe, efficient, and environmentally sound means to drain, divert and retain stormwater and provide flood control by providing necessary facility improvements, ensuring adequate funding, providing a means to detain/retain runoff, and ensuring the facilities meet state environmental regulations. This includes retention strategies that could lessen the county’s vulnerability to drought and wildfire. Goal PF-E: To provide efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally sound storm drainage and flood control facilities that protect both life and property and to divert and retain stormwater runoff for groundwater replenishment. Policy PF-E.1: The County shall coordinate with the agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to assure that construction and acquisition of flood control and drainage facilities are adequate for future urban growth authorized by the County General Plan and city general plans. Policy PF-E.2: The County shall encourage the agencies responsible for flood control of storm drainage to coordinate the multiple use of flood control and drainage facilities with other public agencies. Policy PF-E.3: The County shall encourage the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District to spread the cost of construction and acquisition of flood control and drainage facilities in the most equitable manner consistent with the growth and needs of this area. Policy PF-E.4: The County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to require that storm drainage systems be developed and expanded to meet the needs of existing and planned development. Policy PF-E.5: The County shall only approve land use-related projects that will not render inoperative any existing canal, encroach upon natural channels, and/or restrict natural channels in such a way as to increase potential flooding damage. Policy PF-E.6: The County shall require that drainage facilities be installed concurrently with and as a condition of development activity to ensure the protection of the new improvements as well as existing development that might exist within the watershed. Policy PF-E.7: The County shall require new development to pay its fair share of the costs of Fresno County storm drainage and flood control improvements within unincorporated areas. Policy PF-E.8: The County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to precisely locate drainage facilities well in advance of anticipated construction, thereby facilitating timely installation and encouraging multiple construction projects to be combined, reducing the incidence of disruption of existing facilities. Policy PF-E.9: The County shall require new development to provide protection from the 100-year flood as a minimum. Policy PF-E.10: In growth areas within the jurisdiction of a local agency responsible for flood control or storm drainage, the County shall encourage that agency to design drainage facilities as if the entire areas of service were developed to the pattern reflected in the adopted general plans to assure that the facilities will be adequate as the land use intensifies. Fresno County 4.278 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal PF-E: To provide efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally sound storm drainage and flood control facilities that protect both life and property and to divert and retain stormwater runoff for groundwater replenishment. Policy PF-E.11: The County shall encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and maintain, to the extent feasible, natural site drainage patterns. Policy PF-E.12: The County shall coordinate with the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to ensure that future drainage system discharges comply with applicable State and Federal pollutant discharge requirements. Policy PF-E.13: The County shall encourage the use of natural stormwater drainage systems to preserve and enhance natural drainage features. Policy PF-E.14: The County shall encourage the use of retention-recharge basins for the conservation of water and the recharging of the groundwater supply. Policy PF-E.15: The County should require that retention-recharge basins be suitably landscaped to complement adjacent areas and should, wherever possible, be made available to the community to augment open space and recreation needs. Policy PF-E.16: The County shall minimize sedimentation and erosion through control of grading, cutting of trees, removal of vegetation, placement of roads and bridges, and use of off-road vehicles. The County shall discourage grading activities during the rainy season, unless adequately mitigated, to avoid sedimentation of creeks and damage to riparian habitat. Policy PF-E.17: The County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage retention-recharge basins located in soil strata strongly conducive to groundwater recharge to develop and operate those basins in such a way as to facilitate year-round groundwater recharge. Policy PF-E.18: The County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to plan retention-recharge basins on the principle that the minimum number will be the most economical to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain. Policy PF-E.19: In areas where urbanization or drainage conditions preclude the acquisition and use of retention- recharge basins, the County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or stormwater drainage to discharge storm or drainage water into major canals and other natural water courses subject to established conditions. Policy PF-E.20: The County shall require new development of facilities near rivers, creeks, reservoirs, or substantial aquifer recharge areas to mitigate any potential impacts of release of pollutants in floodwaters, flowing rivers, streams, creeks, or reservoir waters. Policy PF-E.21: The County shall require the use of feasible and practical best management practices (BMPs) to protect streams from the adverse effects of construction activities, and shall encourage the urban storm drainage systems and agricultural activities to use BMPs. Policy PF-E.22: The County shall encourage the local agencies responsible for flood control or storm drainage to control obnoxious odors or mosquito breeding conditions connected with any agency facility by appropriate measures. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services Policies in this section seek to ensure the prompt and efficient provision of fire and emergency medical facility and service needs, ensure adequate funding is available in new development areas, and protect the life and property of residents of and visitors to Fresno County. Goal PF-H: To ensure the prompt and efficient provision of fire and emergency medical facility and service needs, to protect residents of and visitors to Fresno County from injury and loss of life, and to protect property from fire. Policy PF-H.1: The County shall work cooperatively with local fire protection districts to ensure the provision of effective fire and emergency medical services to unincorporated areas within the County. Policy PF-H.2: Prior to the approval of a development project, the County shall determine the need for fire protection services. New development in unincorporated areas of the county shall not be approved until such time that fire protection facilities and services acceptable to the Public Works and Planning Director in consultation with the appropriate fire district are provided. Fresno County 4.279 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal PF-H: To ensure the prompt and efficient provision of fire and emergency medical facility and service needs, to protect residents of and visitors to Fresno County from injury and loss of life, and to protect property from fire. Policy PF-H.3: The County shall require that new fire stations be located to achieve and maintain a service level capability consistent with services for existing land uses. Policy PF-H.4: The County shall reserve adequate sites for fire and emergency medical facilities in unincorporated locations in the County. Policy PF-H.5: The County shall require that new development be designed to maximize safety and minimize fire hazard risks to life and property. Policy PF-H.6: The County shall limit development to very low densities in areas where emergency response times will be more than 20 minutes. Policy PF-H.7: The County shall encourage local fire protection agencies in the County to maintain the following as minimum fire protection standards (expressed as Insurance Service Organization (ISO) ratings): a. ISO 4 in urban areas; b. ISO 6 in suburban areas; and c. ISO 8 in rural areas. Policy PF-H.10: The County shall ensure that all proposed developments are reviewed for compliance with fire safety standards by responsible local fire agencies per the Uniform Fire Code and other State and local ordinances. Open Space and Conservation Element The Open Space and Conservation Element is concerned with protecting and preserving natural resources, preserving open space areas, managing the production of commodity resources, protecting and enhancing cultural resources, and providing recreational opportunities. Applicable goals and policies are presented below. Productive Resources Water Resources Policies in this section seek to protect and enhance the surface water and groundwater resources in the County. The policies address broad water planning issues, groundwater recharge, the relationship of land use decisions to water issues, and water quality problems. Goal OS-A: To protect and enhance the water quality and quantity in Fresno County’s streams, creeks, and groundwater basins. Policy OS-A.1: The County shall develop, implement, and maintain a plan for achieving water resource sustainability, including a strategy to address overdraft and the needs of anticipated growth. Policy OS-A.2: The County shall provide active leadership in the regional coordination of water resource management efforts affecting Fresno County and shall continue to monitor and participate in, as appropriate, regional activities affecting water resources, groundwater, and water quality. Policy OS-A.3: The County shall provide active leadership in efforts to protect, enhance, monitor, and manage groundwater resources within its boundaries. Policy OS-A.4: The County shall develop and implement public education programs designed to increase public participation in water conservation and water quality awareness. Policy OS-A.5: The County shall encourage, where economically, environmentally, and technically feasible, efforts aimed at directly or indirectly recharging the County's groundwater. Policy OS-A.6 The County shall ensure that new development does not limit the capacity or function of groundwater recharge areas. Policy OS-A.7 The County shall direct, to the extent feasible, its available water resources to groundwater recharge areas. Fresno County 4.280 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal OS-A: To protect and enhance the water quality and quantity in Fresno County’s streams, creeks, and groundwater basins. Policy OS-A.8 The County should, in cooperation with respective groundwater sustainability agencies, develop and maintain an inventory of sites within the County that are suitable for groundwater recharge. Policy OS-A.9: The County shall support and/or engage in water banking (i.e., recharge and subsequent extraction for direct and/or indirect use on lands away from the recharge area) based on the established criteria. Policy OS-A.10 The County shall coordinate with the relevant Groundwater Sustainability Agency(ies) concerning their Groundwater Sustainability Plan(s) and refer any substantial proposed General Plan amendment to the agency for review and comment prior to adoption. The County shall give consideration to the adopted groundwater sustainability plan when determining the adequacy of water supply. Policy OS-A.11: The County shall permit and encourage, where economically, environmentally, and technically feasible, overirrigation of surface water as a means to maximize groundwater recharge. Policy OS-A.12: The County shall directly and/or indirectly participate in the development, implementation, and maintenance of a program to recharge the aquifers underlying the County. The program shall make use of flood and other waters to offset existing and future groundwater pumping. Policy OS-A.13: The County shall require the protection of floodplain lands and, where appropriate, acquire public easements for purposes of flood protection, public safety, wildlife preservation, groundwater recharge, access, and recreation. Policy OS-A.14: The County shall support the policies of the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan to protect the San Joaquin River as an aquatic habitat, recreational amenity, aesthetic resource, and water source. Policy OS-A.15: The County shall, where economically, environmentally, and technically feasible, encourage the multiple use of public lands, including County lands, to include groundwater recharge. Natural Resources Wetland and Riparian Areas Policies in this section seek to protect riparian and wetland habitats in the County while allowing compatible uses where appropriate. Goal OS-D: To conserve the function and values of wetland communities and related riparian areas throughout Fresno County while allowing compatible uses where appropriate. Protection of these resource functions will positively affect aesthetics, water quality, floodplain management, ecological function, and recreation/tourism. Policy OS-D.1: The County shall support the “no-net-loss” wetlands policies of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish and Game. Coordination with these agencies at all levels of project review shall continue to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures and the concerns of these agencies are adequately addressed. Policy OS-D.2: The County shall require new development to fully mitigate wetland loss for function and value in regulated wetlands to achieve "no-net-loss" through any combination of avoidance, minimization, or compensation. The County shall support mitigation banking programs that provide the opportunity to mitigate impacts to rare, threatened, and endangered species and/or the habitat that supports these species in wetland and riparian areas. Policy OS-D.3: The County shall require development to be designed in such a manner that pollutants and siltation do not significantly degrade the area, value, or function of wetlands. The County shall require new developments to implement the use of best management practices to aid in this effort. Policy OS-D.7: The County shall support the management of wetland and riparian plant communities for passive recreation, groundwater recharge, nutrient storage, and wildlife habitats. Fresno County 4.281 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Vegetation Policies in this section seek to protect native vegetation resources primarily on private land within the County. Goal OS-F: To preserve and protect the valuable vegetation resources of Fresno County. Policy OS-F.1: The County shall encourage landowners and developers to preserve the integrity of existing terrain and natural vegetation in visually-sensitive areas such as hillsides and ridges, and along important transportation corridors, consistent with fire hazard and property line clearing requirements. Policy OS-F.2: The County shall require developers to use native and compatible nonnative plant species, especially drought-resistant species, to the extent possible, in fulfilling landscaping requirements imposed as conditions of discretionary permit approval or for project mitigation. Policy OS-F.6: The County shall require that development on hillsides be limited to maintain valuable natural vegetation, especially forests and open grasslands, and to control erosion. Policy OS-F.7: The County shall require developers to take into account a site's natural topography with respect to the design and siting of all physical improvements in order to minimize grading. Policy OS-F.9: The County shall support the continued use of prescribed burning to mimic the effects of natural fires to reduce fuel volumes and associated fire hazards to human residents and to enhance the health of biotic communities. Recreation and Cultural Resources Parks and Recreation Policies in this section seek to enhance recreational opportunities in the County by encouraging the further development of public and private recreation lands, and requiring development to help fund additional parks and recreation facilities. Goal OS-H: To designate land for and promote the development and expansion of public and private recreational facilities to serve the needs of residents and visitors. Policy OS-H.11: The County shall support the policies of the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan to protect the San Joaquin River as an aquatic habitat, recreational amenity, aesthetic resource, and water source. Policy OS-H.13: The County shall require that structures and amenities associated with the San Joaquin River Parkway be designed and sited to ensure that such features do not obstruct flood flows, do not create a public safety hazard, or result in a substantial increase in off-site water surface elevations, and that they conform to the requirements of other agencies having jurisdiction. For permanent structures, such as bridge overcrossings, the minimum level of flood design protection shall be the greater of the Standard Project Flood (which is roughly equivalent to a 250-year event) or the riverine requirements of other agencies having jurisdiction to ensure flood flows are not dammed and to prevent flooding on surrounding properties. Historic, Cultural, and Geological Resources Policies in this section seek to preserve the historic, archeological, paleontological, geological, and cultural resources of the County through development review, acquisition, encouragement of easements, coordination with other agencies and groups, and other methods. Fresno County 4.282 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal OS-J: To identify, protect, and enhance Fresno County’s important historical, archeological, paleontological, geological, and cultural sites and their contributing environment. OS-J.1 The County shall encourage preservation of any sites and/or buildings identified as having historical significance pursuant to the list maintained by the Fresno County Historic Landmarks and Records Advisory Commission. OS-J.2 The County shall consider historic resources during preparation or evaluation of plans and discretionary development projects. OS-J.3 Whenever a historical resource is known to exist on a proposed project site, the County (i.e., Fresno County Historic Landmarks and Records Advisory Commission) shall evaluate and make recommendations to minimize potential impacts to said resource. Policy OS-J.4: The County shall require that discretionary development projects, as part of any required CEQA review, identify and protect important historical, archeological, paleontological, and cultural sites and their contributing environment from damage, destruction, and abuse to the maximum extent feasible. Project-level mitigation shall include accurate site surveys, consideration of project alternatives to preserve archeological and historic resources, and provision for resource recovery and preservation when displacement is unavoidable. Fresno County Ordinances The Fresno County General Plan provides policy direction for land use, development, open space protection, and environmental quality, but this policy direction must be carried out through numerous ordinances, programs, and agreements. The following ordinances are among the most important tools for implementing the general plan and/or are critical to the mitigation of hazards identified in this plan. Emergency Organization (Title 2, Chapter 2.44) The declared purposes of this chapter are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within the County in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of the County with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons. Health Authority (Title 8, Chapter 8.70) Among the primary purposes of the health authority are to meet the problems of delivery of publicly assisted medical care in the County and to demonstrate ways of promoting quality care and cost efficiency. Groundwater Management (Title 14, Chapter 14.03) This chapter protects the County’s important groundwater resources by requiring a permit from the County to extract, on a long-term basis, groundwater for transfer outside the County, including groundwater extracted to replace a surface water supply that has been, is being, or will be transferred for long-term use outside of Fresno County. This chapter is limited to requiring a permit for the long-term direct or indirect transfer of groundwater outside the County and is not intended to regulate groundwater in any other way. Fresno County 4.283 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Building Code (Title 15, Chapter 15.08) This chapter adopts the California Building Code, including the appendices, as referenced, except as otherwise provided in the 2001 California Building Standards Code and the Uniform Building Code Standards. Fire Code (Title 15, Chapter 15.10) This chapter adopts the California Fire Code as referenced in the 2001 California Fire Code. Grading and Excavation (Title 15, Chapter 15.28) This chapter establishes that Chapter 33 and Chapter 33 of the Appendix of the 1998 California Building Code is adopted by reference and except as otherwise provided is applicable to and shall cover all grading and excavation within the unincorporated area of the County. Flood Hazard Areas (Title 15, Chapter 15.48) It is the purpose of this chapter to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to: • Protect human life and health; • Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; • Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; • Minimize prolonged business interruptions; • Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric, telephone, and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; • Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damage; • Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard; and • Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions. This chapter includes methods and provisions to: • Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; • Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; • Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters; • Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development that may increase flood damage; and • Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers that will unnaturally divert floodwaters or that may increase flood hazards in other areas. Fresno County 4.284 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirements of this chapter apply to all new development, substantial improvements, minor improvements, and conversions of existing nonresidential structures to residential uses within flood hazard areas. Notably, it requires that a development permit be obtained before start of construction or beginning of development within any area of special flood hazard. It appoints the director of the Public Works and Planning Department to administer and implement the chapter by granting or denying development permit applications in accordance with its provisions. This chapter addresses the following for construction in areas of special flood hazard: • Standards of construction • Standards for storage of materials and equipment • Standards for utilities • Standards for subdivisions • Standards for manufactured homes and manufactured home parks and subdivision • Provisions for floodway development California Department of Forestry State Responsibility Area Fire Safe Regulations of the County (Title 15, Chapter 15.60) This chapter provides for basic emergency access, perimeter wildfire protection measures, signing and building numbering, private water supply reserves for emergency fire use, and vegetation modification. Development requirements in this chapter address setbacks for structures, road improvements, road width, cul-de-sacs and dead-end roads, one-way roads, driveways, gates, road signs, building signs, flammable vegetation and fuels, water supply, and hydrant locations. Fire District Development Impact Mitigation Fees (Title 15, Chapter 15.64) The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Fresno County General Plan policy providing for the adoption of development impact mitigation fees and for the collection of such fees at the time of the issuance of building permits or other permits. Subject to the requirements of this chapter, such fees are to be allocated to a fire district within the Fresno County for the acquisition of capital facilities to ensure the provision of the capital facilities necessary to maintain current levels of fire protection services necessitated by new development. Subdivisions (Title 17, Chapters 17.01-17.60) Chapters 17.04 through 17.60 makeup Fresno County’s subdivision ordinance, which is deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. It addresses orderly growth and development of the County; beneficial use of land in the public interest; and conservation, stabilization, and protection of property values and assures adequate provision for necessary utilities, public roads, and other public conveniences in subdivided areas. The subdivision ordinance regulates the design and improvement of land divisions and the dedication of public Fresno County 4.285 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan improvements needed in connection with land divisions. All land divisions must by law be consistent with the general plan and the zoning ordinance. Drainage of Land (Title 17, Chapter 17.64) Since the development of land for urban uses substantially accelerates the concentration of surface water and stormwater, it is necessary to require the construction of, and to establish and collect fees to defray the actual or estimated cost of, planned local drainage facilities for the control and safe disposal of surface water and stormwater from local drainage areas to promote and protect the public welfare, safety, peace, comfort, convenience, and the general welfare. Fresno County Zoning Ordinance The purpose of the zoning ordinance is to regulate the use of land in each zoning district. The ordinance typically establishes a list of land uses permitted in each district plus a series of specific standards governing lot size, building height, and required yard and setback provisions in the unincorporated area of Fresno County in a manner consistent with the Fresno County General Plan. This ordinance incorporates zoning regulations implementing the Fresno County General Plan and all of its elements. One of the zones created by the ordinance is the Open Space Conservation District (Section 815). This zone is intended to provide for permanent open spaces in the community and to safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of the people by limiting developments in areas where police and fire protection, protection against flooding by stormwater, and dangers from excessive erosion are not possible without excessive costs to the community. Fresno Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan The Fresno Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan is a comprehensive strategy to enhance and maintain the quantity and quality of local groundwater resources. It provides a vehicle for future groundwater management actions. As part of a regional effort, other basin- specific plans have also been developed for the Kings River and San Joaquin River basins. There are also efforts to create a statewide water management plan. All plans are coordinated for the County through the Public Works and Planning departments. Fresno County Hazardous Waste Management Plan The Fresno County Hazardous Waste Management Plan is designed to ensure that safe, effective, and economical facilities for the management of hazardous wastes are available when they are needed. To attain this goal, the plan establishes goals, policies, and programs to encourage the safe handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials. The Fresno County Environmental Health Department administers this plan. Fresno County 4.286 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Special Districts There are numerous special districts that provide a variety of public services in Fresno County. Special districts can provide one or more types of public services, facilities, or infrastructure within a prescribed boundary, and they play an important role in growth management because the availability of their services can encourage or discourage new development. Special districts can tax the properties within their boundaries to pay for the services they provide. Monthly fees may also be assessed. Some of the special districts that provide mitigation-related services in Fresno County are presented below. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District is a special act district. It was created to provide fully coordinated and comprehensive stormwater management and related services on a regional basis through a quasi-joint powers relationship between the Cities of Fresno and Clovis and the County of Fresno. The district service area includes most of the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area (excluding the community of Easton), and unincorporated lands to the east and northeast. The mission of the district is to provide to the citizens living within its boundaries the ability to control and manage the water resources of the area so as to prevent damage, injury, and inconvenience; to conserve such waters for local, domestic, and agricultural use; and to maximize the public use and benefit of the district’s programs and infrastructure. The district maintains a services plan that presents district goals, program objectives, current program descriptions, and implementation strategies. (See Annex M: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District for more information.) Lower San Joaquin Levee District The Lower San Joaquin Levee District is a special act district. It was created to operate, maintain, and repair levees, bypasses, and other facilities built in connection with the Lower San Joaquin River Flood Control Project. The district encompasses approximately 468 square miles in Fresno, Madera, and Merced counties, of which 94 square miles are in Fresno County. (See Annex N: Lower San Joaquin Levee District for more information.) Kings River Conservation District The Kings River Conservation District is a special act district. It is responsible for planning for the proper management of water within its service area, including essential flood control and groundwater management services. The district contains about 2,049 square miles in Fresno, Kings, and Tulare counties. The Fresno County portion has 1,001 square miles. It encompasses the Cities of Clovis, Fresno, Fowler, Kerman, Kingsburg, Parlier, Reedley, San Joaquin, Sanger, and Selma and intervening agricultural lands. (See Annex O: Kings River Conservation District for more information) Fresno County 4.287 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County Fire Protection Districts Fire protection districts provide a variety of services, which may include fire protection, rescue, emergency medical, hazardous material emergency response, and ambulance services. • Bald Mountain Fire Protection District • Fig Garden Fire Protection District • Fresno County Fire Protection District • North Central Fire Protection District • Orange Cove Fire Protection District Fresno County Irrigation Districts Irrigation districts provide water for irrigation to users within their boundaries. They may also use water under their control for other beneficial purposes and provide flood protection measures. • Alta Irrigation District • Central California Irrigation District • Consolidated Irrigation District • Fresno Irrigation District • Hills Valley Irrigation District • James Irrigation District • Laguna Irrigation District • Orange Cove Irrigation District • Riverdale Irrigation District • Tranquillity Irrigation District Fresno County Drainage Districts Drainage districts control storm and other waste waters within a district’s boundaries, protect property and infrastructure within a district from damage by stormwater or wastewater, and conserve stormwater and waste water for beneficial purposes. • Camp 13 Drainage District • Dos Palos Drainage District • Panoche Drainage District • Silver Creek Drainage District Fresno County Mosquito Abatement Districts Mosquito abatement districts provide mosquito surveillance and control. • Coalinga-Huron Mosquito Abatement District • Consolidated Mosquito Abatement District • Fresno Mosquito and Vector Control District Fresno County 4.288 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Fresno-Westside Mosquito Abatement District Fresno County Pest Control Districts Pest control districts are comprised of local growers to control, eradicate, or respond to the effects of pests and/or diseases affecting crops. • Central Valley Pest Control District • West Fresno County Red Scale Protective District Reclamation Districts Reclamation districts reclaim and protect any body of swampland and overflowed salt marsh, tidelands, or other lands subject to overflow to irrigate lands inside or outside their boundaries. Services include drainage, levee maintenance, and irrigation services. • No. 1606 • Zalda No. 801 Fresno County Resource Conservation Districts Resource conservation districts address a wide variety of conservation issues such as forest fuel management, water and air quality, wildlife habitat restoration, soil erosion control, conservation education, and much more. • Excelsior/Kings River Resource Conservation District • Firebaugh Resource Conservation District • James Resource Conservation District • Los Banos Resource Conservation District • Navelencia Resource Conservation District • Panoche Resource Conservation District • Poso Resource Conservation District • San Luis Resource Conservation District • Sierra Resource Conservation District (See Annex P) • Tranquillity Resource Conservation District • Westside Resource Conservation District Fresno County Water Districts (California) Water districts provide water services. Powers may include the acquisition and operation of works for the production, storage, transmission, and distribution of water for irrigation, domestic, industrial, and municipal purposes and any related drainage or reclamation works. • Broadview Water District • Eagle Field Water District • Farmers Water District Fresno County 4.289 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Firebaugh Canal Water District • Fresno Slough Water District • Garfield Water District • International Water District • Kings River Water District • Liberty Water District • Mercy Springs Water District • Mid-Valley Water District • Oro Loma Water District • Pacheco Water District • Panoche Water District • Pleasant Valley Water District • Raisin City Water District • San Luis Water District • Santa Rita Water District • Stinson Water District • Tri-Valley Water District • Westlands Water District • Wildren Water District Fresno County Water Districts (County) County water districts furnish imported water. • Freewater County Water District • Malaga County Water District • Pinedale County Water District Fresno County Local Boards, Commissions, and Committees There are a number of local boards, commissions, and committees in Fresno County. Those that have responsibilities related to hazard mitigation are described briefly below. • Agricultural Land Conservation Committee—This committee reviews cancellation of land conservation contracts and makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. • Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies—This organization is charged with providing sufficient quality water to satisfy future requirements for municipal, industrial, and agricultural uses within the areas served by the member agencies. • Planning Commission—This commission is charged with the review and approval or denial of discretionary land use permits. The Commission is also advisory to the Board of Supervisors on proposed amendments to the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Fresno County 4.290 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fire Safe Councils The Fire Safe Council provides resources for establishing and maintaining local fire safe councils to mobilize Californians to protect their homes, communities, and environments from wildfire. These councils serve as forums for stakeholders to share and validate fire safety and fire planning information. There are two fire safe councils in Fresno County: • Highway I-168 Fire Safe Council (northeastern Fresno County) • Highway I-80 Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council (southeastern Fresno County) Both fire safe councils were active in the 2017-2018 update of the HMP and participated with the Sierra Resource Conservation District in the development and update of their annex (see Annex P). 4.5.2 Fresno County’s Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table 4.79 identifies the County personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Fresno County. Table 4.79 Fresno County’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Public Works and Planning Development Services Division, principal planner/senior engineer Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Public Works and Planning Development Services Division, supervising plan check engineer/senior engineer Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Public Works and Planning Development Services Division (no one official is designated, all are familiar) Personnel skilled in GIS Public Works and Planning, Development Services Division, staff analyst; Computer Data Services Full-time building official Public Works and Planning Development Services Division, director Floodplain manager Public Works and Planning Development Services Division Emergency manager Office of Emergency Services GIS data—Hazard areas Public Works and Planning, Development Services Division, staff analyst (some) GIS data—Critical facilities Office of Emergency Services and Internal Services Department GIS data—Land use Public Works and Planning Development Services Division, staff analyst GIS data—Assessor’s data Public Works and Planning, Development Services Division, staff analyst; Computer Data Services Fresno County 4.291 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County Department of Public Health A number of important mitigation and emergency management programs and services are located in the Fresno County Department of Public Health, which provides health promotion, surveillance, and disease prevention services to protect the public health. Some of these are described below: Office of Emergency Services and its Mission The Fresno County Office of Emergency Services (OES) is a program located within the Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Division. Fresno County OES coordinates planning and preparedness, response and recovery efforts for disasters occurring within the unincorporated area of the County. The mission of the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services is to develop and maintain the capability to prepare for, mitigate, respond to, and recover from emergencies and disasters, and to ensure the most effective use of all available resources. To accomplish this mission OES communicates and coordinates with all levels of government and many other entities in order to minimize the impact of disasters and enable affected communities to return to pre-disaster conditions as soon as possible. On November 14, 1995, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors adopted the State's Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), established the geographic area of the County of Fresno as the Fresno County Operational Area, and designated Fresno County as the Operational Area Lead Agency. Fresno County OES is mandated by the California Emergency Services Act (Chapter 7, Division 1, Title 2 of Government Code) to serve as the liaison between the State and all the local government political subdivisions comprising Fresno County. As the Operational Area lead agency, Fresno County OES maintains ongoing communication with local government agencies (County Departments, Incorporated Cities, Special Districts, and Public School Districts) as well as many state and federal agencies and nonprofit organizations to maintain and enhance the capability to respond to and recover from disasters. During a Disaster The Office of Emergency Services provides the initial staffing and coordination of the County’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC), which is the primary coordination point for response to major emergencies and disasters. During a disaster event OES staff gathers information from the affected jurisdictions and determines the level of response required. OES acts as the link between local government agencies and the State to transmit emergency related information and to request necessary State and Federal assistance. Between Disasters The Office of Emergency Services coordinates a wide variety of emergency management functions including developing and updating response plans, maintaining and enhancing the emergency operations center and related equipment, administering emergency preparedness grants, assisting county agencies and local jurisdictions with emergency related activities, and identifying and coordinating appropriate emergency training activities Fresno County 4.292 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan The program coordinates the development and maintenance of the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, which serves as a guide for the County’s response to emergencies/disasters in the Fresno County Operational Area, and to coordinate and assist with disaster response in jurisdictions both within and outside of the Fresno County Operational Area. Certified Unified Program Agency The Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) is responsible for implementing a unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program. The agency provides oversight of businesses that require hazardous materials business plans, require California accidental release prevention plans or federal risk management plans, operate storage tanks, generate hazardous waste(s), and have onsite treatment of hazardous waste(s)/tiered permits. Land Use Program Land Use program staff are responsible for reviewing proposed land use development applications submitted to the various planning agencies in the County and providing comments regarding project compliance with the appropriate environmental health standards relative to the staff’s areas of expertise. The program evaluates proposed land developments for compliance with laws and regulations pertaining to domestic and public water supplies and vector control, among other things. Water Surveillance Program The Water Surveillance Program permits, monitors, and inspects small public water systems and state small water systems within Fresno County and permits new water well construction, reconstruction of existing wells, and destruction of abandoned wells within unincorporated Fresno County. These activities are designed to help assure that a reliable supply of pure, wholesome, and potable water is provided to small public and state small water systems within Fresno County. In addition, the water well permitting program helps assure that private water wells are constructed to minimize the potential for contamination of the groundwater supply and eliminate safety hazards associated with abandoned wells. Communicable Disease Division The Communicable Disease Division of the Public Health Department participates in hazard mitigation in several ways, including immunizations, education, and preventive medication to prevent and/or control the spread of disease. The ultimate result is a reduction in human suffering, medical costs, and lost productivity. In the case of a pandemic influenza or bio-terrorism event, the division would mobilize to mitigate the effects on the general population as well as first responders and essential personnel by administering antivirals, antibiotics, and immunizations. The County has a pandemic response plan that is implemented by this division. Fresno County 4.293 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Education and Prevention Services Education and Prevention Services supports the public health objectives of the Department of Public Health. It conducts research on current health issues and, where appropriate, develops and implements programs to provide information, education, and services that promote and improve the public health and safety within the Fresno community. Staff also participate in a variety of public health partnerships with schools, community-based organizations, health and safety coalitions, public health agencies, managed care, medical institutions, and community members. Activities include: • Conducting research and development on identified unmet public health needs; • Developing, implementing, and evaluating primary prevention interventions intended to address targeted health needs of children, youth, and families; • Providing consumer, youth, and employer health and wellness education; • Creating and implementing informational marketing campaigns on health and safety topics; • Coordinating selected training, assessment, and evaluation activities for the department. Public Health Laboratory The Public Health Laboratory provides surveillance and detects the presence of disease producing agents that have the potential to adversely affect the health of an entire community. The information generated by this testing is furnished to other agencies and departments to be used for the purpose of monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and environmental threats to the public’s health. The information can then be used to plan containment strategies and assess the effectiveness of various health education programs. Fresno County Heat Emergency Contingency Plan Administered by a number of the departments within the Department of Public Health, the Fresno County Heat Emergency Contingency Plan was developed to reduce the incidence of morbidity and mortality associated with local extreme heat events. The plan describes County operations during heat-related emergencies and provides guidance for County departments and personnel. Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning The Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning is responsible for a wide variety of programs and activities related to planning, zoning, permits, water, community service districts, housing, community and economic development, and roads and bridges for the unincorporated portion of Fresno County. Most of the department’s mitigation activities take place in the Development Services Division, which consists of the following sections: • Building and Safety Section—Responsibilities include administration of building codes and regulations to ensure the public’s safety. • Land Development, Policy Planning, and Environmental Analysis Units - Responsibilities include processing of land use applications, land division, administration of the County’s Fresno County 4.294 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan general plan, Regional, Community and specific plans, urban growth management, and project-related amendments to General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. • Development Engineering – Responsibilities include processing grading permits, processing parcel maps and lot line adjustments. Development Engineering is also responsible for floodplain administration and administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for unincorporated areas of the County. The NFIP is a FEMA program that makes flood insurance available to communities that have enacted local ordinances restricting development within the 100-year floodplain. Fresno County has been an NFIP participant since 1982. Floodplain management in Fresno County is based on mapping associated with the 2016 FEMA Flood Insurance Study, which contains revised and updated information on flood hazards in the geographic area of Fresno County, including the Cities of Clovis, Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cover, Parlier, Reedley, Sanger, San Joaquin, and Selma and the unincorporated areas of Fresno County. This study developed flood- risk data for various areas of the community that will be used to establish actuarial flood insurance rates and to assist the community in its efforts to promote sound floodplain management. Community Development The department’s Community Development Division provides a variety of services and activities to improve the quality of life and ensure a healthy economy for residents of unincorporated Fresno County and its partner cities. The division is responsible for the administration of the Community Development Block Grant Program, which provides funding, including mitigation funding, to upgrade low and moderate income neighborhoods. Fresno County Department of Agriculture The Fresno County Department of Agriculture, under direction of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, is responsible for conducting regulatory and service functions pertaining to the multi-billion dollar agricultural industry in Fresno County. The primary purpose and objective of the department is the promotion and protection of the County agricultural industry and the general public. Three divisions carry out the department’s program objectives: • Pest Detection and Exclusion Division • Environmental Protection and Pest Management Division • Weights and Measures/Standardization and Statistics Division County Administrative Office The County Administrative Office functions as the operations arm of the County Board of Supervisors and carries out its mission of delivering the highest quality of public services. The office administers the County’s $1.45 billion dollar budget that funds services in public safety, law Fresno County 4.295 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan enforcement, agriculture, public works, human services, libraries, and elections. It takes the lead in activities to improve the quality of life in Fresno County, including economic development, capital improvements, and tourism. Fresno County Public Library The Fresno County Public Library provides collections and services through its Central Resource Library and 34 branches. It is part of the San Joaquin Valley Library System, a cooperative network of nine public library jurisdictions in the counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, and Tulare. The library is an excellent resource for information about hazards and emergency preparedness. State and Federal Programs A number of state and federal programs exist to provide technical and financial assistance to local communities for hazard mitigation. Some of the primary agencies/departments that are closely involved with local governments in the administration of these programs include: • California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services − State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan • California Department of Water Resources (San Joaquin District)* − San Joaquin River Management Plan • California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Fresno King’s Unit)* • California Environmental Protection Agency • California Department of Fish and Game* • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) • California Highway Patrol • California State Parks and Recreation Department* • California State Lands Commission* • San Joaquin River Conservancy* • Federal Emergency Management Agency (Region IX) • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (South Pacific Division/Sacramento District)* • Bureau of Reclamation (Mid-Pacific Region, Hollister planning area)* • USDA Forest Service (Pacific Southwest Region)* • National Parks Service (Pacific West Region)* • USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (Fresno Service Center)* • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region IX) • American Red Cross (Fresno/Madera) *Owns and/or manages land and/or facilities (or has some sort of administrative role, e.g., fire protection) in the County, potential partner for mitigation activities Fresno County 4.296 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.5.3 Fresno County’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table 4.80 identifies financial tools or resources that the County could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table 4.80. Fresno County’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Based on direction of chief administrative officer and Board approval Capital improvements project funding Yes Based on direction of chief administrative officer Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Based on approval by Board of Supervisors and taxpayers Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services No/Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Based on approval by Board of Supervisors Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Based on approval by Board of Supervisors, via County election process Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Based on approval by Board of Supervisors, via County election process Incur debt through private activities Yes Based on approval by Board of Supervisors Withhold spending in hazard prone areas Yes Based on direction of chief administrative officer and Board approval Fresno County 5.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 5 MITIGATION STRATEGY Requirement §201.6(c)(3): [The plan shall include] a mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. This section describes the mitigation strategy process and mitigation action plan for the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. It describes how the County and participating jurisdictions met the requirements for the following from the 10-step planning process: • Planning Step 6: Set Goals • Planning Step 7: Review Possible Activities • Planning Step 8: Draft an Action Plan The results of the planning process, the risk assessment, the goal setting, the identification of mitigation actions, and the hard work of the HMPC led to the action plan in Section 5.3 Mitigation Action Plan. Taking all the above into consideration, the HMPC developed the following overall mitigation strategy: • Communicate the hazard information collected and analyzed through this planning process as well as HMPC success stories so that the community better understands what can happen where and what they themselves can do to be better prepared. • Implement the action plan recommendations of this plan. • Use existing rules, regulations, policies, and procedures already in existence. Given the flood hazard in the planning area, an emphasis should be placed on continued compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program and participation by all communities in the Community Rating System. • Monitor multi-objective management opportunities so that funding opportunities may be shared and packaged, and broader constituent support may be garnered. 5.1 Goals and Objectives Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i): [The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. Up to this point in the planning process, the HMPC has organized resources, assessed hazards and risks, and documented mitigation capabilities. The resulting goals, objectives, and mitigation actions were developed based on these tasks. The HMPC held a series of meetings and exercises designed to achieve a collaborative mitigation strategy as described further throughout this section. Fresno County 5.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan During the initial goal-setting meeting, the HMPC reviewed the results of the hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and capability assessment with the HMPC. This analysis of the risk assessment identified areas where improvements could be made and provided the framework for the HMPC to formulate planning goals and objectives and the ultimate mitigation strategy for the Fresno County planning area. Goals were defined for the purpose of this mitigation plan as broad-based public policy statements that: • Represent basic desires of the community; • Encompass all aspects of community, public and private; • Are nonspecific, in that they refer to the quality (not the quantity) of the outcome; • Are future-oriented, in that they are achievable in the future; and • Are time-independent, in that they are not scheduled events. Goals are stated without regard to implementation. Implementation cost, schedule, and means are not considered. Goals are defined before considering how to accomplish them so that they are not dependent on the means of achievement. Goal statements form the basis for objectives and actions that will be used as means to achieve the goals. Objectives define strategies to attain the goals and are more specific and measurable. During the 2009 planning process, HMPC members were given a list of sample goals to consider. They were told that they could use, combine, or revise the statements provided or develop new ones, keeping the risk assessment in mind. Each member was each given three index cards and asked to write a goal statement on each card. Goal statements were collected and grouped into similar themes and pasted onto the wall of the meeting room. The goal statements were then grouped into similar topics. New goals from the HMPC were discussed until the team came to consensus. Some of the statements were determined to be better suited as objectives or actual mitigation actions and were set aside for later use. Next, the HMPC developed objectives that summarized strategies to achieve each goal. During this plan update process, HMPC members reviewed the existing goals and objectives. In general, the committee found that the 2009 plan goals and objectives were still relevant and valid; however, following discussion the group decided to update Goal 2 to incorporate an emphasis on resilience. Based on the risk assessment review and goal setting process, the HMPC identified the following goals and objectives, which provide the direction for reducing future hazard-related losses within the Fresno County planning area. One jurisdiction, the City of Kingsburg, chose to modify the countywide goals to better reflect the desires specific to their community. Kingsburg’s modified goals are included in their jurisdictional annex to this plan. Goal 1: Provide Protection for People’s Lives from Hazards Objective 1.1: Provide timely notification and direction to the public of imminent and potential hazards Fresno County 5.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Objective 1.2: Protect public health and safety by preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the effects of natural or technological disasters Objective 1.3: Improve community transportation corridors to allow for better evacuation routes for the public and better access for emergency responders Goal 2: Improve All Communities’ Resilience and Capabilities to Mitigate Hazards and Reduce Exposure to Hazard-Related Losses Objective 2.1: Reduce wildfires/protect life, property, and natural resources from damaging wildfires Objective 2.2: Reduce flood and storm-related losses Objective 2.3: Reduce hazards that adversely impact the agricultural industry Objective 2.4: Minimize the impact to the communities due to recurring drought conditions that impact both ground water supply and the agricultural industry Objective 2.5: Minimize the risk/loss to endangered species, native plants, land (erosion), and native wildlife Goal 3: Improve Community and Agency Awareness about Hazards and Associated Vulnerabilities that Threaten Fresno County Planning Area Communities Objective 3.1: Increase public awareness about the nature and extent of hazards they are exposed to, where they occur, what is vulnerable, and recommended mitigation and preparedness for identified hazards Goal 4: Provide Protection for Critical Facilities, Utilities, and Services from Hazard Impacts Goal 5: Maintain Coordination of Disaster Planning Objective 5.1: Coordinate with changing U.S. Department of Homeland Security/FEMA needs Objective 5.2: Coordinate with other community plans Objective 5.3: Maximize the use of shared resources between jurisdictions and special districts for mitigation/communication Objective 5.4: Standardize systems among agencies to provide for better interoperability Goal 6: Maintain/Provide for FEMA Eligibility and Work to Position Jurisdictions for Grant Funding Objective 6.1: Provide County departments and other jurisdictions with information regarding mitigation opportunities Fresno County 5.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Objective 6.2: As part of plan implementation, review actions in this plan on an annual basis to be considered for annual FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant allocations or after a presidential disaster declaration in California for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding as well as for other local, state, and federal funding opportunities 5.2 Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Actions Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. In order to identify and select mitigation actions to support the mitigation goals, each hazard identified in Section 4.1 Identifying Hazards: Natural Hazards was evaluated. Only those hazards that were determined to be a priority hazard were considered further in the development of hazard- specific mitigation actions. These priority hazards are: • Agricultural Hazards • Dam Failure • Drought • Earthquake • Flood/Levee Failure • Human Health Hazards − Epidemic/Pandemic • Severe Weather − Extreme Temperatures − Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning − Fog − Windstorm • Soil Hazards − Land Subsidence • Wildfire Hazardous materials incident (release from a fixed facility or transportation accident) was also identified by the HMPC as a priority hazard, as noted in Section 4.4 Human-caused Hazards. The HMPC eliminated the hazards identified below from further consideration in the development of mitigation actions because the risk of a hazard event in the County is unlikely or nonexistent, the vulnerability of the County is low, or capabilities are already in place to mitigate negative impacts. The eliminated hazards are: Fresno County 5.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Avalanche • Human Health Hazards − West Nile Virus • Landslide • Severe Weather − Snow − Tornado • Soil Hazards − Erosion − Expansive Soils • Volcano It is important to note, however, that all the hazards addressed in this plan are included in the countywide multi-hazard public awareness mitigation action. Once it was determined which hazards warranted the development of specific mitigation actions, the HMPC analyzed viable mitigation options that supported the identified goals and objectives. The HMPC was provided with the following list of categories of mitigation actions, which originate from the Community Rating System: • Prevention: Administrative or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. • Property protection: Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or remove them from the hazard area. • Structural: Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. • Natural resource protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses, also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. • Emergency services: Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a disaster or hazard event. • Public information/education and awareness: Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about the hazards and potential ways to mitigate them At the mitigation strategy meeting the HMPC was also provided with a matrix showing examples of potential mitigation action alternatives for each of the above categories, for each of the identified hazards. The HMPC was also provided a handout that explains the categories and provided further examples. Another reference document titled “Mitigation Ideas” developed by FEMA was distributed to the HMPC via an online link. This document lists the common alternatives for mitigation by hazard. The HMPC was also instructed to consider both future and existing buildings in considering possible mitigation actions. A facilitated discussion then took place to examine and analyze the options. Appendix C provides the matrix of alternatives considered. Fresno County 5.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Each proposed action was written on a large sticky note and posted on flip charts in meeting room underneath the hazard it addressed. 5.2.1 Prioritization Process Once the mitigation actions were identified, the HMPC was provided with several decision-making tools, including FEMA’s recommended prioritization criteria, STAPLEE, to assist in deciding why one recommended action might be more important, more effective, or more likely to be implemented than another., STAPLEE stands for the following: • Social: Does the measure treat people fairly? (e.g., different groups, different generations) • Technical: Is the action technically feasible? Does it solve the problem? • Administrative: Are there adequate staffing, funding, and other capabilities to implement the project? • Political: Who are the stakeholders? Will there be adequate political and public support for the project? • Legal: Does the jurisdiction have the legal authority to implement the action? Is it legal? • Economic: Is the action cost-beneficial? Is there funding available? Will the action contribute to the local economy? • Environmental: Does the action comply with environmental regulations? Will there be negative environmental consequences from the action? In accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act requirements, an emphasis was placed on the importance of a benefit-cost analysis in determining action priority. Other criteria used to assist in evaluating the benefit-cost of a mitigation action included: • Does the action address hazards or areas with the highest risk? • Does the action protect lives? • Does the action protect infrastructure, community assets or critical facilities? • Does the action meet multiple objectives (Multiple Objective Management)? • What will the action cost? • What is the timing of available funding? The mitigation categories, multi-hazard actions, and criteria are included in Appendix C: Mitigation Categories, Alternatives, and Selection Criteria. At the mitigation strategy meeting the HMPC used STAPLEE to determine which of the identified actions were most likely to be implemented and effective. With these criteria in mind, team members were given a set of four green sticky-dots. The team was asked to use the dots to prioritize projects with the above criteria in mind, essentially voting on the projects. The projects with the most dots became the higher priority projects. This process provided both consensus and priority for the recommendations. Follow-up meetings were held within each jurisdiction to finalize the Fresno County 5.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan actions that are part of this plan. Participating jurisdictions were given the leeway to prioritize the actions specific to them, using the previously mentioned criteria. This plan also carries forward many mitigation actions developed during the 2009 planning process. HMPC members and jurisdictional planning teams were asked to review their existing mitigation actions and report on the progress made toward implementation and decide whether and incomplete actions should be carried forward for continued or future implementation or be deleted. In some cases, mitigation actions were adjusted to reflect new situations or needs. The process of identification and analysis of mitigation alternatives allowed the HMPC to come to consensus and to collectively prioritize recommended mitigation actions. During the voting process, emphasis was placed on the importance of a benefit-cost review in determining project priority; however, this was not a quantitative analysis. After completing the prioritization exercise, some team members expressed concern that prioritizing all the actions as a group is not very effective, since many of the actions are jurisdiction- or department-specific. However, the team agreed that prioritizing the actions collectively enabled the actions to be ranked in order of relative importance and helped steer the development of additional actions that meet the more important objectives while eliminating some of the actions which did not garner much support. Benefit-cost was also considered in greater detail in the development of the Mitigation Action Plan detailed below in Section 5.3. Specifically, each action developed for this plan contains a description of the problem and proposed project, the entity with primary responsibility for implementation, any other alternatives considered, a cost estimate, expected project benefits, potential funding sources, and a schedule for implementation. Development of these project details for each action led to the determination of a High, Medium, or Low priority for each action. Recognizing the limitations in prioritizing actions from multiple jurisdictions and departments and the regulatory requirement to prioritize by benefit-cost to ensure cost-effectiveness, the HMPC decided to pursue mitigation action strategy development and implementation according to the nature and extent of damages, the level of protection and benefits each action provides, political support, project cost, available funding, and individual jurisdiction and department priority. This process drove the development of a prioritized action plan for the Fresno County planning area. Cost-effectiveness will be considered in greater detail through a formal benefit-cost analysis when seeking FEMA mitigation grant funding for eligible actions associated with this plan. 5.3 Mitigation Action Plan Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii): [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. Fresno County 5.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This action plan was developed to present the recommendations developed by the HMPC for how the Fresno County planning area can reduce the vulnerability of people, property, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources to future disaster losses. Over time the implementation of these projects will be tracked as a measure of demonstrated progress on meeting the plan’s goals. 5.3.1 Progress on Previous Mitigation Actions Fresno County and the many of the participating jurisdictions have been successful in implementing actions identified in the 2009 LHMP Mitigation Strategy, thus, working steadily towards meeting the 2009 plan goals. Projects that helped meet five of the six goals have been completed as of early 2018. The 2009 mitigation strategy contained 89 separate mitigation actions including 19 actions led by Fresno County. Of the County’s actions, three have been completed. Several others have had aspects implemented or are ongoing, such as ‘Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program.’ Across all jurisdictions, 18 actions from the 2009 Plan have been completed, including several by the City of Clovis. Table 5.1 provides a summary of the mitigation action projects completed from the 2009 Plan. More details on in-progress and ongoing actions are discussed in the “Status” associated with the County Mitigation Action details and jurisdictional annexes. These actions are included in Table 5.3. Table 5.1 Mitigation Actions Completed from 2009 Plan Jurisdiction Mitigation Action Title Corresponding Hazard Priority Related Goals Fresno County Implement Mass Notification System for Fresno County Multi-Hazard High 1 Develop and Conduct Disaster Response/Disaster Management Training for Designated County/City Staff Multi-Hazard Medium 2 Install Automated Fog Warning System Fog High 1 City of Clovis (Annex A) Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan Multi-Hazard High 4 Train and Certify City Inspectors to Conduct Post-Disaster Damage Assessment Multi-Hazard High 2 Implement a System of Automatic Vehicle Location Multi-Hazard High 2 Install Battery Back-Up Systems at Traffic Signals in the City of Clovis on Major Transportation Routes Multi-Hazard High 1, 4 Replace Traffic Management Center Software and Herndon Avenue Traffic Signal Equipment and Implement Communications Upgrades Multi-Hazard Medium 1 Fresno County 5.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Mitigation Action Title Corresponding Hazard Priority Related Goals Modify and Enhance Emergency Traffic Control System Multi-Hazard Medium 1 Implement a System to Share Information with City Police Officers/Employees (SharePoint) Multi-Hazard Medium 3, 5 Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into Safety Element of General Plan Multi-Hazard High 5 Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public Flood Medium 3 City of Coalinga (Annex B) Improve Nonstructural Earthquake Mitigation in Public Buildings Earthquake High 1, 4 Inventory At-Risk Buildings Earthquake High 1 City of Kingsburg (Annex G) Conduct Disaster Response Training Multi-Hazard High 2 Replace Storm Drains on Lewis and Washington Streets Flood High 2 Sierra Resource Conservation District (Annex P) Create an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for Eastern Fresno County Drought Medium 5 Conduct a Fractured Rock Groundwater Capacity Study for Eastern Fresno County Drought Medium 2 During the 2017-18 update, the actions from the 2009 plan were revisited, re-evaluated, and in some cases re-prioritized. During this process several actions were noted as not completed and no longer relevant to continue forward in the updated plan. Some actions were deleted because they were considered response actions rather than mitigation, while others were simply no longer a priority. The actions from the 2009 Plan that were not completed but are no longer being pursued are noted in the table below. Table 5.2 Mitigation Actions Deleted Jurisdiction Mitigation Action Title Corresponding Hazard Related Goals Reason for Deleting Fresno County Establish an Abandoned Water Well Program N/A N/A Not tied to mitigation of a specific hazard Develop Mitigation and Monitoring Program for Groundwater Supplies in the Northeast Portion of the County Drought 2 Replaced by new action #9 SGMA Compliance and Implementation Fresno County 5.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdiction Mitigation Action Title Corresponding Hazard Related Goals Reason for Deleting Create and Maintain a Water Stewardship Forum of Stakeholders in Northeastern Fresno County Drought 2 Replaced by new action #9 SGMA Compliance and Implementation Control E. Coli through Wild Hog Population Management Agricultural 2 No longer considered a relevant project Develop an Animal Carcass Disposal Plan Multi-Hazard 2 Plan not necessary; Managed through State and other guidance City of Coalinga Provide Bilingual Neighborhood Emergency Response Team (NERT) Training to Community Residents and Businesses Earthquake 2 Considered a Response Activity City of Sanger (Annex I) Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public Flood 3 No longer a priority; replaced with flood awareness outreach targeting areas with localized flooding issues Install Battery Back-Up Systems at Traffic Signals in the City of Sanger on Major Transportation Routes Multi-Hazard 1 No longer considered a priority Improve City’s Floodplain Management Program and Apply to Community Rating System Flood 2 Participation in the CRS no longer considered a priority City of Selma (Annex J) Construct a Railroad Crossing Underpass Multi-Hazard 1 No longer considered a viable alternative Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (Annex M) Construct Control Structures and Flood Channel for Mud Creek Flows between the Gould and Fresno Canals Flood 2 Replaced with New Project Construct Improvements to the Vernon Drain Between the Gould and Fresno Canals Flood 2 Replaced with New Project 5.3.2 Continued Compliance with NFIP Recognizing the importance of the NFIP in mitigating flood losses, an emphasis will be placed on continued compliance with the NFIP by Fresno County and other NFIP participating communities including the cities of Clovis, Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Kingsburg, Mendota, Reedley, San Joaquin and Sanger. As NFIP participants, these communities have and will continue to make every effort to remain in good standing with NFIP. This includes continuing to comply with the NFIP’s standards for updating and adopting floodplain maps and maintaining and updating the floodplain zoning ordinance. The City of Selma has chosen not to participate in the NFIP for several years due to limited flood risk, though some Special Flood Hazard Area exists within city Fresno County 5.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan limits. Other details related to NFIP participation are discussed in the flood vulnerability discussion in Chapter 4 and in the capability assessment in Section 4.5 and jurisdictional annexes. 5.3.3 Updated Mitigation Action Plan The action plan summarizes who is responsible for implementing each of the prioritized actions as well as when and how the actions will be implemented. Each action summary also includes a discussion of the benefit-cost review conducted to meet the regulatory requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act. Table 5.3 identifies the mitigation actions and lead jurisdiction for each action. Only those actions where the County is the lead jurisdiction, or are multi-jurisdictional, are detailed further in this section. Actions specific to other participating jurisdictions, or where other jurisdictions are taking the lead, are detailed in the jurisdictional annexes. The Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program was a former County action in the 2009 plan and has been revised to be a multi-jurisdictional, county-wide action in which all municipalities and participating special districts will be partners with the County to educate and disseminate information related to a community’s risk and vulnerability to natural hazards and how individuals can take steps to lessen their risk to certain hazards. The program will focus on the hazards that pose the greatest risk to the communities, such as earthquake, drought, flooding, and wildfires. Specific details on this multi-jurisdictional action follow the summary table. It is important to note that Fresno County and the participating jurisdictions have numerous existing, detailed action descriptions, which include benefit-cost estimates, in other planning documents, such as community wildfire protection plans and capital improvement budgets and reports. These actions are considered to be part of this plan, and the details, to avoid duplication, should be referenced in their original source document. The Fresno County planning area also realizes that new needs and priorities may arise as a result of a disaster or other circumstances and reserves the right to support new actions, as necessary, as long as they conform to the overall goals of this plan. The results of the 2017-18 project identification and prioritization exercise are summarized below in Table 5.3. Included in the table are actions that are being carried forward from the 2009 plan, which are noted as continuing or deferred projects in the ‘project status’ column. Deferred projects are those that were identified in 2009 but not yet started. Continuing projects are those identified in 2009 that may have been started but either more work remains, or they are annually implemented projects. The actions are grouped by jurisdiction and priority. More detail about the actions identified for Fresno County follow the table, including a description of the activity, the entity responsible for implementation, any other alternatives considered, cost estimate, and a schedule for implementation. The jurisdictional annexes contain the detailed action item descriptions respective to each jurisdiction. The summary table can be used for reference during future HMPC meetings to track progress moving forward. Actions that mitigate losses to future development are denoted by an ‘*’ in the table. Fresno County 5.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 5.3 Fresno County Mitigation Action Plan Summary Table Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions Multi- Jurisdictional 1 Multi-Hazard Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program High 3 Continuing Fresno County Mitigation Actions County 1 Multi-Hazard Identify Critical Facilities and Inspect for Vulnerability to Major Hazards High 2 Continuing County 2 Multi-Hazard Upgrade or Replace Critical County Facilities Found to be Vulnerable to Major Hazards High 4 Continuing County 3 Multi-Hazard Enhance the County Emergency Operations Center High 2, 5 Continuing County 4 Agricultural Control Bubonic Plague through Coyote and California Ground Squirrel Population Management High 2 Continuing County 5 Dam Failure Minimize Flood Events by Exercising Reclamation’s Emergency Action Plan and Provide an Early Warning System to Downstream Emergency Response Agencies High 1, 2 Continuing County 6 Dam Failure Update Dam Failure Evacuation Plan Medium 1 New County 7* Drought, Subsidence Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New Project County 8 Flood Conduct Feasibility Study for Panoche- Silver Creek Flood Detention Facility (see Mendota) High 2 Deferred County 9 Flood Investigate and Construct Water Storage Options for the Upper San Joaquin River Basin High 2 Continuing County 10 Flood Analyze System, Condition, and Management of Flood Water Conveyance Facilities High 2 Deferred County 11* Flood Prepare Stormwater Drainage Master Plans Medium 2 Continuing County 12 Human Health Control West Nile Virus through Beaver Population Management High 2 Continuing County 13 Wildfire/ Wind Wildfire Defensible Fuel Modification Zones in Areas of Tree Mortality High 2, 3 New Project Fresno County 5.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) City of Clovis Mitigation Actions Clovis 1 Multi-Hazard Construct a Water Intertie between the Cities of Clovis and Fresno High 5 Continuing Clovis 2 Multi-Hazard Modernize Information Technology Backup Infrastructure High 4 Continuing Clovis 3 Multi-Hazard Improve the City’s Capabilities for Sheltering Animals in a Disaster High 1 Continuing Clovis 4 Multi-Hazard Purchase Hazard Mitigation Public Notification Boards High 1 Deferred Clovis 5 Multi-Hazard Improve Emergency Evacuation and Emergency Vehicle Routes High 1, 4 Deferred Clovis 6 Earthquake Conduct a Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of City-Owned Critical Facilities Medium 2 Continuing Clovis 7 Flood Construct Channel Improvements for Dog Creek Stream, South of Gettysburg- Ashlan High 2 Continuing Clovis 8* Flood Improve Flow Design Parameters for Big Dry Creek and the Enterprise Canal High 2 Continuing Clovis 9* Flood Improve City’s Floodplain Management Program and Apply to Community Rating System Medium 2 Continuing Clovis 10* Flood Enforce Master Drainage Plan Requirements Low 1 Continuing Clovis 11 Other Install a System of Surface Water Hazard Detection High 2 Continuing Clovis 12 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Coalinga Mitigation Actions Coalinga 1 Multi-Hazard Plan for Alternative Water Sources for the Water System High 2 New Coalinga 2 Multi-Hazard Plan for Water System Sustainability in the Event of Long Term Power Failure High 4 New City of Firebaugh Mitigation Actions Firebaugh 1 Flood Assess Levee System for Necessary Improvements Medium 1,2,4 New Firebaugh 2 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Fowler Mitigation Actions Fresno County 5.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) Fowler 1 Multi-Hazard Install Back-up Power System for City Critical Facilities High 4 New Fowler 2 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Fresno Mitigation Actions Fresno 1 Multi-Hazard Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan High 5 Continuing Fresno 2 Multi-Hazard Improve the City’s Capabilities for Sheltering Animals in a Disaster High 1 Continuing Fresno 3 Multi-Hazard Train and Certify City Inspectors to Conduct Post-Disaster Damage Assessment High 2 Deferred Fresno 4 Flood Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public Medium 3 Deferred Fresno 5 Drought Southwest Fresno - Recycled Water Distribution System Construction High 2 New Fresno 6 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Kerman Mitigation Actions Kerman 1 Flood Construct California Avenue Parallel Storm Drain Line High 2 Deferred Kerman 2 Severe Weather: Fog Install Warning Lights for the Intersection of State Route 145 and Highway 180 Medium 1 Deferred Kerman 3 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Kingsburg Mitigation Actions Kingsburg 1 Multi-Hazard Enhance Traffic Diversion System High 1 Deferred Kingsburg 2 Multi-Hazard Create Emergency Evacuation Plan for Large Scale Incident High 1 New Kingsburg 3* Multi-Hazard Identify High Risk and High Value Target Areas High 2 New Kingsburg 4 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Mendota Mitigation Actions Fresno County 5.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) Mendota 1 Flood Build a Stormwater Detention/Desilting Basin High 1 Continuing Mendota 2 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Reedley Mitigation Actions Reedley 1 Flood Develop Stormwater Detention Basin High 2 New City of San Joaquin Mitigation Actions San Joaquin Multi-Hazard Construct Water Storage Tank and Booster Pump Station including emergency generators High 2,4 New City of Sanger Mitigation Actions Sanger 1 Multi-Hazard Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan High 4 Continuing Sanger 2 Multi-Hazard Add Potable Water Storage Capacity (500,000 Gallon above Ground Tank) to the City of Sanger’s Water System High 2 Continuing Sanger 3 Multi-Hazard Provide Backup Power to City Pumps/Wells High 1, 4 Continuing Sanger 4 Flood Replace Old Drainage System to Prevent Flooding Medium 2 Continuing Sanger 5 Flood Provide Fire Department Office Security Medium 4 Deferred Sanger 6 Other Provide Compound Security for Police and Fire Departments Medium 4 Deferred Sanger 7 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New City of Selma Selma 1 Multi-Hazard Institute a Disaster Preparedness Education Program for the Public High 3 Deferred Selma 2 Flood Install Back-up Power for Storm Drain Pumps High 4 Deferred Selma 3 Flood Sheridan Street Pump Station High 4 Deferred Selma 4 Technological Construct New Police and Fire Department Headquarters High 2 Deferred Selma 5 Drought Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation High 2 New Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Mitigation Actions Fresno County 5.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) FMFCD 1 Flood Construct the Gould Canal to Fancher Creek Detention Basin Pipeline High 2, 4 New FMFCD 2 Flood Construct the Fancher Creek Detention Basin Pump Station and Telemetry System High 2, 4 New FMFCD 3* Flood Provide for Local Stormwater Drainage System Infrastructure High 2 Continuing FMFCD 4* Flood Retain 200-Year Flood Control Protection Medium 2 Continuing FMFCD 5 Flood Retrofit Areas with Surface Outlets to Protect Existing Structures Medium 2, 4 Continuing FMFCD 6 Flood Install Back-up Generators for Pump Only Facilities Low 4 Deferred FMFCD 7 Flood Big Dry Creek Diversion Additional Drop Structure Medium 4 New Lower San Joaquin Levee District Mitigation Actions LSJLD 1 Flood Institute a Dredging Management Program for the Purpose of Flood Damage Reduction High 2 Continuing LSJLD 2 Flood Institute an Invasive Vegetation Management Program for the Purpose of Flood Damage Reduction High 2 Continuing Sierra Resource Conservation District Mitigation Actions SRCD 1 Multi-Hazard Strengthen Non-Native Noxious Weed Control Efforts Low 2 Deferred SRCD 2 Dam Failure Strengthen Dam Failure/Flood Planning, Coordination, and Training Low 2 Deferred SRCD 3 Wildfire Improve Alternate Emergency Access Roads High 1 Continuing SRCD 4 Wildfire Conduct Community Fuel Break Construction and Maintenance on a Landscape Scale High 2 Continuing SRCD 5 Wildfire Create a Fuel Break Along Highway 168 High 2 Deferred SRCD 6 Wildfire Implement a Neighborhood Chipper Program High 2 Continuing SRCD 7 Wildfire Conduct Prescribed Fires High 2 Continuing SRCD 8 Wildfire Establish a System of Fire Pumper/Tanker Fill Stations and Water Storage High 2 Continuing SRCD 9 Wildfire Implement a Public Fire Prevention, Survival, and Mitigation Education Program Medium 3 Continuing Fresno County 5.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Action ID Hazard Addressed Mitigation Action Title Priority Related Goals Action Status (New, Continuing, Deferred) SRCD 10 Wildfire Update Highway 168 FireSafe Council's Community Wildfire Protection Plan through CA FireSafe Council Funding High 2 New SRCD 11 Wildfire Develop Wildfire Protection Plan with Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council through CA FireSafe Council Funding High 5 New SRCD 12 Wildfire Implement a biomass utilization and dispositioning program for excessive forest and rangeland vegetation High 2 New SRCD 13 Wildfire Partner with U.S. Forest Service to reduce fire risk in Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) High 2 New SRCD 14 Wildfire Removal of Illegal marijuana grows to reduce fire risk in Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) High 2 New SRCD 15 Wildfire Burns Flat Fuel Break High 2 New SRCD 16 Wildfire Whispering Springs Fuel Break High 2 New SRCD 17 Wildfire The Beal Fire Road Fuel Break High 2 New SRCD 18 Wildfire Peterson Road Fuel Break Medium 2 New Westlands Water District WWD 1 Drought Institute a Groundwater Replenishment and Drought Resiliency Project High 2, 4 New Kings River Conservation District KRCD 1 Multi-Hazard Analysis of Levee Integrity and Improvement Project High 1, 2 New *Denotes a mitigation action that addresses future development Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions 1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program Hazards Addressed: Agricultural Hazards, Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake Flood/Levee Failure, Human Health, Landslide, Severe Weather, Soil Hazards (subsidence), Wildfire, Volcano Issue/Background: The jurisdictions within Fresno County are at risk to the natural hazards identified in this plan. Each hazard poses a different degree of risk and associated vulnerability, depending on the location within the County, but drought, flooding, wildfire and earthquake represent some of the most significant hazards. Some hazards such as flooding, have a high likelihood of occurrence, a specific location that would likely be impacted, and proven approaches that could reduce the impact. For other hazards, where either the likelihood of occurrence is very low, the area of likely impact is not specifically known, or there is very little that can be done to reduce the impacts. The public needs to be made aware of the hazards so they can take action to reduce potential impacts to their own personal property and safety. The County and HMPC, Fresno County 5.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan including participating jurisdictions and special districts involved in the plan, have determined that public awareness is a key component of the overall mitigation strategy for this plan. People should have information describing historical events and losses, the likelihood of future occurrences, the range of possible impacts, appropriate actions to save lives and minimize property damage, and where additional information can be found. Any information provided through this effort should be accurate, specific, timely, and consistent with current and accepted local emergency management procedures as promoted by the California State Office of Emergency Services and the American Red Cross. This public outreach effort will be conducted annually and will include: • Using a variety of information outlets, including local news media, social media, and web- based information; • Creating and printing (where applicable) brochures, leaflets, water bill inserts, websites, and public service announcements; • Displaying current brochures and flyers in County and City office buildings, libraries, and other public places; • Developing public-private partnerships and incentives to support public education activities; • Provide information on priority hazards including: Agricultural Hazards, Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Flood/Levee Failure, Human Health, Severe Weather, Soil Hazards (subsidence), Wildfire; • Provide information on water conservation, particularly during times of drought; • Participation in statewide events such as The 2018 Great California ShakeOut earthquake awareness drill Other Alternatives: Continue public information activities currently in place Responsible Office: Fresno County Office of Emergency Services, Department of Public Works and Planning, and Chamber of Commerce; American Red Cross. All municipalities and special districts will be partners including: • City of Clovis • City of Coalinga • City of Firebaugh • City of Fowler • City of Fresno • City of Kerman • City of Kingsburg • City of Mendota • City of Reedley • City of San Joaquin • City of Sanger • City of Sel ma • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fresno County 5.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Lower San Joaquin Levee District • Sierra Resource Conservation District (including Highway 168 Fire Safe Council and Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council) • Kings River Conservation District • Westlands Water District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $5,000-20,000 annually, depending on printing and mailing costs, level of volunteer participation, and scope and frequency of events Potential Funding: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Fresno County funds, other available grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Heightened awareness that can lead to enhanced life safety, reduction in property losses; relatively low cost Schedule: Part of seasonal multi-hazard public awareness campaign Status: 2009 project, implementation ongoing at County level but revised in 2018 to make it more of a multi-jurisdictional effort. Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Actions 1. Identify Critical Facilities and Inspect for Vulnerability to Major Hazards Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, volcano, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The County has various facilities that may need to function in times of crisis and/or emergency. • The facilities should be identified. • The identified facilities should be reviewed and inspected to determine if the infrastructure can withstand and operate under critical conditions. • Required upgrades to each of the facilities should be identified and prioritized. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Internal Services Department in coordination with Fresno County Department of Public Works and County OES Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Up to $3 million, depending on the number of facilities identified for review Fresno County 5.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Potential Funding: Annual budgets Benefits (Avoided Losses): The County will be able to develop a plan to methodically upgrade the infrastructure and systems necessary to operate in times of emergency. Schedule: 1-5 years Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 2. Upgrade or Replace Critical County Facilities Found to be Vulnerable to Major Hazards Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, volcano, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The County has various facilities that may need to function in times of crisis and/or emergency. The County should upgrade or replace those facilities found to be vulnerable in accordance with a developed prioritized schedule. Other Alternatives: Contact other jurisdictions to determine if capacity exists to accommodate County critical functions within facilities they control. Responsible Office: Fresno County Department of Public Works and Planning Capital Projects Division Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Unknown at this time, will depend on the number of facilities identified, total cost could approach $100 million or more Potential Funding: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, state funds, Fresno County budgets Benefits (Avoided Losses): The County will have reliable infrastructure and systems necessary to operate in times of emergency Schedule: 2-10 years Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 3. Enhance the County Emergency Operations Center Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, human health hazards, severe weather, wildfire, volcano, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for Fresno County is located in multiple rooms on multiple floors within the Public Health Department. Because the EOC sections Fresno County 5.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan are isolated, communications are limited, and section staff are unable to interact well. A centralized modern day EOC in a single location would greatly enhance communications and improve the effectiveness of those who work in it. Other Alternatives: Enhance the EOCs of other jurisdictions and activate them in the event of an emergency Responsible Office: Fresno County Office of Emergency Services Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2.5 million Potential Funding: Fresno County General Fund, grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): A modern EOC in one location would decrease emergency response time and the public notification process, reducing potential loss of life and damage. The more time people are given to prepare for a potential emergency, the better chance they have of avoiding the effects of that event. The benefits would reduce set-up time currently needed. This would result in greater efficiencies that could leverage current technologies and result in improved communication and save time, money and lives through a faster response Schedule: within 5-10 years Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress; Some improvements are in place. A centralized EOC is not yet in place. Fresno County Agricultural Hazards Mitigation Actions 4. Control Bubonic Plague through Coyote and California Ground Squirrel Population Management Issue/Background: Bubonic plague is endemic to parts of Fresno County. Coyotes and the California ground squirrel are free ranging wildlife that are present in all of Fresno County. Coyotes and ground squirrels cause extensive agricultural livestock, crop, and property damage. Coyotes are very mobile and can travel 20 to 25 miles in a day. Coyotes are known to carry and transmit diseases to humans, domestic animals, and livestock. Coyotes are carriers of the bubonic plague bacteria, which they receive from the bite of an infected flea. Coyotes can spread the disease to various California ground squirrel colonies. Human interaction with ground squirrels in open spaces, parks, and recreational areas can potentially result in bubonic plague infection through flea bites. Blood samples from coyotes can be tested for the presence of bubonic plague. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Fresno County Department of Agriculture Wildlife Damage Management Fresno County 5.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 Potential Funding: Fresno County General Fund, California Department of Public Health, unrefunded gas tax Benefits (Avoided Losses): • One human life saved is $3.1 million • Avoids disease transmission to humans • Reduces the discomfort and adverse effects of flea bites Schedule: Annually, June through October Status: 2009 project, continuing implementation on an as needed basis Fresno County Dam Failure Mitigation Actions 5. Minimize Flood Events by Exercising Reclamation’s Emergency Action Plan and Provide an Early Warning System to Downstream Emergency Response Agencies Issue/Background: Friant Dam was constructed in 1942 and is located 20 miles northeast of the City of Fresno. It serves as a water conservation and flood control facility. The dam has a structural height of 319 feet with a top of crest elevation of 581.25 feet. Millerton Lake reservoir has a storage capacity of 520,500 acre-feet. The Bureau of Reclamation has the ability to divert water to the Friant Kern Canal, Madera Canal, and the San Joaquin River. During unforeseen events, the Bureau of Reclamation may be required to release water into the San Joaquin River that may exceed the river channel capacity. Other Alternatives: Divert flood water to the Friant Kern Canal and the Madera Canal, reduce encroachment of development in the San Joaquin River floodplain, construct a new storage facility Responsible Office: Bureau of Reclamation, South Central California Area Office-Fresno; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento Branch Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $5,000-10,000 to exercise and update emergency action plan Potential Funding: FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, state funding, other available grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Minimized risk of loss of life and property damage Fresno County 5.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: 1-3 years Status: 2009 project, continuing ongoing implementation 6. Update Dam Failure Evacuation Plan Issue/Background: New statues in the California Water code will require dam operators to update inundation maps. Development of new inundation maps will need to be incorporated into the County’s dam failure evacuation plans. This will impact at least 23 dams within the County. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: County OES, PW and Sheriff’s Office Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $150,000-$200,000 Potential Funding: Annual budget, grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This plan will provide updated information that will enable an effective method for warning and evacuating downstream residents if a dam were to fail. This will enable the lives of many residents to be saved. Schedule: 1-3 years depending on when updated inundation maps are completed Status: New project Fresno County Drought and Subsidence Mitigation Actions 7. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Issue/Background: Like many groundwater basins throughout the State, all four of the groundwater subbasins that underlay Fresno County are in overdraft condition and three (Kings, Westside, and Delta-Mendota) have been prioritized by DWR as critical, meaning, underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. Recognizing the importance of groundwater and the consequences of overuse, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law in 2014, to address the sustainable management of groundwater in California. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). Each GSA is required to develop and implement, no later than January 31, 2020, a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that Fresno County 5.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Fresno County is working cooperatively with multiple GSAs within the four subbasins located within Fresno County towards the preparation and implementation of required GSPs. Maintaining sustainable groundwater supplies will provide insurance against periods of long-term drought, and assist in the mitigating the potential for land subsidence. As required in §10724(a) of the Water Code, the areas within the priority basins that underlay Fresno County that are not within the management area of one of these GSAs, the County is presumed to be the GSA for that area. There are nineteen (19) GSAs that have been formed within Fresno County, of these the County is the Authority for two GSAs (Management Area ‘B’, and Management Area ‘A’). The Westside Subbasin is covered by two GSAs, as such the County and Westlands Water District work cooperatively through an MOU. Other jurisdictions in Fresno County have formed their own GSAs (City of Firebaugh and City of Mendota) for the portions of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin that underlay each jurisdictions boundary. While other jurisdictions have formed a GSA along with other local agencies as a joint powers authority, listed below. These jurisdictions have similar mitigation actions and can be found in their respective jurisdictional annexes. North Kings GSA: City of Fresno, City of Clovis and City of Kerman South Kings GSA: City of Fowler, City of Kingsburg, City of Sanger Central Kings GSA: City of Selma Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: Responsibilities for compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act have been assumed through the formation of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies within the four Fresno County groundwater subbasins recognized by the California Department of Water Resources. Fresno County is generally party to each of the GSAs within Fresno County by agreement or memorandum of understanding. Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Fresno County 5.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 Fresno County Flood/Levee Failure Mitigation Actions 8. Conduct Feasibility Study for Panoche-Silver Creek Flood Detention Facility Issue/Background: Panoche-Silver Creek downstream of the California Aqueduct causes frequent flooding of Belmont Avenue, a major transportation corridor connecting west Fresno County to I-5, the future Route 180 alignment, and the City of Mendota, a downstream community. Flooding occurs during normal-intensity storm events. High-intensity events result in extended road closures in an area of the County with limited transportation corridors. A feasibility study is needed to assess feasibility and location of facilities to route flood flows to a detention reservoir. Other Alternatives: None identified Responsible Office: Joint, possible partners include California Department of Water Resources, Bureau of Reclamation, Fresno County, City of Mendota, Westlands Water District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $1.2 million Potential Funding: State or federal grant sources Benefits (Avoided Losses): Finding potential solution to reduce traffic disruptions Schedule: 2-5 years Status: 2009 project; Deferred. As of March 2018, Project has not started but a need for the project remains. 9. Investigate and Construct Water Storage Options for the Upper San Joaquin River Basin Issue/Background: The Upper San Joaquin River Storage Investigation will investigate feasibility and cost to provide on- or off-stream storage in the upper San Joaquin River Basin. The objectives are conjunctive beneficial uses, including restoration of the San Joaquin River, increased management and exchange opportunities to secure and stabilize deliveries to urban and agricultural uses, flood control, recreation, reduced groundwater overdraft, and potentially hydropower. Other Alternatives: No action Fresno County 5.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Responsible Office: California Department of Water Resources, Bureau of Reclamation Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Study—to be determined; resulting project—$1-1.5 billion Potential Funding: State or federal sources Benefits (Avoided Losses): Reduction of flood risk downstream of Friant Dam Schedule: 5-10 years Status: 2009 project; As of March 2018, a draft Environmental Impact Statement has been completed and funding is being sought for implementation 10. Analyze System, Condition, and Management of Flood Water Conveyance Facilities Issue/Background: Flood water conveyance occurs over a disparate system of natural and manmade channels, levees, irrigation canals, and ad-hoc structures whose primary function may be for purposes other than flood management. A systemwide inventory and analysis is needed to develop priorities across many jurisdictions, both public and private, for rehabilitation and upgrade of critical flood management facilities, including public and private levees. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Potentially San Joaquin Valley-wide, possible lead or joint lead entities include California Department of Water Resources; Bureau of Reclamation; irrigation, water, and conservation districts; regional partners through integrated regional water management plans; Fresno County Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $5 million (Fresno County) Potential Funding: State and federal grant funding Benefits (Avoided Losses): Reduced flood risk and flood losses Schedule: 10-20 years Status: 2009 project; Deferred. As of March 2018 implementation of this project has not started but a study is still needed. 11. Prepare Stormwater Drainage Master Plans Issue/Background: Some unincorporated communities in Fresno County do not have master plans for stormwater drainage, which provide for flow, collection, and diversion of stormwater from Fresno County 5.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan public streets to detention or recharge facilities. Lacking appropriate drainage, stormwater may flood streets and/or property, and standing water may persist, leading to health or traffic safety concerns. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Special or community service districts or County service area zones of benefit Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $150,000-500,000 per community Potential Funding: Undetermined Benefits (Avoided Losses): Reduced property damage and adverse impacts on health and traffic safety Schedule: 3-5 years Status: 2009 project; Continuing Fresno County Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus Mitigation Actions 12. Control West Nile Virus through Beaver Population Management Issue/Background: Between 2003 and 2016, there were over 6,000 cases of West Nile virus in California; 248 of those cases resulted in fatalities. On August 2, 2007, the governor of California declared a disaster in three California counties because of deaths related to the virus. Fresno County had 242 cases with 10 fatalities between the years of 2003 and 2016. Fresno County has averaged one virus-related death and 17 virus cases per year since 2003. West Nile virus is transmitted by mosquitoes. One breeding area for mosquitoes is beaver ponds. Beavers are native to Fresno County, and their dams create ponds in waterways. Beaver dams cause streams and waterways to overflow, which causes flooding of farm and private land. The resulting excess standing water provides another breeding source for mosquitoes. The Mosquito Abatement District estimates that removing the beaver ponds from waterways near residential areas will reduce mosquito populations, thus potentially reducing the number of West Nile virus infections. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Fresno County Department of Agriculture Wildlife Damage Management Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Fresno County 5.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cost Estimate: $10,000-25,000 Potential Funding: California Department of Public Health, Fresno County general fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): • Reduction of incidence of infection and resulting fatalities: .5 human lives saved is $1.55 million • Reduction in the number of cases, resulting in improved human health and reduced medical costs • Reduction in discomfort and adverse effects of mosquito bites • Reduction in treatments to suppress mosquito population by the Mosquito Abatement District and related jurisdictions • Reduction of future costs associated with mosquito control • Repeated removal of beaver dams Schedule: Annually, February through June Status: 2009 project, continuing implementation on an as needed basis Fresno County Wildfire and Wind Mitigation Actions 13. Wildfire Defensible Fuel Modification Zones in Areas of Tree Mortality Issue/Background: The foothill and mountain areas of Fresno County have been severely impacted by the drought and subsequent bark beetle outbreak since 2014. This has caused tree mortality across 216,000 acres and over 21 million trees have died. Not only have the trees died but the brush and shrubs throughout the County have died back creating an additional fuel load. All the communities in these areas are at an increased risk of a damaging wildland fire due to the mortality and fuel loading. Much of this mortality is on open land, both private and public, that will not get removed causing an increased ground fuel loading that will persist for decades to come. The Communities, businesses and local infrastructure will need increased Defensible Fuel Modification Zones (DFZ’s) and hazard tree removal to reduce the damaging effects of a wildland fire. In addition this project would help mitigate wind-fall hazards on property and people. Other Alternatives: In the past CAL FIRE, United State Forest Service and local fire safe councils have been creating DFZ’s throughout the County in high fire prone areas. Due to the change in the fuels and health of the forest all communities in the affected areas are at high risk and need to implement integrated community DFZ’s. These community DFZ’s need to tie into existing DFZ’s, roads, designated escape routes and homeowner defensible space to create a network that allows for increased community protection. Ingress and egress corridors need to be created by removing both dead trees and brush for the public to evacuate safely and allow emergency response personnel safe access. These DFZ’s will need to be created using heavy equipment, masticators, hand crews and prescribed fire to remove dead trees, reduce understory brush and remove ground Fresno County 5.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan fuels. This network will need to be maintained over time and retreatment of the fuels will need to occur every 3 to 7 years for them to be effective. Community education related to fire safety, building construction, evacuation procedures and fuels management is a main part of this plan to be successful. Responsible Office: CAL FIRE, County (Public Works, OES), USFS; partner agencies include Fire Safety Councils, PG&E, Cal Trans Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $10,000,000 Potential Funding: CAL FIRE grants, CAL OES funds, FEMA grants, County funds, CAL FIRE Unit funds, USDA Forest Service funds, Private funds and other funds not currently identified Benefits (Avoided Losses): By completing these types of projects, it is estimated to reduce the impacts of fire to over 4,816 residences, numerous businesses and critical infrastructure directly affected by the tree mortality. Schedule: September 1, 2015 until completed through 2020 Status: New project in 2018 6 PLAN ADOPTION Fresno County 6.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirement §201.6(c)(5): [The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the plan has been formally approved by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, county commissioner, Tribal Council). The purpose of formally adopting this plan is to secure buy-in from Fresno County and participating jurisdictions, raise awareness of the plan, and formalize the plan’s implementation. The adoption of this plan completes Planning Step 9 of the 10-step planning process: Adopt the Plan, in accordance with the requirements of DMA 2000. This adoption also establishes compliance with AB 2140 requiring adoption by reference or incorporation into the safety element of the general plan. The governing board for each participating jurisdiction has adopted this multi- hazard mitigation plan by passing a resolution. A copy of the generic resolution and the executed copies are included in Appendix A: Adoption Resolutions. Fresno County 7.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 7 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE Requirement §201.6(c)(4): [The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle. Implementation and maintenance of the plan is critical to the overall success of hazard mitigation planning. This is Planning Step 10 of the 10-step planning process. This chapter provides an overview of the overall strategy for plan implementation and maintenance and outlines the method and schedule for monitoring, updating, and evaluating the plan. The chapter also discusses incorporating the plan into existing planning mechanisms and how to address continued public involvement. 7.1 Implementation Once adopted, the plan faces the truest test of its worth: implementation. While this plan contains many worthwhile actions, the participating jurisdictions will need to decide which action(s) to undertake first. Two factors will help with making that decision: the priority assigned the actions in the planning process and funding availability. Low or no-cost actions most easily demonstrate progress toward successful plan implementation. Implementation will be accomplished by adhering to the schedules identified for each action (see Chapter 5 Mitigation Actions for the County and the actions detailed in the jurisdictional annexes) and through constant, pervasive, and energetic efforts to network and highlight the multi-objective, win-win benefits of each project to the Fresno County community and its stakeholders. These efforts include the routine actions of monitoring agendas, attending meetings, and promoting a safe, sustainable community. The three main components of implementation are: • IMPLEMENT the action plan recommendations of this plan; • UTILIZE existing rules, regulations, policies and procedures already in existence; and • COMMUNICATE the hazard information collected and analyzed through this planning process so that the community better understands what can happen where, and what they can do themselves to be better prepared. Also, publicize the “success stories” that are achieved through the HMPC’s ongoing efforts. Mitigation is most successful when it is incorporated into the day-to-day functions and priorities of government and development. Implementation will be accomplished by adhering to the schedules identified for each action and through constant, pervasive, and energetic efforts to network and highlight the multi-objective, win-win benefits to each program and the Fresno County community and its stakeholders. This effort is achieved through the routine actions of Fresno County 7.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan monitoring agendas, attending meetings, and promoting a safe, sustainable community. Additional mitigation strategies could include consistent and ongoing enforcement of existing policies and vigilant review of programs for coordination and multi-objective opportunities. One example of an important implementation mechanism that is highly effective and low-cost is incorporation of the hazard mitigation plan recommendations and their underlying principles into other plans and mechanisms, such as the general plans for Fresno County and the participating jurisdictions. The County and participating jurisdictions already implement policies and programs to reduce losses to life and property from hazards. This plan builds upon the momentum developed through previous and related planning efforts and mitigation programs and recommends implementing actions, where possible, through these other program mechanisms. Simultaneously to these efforts, it is important to maintain a constant monitoring of funding opportunities that can be leveraged to implement some of the more costly recommended actions. This will include creating and maintaining a bank of ideas on how to meet local match or participation requirements. When funding does become available, the participating jurisdictions will be in a position to capitalize on the opportunity. Funding opportunities to be monitored include special pre- and post-disaster funds, special district budgeted funds, state and federal earmarked funds, and other grant programs, including those that can serve or support multi-objective applications. 7.1.1 Role of Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee in Implementation and Maintenance With adoption of this plan, the participating jurisdictions will be tasked with plan implementation and maintenance. The participating jurisdictions, led by the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services, agrees to: • Act as a forum for hazard mitigation issues; • Disseminate hazard mitigation ideas and activities to all participants; • Pursue the implementation of high-priority, low/no-cost recommended actions; • Keep the concept of mitigation in the forefront of community decision making by identifying plan recommendations when other community goals, plans, and activities overlap, influence, or directly affect increased community vulnerability to disasters; • Maintain a vigilant monitoring of multi-objective cost-share opportunities to help the community implement the plan’s recommended actions for which no current funding exists; • Monitor and assist in implementation and update of this plan; • Report on plan progress and recommended changes to the Fresno County Board of Supervisors and the governing boards of the other participating jurisdictions; and • Inform and solicit input from the public. Fresno County 7.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The primary duty of the participating jurisdictions is to see the plan successfully carried out and to report to their community governing boards and the public on the status of plan implementation and mitigation opportunities. Other duties include reviewing and promoting mitigation proposals, considering stakeholder concerns about hazard mitigation, passing concerns on to appropriate entities, and posting relevant information on the County website (and others as appropriate). 7.2 Maintenance/Monitoring Plan maintenance implies an ongoing effort to monitor and evaluate plan implementation and to update the plan as progress, roadblocks, or changing circumstances are recognized. 7.2.1 Maintenance/Monitoring Schedule The Emergency Manager in the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services within the Department of Public Health is responsible for initiating plan reviews and will consult with the heads of participating departments and other participating jurisdictions. In order to monitor progress and update the mitigation strategies identified in the action plan, the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services will revisit this plan annually and after a hazard event. The annual review will be conducted by re-convening the HMPC in November of each year. This plan will be updated, approved and adopted within a five-year cycle as per Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i) of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 unless disaster or other circumstances (e.g., changing regulations) require a change to this schedule. With the initial approval of this plan occurring in mid-2018, the plan will need to be updated, reviewed by Cal OES and FEMA Region IX, and re-adopted by all participating jurisdictions no later than June of 2023. The County will monitor planning grant opportunities from Cal OES and FEMA for funds to assist with the update. These grants should be pursued as early as 2021, as some grants have a three-year performance period to expend the funds, plus there is no guarantee that the grant will be awarded when initially submitted. This allows time to resubmit the grant in 2022 if needed. 7.2.2 Maintenance Evaluation Process The planning team will continually observe the incorporation process, evaluation method, updating method, continued public participation, and completion of the action/projects to assure that the planning team and the plan itself are performing as anticipated. By monitoring these processes, the planning team will then be able to evaluate them at the time of the plan update, determining if any changes are needed. Evaluation of progress can be achieved by monitoring changes in vulnerabilities identified in the plan. Changes in vulnerability can be identified by noting: • Decreased vulnerability as a result of implementing recommended actions, Fresno County 7.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Increased vulnerability as a result of failed or ineffective mitigation actions, and/or • Increased vulnerability as a result of new development (and/or annexation). The HMPC will use the following process to evaluate progress and any changes in vulnerability as a result of plan implementation. • A representative from the responsible entity identified in each mitigation measure will be responsible for tracking and reporting on an annual basis to the HMPC on project status and provide input on whether the project as implemented meets the defined objectives and is likely to be successful in reducing vulnerabilities. • If the project does not meet identified objectives, the HMPC will determine what alternate projects may be implemented, and an assigned individual will be responsible for defining action scope, implementing the action, monitoring success of the action, and making any required modifications to the plan. • New projects identified will require an individual assigned to be responsible for defining the project scope, implementing the project, and monitoring success of the project. • Projects that were not ranked high priority but were identified as potential mitigation strategies will be reviewed as well during the monitoring and update of this plan to determine feasibility of future implementation. • Changes will be made to the plan to accommodate for projects that have failed or are not considered feasible after a review for their consistency with established criteria, the time frame, priorities, and/or funding resources. Updating of the plan will be by written changes and submissions, as the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services deems appropriate and necessary, and as approved by the Fresno County Board of Supervisors and the governing boards of the other participating jurisdictions. Updates to this plan will: • Consider changes in vulnerability due to action implementation; • Document success stories where mitigation efforts have proven effective; • Document areas where mitigation actions were not effective; • Document any new hazards that may arise or were previously overlooked; • Document hazard events and impacts that occurred within the five-year period; • Incorporate new data or studies on hazards and risks; • Incorporate new capabilities or changes in capabilities; • Incorporate documentation of continued public involvement; • Incorporate documentation to update the planning process that may include new or additional stakeholder involvement; • Incorporate growth and development-related changes to building inventories; • Incorporate new project recommendations or changes in project prioritization; Fresno County 7.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Include a public involvement process to receive public comment on the updated plan prior to submitting the updated plan to Cal OES/FEMA; and • Include re-adoption by all participating entities following Cal OES/FEMA approval. 7.2.3 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms Another important implementation mechanism that is highly effective and low-cost is incorporation of the hazard mitigation plan recommendations and their underlying principles into other County and City plans and mechanisms. Where possible, plan participants will use existing plans and/or programs to implement hazard mitigation actions. As previously stated in Section 7.1 of this plan, mitigation is most successful when it is incorporated into the day-to-day functions and priorities of government and development. This point is re-emphasized here. As described in this plan’s capability assessment, the County and participating jurisdictions already implement policies and programs to reduce losses to life and property from hazards. This plan builds upon the momentum developed through previous and related planning efforts and mitigation programs and recommends implementing actions, where possible, through these other program mechanisms. These existing mechanisms include (but not limited to) the following: • County and city general and master plans • County and city emergency operations plans • County and city ordinances • Flood/stormwater management/master plans • Community Wildfire Protection plans • Drought management and response plans • Capital improvement plans and budgets • Other plans and policies outlined in the capability assessments in the jurisdictional annexes • Other plans, regulations, and practices with a mitigation focus HMPC members involved in the updates to the planning mechanisms will be responsible for integrating the findings and recommendations of this plan with these other plans, programs, etc, as appropriate. As an action step to ensure integration with other planning mechanisms the County Office of Emergency Services Manager or designee will discuss this topic at the annual meeting of the HMPC previously described in the Maintenance Schedule. The HMPC will discuss if there are opportunities to incorporate the plan into other planning mechanisms and who would be responsible for leveraging those opportunities. HMPC members representing local jurisdictions will work with their jurisdictional planning teams to integrate their identified mitigation actions into their own local plans and programs. Efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs, and policies will be reported on at the annual HMPC plan review meeting, and a record of successful integration efforts will be kept. Fresno County 7.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Examples of a process for incorporation of the LHMP into existing planning mechanisms include: • As recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140, each community should adopt (by reference or incorporation) this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan(s). Evidence of such adoption (by formal, certified resolution) shall be provided to Cal OES and FEMA. • Integration of wildfire actions identified in this mitigation strategy with the actions and implementation priorities established in existing Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPPs). This has already occurred and will continue to occur as the CWPPs are updated and implemented. Specifically, key people responsible for development of the Highway 168 Fire Safe Council CWPP and Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council CWPP participated as a member of the HMPC in the original development and 2017-2018 update of this LHMP. They identified key projects in the CWPPs and integrated them into the Mitigation Strategy of this LHMP. Likewise, actual implementation of these wildfire projects will likely occur through the CWPP implementation process through the efforts of these same individuals. • Using the risk assessment information to update the hazard analysis in the Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan. Efforts should continuously be made to monitor the progress of mitigation actions implemented through these other planning mechanisms and, where appropriate, their priority actions should be incorporated into updates of this hazard mitigation plan. 7.2.4 Continued Public Involvement Continued public involvement is imperative to the overall success of the plan’s implementation. Efforts will be made to involve the public in the plan maintenance, evaluation, and review process. This includes maintaining a digital version of the plan on the County Office of Emergency Services website for public review. In addition, information on who to contact within the Office of Emergency Services will be posted with the plan. The Emergency Manager in the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services will maintain a file of comments received for reference during the next five-year update. Any revisions to the plan that may occur as a result of a disaster will also be made public and posted on the County website. The next five-year update process also provides an opportunity to solicit participation from new and existing stakeholders and to publicize success stories from the plan implementation and seek additional public comment. A public hearing(s) or survey to receive public comment on the plan will be held during the plan update period. When the HMPC reconvenes for the update, they will coordinate with all stakeholders participating in the planning process, including those who joined the HMPC after the initial effort, to update and revise the plan. Public notice will be posted and public participation will be invited, at a minimum, through available website postings and press releases to the local media outlets as well as email and social media announcements. Fresno County 7.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Continued public outreach and education is also an aspect of the mitigation strategy in Chapter 5 of this plan through inclusion of an action to develop and conduct a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program on an annual basis. Activities related to public involvement during the 2017-2018 update are documented in Chapter 3 and Appendix E. ANNEX A: CITY OF CLOVIS Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.1 Community Profile Figure A.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Clovis and its Sphere of Influence. Figure A.1: The City of Clovis A.1.1 Geography and Climate Located in the northeast quadrant of the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area in northern Fresno County, Clovis is situated in the midst of the agriculturally rich San Joaquin Valley. It covers a roughly 21,108-acre area that encompasses the City of Clovis and unincorporated Fresno County, inclusive of the City’s Sphere of Influence. Over the past decade, the City has annexed land in the southeast near Dog Creek and expanded its Sphere of Influence in the north. All lands outside of the City’s Sphere of Influence are regulated by the Fresno County General Plan and zoning designations. However, state law requires that cities plan for areas outside of their immediate jurisdiction if the areas have a direct relationship to planning needs. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Clovis consists of three distinct geographical areas: The City, which represents the incorporated City within the City limit boundaries; the Sphere of Influence, which corresponds to the City’s existing Sphere of Influence; and the study area, which includes unincorporated Fresno County lands outside of the City’s Sphere of Influence. Immediately beyond Clovis to the northeast are the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The City of Fresno and its Sphere of Influence are located to the southwest. The southwestern portion of Clovis is characterized by mostly urbanized land uses, whereas the northern and eastern portions of Clovis are predominantly rural in nature, comprised of agricultural, rural, residential, and vacant land uses. Clovis has an average annual temperature of 63.2°F and receives 10.2 inches of rain. While the average is relatively temperate, summer and winter months bring unique weather patterns to the region. During the winter, high temperatures hover around 55°F. Combined with the regional geography and precipitation during this time, Clovis experiences numerous days with dense fog, which has its greatest impact on transportation: accident rates jump 50 percent on foggy days. During the summer months, the region has extended periods where temperatures exceed 100°F. While the average temperature is 90°F during the summer, these extended heat waves impact the medically fragile, elderly, and animal populations. In addition to heat waves, the Fresno County region continues to suffer regular drought due to lower than normal snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, which supplies water for agricultural use and replenishes the groundwater supply. A.1.2 History The City of Clovis was named after the spirited pioneer, Clovis M. Cole, who spent nearly all of his life in the vicinity. The area was known for the thousands of acres of wheat that he had cultivated. The first thoughts of settlement, however, are credited to Padre Martin, who explored the area in 1806 while searching for a mission site. Missionaries and trappers were the first nonnative people to roam the area. Miners soon followed during the gold rush, displacing the many Native American tribes that were settled in the foothills and near the rivers. Another early settler, Marcus Pollasky, proposed and coordinated the construction of a railroad through the grain, cattle, and mining country and into the timber-rich forests of the nearby Sierra. The City eventually grew up around the San Joaquin Division of the Southern Pacific Railroad, which played an important role in the founding and growth of Clovis. In addition to the arrival of the railroad, the completion of the 42-mile-long Shaver log flume, development of the 40-acre Clovis mill and finishing plant, expansion of grain production, and the livestock industry all contributed to the founding of Clovis in 1891. The City was incorporated in 1912. A.1.3 Economy The City’s economic base consists of retail sales and services and light manufacturing. Availability of housing, quality hospital care, excellent schools with modern facilities, responsive safety Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan services, a mild climate, access to varied recreational opportunities, and strong community identity all contribute to Clovis’ reputation as a great place to live. Clovis has actively maintained a small-town community spirit as envisioned by its founders, exemplified by such community events as the annual Rodeo Days, Big Hat Days, and Clovisfest celebration. This community pride, combined with Clovis’ unique growth opportunities, continues to attract new residents, developers, businesses, and industries to the City. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Clovis are shown in Table A.1. Table A.1: City of Clovis’ Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Clovis Families below Poverty Level 11.7% All People below Poverty Level 13.8% Median Family Income $72,787 Median Household Income $62,666 Per Capita Income $28,686 Population in Labor Force 49,156 Population Employed* 44,086 Unemployment 10.0% Number of Companies 7,100 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables A.2 and A.3 show how the City of Clovis’ labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table A.2: City of Clovis’ Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Sales and Office Occupations 11,587 26.3 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 17,568 39.8 Management, Business, and Financial Occupations (6,296) (14.3) Computer, Engineering, and Science Occupations (1,871) (4.2) Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media Occupations (5,570) (12.6) Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations (3,831) (8.7) Service Occupations 7,971 18.1 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 3,732 8.5 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 3,228 7.3 Total 194,640 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table A.3: City of Clovis’ Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 12,511 28.4 Retail Trade 4,850 11.0 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 4,354 9.9 Manufacturing 2,843 6.4 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 3,953 9.0 Construction 2,376 5.4 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 2,686 6.1 Public Administration 3,734 8.5 Other Services, Except Public Administration 1,992 4.5 Wholesale Trade 1,557 3.5 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 1,699 3.8 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 664 1.5 Information 867 2.0 Total 194,640 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ A.1.4 Population In 2015, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, the total population for the City of Clovis was estimated at 100,437. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Clovis from the 2015 American Community Survey are shown in Table A.4. Table A.4: City of Clovis’ Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Clovis Gender/Age Male 48.3% Female 51.7% Median age 34.3 Under 5 years 6.5% Under 18 years 27.4% 65 years and over 11.7% Race/Ethnicity* White 71.1% Asian 10.7% Black or African American 2.7% American Indian/Alaska Native 1.1% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 27.8% Education High school graduate or higher 88.9% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 12.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 96.1% reporting one race Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Clovis’ planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Clovis (see Table A.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are unique to Clovis. Table A.5: City of Clovis—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited Medium Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Medium Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Clovis’ vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Clovis’ HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Clovis. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may var y slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table A.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Clovis’ HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table A.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Clovis are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section A.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include flood/levee failure and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incident • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze, extreme heat, fog, windstorm, winter storm • wildfire Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Clovis, those hazards are as follows: • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado • soil hazards • volcano Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of Clovis. A.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Clovis’ assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, historic assets, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table A.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Clovis. Table A.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Clovis by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 9 9 $2,557,614 $2,557,614 $5,115,228 Commercial 857 3,214 $938,241,308 $938,241,308 $1,876,482,616 Exempt 292 715 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 226 439 $122,817,146 $184,225,719 $307,042,865 Multi-Residential 593 7,233 $521,005,521 $260,502,761 $781,508,282 Open Space 1 6 $316,603 $316,603 $633,206 Residential 29,590 29,949 $5,545,158,353 $2,772,579,177 $8,317,737,530 Total 31,568 41,565 $7,130,096,545 $4,158,423,181 $11,288,519,726 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Since the 2009 Plan, the City of Clovis has experienced notable increases in commercial and residential properties and property values at risk. Compared to improved values from the Fresno County Assessor’s Office’s 2007 Certified Roll Values, commercial improved value has increased by 53.3 percent and total residential improved value has increased by 30.0 percent. Assets directly owned and controlled by the City of Clovis include a range of properties and equipment from each department. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Clovis from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table A.7 and illustrated in Figure A.2. Table A.7: City of Clovis’ Critical Facilities Facility Type Counts CalARP 2 Colleges & Universities 6 Courthouse 1 Fire Station 6 Health Care 1 Nursing Home 3 Police 2 School 37 Urgent Care 1 Total 59 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 FEMA’s Hazus-MH loss estimation software uses three categories of critical assets. Essential facilities are those that if damaged would have devastating impacts on disaster response and recovery. High potential loss facilities are those that would have a high loss or impact on the community. Transportation and lifeline facilities are the third category. Essential Facilities Essential facilities as identified by Hazus-MH are as follows: • Clovis Fire/Police Department Headquarters—1233 Fifth Street • Clovis Fire Stations − CFD 1—633 Pollasky − CFD 2—2300 Minnewawa − CFD 3—555 North Villa − CFD 4—2427 Armstrong Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan − CFD 5—790 North Temperance − CFD Logistics Center—650 Fowler • Clovis Community Medical Center—2755 Herndon • Kaiser Medical Offices—2071 Herndon • Central Valley Indian Health Inc.— 20 North DeWitt High Potential Loss Facilities High potential loss facilities as identified by FEMA Hazus-MH are located throughout Clovis. Clovis works closely with the Clovis Unified School District, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, and elder care property owners in monitoring and assessing facilities that fall into this category that are not owned by the City. Transportation and Lifeline Facilities Transportation and lifeline facilities are located in the center and northeast portion of Clovis. Highway 168 is the major thoroughfare through Clovis. The surface water treatment plant converts raw water from the Enterprise Canal (originating from the Kings River) into potable water for the residents of Clovis. This additional water production enables the City to turn off a portion of its groundwater wells throughout the year, resulting in the replenishment of the water table. The plant is capable of treating and delivering up to 15 million gallons per day of potable water to the City’s customers (expandable to 45 million gallons per day). Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.2: City of Clovis’ Critical Facilities Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic Resources While the City of Clovis has no registered state or federal historic sites, there are several assets within Clovis that define the community and represent the City’s history. Some of the historical sites of importance to Clovis are listed below. • The Tarpey Depot—Northeast corner of Pollasky and Fourth • First National Bank of Clovis/Clovis Museum—Southeast corner of Pollasky and Fourth* • Carnegie Library Building—325 Pollasky* • Hoblitt/Clovis Hotel —Northwest corner of Pollasky and Fourth • American Legion—Southeast corner of Fourth and Woodworth • Dr. McMurtry Home—431 Fourth • May Case Home—420 Woodworth • Whiton Home—446 Woodworth • Burke Home—460 Woodworth • United Methodist Church—Southwest corner of Woodworth and Fifth • Mayo/Flume House—406 Fifth Street • Masonic Temple—Northwest corner of Fifth and DeWitt • The Jackson/Brandon Home—406 DeWitt • Clovis M. Cole Home—304 Harvard • Blasingame House—406 Oxford • Richard Norrish Home—36 Pollasky • Agnes G. de Jahn House—6 Pollasky • Gibson Home 940—Third Street* • Clovis Union High School—901 Fifth • Clovis Water Towner—Southeast corner of Clovis • Nestor Freitas Hall—500 Club • John Good Building—Northwest corner of Clovis and Fifth • McFarland Building—Southeast corner of Fifth and Pollasky • Lewis Gibson Store—Northwest corner of Fifth and Pollasky • Ingmire House—Seventh and Pollasky • Macias House—931 Pollasky * Fresno County Historical Landmarks Economic Assets Clovis is the home of two of the largest agile manufactures in the Central Valley—PELCO (1,600 employees) and Anlin (350 employees). Loss of either employer would have the net result of 2,000 displaced employees and sales tax revenue in the millions of dollars. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Growth and Development Trends Clovis continues to be the premier choice for housing developers and home buyers in the Fresno/Clovis metropolitan area. The City has been aided by an outstanding school district, which ranks among the best in the nation. The City has a reputation for being a safe and friendly community to raise a family. However, land is costly and becoming very short in supply for housing, commercial, and industrial development. As Clovis strives to be more than a bedroom community, attention needs to be paid to preserving land for job generating activity in order to meet the jobs/housing balance. Continued growth and development trends continue to be addressed at a local level and regional level through the Local Agency Formation Commission. These agencies coordinate to develop solutions that mitigate the impact of growth to land use, transportation, land use, air quality and access to services. Hazard vulnerability and mitigation is addressed through these governing bodies based on the subject matter expertise of local public safety agencies or special districts who have the jurisdictional authority in particular areas. Table A.8 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. As of 2015, the population of Clovis was 95,631 with an average growth rate of 5.03 percent. Table A.8: City of Clovis’ Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010- 2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 95,631 100,437 +5.03 35,306 36,270 +2.73 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates Of the 36,270 housing units in Clovis, 95.2 percent are occupied. Owner-occupied units account for 60.2 percent of all occupied housing. Single family detached homes comprise 72.0 percent of the housing stock in the City. The southwestern portion of Clovis is characterized by mostly urbanized land uses, whereas the northern and eastern portions of Clovis are predominantly rural in nature and characterized by agricultural, rural, residential and vacant land uses. California state law (Government Code Section 65302) requires each city and county to have an adopted general plan, a blueprint for future growth and development that addresses issues directly related to land use decisions (see Figure A.3 for current land use designations). The law specifies that each general plan address seven issue areas: land use, circulation, open space, conservation, housing, safety, and noise. Adopted in 1993, the City of Clovis General Plan Program provides comprehensive planning for the future. It encompasses what the City is now, and what it intends to be, and provides the overall framework of how to achieve this future condition. Estimates are Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan made about future population, household types, and employment base, so that plans for land use, circulation, and facilities can be made to meet future needs. The general plan represents an agreement on the fundamental values and vision that is shared by the residents and the business community of Clovis and the surrounding area of interest. Its purpose is to provide decision makers and City staff with direction for confronting present issues as an aid in coordinating planning issues with other governmental agencies and for navigating the future. Clovis’ 2014 general plan is an update, expansion, and reorganization of the 1993 general plan. Significant changes to the planning area have occurred, expanding the boundaries of the new planning area to the north and east to include both a Sphere of Influence and a study area beyond the sphere. Pressure for development in the metropolitan area in and around the City of Clovis, the need for linkage to the regional transportation network, and the desire to establish Clovis in a pivotal position in the regional context warrant the decision to greatly expand the planning area as the foundation for the update and augmentation of the general plan. Clovis’ general plan consists of eight separate elements: 1. Land Use 2. Economic Development 3. Circulation 4. Housing 5. Public Facilities and Services 6. Environmental Safety 7. Open Space and Conservation 8. Air Quality Mitigation activities continue to be done in accordance with applicable state and federal requirements for floodplain management and in coordination with the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District which maintains regional responsibility for water management. Additional mitigation measures for critical infrastructure protection and rehabilitation are done through the City’s Capital Improvement Project (CIP) budget. To date, those mitigation projects have included fire station security, water/sewer infrastructure improvements and City Hall building rehabilitation. For more information on hazard mitigation-related aspects of the general plan, see the discussion in Section A.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.3: City of Clovis’ Land Use Designations Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (according to HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table A.6 above shows Clovis’ exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County as a whole). Note: The risk and vulnerability related to windstorm and winter storm hazards in Clovis do not differ from those of the County at large. Please refer to Chapter 4 Risk Assessment of the main plan for more details on these hazards. Agricultural Hazards Agricultural hazards are considered a lower significance hazard for the City of Clovis than for the overall planning area due to the limited role of agriculture in the City’s land use and economy. The medium significance reflects the impacts the City would experience as a result of the importance of agriculture to the overall planning area. Dam Failure Potential flooding also exists in the form of reservoirs to the northeast and southeast of Clovis: Fancher Creek Reservoir and Big Dry Creek Reservoir. The major inundation areas from potential overflows from the Big Dry Creek Reservoir affect a major part of the northwesterly portion of Clovis as well as the northwesterly portions of the current City Sphere of Influence and City boundaries. The Big Dry Creek Dam, approximately 3.5 miles upstream from the City of Clovis, impounds stormwater runoff from Big Dry Creek in the Big Dry Creek Reservoir. The Big Dry Creek Reservoir is owned and operated by the Fresno County Metropolitan Flood Control District and is intended primarily for flood control of winter runoff from the Dry Creek and Dog Creek watersheds. In the 1990s, modifications were made to increase the capacity of the reservoir, and it now provides protection against the 200-year flood. Under wet conditions, the Big Dry Creek Reservoir captures runoff and controls releases into artificial ditches and canals, which drain into either Little Dry Creek, located north of the reservoir, or in a southerly direction into Mill Ditch. Flows from Little Dry Creek and Mill Ditch eventually drain to the San Joaquin River. Flows from the reservoir can also be diverted into Dog Creek, which also eventually drains into the San Joaquin River. During dry weather conditions, the Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan reservoir does not discharge water and is normally empty, with the exception of a 156 acre-foot residual pool. The top of the pool remains below the elevation of an existing discharge gate. Drought In 1988, 45 California counties experienced water shortages that adversely affected about 30 percent of the state’s population, much of the dry farmed agriculture, and over 40 percent of the irrigated agriculture. Fish and wildlife resources suffered, recreational use of lakes and rivers decreased, forestry losses and fires increased, and hydroelectric power production decreased. Since 1976, Clovis has experienced one state declaration for drought within Fresno County and one U.S. Department of Agriculture declaration for crop losses associated with drought. The City of Clovis rated drought as a lower priority hazard than for the County as a whole. In part, drought is of lower significance because unlike the unincorporated County and smaller jurisdictions, the City is not dependent on agriculture, which is highly vulnerable to drought. Earthquake Clovis is subject to relatively low seismic hazards compared to many other parts of California. The primary seismic hazard is ground shaking produced by earthquakes generated on regional faults. The northwest-trending Clovis fault is believed to be located approximately five to six miles east of the City of Clovis, extending from an area just south of the San Joaquin River to a few miles south of Fancher Creek. It is considered a pre-Quaternary fault or fault without recognized Quaternary displacement. This fault is not necessarily inactive. The most probable sources of earthquakes that might cause damage in Clovis are the Owens Valley Fault Group about 68 miles to the northeast, the Foothills Suture Fault Zone approximately 75 miles to the north, the San Andreas fault approximately 80 miles to the southwest, and the White Wolf fault located about 120 miles to the south. A maximum probable earthquake on any of the major faults would produce a maximum ground acceleration in the area of about 0.lg as ground deceleration generally decreases with increasing distance from the earthquake source. Several unreinforced masonry buildings are located in the Old Town part of the City. The recreation building also may be vulnerable to earthquakes. Flood/Levee Failure Clovis is traversed by three natural stream systems. Each of these systems consists of substreams or creeks that collect together to discharge to a centralized natural drainage channel. These systems are the Red Bank, Fancher, and Dog Creek System; the Dry and Dog Creek System ; and the Pup Creek/Alluvial Drain System. The latter is a tributary of the original Dry Creek channel. These stream systems collect storm runoff from the foothills east of Clovis and convey such runoff through the Clovis/Fresno metropolitan areas to the Fresno Slough, which is located west of the City of Fresno. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Many of these channels have been modified over time such that they have become duel use stormwater conveyance channels and irrigation water conveyance channels. Those streams that have not been used for irrigation purposes have essentially remained in their natural state and have flowed uncontrolled during storm runoff events. These stream channels have limited flow capacity. In some cases, the uncontrolled grading of land has obliterated or severely modified the natural channels to the extent that their flow capacity has been seriously limited. Flooding has been a serious problem in the Clovis/Fresno metropolitan area when these channel capacities are exceeded. The flat slope characteristics in Clovis that exhibit natural slopes of less than .001 feet per foot can make the control of drainage runoff difficult and many natural depressions within the flat topography naturally collect and pond stormwater runoff. Nevertheless, the soils within or relatively near the stream courses tend to be the loamy, well-drained soils with high permeability. The major sources of flooding include areas along the Pup Creek alignment from the northeasterly portion of the Clovis through the center of the City of Clovis. Most of this flooding is confined to the areas in and around the Pup Creek channel. Pup Creek enters the northeastern portion of the City of Clovis near the intersection of Armstrong and East Bullard avenues. Most flood flows enter a culvert at Minnewawa Avenue, north of Barstow Avenue, and are conveyed to Dry Creek in the vicinity of North Helm and Mitchell Avenues. Dry Creek enters the northwestern portion of the City of Clovis near the intersection of the Union Pacific Railroad and Herndon Avenue. The creek flows out of the City at the southwestern corporate limits just south of the intersection of Shaw and Winery avenues. Other areas of flooding are related to the Alluvial Drain area, the Big Dry Creek Reservoir and its possible overflow areas, along the Dog Creek channel alignment, and in low depressed areas along the easterly sides of the Enterprise Canal. Small areas of localized flooding occur in the southeastern part of the City during periods of moderate rainfall or heavy cloudburst storms. There are also a number of ponding areas in the City: • The ponding area at the northern corporate limits of the City of Clovis, east of Dry Creek and north of the railroad, is caused by the limited channel capacity of Dry Creek from the vicinity of Herndon Avenue to the vicinity of Nees Avenue outside the corporate limits of the City of Clovis. • The ponding area along Pup Creek between Minnewawa and Peach avenues is caused by excessive overland losses from Dry Creek and limited culvert capacity for Pup Creek at Minnewawa Avenue. • The ponding area south of Pup Creek and east of the railroad between Jefferson and Barstow avenues is caused by excessive overbank losses on Pup Creek crossing back over the railroad and from a local drainage problem east of Brookhaven Avenue. The City of Clovis actively uses GIS and FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) to assess flood risk and infrastructure mitigation. According to the City’s FIRM, all City facilities are within Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B, C, or X zones, which are outside the 100-year floodplain; insurance purchase is not required in these zones. While past flooding has resulted in reimbursable expenses, the majority of the costs were for emergency protective measures and not direct property loss. Figure A.4 shows the City inlet system compared to the FEMA 100-year floodplain threat. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.4: City of Clovis’ Drain Inlet and Flooding Hot Spot Map Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood protection in Clovis is afforded by Big Dry Creek Dam on Dry Creek. Big Dry Creek Dam is located approximately 3.5 miles upstream of the City of Clovis. Its main purpose is flood control, and it has a storage capacity of 16,250 acre-feet. Big Dry Creek Reservoir has prevented an estimated $15 million in damage in the Fresno-Clovis area since its completion in 1948. Even with significant investment in planning/mitigation and water management through Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, portions of the City of Clovis, the Sphere of Influence areas, and the unincorporated Fresno County area, have been subject to historical flooding. Flooding occurred in January 2006 (CDAA-2006-01) and March of 2006 (CDAA-2006-03). The combined impact of these storms left Clovis with $14,562 in damage that was reimbursable since Fresno County received state declarations for the storms. In both instances, there were short periods when intersections were closed due to flooding and customers could not reach businesses. According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), damaging floods also occurred in the area in 1938, 1955, 1958, 1969, and 1978. Details on some of these events follow: • December 1955—Pup Creek overflowed and flooded more than 20 homes in the vicinity of Clovis Avenue and Ninth Street. Floodwater two feet deep in some places blocked streets and disrupted traffic. • March 1958—Pup Creek overflowed and flooded areas along Ninth Street. Floodwater was up to three feet deep, but damage was limited to streets, external residential improvements, and disruption of traffic. • January-February 1969—Creeks and canals in the area overflowed and inundated agricultural land, residential property, and streets and roads. Many homes were evacuated and others protected by sandbags. Traffic was disrupted by flooded streets and roads. Dry Creek and tributaries flooded approximately 1,400 acres and caused an estimated $329,000 in damage below Big Dry Creek Reservoir. • February 1978—Pup Creek overflowed. Residential property was inundated, homes were evacuated, roads and streets were closed, and traffic was disrupted. The recurrence interval of this flood was 74 years. The 2016 FIS also notes problems of localized flooding in the City of Clovis. Localized flooding primarily occurs in areas east of Clovis Avenue and south of Shaw Avenue in addition to an area south of Keats Avenue and an area south of Celeste Street. In each of these locations, flooding is common following moderate rainfall or heavy cloudburst storms. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Clovis was created (see Figure A.5). Tables A.9 and A.10 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.5: City of Clovis’ 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table A.9: City of Clovis’ FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 19 24 $9,800,415 $9,800,415 $19,600,830 $4,900,208 Exempt 8 8 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 14 27 $2,479,947 $3,719,921 $6,199,868 $1,549,967 Multi-Residential 6 40 $3,863,098 $1,931,549 $5,794,647 $1,448,662 Residential 123 133 $30,418,012 $15,209,006 $45,627,018 $11,406,755 Total 170 232 $46,561,472 $30,660,891 $77,222,363 $19,305,591 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table A.10: City of Clovis’ FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 0 $88,794 $88,794 $177,588 $44,397 Commercial 152 927 $218,953,803 $218,953,803 $437,907,606 $109,476,902 Exempt 47 176 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 17 38 $6,781,245 $10,171,868 $16,953,113 $4,238,278 Multi-Residential 146 2,599 $149,271,660 $74,635,830 $223,907,490 $55,976,873 Residential 5,766 5,804 $1,092,919,916 $546,459,958 $1,639,379,874 $409,844,969 Total 6,129 9,544 $1,468,015,418 $850,310,253 $2,318,325,671 $579,581,418 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Clovis has significant assets at risk to the 100-year and greater floods. 170 improved parcels are located within the 100-year floodplain for a total value of over $77 million. An additional 6,129 improved parcels valued at over $2.3 billion fall within the 500- year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as previously described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing roughly $19 million in damage in the City of Clovis and a 0.2 percent chance in any given year of a 500-year flood causing roughly $599 million in damage (combined damage from both floods). Figure A.6 shows the properties at risk to flooding in and around the City of Clovis in relation to the mapped floodplain. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.6: City of Clovis’ Properties at Risk in 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Clovis: • 100-year flood—409 people • 500-year flood—18,741 people • Total flood—19,150 people Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Clovis joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on March 16, 1983. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of March 30, 2017, there were 103 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $31,999,500 of coverage. Of the 103 policies, 100 were residential (97 for single- family homes) and 3 were nonresidential. There were 12 policies in A zones, and the remaining 91 were in B, C, and X zones. There have been 14 historical claims for flood losses totaling $134,920.02. All claims were for residential properties; 12 were in A zones and 2 were in B, C or X zones; and 13 were pre-FIRM structures (the one post-FIRM structure with a reported loss was in a B, C, or X zone). According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. Table A.11 lists the critical facilities in the City’s 100- and 500-year floodplains. The impact to the community could be great if these critical facilities are damaged or destroyed during a flood event. Table A.11: Critical Facilities in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains: City of Clovis Critical Facility Type 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Colleges & Universities - 1 Nursing Home - 1 School - 6 Total - 8 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 There are no critical facilities in the City’s 100-year floodplain, but according to the risk assessment for the County, floods in Clovis tend to be 500-year events. Thus, it is particularly important to note that the critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain are all facilities that serve vulnerable populations and thus should be given special attention. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazardous Materials Incident Hazardous materials likely to be involved in a spill or release within the City include herbicides, pesticides, chemicals in gas, liquid, solid, or slurry form; flammables; explosives; petroleum products; toxic wastes; and radioactive substances. The County Health Department is the designated administering agency for the Fresno County area hazardous material monitoring program. There are two CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Clovis. As identified in Table A.12, there are three critical facilities in Clovis located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table A.12: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Clovis Critical Facility Type Count Fire Station 1 School 2 Total 3 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Severe Weather: Extreme Cold/Freeze Figure A.7 below illustrates the average temperature by month. From the figure, one can see that December and January have the greatest potential for extreme cold/freeze with an average minimum temperature of 37.5°F. In Clovis, it is not uncommon to have consecutive days with a minimum overnight low temperature of 32°F. Clovis has been impacted by severe freezing in winters past. Most notable were the freezes of 1997/98 and 2006/2007. Severe cold/freeze declarations occurred in 1990, 1998, and 2001. These incidents impacted local agriculture and City infrastructure. Estimated agricultural losses in 2006/2007 totaled $1 million with another $10,000 in damage to infrastructure. The following chronicles historic periods of extreme cold in Clovis: Low Temperature of 20°F or Below • 2 days from 1/16/1888–1/17/1888 • 2 days from 1/6/1913–1/7/1913 • 2 days from 1/10/1949–1/11/1949 • 3 days from 12/22/1990–12/24/1990 Low Temperature of 24°F or Below • 4 days from 1/14/1888–1/17/1888 • 4 days from 1/3/1949–1/6/1949 • 5 days from 1/3/1950–1/7/1950 • 6 days from 12/12/1963–1/17/1963 • 5 days from 12/31/1975–1/4/1976 Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • 6 days from 12/21/1990–12/26/1990 Low Temperature of 28°F or Below • 12 days from 1/7/1888–1/18/1888 • 7 days from 1/12/1963–1/18/1963 • 9 days from 1/17/1966–1/25/1966 • 14 days from 12/20/1990–1/2/1991 • 8 days from 1/20/1998–12/27/1998 Low Temperature of 32°F or Below • 21 days from 1/3/1947–1/22/1947 • 15 days from 12/28/1960–1/11/1961 • 15 days from 1/11/1963–1/25/1963 • 16 days from 12/19/1990–1/2/1991 • 19 days from 1/6/2007–1/24/2007 During the January 2007 freeze (CDAA 2007-02), Clovis experienced 19 days of consecutive low temperatures at or below 32°F. In response, Clovis coordinated the resources and staff necessary to establish a warming station at the Clovis Senior Center. Public safety personnel continually monitored calls for service related to vulnerable populations, such as the homeless and seniors who might have needed these services. In addition, fire prevention staff checked on mobile home residents during their normal smoke alarm check/installs. Fortunately, Clovis residents were prepared, and the City did not have to open a warming center. School facilities incurred $55,000 in damage. In the urban area, there was some damage to wells, and some small businesses reported leaky/broken sprinkler pipes. City damage reimbursable through the state declaration totaled $9,373. Agricultural losses were greatest in the citrus growing and packaging industry. Local growers/packers included P&R Farms and Harlan Ranch. Since P&R Farms primarily handles stone fruit (i.e., peaches, apricots), impact to their crops was minimal. Harlan Ranch suffered 100 percent crop loss due to the fact that their primary commodity was citrus, and they had planted over 100 new acres of trees. At last check, their crop loss was $2.5 million. While some oranges were juiced, Harlan Ranch representatives said the juice market was break-even at best. Severe Weather: Extreme Heat The following data support the City of Clovis’ decision to rate extreme heat a medium significance hazard (higher than the overall County rating). As recently as 2006 and 2007, Clovis experienced heat waves that exceeded 24 days. While no direct loss of livestock was reported, the City staffed cooling centers to protect vulnerable populations, and there were several power outages that rotated through the area. Figure A.7. shows historical temperatures in Clovis. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.7: Historical Temperatures in Clovis Source: High Plains Regional Climate Center; climod.unl.edu It is not uncommon in Clovis to have consecutive days over 100°F. In the past decade (2008-2017), There were 62 periods of three days or longer where temperatures remained above 100 degrees. The longest period of extreme temperatures occurred in August of 2012, where daily high temperatures remained above 100°F for 19 consecutive days. The highest temperature reached was 112°F, which occurred once in July of 2008 and again in July of 2009. The following chronicles heat waves in Clovis prior to 2006: High Temperature of 112°F or Greater • 4 days from 7/30/1908 – 8/2/1908 • 5 days from 7/22/2006–7/26/2006 High Temperature of 110°F or Greater • 4 days from 6/29/1891–7/2/1891 • 4 days from 7/8/1896–7/11/1896 • 6 days from 7/26/1898–7/31/1898 • 5 days from 7/5/1905–7/9/1905 • 5 days from 7/29/1908–8/2/1908 • 4 days from 7/24/1931–7/27/1931 • 5 days from 7/22/2006–7/26/2006 High Temperature of 105°F or Greater • 10 days from 7/28/1889–8/6/1889 • 9 days from 7/6/1896–7/14/1896 • 10 days from 7/18/1931–7/27/1931 • 9 days from 7/21/1980–7/29/1980 Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • 14 days from 7/17/1988–7/30/1988 • 9 days from 7/13/2005–7/21/2005 • 12 days from 7/16/2006–7/27/2006 High Temperature of 95°F or Greater • 51 days from 6/23/1908–8/12/1908 • 53 days from 7/6/1910–8/27/1910 • 51 days from 7/7/1939–8/26/1939 • 50 days from 6/6/1967–8/24/1967 • 51 days from 6/30/2006–8/19/2006 In response to extreme heat events in 2007, the City implemented Phase II of the City’s Heat Emergency Plan, which entailed opening facilities and using volunteer staff from 12–10 p.m. to provide cooling for individuals impacted by the heat. The cost to provide this level of service was negligible since the facility used was already open and volunteers staffed the center. While few people sought relief, the most significant benefit was from volunteers checking the welfare of vulnerable seniors who rely on swamp coolers for cooling and who cannot always determine their physiological need for hydration. For the summer, Phase II of the plan was activated seven times. Over 20 individuals sought refuge in the center, and volunteers placed over 183 personal welfare calls to the medically fragile. In Clovis, there was no loss of human or livestock life. Severe Weather: Fog In Fresno/Clovis, the average number of days with dense fog per year is 35.1 (see Table A.13). The most consecutive days with dense fog were the following: • 14 days from 12/19/1929-1/2/1930 • 16 days from 12/13/1985-12/28/1985 Table A.13: Average Number of Days in Fresno/Clovis with Dense Fog Month Number of Days January 11.5 February 5.1 March 1.5 April 0.2 May 0 June 0 July 0 August 0 September 0 October 0.6 November 5.2 December 11.0 Annual 35.1 Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Wildfire Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a wildfire map for the City of Clovis was created (see Figure A.8). An analysis was performed using GIS software that determined that there were not any critical facilities in wildfire threat zones in Clovis. Only one parcel in Clovis is considered at risk to moderate fire severity, and it does not have any improved value, indicating lower risk to wildfire in the City compared to the Fresno County planning area as a whole. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure A.8: City of Clovis’ Wildfire Threat Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Clovis’ updated capabilities are summarized below. A.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table A.14 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Clovis. Table A.14: City of Clovis’ Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes 2014 Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Growth management ordinance Yes Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Yes Building code Yes Version: 2016 Fire department ISO rating Yes Rating: 2 Erosion or sediment control program Yes Stormwater management program Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes 2017 Other special plans Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016 Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) Yes The City of Clovis General Plan Program, 2014 The City of Clovis General Plan Program serves as the blueprint for future growth and development and provides comprehensive planning for the future. It encompasses what the City is now, and what it intends to be, and provides the overall framework of how to achieve this future condition (see the discussion in Section A.3.1 Growth and Development Trends). The general plan includes a Safety Element that focuses on safety issues to be considered in planning for the present and future development of the Clovis planning area. Identified hazards include fire, geologic/seismic, flooding, and hazardous materials. Mitigation-related goals, policies, and actions are presented below. Goal 1: Protect the Clovis community from hazards associated with the natural environment. Policy 1.1: Minimize risks of personal injury and property damage associated with natural hazards. Actions: Educating the community on procedures regarding preparedness and response to natural disasters providing information describing procedures and evacuation routes to be followed in the event of a disaster. Establishing design criteria for publicly accessible stream corridors, detention basins, and drainage facilities to minimize potential for accidents and injury. Preserve as open space areas along waterways, detention basins, and ponding areas, and in areas of wildfire and known flooding hazards where building for human occupancy is hazardous. Policy 1.2: Provide flood protection for existing development and for areas planned for new development. Actions: Coordinate with the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) in its efforts to enact a program of channel preservation, renovation, and maintenance. Support the FMFCD in the creation of an inventory of all streams draining from the foothills areas and identifying all channels that have been obliterated or altered. Require, as a condition of development, protection of channel alignments, identification of floodway areas, and construction of channel improvement so that projected 100-year flood flows can pass without affecting new development. Utilize zoning and other land use regulation to limit and or prohibit development in flood-prone areas. Map dam inundation areas and develop, maintain, and inform the public of an evacuation procedure for all affected areas in the event of failure of dams. Policy 1.3: Utilize the unprotected 100-year floodplain for low density uses such as agriculture, open space, recreation, and for reclaiming water and wetlands. Actions: Establish development set-back requirements from natural water courses that traverse the project areas. Policy 1.4: Mitigation potential adverse impacts of geologic and seismic hazards. Actions: Require geologic and soils studies to identify potential hazards as part of the approval process for all new development prior to grading activities. Conduct a building survey to identify structures that are substandard in terms of seismic safety. Develop a program to bring these structures up to current seismic safety code standards. Require that underground utilities be designed to withstand seismic forces. Coordinate with the FMFCD to regularly inspect and repair levees as part of their proposed program of channel preservation, renovation, and maintenance. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.33 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal 1: Protect the Clovis community from hazards associated with the natural environment. Incorporate appropriate earthquake prevention standards into the uniform technical codes and require that all new structures are engineered to meet seismic safety code standards. The Public Facilities Element of the general defines policy for public facilities and services, including infrastructure, and addresses the issues of providing adequate infrastructure and community services to expanding populations by planning in conjunction with land use. Clovis’ infrastructure consists of water, wastewater, storm drainage/flood control, and solid waste systems. The element does not address how new facilities and infrastructure are sited in regard to known hazard areas. It does include hazard-related policies to provide effective storm drainage facilities for planned development by maintaining agreement with the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District to reduce the effect that development has on natural watercourses and to ensure that adequate water supply can be provided through water reuse and water conservation. Clovis Municipal Code The following ordinances are used for implementing the general plan and/or are critical to the mitigation of hazards identified in this plan. Zoning Ordinance (Title 9—Chapter 9.08) The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to encourage, classify, designate, regulate, restrict, and segregate the highest and best locations for, and uses of, buildings, structures, and land for agriculture, residence, commerce, trade, industry, water conservation, or other purposes in appropriate places; to regulate and limit the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures hereafter designed, erected, or altered; to regulate and determine the size of yards and other open spaces; and to regulate and limit the density of population, and for such purposes to divide the City into districts of such number, shape, and area as may be deemed best suited to provide for their enforcement. Further, the Zoning Ordinance addresses the following: • Most appropriate uses of land • Conservation and stabilization of property values • Provision of adequate open space for light and air and to prevent and fight fires • Prevention of undue concentration of population • Lessening of congestion of streets • Facilitation of adequate provision of community utilities, such as transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements • Promotion of the public health, safety, and general welfare Site Plan Ordinance (Title 9—Chapter 9.56) The site plan review is performed by the Clovis Planning and Development Services Department. During the review, the owner of a parcel is required to submit a plan to scale demonstrating all of the uses for a specific parcel of land. This review ensures compliance with applicable law and the zoning requirements within the City. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.34 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9—Chapter 9.100) The Subdivision Ordinance specifically provides for proper grading and erosion control and prevention of sedimentation or damage to off-site property. Each local agency may by ordinance regulate and control other subdivisions, provided that the regulations are not more restrictive than the regulations commencing in California Government Code Section 66410. Erosion or Sediment Control Program (Title 9—Chapter 9.2.309) Every map approved pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivisions Ordinance are conditioned on compliance with the requirements for grading and erosion control, including the prevention of sedimentation or damage to off-site property, set forth in Appendix Chapter 70 of the California Building Code, as adopted and amended by the City. Flood Hazard Ordinance (Title 8—Chapter 8.12) Flood losses are caused by uses that are inadequately elevated, floodproofed, or protected from flood damage. The cumulative effect of obstructions in areas of special flood hazards that increase flood heights and velocities also contribute to flood loss. It is the purpose of the Flood Hazard Ordinance to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to: • Protect human life and health; • Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; • Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; • Minimize prolonged business interruptions; • Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric, telephone, and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; • Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damage; • Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard; and • Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions. In order to reduce flood losses, the ordinance includes methods and provisions to: • Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; • Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; • Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters; • Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.35 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas. Emergency Services Ordinance (Title 4—Chapter 4.2) The declared purposes of the Emergency Services Ordinance are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within the City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of the City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons. Stormwater Management Program (Emergency Flood Control Procedures 2007- 2008) The City’s Public Utilities Department has three Stormwater Patrol teams, made up of 22 public utilities employees, to implement emergency flood control measures. The plan contains information and procedures to rapidly address flooding throughout the City. Contact information and team assignment data is updated regularly as are geographic locations subject to flooding. Appendices include suppliers/contractors, storm basin list, problem drain lists, and partnerships and agencies with shared responsibility for storm preparedness, mitigation, and response. Five-Year Community Investment Program The Five-Year Community Investment Program (CIP) represents an effort to identify major capital needs and schedule projects consistent with community priorities and available funding. A major portion of the funding for these projects comes from development fees. Projects identified in the CIP are broken down as follows: • General Government Facilities—The capital projects for the General Government Facilities program consist of acquisition of new facilities, improvement to existing facilities, and maintenance of existing improvements required by City departments to enable them to adequately carry out their mission. • Sewer Capital Projects—The Enterprise budget includes projects that will repair and/or replace existing sanitary sewer mains that are severely deteriorated or are not adequately sized for the flows being experienced. The Developer budget includes the debt service payments for the 2007 Sewer Revenue Bond for the Sewage Treatment and Water Reuse Facility. • Parks Improvements—These primarily consist of master planning and design and construction of park improvements. Community park improvements are funded by development fees and state grants when available. Neighborhood parks are installed by development. Park fees are paid by all new developments constructed within the City of Clovis. • Street Improvements —These include traffic signal installation, street repair and improvement, sidewalk installation/modification, and design work throughout the City. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.36 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Water—This includes projects that will continue to improve the water distribution system, and improve water quality through the addition of treatment facilities at existing wells, and increase the reliability of the water supply by the addition of auxiliary power generators. • Refuse—This includes regulatory design and maintenance of City-owned landfill and associated projects. • Clovis Community Development Agency—This focuses on projects that provide affordable housing in the community and on encouraging and enhancing the business environment of Clovis. • Police/Fire—This addresses facility design and maintenance for satellite locations and main headquarters. Economic Development Strategy, 2014 On July 14, 2014, the City Council adopted an updated Economic Development Strategy, developed by the City’s Economic Development Strategy Advisory Committee (EDSAC) and based on presentations from experts regarding perspectives on current markets, the regulatory environment, access to capital, characteristics of the local labor force, public incentive programs, and the local commercial and industrial real estate market. The City of Clovis adopted the initial Economic Development Strategy in March 1998. The 1998 strategy included a mission statement as well as goals and objectives for three individual strategies: Industrial Development, Commercial Development, and Tourism. The City of Clovis believes that these three individual strategies make up the basis for a well-rounded economic development program. If progress is made in the implementation of the stated goals and objectives in each of these strategies, the City will be better able to create the wealth necessary to provide municipal services to Clovis residents and businesses. City of Clovis Emergency Operations Plan The City of Clovis Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) Basic Plan addresses the planned response for the City of Clovis to emergencies associated with disasters, technological incidents, or other dangerous conditions created by either man or nature. It provides an overview of operational concepts, identifies components of the City emergency management organization, and describes the overall responsibilities of local, state, and federal entities. The City will place emphasis on emergency planning; training of full-time, auxiliary, and reserve personnel; public awareness and education; and assuring the adequacy and availability of sufficient resources to cope with emergencies. Emphasis will also be placed on mitigation measures to reduce losses from disasters, including the development and enforcement of appropriate land use, design, and construction regulations. The EOP’s section on hazard mitigation establishes actions, policies, and procedures for implementing Section 409 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act following a presidentially declared emergency or major disaster. It also assigns hazard Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.37 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan mitigation responsibilities to various elements of federal, state, and local governments in California. Heat Emergency Contingency Plan The Heat Emergency Contingency Plan describes City operations during heat-related emergencies and provides guidance for City departments and personnel. It recognizes the need to communicate and coordinate with local agencies and mobilize and initiate actions in advance of local requests and supports local actions according to the Standardized Emergency Management System and the National Incident Management System. The plan goal is to reduce the incidence of morbidity and mortality associated with local extreme heat events. Urban Water Management Plan Clovis proactively manages water supplies and has policies in place to effectively deliver water to local residents. In order to appropriately manage water resources within Clovis, the City updated its Urban Water Management Plan in 2005 in coordination with the City of Fresno, County of Fresno, Fresno Irrigation District, and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control district. The City of Clovis utilizes many water management tools and options to maximize water resources and minimize the need to import water. The City has an existing groundwater management plan (1997) and is involved in the Fresno-Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan. Clovis Unified School District Hazard Mitigation Plan The Clovis Unified School District is a K-12 public school system that serves the Cities of Clovis and Fresno, some unincorporated areas of Fresno County, and the rural community of Friant. It covers approximately 198 square miles and has a student population of nearly 38,000. The overall goal of the Clovis Unified School District Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce or prevent injury and damage from natural hazards in the District by addressing the hazards that present the greatest risk to the District, its students, staff, facilities, infrastructure, properties, and the natural environment. The plan examines past events and hazard mitigation programs already in place and prioritizes additional mitigation activities for the District. Planning goals include facilitating the integration of City and County hazard mitigation planning activities into District efforts. A.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table A.15 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Clovis. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.38 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table A.15: City of Clovis’ Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes City Planner Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Building Official Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes City Engineer Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Senior IT Analyst Full time building official Yes Building Official Floodplain manager Yes Building Official Emergency manager Yes Life Safety Enforcement Manager Grant writer Yes Various Other personnel GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) Yes IT Division and Planning/Development Services Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Yes Facebook, NextDoor A.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table A.16 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table A.16: City of Clovis’ Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No A.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The City of Clovis has two fire prevention specialists dedicated to public education, reaching 17,000 kids per year in the school system. The city also runs a responsible water use outreach program to encourage conservation and efficiency. Additionally, the City has a Community Emergency Response Team volunteer program and a Citizens On Patrol volunteer group. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.39 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts The fire department is accredited through the Commission on Fire Accreditation International, which is part of the Center for Public Safety Excellence. Additionally, the City is recognized by the National Weather Service as a StormReady Community. A.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Clovis has several existing mechanisms in place that already help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities for the City to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. Future improvements may include providing training for staff members related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Additional training opportunities will help to inform City staff members on how best to integrate hazard information and mitigation projects into their departments. Continuing to train City staff on mitigation and the hazards that pose a risk to the City of Clovis will lead to more informed staff members who can better communicate this information to the public. A.5 Mitigation Strategy A.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Clovis adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Engineering Division may utilize the hazard information when implementing the City’s Community Investment Program and the Planning and Building Divisions may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a site plan or other type of development applications. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Clovis will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1983. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.40 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. A.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Clovis completed nine mitigations actions identified in the 2009 plan. These completed actions are as follows: • Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan • Train and Certify City Inspectors to Conduct Post-Disaster Damage Assessment • Implement a System of Automatic Vehicle Location • Install Battery Back-Up Systems at Traffic Signals in the City of Clovis on Major Transportation Routes • Replace Traffic Management Center Software and Herndon Avenue Traffic Signal Equipment and Implement Communications Upgrades • Modify and Enhance Emergency Traffic Control System • Implement a System to Share Information with City Police Officers/Employees (SharePoint) • Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into Safety Element of General Plan • Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public These completed actions have reduced vulnerability to hazards and increased local capability to implement additional mitigation actions. A.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Clovis identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. Actions with an ‘*’ are those that mitigate losses to future development. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Clovis will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.41 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1. Construct a Water Intertie between the Cities of Clovis and Fresno Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, drought, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The City of Clovis operates a water system that serves over 95,000 residents. During rolling power blackouts or earthquakes or due to potential contamination of the water supply, there is a need to have a backup supply of potable water available. The City has an agreement with the City of Fresno to construct an intertie between the two water systems to act as an emergency backup. Other Alternatives: The City has backup power at many of its facilities but not all of them. Additionally, backup power will not help if the issue is unrelated to a power blackout. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Public Utilities Department Water Division Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $890,000 Potential Funding: City of Clovis Water Enterprise Fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will prevent the loss of human life, illness, customer confidence, and revenue. Schedule: Estimated completion in 2019 Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 2. Modernize Information Technology Backup Infrastructure Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, volcano, hazardous materials Issue/Background: During the last emergency operations center exercise, it became evident that many of the technology systems needed to coordinate services during a disaster were limited or not available at all. Personal computer systems were out of date, the telecommunications system and phones were not properly functioning, and many resources (software applications) were not configured or available. The City could benefit from disaster recovery/business continuity technology systems that use virtualization and storage area network backup infrastructure systems for emergency operations center operations. Other Alternatives: Tapes and backup systems that are not real time are not as reliable and cause delays in data restoration. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Information Services Division Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.42 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 Potential Funding: General fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): Ensures business continuity and avoids downtime. Thus, speeds up relief efforts during a disaster. Schedule: Estimated completion in 2020 Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 3. Improve the City’s Capabilities for Sheltering Animals in a Disaster Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, flood, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: During a disaster, not only do people need to be rescued, but their pets do also. Hurricane Katrina showed the nation that shelters do not typically allow pets, so pets may be left behind when their owners evacuate. The care of the animals left behind falls to local animal shelters. Currently, the City of Clovis Animal Shelter does not have the supplies to handle a large scale animal emergency. The City has approximately 8,000 licensed dogs. If a disaster occurred, they would only be able to house 102 of them. Overcrowding of animals usually causes diseases and loss of animal life. Purchasing new cages would alleviate some of the overcrowding created by a disaster. Other Alternatives: Ask other agencies for supplies, if they have them available. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Police Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $44,000 Potential Funding: General fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will cut down on the spread of disease and animal loss during an emergency or disaster. Schedule: Estimate completion in 2020 Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 4. Purchase Hazard Mitigation Public Notification Boards Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, flood, wildfire, hazardous materials Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.43 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Issue/Background: Purchase mobile self-contained changeable message signs to pre-alert motorists to avoid a “real time” traffic (or other) hazard. Other Alternatives: Rely on contract service providers who may not be able to respond with adequate resources in a timely fashion. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Engineering Division Traffic Management Group, Public Utilities Department Streets Division, Police Department, and Fire Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: 4 signs @ $35,000 each = $140,000 Potential Funding: Departmental operational budgets or grant funding Benefits (Avoided Losses): Provides the ability for City forces to aid emergency response crews by dispatching mobile sign units to be stationed at critical locations to alert motorists and citizens of potential hazard areas. This will allow for better routing of nonessential vehicle traffic that may impede the delivery of critical health and safety services and ultimately result in quicker overall response delivery times. Schedule: Estimate completion in 2019/2020 Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 5. Improve Emergency Evacuation and Emergency Vehicle Routes Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, flood, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: Currently, there are several street segments within the City of Clovis that could serve as evacuation routes or detour routes in the event of a disaster. These segments are currently deficient in terms of traffic carrying capacity and serviceability. Improvements to these routes would provide the additional pavement width necessary to provide increased flexibility and capacity in routing traffic and emergency vehicles. Routes include: • Shepherd Avenue from Clovis to Fowler (1 mile) • Nees Avenue from Clovis to Armstrong (1.6 miles) • Alluvial Avenue from Sunnyside to Temperance (1.25 miles) • Sunnyside Avenue from Nees to Shepherd (1 mile) Other Alternatives: No action. Existing road segments would remain constricted, impeding evacuation expediency and limiting detour alternatives. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Public Utilities Department—Long-term Maintenance, City of Clovis Engineering Department—Construction Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.44 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $7,500,000 Potential Funding: None identified, potential for federal or state grant funding Benefits (Avoided Losses): Improved traffic flow and increased flexibility in moving traffic and emergency vehicles during a disaster Schedule: One year Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 6. Conduct a Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of City-Owned Critical Facilities Hazard(s) Addressed: earthquake Issue/Background: The City is interested in performing a building-specific, seismic vulnerability assessment of City-owned critical facilities constructed prior to 1980 (including infrastructure). Included in this assessment will be recommended mitigation alternatives that meet goals and objectives of this plan. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Clovis Planning and Development Services—Building Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $200,000 Potential Funding: General fund, FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will prevent the loss of human life, economic loss, and property loss. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 7. Construct Channel Improvements for Dog Creek Stream, South of Gettysburg-Ashlan Hazard(s) Addressed: flood Issue/Background: Dog Creek has been identified in the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s (FMFCD) Rural Streams Program as a facility that needs master planned drainage improvements to adequately convey rural stream floodwaters. The FMFCD requires all development within rural stream areas to provide and construct the necessary channel Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.45 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan improvements. The channel improvements required of Dog Creek include relocation/reconstruction of the existing channels geometry to allow a flow of 315 cubic feet per second to be passed. In order to meet this flow capacity, Dog Creek must have geometry of approximately 60 feet in width and 12 feet in depth. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Clovis Planning and Development Services Department, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $700,000 Potential Funding: California Department of Water Resources grant Benefits (Avoided Losses): The project goals and objectives are to improve flood management of Dog Creek for future development, as planned for in the area, thus minimizing the potential of rural stream flows to flood urbanized areas. Development activity in the City of Clovis is managed through the FMFCD for both urbanized development and rural stormwater flows. FMFCD policy does not allow for the mixing of urban and rural flows in the same channel. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 8. Improve Flow Design Parameters for Big Dry Creek and the Enterprise Canal* Hazard(s) Addressed: flood Issue/Background: In order to meet the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s flow design parameters for Big Dry Creek and the Enterprise Canal, the existing siphon at the confluence of the two waterways needs to be replaced with a similar type structure. The new structure will have enhanced flow measurement and control for both the Big Dry Creek and Enterprise Canal and would incorporate a walkway to accommodate a path along Big Dry Creek for the general public. The primary purpose of the project is to provide for the long term integrity of the siphon to pass Big Dry Creek and Enterprise Canal flows. The existing structure on the Enterprise Canal (located beneath Dry Creek) was constructed in the early 1900s (estimated 1915). The replacement of this structure is essential to the reliable delivery of water over the long term. The existing structure consists of a box culvert with an integrally constructed weir. Material strength testing was conducted at the siphon, which included two concrete cores and rebar mapping of the top slab. This testing determined that the concrete compressive strength was a minimum of 4,300 pounds per square inch. Several large cracks were found in the center culvert wall approximately ¼ inch wide by 10 feet long. The cut-off wall located at the end of the apron extending from the weir Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.46 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan structure had significant damage where rebar has been exposed and pieces of concrete have broken off. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Clovis Planning and Development Services Department, City of Clovis Public Utilities Department, Fresno Irrigation District, Fresno County, City of Fresno, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $845,000 Potential Funding: California Department of Water Resources grant Benefits (Avoided Losses): The project goals and objectives are to provide for the long-term integrity of the siphon to carry Dry Creek and Enterprise Canal flows. Schedule: Lon g term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 9. Improve City’s Floodplain Management Program and Apply to Community Rating System* Hazard (s) Addressed: flood Issue/Background: Seek Community Rating System (CRS) classification improvements within the capabilities of City programs, including adoption and administration of FEMA-approved ordinances and flood insurance rate maps. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Clovis Fire Department—Emergency Preparedness Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $300,000 Potential Funding: General fund, FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Participation in the CRS and improvements outlined by the system will translate into improved flood mitigation and reduced flood insurance rates for local citizens. Ultimately, it will prevent the loss of human life and economic and property losses. Schedule: Long term Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.47 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 10. Enforce Master Drainage Plan Requirements* Hazard(s) Addressed: flood Issue/Background: The City of Clovis requires a master drainage plan as part of the approval process for all specific plans and large development projects as determined by the City’s Public Works director. The master drainage plan requirements consider cumulative regional drainage and flooding mitigation. The intent of a master drainage plan is to ensure that the overall rate of runoff from a project does not exceed pre-development levels. If necessary, this objective shall be achieved by incorporating run-off control measures to minimize peak flows and/or assistance in financing or otherwise implementing comprehensive drainage plans. Enforcement will include review of development during and after construction to ensure that drainage requirements have been implemented as proposed. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Clovis Fire Department—Emergency Preparedness Priority (High, Medium, Low): Low Cost Estimate: Developer-based funding under specific plan requirements Potential Funding: Developer-based funding under specific plan requirements Benefits (avoided Losses): This will prevent the loss of human life and economic and property losses and addresses flood mitigation with future development. Enforcement of these requirements ensures that the overall rate of runoff from a project does not exceed pre-development levels, thus prevents making stormwater flooding worse. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 11. Install a System of Surface Water Hazard Detection Hazard(s) Addressed: hazardous materials Issue/Background: The City operates a surface water treatment plant that supplies water to a community of over 95,000 people. The water is delivered to the plant via an open canal that travels approximately 30 miles from the source to the plant. There have been several incidents where items have been dumped into the canal, requiring the plant to shut down. The City is concerned that the dumping of hazardous chemicals could occur and, without some advance notification, that the chemicals could get through the treatment plant and into the distribution system, making customers sick. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.48 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Equipment is available that can be installed upgradient from the plant that will sample the water, analyze the water on-site, and provide notification to the plant prior to it reaching the plant. Other Alternatives: Continue patrolling the canal on a daily basis. Responsible Office: City of Clovis Public Utilities Department Water Division Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 Potential Funding: City of Clovis Water Operations Fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will prevent the loss of human life, illness, customer confidence, and revenue. Schedule: Estimate completion in 2019 Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 12. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Clovis and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Clovis has become a joint power authority of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the County of Fresno, City of Kerman, City of Fresno Biola Community Services District, Garfield Water District and International Water District. As a member of the North Kings GSA, the City of Clovis is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the North Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Fresno County (Clovis) Annex A.49 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Responsible Office: City Engineer and North Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX B: CITY OF COALINGA Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B.1 Community Profile Figure B.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Coalinga and its Sphere of Influence. Figure B.1: The City of Coalinga B.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Coalinga is located in the southwestern portion of the San Joaquin Valley in an area known as Pleasant Valley. Over the past decade, the City boundaries have not changed, but the City did annex land southeast of State Route 33, outside the current Sphere of Influence. The City and its Sphere of Influence cover 5,161 acres, 4,133 acres of which are within the City limits. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Access to Coalinga is by State Routes 198 and 33. Interstate 5 is located approximately 13 miles to the east. Existing development in the City is characterized by residential neighborhoods with commercial uses concentrated along State Routes 198 and 33 and Polk Street. The City of Coalinga lies over or near more than one earthquake fault and lateral or blind thrust fault. It is approximately 29 miles from the Town of Parkfield, which is located on the San Andreas fault and has been the site of an earthquake study since the late 1970s. The climate is mild and damp in the winter and hot and dry in the summer. High temperatures average 64°F in January and 103°F in July. Low temperatures average 29°F in January and 53°F in July. Annual precipitation is 8.4 inches. B.1.2 History The following history of Coalinga is from the City of Coalinga General Plan Update, 2007: For many centuries, numerous tribes of Native Americans, all belonging to the Yokut, inhabited the San Joaquin Valley. Although it is not clear when the first people made their way to Coalinga, it is known that the Tache (Tachi), one of the largest of all the Yokut tribes, found a permanent water supply at a place called Posa Chanet near the City’s present site. From this encampment, the Tache scoured the hills for trade goods. They discovered oil seeps and thick tar. Oil was an important item to early inhabitants of the Pleasant Valley. Seepages in the area provided asphalt used to line baskets and was a good traded among other tribes. Eventually, Spaniards and Basques, who wanted the land for its cattle and sheep grazing potential, displaced the Indians. As new settlers came to the west seeking a new life and greater opportunities, interest in oil seepages inspired an oil rush in 1865. In 1867, a specialized oil-drilling rig, shipped from the east coast, began drilling for oil north of the present site of Coalinga. However, shipping problems caused early interest to die down; the world had not yet discovered the full potential of petroleum. In the late 1800s, stories of sheepherders who burned rocks at night to keep warm drew the attention of Messer’s Robins and Rollins, English second sons. Excited by the promise of coal in the area, they established a mine in a slash of hillside where the Coalinga Rifle Range now exists. It was never profitable. The coal was actually shale. However, the potential of coal from the mine and in nearby Priest Valley was enough to induce the Southern Pacific Railroad to extend its southern route. It crossed Huron and stretched slightly beyond the Coalinga area. There is debate about how Coalinga got its name. The usual version is that while deposits of oil saturated shale, or “coal,” were being mined in the hills nearby “Coaling Station A,” “Coaling Station B,” and “Coaling Station C” were situated along the rail line for loading purposes. “Coaling Station A” was eventually shortened to “Coalinga.” This story does not stand close scrutiny, and a more likely explanation is that Coalinga was given the final “a” for musical effect. The truth may never be known, since the great quake and fire in San Francisco in 1906 destroyed the Southern Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Pacific Railroad’s office and all its records. Whatever the origin, “Coalinga” was in use fairly quickly after the rail line opened in July 1888. The extension of the railroad coincided with a significant worldwide interest in oil production. A second oil rush occurred around 1890. By 1910, Coalinga was the third largest shipping point for the railroads in California with nearly all tonnage connected to oil production. The town grew quickly in the late 1800s. In 1889, the Coalinga post office was established. In 1891, Southern Pacific Railroad purchased the 160-acre homestead of M.L. Curtis for $900 and laid out the town site of Coalinga as a square cut diagonally by the railroad tracks. Street numbers from one to eight went north to south and the letters A to H from west to east. The Coalinga Women’s Improvement Society later changed the alphabetical names to botanical ones. A succession of historically important oil wells brought “boomers” into Coalinga by the thousands. With over 15 years of continuous prosperity behind them, a handful of local citizens began the process of incorporation, which was completed in April 1906. In 1909, the Coalinga Chamber of Commerce was organized, and in its first report dated April 16, 1910, they excitedly spoke about the promise of the City. The Coalinga oil field was the largest in California. In September 1909, the Silver Tip well, located just one-half mile from the City limits, blew with the greatest gusher known in California at that time. This discovery caused enough excitement among the financiers of California that the Los Angeles Stock Exchange was closed on a Friday in November and a special excursion train traveled to Coalinga so potential investors could marvel at the sight. During the early years of production, there were several important developments in Coalinga. In 1904, a six-inch oil pipeline was laid from Coalinga to Monterey on the coast (104 miles) to provide tanker oil for overseas buyers. The pipeline was built in 90 days and crossed two mountain ranges with maximum elevation of 2,000 feet. In 1916, Coalinga oilfield workers fought for and won the industry’s first eight-hour workday. In 1919, A&W Root Beer was formulated in downtown Coalinga. During World War II, Signal Hill oil in Long Beach was brought in. The supply was so great that the existing pipeline flow from Coalinga to the Los Angeles refineries was revered and excess Signal Hill oil was stored in a massive tank farm called Caliola about 10 miles east of Coalinga. Coalinga’s oil fields produced some of the oil industry’s giants, including R.C. Baker, founder of Baker Oil Tools. His original buildings in Coalinga are now home of the R.C. Baker Memorial Museum, which focuses on oil as well as pioneer life in the Coalinga area. From the outset, it was said that whiskey was easier to get than water in Coalinga. The natural well water had high amounts of dissolved minerals in it, making it suitable for only the most basic uses of washing and irrigating. To meet this challenge, Coalinga’s drinking water was imported. Until 1960, the major source of drinking water was Southern Pacific water wells in Armona. In time, a municipal water service was provided for the central area of town. In 1960, Coalinga was selected for experimental systems to soften hard water and make it suitable for human consumption. The first of these was an ionic system that was later replaced by the Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan reverse osmosis method. In April 1972, Coalinga received its first delivery of San Luis Canal water from the state water system. B.1.3 Economy While oil was the staple of the local economy, agriculture always played an important role. Before 1972, agriculture was limited to cotton and other salt water resistant crops. With the arrival of canal water, the area has become a region of specialty crops, which include lettuce, tomatoes, asparagus, and a variety of nut and fruit trees. While there was open speculation that Coalinga would not survive the May 1983 earthquake, the disaster became the catalyst that inspired revitalization. In 1988, the residents approved a bond issue for a new $14 million community hospital facility to replace the one destroyed in the earthquake. Coalinga completed an 800-acre annexation to include Pleasant Valley State Prison and the new airport in the City limits in 1991. In 1994, the Department of Corrections located a major prison facility in Pleasant Valley. With this as an economic base, the City developed a 40- acre industrial park. To address concerns about proximity to schools and associated noise hazards, the airport was relocated four miles to the east. A brand new $8 million airport facility was built in 1996. The Coalinga Regional Medical Center was completed in 2002, and construction of a new mental health facility, the Coalinga State Hospital, was completed in the spring of 2005. In the oilfields, a process of steam injection promises to produce $2.3 billion more barrels of oil, perhaps as much as has already been mined. Since the 1983 earthquake, significant efforts have been made to rebuild and revitalize the City. These efforts, combined with Coalinga’s central geographical location and proximity to the busy Interstate 5 corridor, are expected to diversify the City’s economy as state growth continues. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Coalinga from the American Community Survey (ACS) are shown in Table B.1. Table B.1: City of Coalinga’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Coalinga Families below Poverty Level 19.7% All People below Poverty Level 23.2% Median Family Income $58,936 Median Household Income $51,860 Per Capita Income $17,787 Population in Labor Force 5,969 Population Employed* 5,341 Unemployment 10.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Tables B.2 and B.3 show how the City of Coalinga’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on 5-year estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table B.2: City of Coalinga’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Management, Business, Science and Arts Occupations 1,657 31.0 Management, Business, and Financial Occupations (487) (9.1) Computer, Engineering, and Science Occupations (86) (1.6) Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media Occupations (359) (10.1) Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations (725) (13.6) Sales and Office Occupations 1,013 19.0 Service Occupations 993 18.6 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 950 17.8 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 728 13.6 Total 5,341 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table B.3: City of Coalinga’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care, and Social Assistance 1,722 32.2 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 694 13.0 Public Administration 569 10.7 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 469 8.8 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 456 8.5 Retail Trade 446 8.4 Construction 336 6.3 Other Services, Except Public Administration 166 3.1 Professional, Scientific, and Management, and Administrative and Waste Management Services 143 2.7 Manufacturing 137 2.6 Information 104 1.9 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 67 1.3 Wholesale Trade 32 0.6 Total 5,341 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ B.1.4 Population According to the California Department of Finance, the City of Coalinga’s population was estimated to be 16,982 at the start of 2017. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Fresno from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates are shown in Table B.4. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table B.4: City of Coalinga’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015* Characteristic City of Coalinga Gender/Age Male 62.8% Female 37.2% Median age 33.4 Under 5 years 6.6% Under 18 years 22.2% 65 years and over 6.6% Race/Ethnicity** White 58.0% Asian 2.7% Black or African American 7.7% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.7% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 51.1% Education High school graduate or higher 73.0% Disability Status Population 5 years and over 10.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Based on a 2015 estimated population of 16,940 **Of the 94.4% reporting one race Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Coalinga’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the City (see Table B.5). In the context of the planning area, there are no hazards unique to Coalinga. Table B.5: City of Coalinga—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Unlikely Critical Low Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic High Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Unlikely Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Medium Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Coalinga’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. Additional criteria for assessing vulnerability are identified below. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Coalinga’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Coalinga. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table B.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Coalinga’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table B.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Coalinga are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section B.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought, earthquake, and wildfire. • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic • severe weather: extreme cold; extreme heat; windstorm; winter storm • wildfire Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Coalinga, those hazards are as follows: • agricultural hazards* • dam failure* • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • landslide • fog • heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning • tornado • soil hazards • volcano Note on Agricultural Hazards*: Although ranked High by the County, the City ranks it as Low. According to the Committee, as the City’s economy has diversified and become less reliant on agriculture, vulnerability to this hazard has declined, resulting in a lower overall priority rating. Note on Dam Failure*: Although the County ranks dam failure as High in significance, the City determined the hazard to be of Low significance given that the only dam in the City is the Silt Pond dam, an extremely small dam at just 25 acres-feet of capacity. Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche is considered not applicable to the City of Coalinga. B.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Coalinga’s assets at risk, including population (previously discussed in Section B.1.4); values at risk; critical facilities and infrastructure; and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan disaster it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table B.6 shows the 2017 values at risk broken down by property type for the City of Coalinga. Table B.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Coalinga by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 2 2 $169,412 $169,412 $338,824 Commercial 207 456 $50,008,372 $50,008,372 $100,016,744 Exempt 51 75 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 45 57 $10,263,329 $15,394,994 $25,658,323 Multi-Residential 184 337 $64,311,054 $32,155,527 $96,466,581 Residential 2,782 2,870 $268,992,081 $134,496,041 $403,488,122 Total 3,271 3,797 $393,744,248 $232,224,345 $625,968,593 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Coalinga from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table B.7 and mapped in Figure B.2. Table B.7: City of Coalinga’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number Airport 1 Colleges & Universities 2 Communications 1 Department of Public Works 1 Fire Station 3 Health Care 1 Police 3 School 10 Total 22 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure B.2: City of Coalinga’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table B.8 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by Coalinga’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table B.8: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by the City of Coalinga’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Occupancy/ Capacity # City Hall Building, 160 W. Elm Avenue 1,925,148 15,791 City Hall Building (Building Expansion), 155 W. Durian Avenue 4,901,358 21,060 Corporation Yard, 135 Sacramento 33,101 1,600 Coalinga Airport Facility 6,602,127 Waste Water Treatment Facility, 60500 Jayne Ave 528,000 Water Filtration Plant, 25034 W. Palmer Avenue 6841332 Water System, Palmer Avenue Tank 188,515 250,000 gallons Water System, Oil King Tank 377,029 500,000 gallons Water System, Derrick Avenue Tank 3,198,468 8,000,000 gallons Water System, Palmer Avenue Tank 1,421,543 3,000,000 gallons Water System, Calaveras Avenue Tank 1,444,290 5,000,000 gallons Palmer Ave, Repeater Station, Emergency Communications 9,198 Fire Station, City 1,421,543 12,254 Growth and Development Trends Table B.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2017. Table B.9: City of Coalinga’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2017 2010 Population 2017 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2017 2010 # of Housing Units 2017 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2017 13,380 16,982 +26.92 4,344 4,482 +3.18 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Census; California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. B.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table B.6 above shows Coalinga’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below in accordance with the criteria identified under section B.3 Vulnerability Assessment and Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table B.5 above. (See Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Drought The risk and vulnerability factors for this hazard are not unique to the City and the hazard potentially impacts the entire planning area. Please see the main plan’s coverage of the Drought hazard in Section 4. Earthquake There are several faults in the vicinity of Coalinga that could cause problems in the future. These include the Nuñez fault, located about ten kilometers northwest of Coalinga; the Coalinga fault, located five kilometers northeast of Coalinga; and the New Idria fault; located approximately 21 miles northwest of Coalinga. The U.S. Geological Survey is predicting an earthquake in Parkfield in Monterey County, approximately 15 miles southwest of Coalinga. Coalinga is the only urban area in the County directly affected by earthquake-related settlement. Two earthquakes of note that occurred in or near Coalinga are described below: •May 2, 1983—In Coalinga, a surface rupture occurred along the Nuñez fault. The main shock was magnitude 6.7 on the Richter scale. Approximately 800 buildings were destroyed, and 1,000 people left homeless. No deaths resulted, but 200 people were injured. Private homeowner losses exceeded $25 million. Public agency losses approximated $6 million. The commercial section of Coalinga was heavily damaged; however, most schools and the hospital received only slight damage. Production in nearby oil fields was shut down. The City was left with numerous vacant parcels and city-owned lots. Local, state, and federal disaster declarations resulted. •August 4, 1985—A magnitude 6.0 earthquake occurred that was centered about 10.5 kilometers east of Coalinga. Flood/Levee Failure According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), Coalinga’s principal flood problems are associated with Los Gatos Creek and Warthan Creek. The Los Gatos Creek headwaters are approximately 22 miles northwest of the City in the eastern foothills of the Coast Range. The creek enters the northern portion of the City flowing east-southeast. The creek flows just north of the sewage treatment plant. The Warthan Creek headwaters are located approximately 16 miles southwest of the City in the eastern foothills of the Coast Range. Warthan Creek enters Coalinga from the south and flows through the southeastern portion of the City before leaving just north of the intersection of East Polk Street and Alicia Avenue. From there, the creek continues for less than a mile to its confluence with Los Gatos Creek just northwest of the sewage treatment plant. Some areas in the City are subject to shallow overland flooding caused by insufficient channel capacity of Los Gatos Creek or insufficient levee height on Warthan Creek. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan According to the 2016 FIS, floods occurred in or around Coalinga in 1952, 1958, 1962, 1966, 1969, 1976, and 1978. Details on some of these events follow: • April 1958—Flooding affected mainly agricultural lands and public facilities, such as roads and bridges. • December 1966—Flooding caused extensive road and bridge damage in the upper reaches of Los Gatos and Warthan Creeks. East of the City, sewage treatment facilities and the levees along Warthan Creek were damaged, the Los Gatos Creek channel was severely eroded, and there was extensive damage to utilities and agricultural land. Damage totaled approximately $570,000, and floodwater inundated 4,500 acres. • February 1969—The largest and most damaging flood in Coalinga’s recorded history occurred when floodwater from Los Gatos and Warthan Creeks covered 16,600 acres and caused approximately $4.5 million in damage. Flooding extended from the foothills west of the City to the valley east of the City. Bridges and roads were washed out, agricultural land was eroded, farm and ranch improvements and petroleum installations were damaged and destroyed, areas were isolated, traffic was disrupted, and residential and commercial areas in the northwest and southeast portions of the City were damaged. • February 1978—Flooding occurred along Los Gatos Creek from the foothills to the valley floor and damaged agricultural lands, roads and bridges, and utilities. An estimated 4,500 acres were flooded. Damage totaled $160,000. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Coalinga was created (see Figure B.3). Tables B.10 and B.11 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure B.3: City of Coalinga’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table B.10: City of Coalinga’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 1 $66,463 $66,463 $132,926 $33,232 Commercial 3 109 $1,088,393 $1,088,393 $2,176,786 $544,197 Exempt 1 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 3 5 $82,927 $41,464 $124,391 $31,098 Residential 101 105 $8,863,171 $4,431,586 $13,294,757 $3,323,689 Total 109 221 $10,100,954 $5,627,905 $15,728,859 $3,932,215 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table B.11: City of Coalinga’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 7 70 $4,983,568 $4,983,568 $9,967,136 $2,491,784 Exempt 6 6 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 3 2 $4,264,378 $6,396,567 $10,660,945 $2,665,236 Multi-Residential 2 14 $9,920,000 $4,960,000 $14,880,000 $3,720,000 Residential 565 574 $81,806,142 $81,806,142 $163,612,284 $40,903,071 Total 583 666 $100,974,088 $98,146,277 $199,120,365 $49,780,091 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Coalinga has significant assets at risk to the 100-year and greater floods. There are 109 improved parcels within the 100-year floodplain for a total value of roughly $15.7 million. An additional 583 improved parcels valued at roughly $199 million fall within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing roughly $3.9 million in damage in the City of Coalinga and a 0.2 percent chance in any given year of a 500-year flood causing roughly $53.7 million in damage (combined damage from both floods). Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Properties at risk to flooding are shown in relation to the floodplain in Figure B.4. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure B.4: City of Coalinga’s Properties at Risk in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the U.S. Census Bureau 2016 estimate for the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Coalinga: • 100-year flood—320 people • 500-year flood—1,797 people • Total flood—2,117 people Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Coalinga joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on August 23, 1982. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of June 30, 2017 there were 60 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $12,902,300 of coverage. This coverage represents a 38 percent decrease in coverage over the past decade. Of the 60 policies in force, all were residential. Fifty of the policies were in A Zones (A01-30 & AE Zones and AO Zones) and the remaining 10 were in B, C, and X zones. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. There have been no historical claims for flood losses. Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. Table B.12 lists the critical facilities in the City’s 100- and 500-year floodplains. Table B.12: Critical Facilities in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains: City of Fresno Critical Facility Type 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Colleges & Universities 1 0 Department of Public Works 1 0 Health Care - 1 Total 2 1 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Hazardous Materials Incident Hazardous materials likely to be involved in a spill or release within the City include herbicides, pesticides, chemicals in gas, liquid, solid, or slurry form; flammables; explosives; petroleum products; toxic wastes; and radioactive substances. The County Health Department is the designated administering agency for the Fresno County area hazardous material monitoring program. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A total of 5 incidents have occurred in the City of Coalinga between 2009 and 2016, including one fixed site incident (at a building), three storage tank/platform/pipeline (not specified), and one mobile vehicle incident. Four of the five incidents were related to oil spills, with one unknown material spill. No property damage and no injuries were reported. (Source: http://www.rtk.net/erns/search.php) There are no identified CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Coalinga. Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic The risk and vulnerability factors for this hazard are not unique to the City and the hazard potentially impacts the entire planning area. Please see the main plan’s coverage of this hazard in Section 4. Severe Weather: Extreme Cold/Freeze The City of Coalinga does not have a record of past severe weather events, but significantly low temperatures have occurred in the City. Extreme cold can be exacerbated by winds, as the most common wind condition in Coalinga, is caused by severe winter storms. Severe Weather: Extreme Heat The City of Coalinga has experienced very high temperatures. High temperatures have exceeded 110°F and resulted in loss of crops, livestock, and wages (workers were sent home) as well as the temporary closure of schools. Very high temperatures in August 1997 contributed to five deaths. Also, during California’s fire season, high temperatures have hampered firefighting efforts. Wildfire Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a fire map for the City of Coalinga was created (see Figure B.5). An analysis was performed using GIS software to determine where populations, values at risk, and critical facilities are located within wildfire threat zones. Tables B.13 and B.14 show the values at risk in the high and moderate wildfire threat zones (there are no values at risk in the very high threat zone). Among the City’s critical facilities, two are located in wildfire threat zones: a maintenance yard is in the high fire hazard zone and a health care facility is in the moderate fire hazard zone. Table B.13: Values at Risk to Wildfire (High Threat) in the City of Coalinga Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 1 $66,463 $66,463 $132,926 Commercial 4 118 $1,419,770 $1,419,770 $2,839,540 Multi-Residential 3 5 $151,816 $75,908 $227,724 Residential 234 244 $29,036,494 $14,518,247 $43,554,741 Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Total 242 368 $30,674,543 $16,080,388 $46,754,931 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Table B.14: Values at Risk to Wildfire (Moderate Threat) in the City of Coalinga Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 1 $102,949 $102,949 $205,898 Commercial 3 59 $1,996,374 $1,996,374 $3,992,748 Exempt 3 2 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 16 16 $1,780,623 $2,670,935 $4,451,558 Multi-Residential 12 18 $15,122,867 $7,561,434 $22,684,301 Residential 542 554 $58,954,216 $29,477,108 $88,431,324 Total 577 650 $77,957,029 $41,808,799 $119,765,828 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Based on this analysis, the City of Coalinga has significant assets at risk to a wildfire. There are 242 improved parcels valued at roughly $46.8 million within the high wildfire threat zone. Based on the average household factor for Fresno County and the number of residential properties at risk, there are 751 people living within the high threat zone. There are an additional 1,756 people and 577 improved parcels valued at roughly $119.8 million within the moderate wildfire threat zone. The majority of the parcels in both of these zones are residential. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure B.5: City of Coalinga’s Wildfire Threat Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. The capabilities assessment is divided into four sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, and mitigation outreach and partnerships. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Coalinga’s updated capabilities are summarized below. B.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table B.15 lists planning and land management tools typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Coalinga. Table B.15: City of Coalinga’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes Certified by Council 2009 Zoning ordinance Yes Currently adopted Subdivision ordinance Yes Uses by reference Subdivision Map Act Site plan review requirements Yes Included in Zoning Ordinance Growth management ordinance No Included in Zoning Ordinance and proposed in general plan update Floodplain ordinance Yes Adopted in 2006 in accordance with FEMA and OES guidelines and FEMA approved Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) No Storm Water Mater Plan, approved April 3, 2008 Building code Yes Adopted by reference in the Municipal Code Fire department ISO rating Yes Rating: 3 Erosion or sediment control program No By reference in Subdivision Map Act and Zoning Ordinance/Building Code Stormwater management program No Adopted Storm Water Master Plan Capital improvements plan Yes Five-year implementation plan Economic development plan No RDA % yr. Implementation Plan Local emergency operations plan Yes Other special plans Yes Wastewater Master Plan Water Master Plan, Natural Gas Master Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines, Residential Design Guidelines Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016 B.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table B.16 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Coalinga. Table B.16: City of Coalinga’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Community Development Director Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Tri-City Engineering Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Personnel skilled in GIS No Full time building official Yes Floodplain manager Yes City Engineer Emergency manager Yes City Manager Grant writer Yes Community Development Director Other personnel No GIS Data—Land use No Participation with Fresno County GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data No Participation with Fresno County Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Yes Civil defense horn Other Yes Community Development Director B.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table B.17 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table B.17: City of Coalinga’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Development impact fees Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Connection fees, utility fees, and development impact fees Impact fees for new development Yes Sec. 66000 Development Impact Fee Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan B.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The City of Coalinga partnered with the Coalinga-Huron Unified School District in the development of the Coalinga-Huron Unified School District Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, which was completed in 2005. B.4.5 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Coalinga has several existing mechanisms in place that already help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities for the City to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. These opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. •Develop a Stormwater Management Program. One opportunity of enhancement for the City is to build of its existing Storm Water Master Plan, approved in 2008, and create a stormwater management program with staff to help implement and enforce the existing Master Plan as well as develop an update for the plan. •Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City of Coalinga. B.5 Mitigation Strategy B.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Coalinga adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Community Development Department, which is comprised of the Planning, Engineering, and Building and Code Enforcement divisions, may utilize the hazard information when reviewing site plans or building permit applications. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Coalinga will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1982. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. B.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Coalinga completed two mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan. These completed actions are: • Inventory At-Risk Buildings • Improve Nonstructural Earthquake Mitigation in Public Buildings Completing these actions has reduced the City of Coalinga’s vulnerability to hazards and increased the City’s capability to implement additional mitigation actions. Note: There is one action from the City of Coalinga’s 2009 mitigation strategy that the City has not completed but has decided not to carry forward and recommend for implementation in this plan. The deleted action and the reason for their deletion are as follows: • Provide Bilingual Neighborhood Emergency Response Team (NERT) Training to Community Residents and Businesses – upon review, this action was considered a response-related activity rather than hazard mitigation B.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Coalinga identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Coalinga will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought, earthquake, and wildfire. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi- Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1. Plan for Alternative Water Sources for the Water System Hazard(s) Addressed: drought, earthquake, wildfire Issue/Background: The City of Coalinga currently receives its water from the California Aqueduct. This canal system is approaching 50 years old and is likely to need some major repairs in the future. The current water system is capable of supplying water to the city for 4-5 days in the event water from the aqueduct is lost. Having wells as a backup water supply will also help mitigate drought by providing a reliable source in case of low water supply in the California Aqueduct. Ideas for Implementation: Construct two new wells as backup water sources for the City. Other Alternatives: Rely on truck delivery of water as the only alternative Responsible Office: City of Coalinga Public Works Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $300,000 ($150,000 per well. Two wells needed. One at water treatment plant and one in town) Potential Funding: Water enterprise funds/bond. Benefits (Avoided Losses): The City will have an alternative water source in the event that the California Aqueduct is not able to provide sufficient supply. Schedule: Preliminary engineering 2/2018. Design 5/2018. Construction 9/2018. Status: New project 2. Plan For Water System Sustainability In The Event of Long Term Power Failure Hazard(s) Addressed: drought, earthquake, severe weather, wildfire Issue/Background: The City of Coalinga currently receives its water from the California Aqueduct and the Pleasant Valley Canal system. Water that has been treated at the Water Treatment Plant (WTP) is pumped uphill with electric water pumps to Palmer Tank, and the water gravity feeds from that location to the remainder of the water system. If there is a loss of power, the main link of the water system is removed. This project would evaluate the cost/benefit of installing an emergency generator which would keep the plant operational during this loss of power. Ideas for Implementation: Install an emergency generator to power the Water Treatment Plant during power outages. Fresno County (Coalinga) Annex B.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Alternatives: Rely on truck delivery of water as the only alternative Responsible Office: City of Coalinga Public Works Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $150,000 Potential Funding: Water enterprise funds/bond. Benefits (Avoided Losses): The Water Treatment Plant will not be vulnerable to power outages. Schedule: Preliminary engineering 02/2018. Design 04/2018. Construction 06/2018. Status: New project ANNEX C: CITY OF FIREBAUGH Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.1 Community Profile Figure C.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Firebaugh and its Sphere of Influence. Figure C.1: The City of Firebaugh C.1.1 Geography and Climate Firebaugh is situated in western Fresno County along the Madera County border, approximately 38 miles west of the City of Fresno. The City sits on the west bank of the San Joaquin River. Firebaugh and its Sphere of Influence cover a 3,411-acre area, 2,408 acres of which is within the city limits. The San Joaquin Valley Railroad passes through downtown Firebaugh, as does State Route 33, which connects the City with the Mendota, approximately 7 miles to the south. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.1.2 History In 1854, Andrew Firebaugh established a trading post and ferry on the San Joaquin River. Known as Firebaugh’s Ferry, it was a station on the great Butterfield Overland Stage Route. Andrew Firebaugh also built the first road over Pacheco Pass, and in 1872, he was one of the founders of the “The Academy,” Fresno County’s first secondary school. When he died in 1875, he was buried on his homestead some ten miles above there on the Tollhouse Road. Firebaugh is one of the oldest historical towns on the Westside of the San Joaquin River, and Firebaugh’s Ferry was the major crossing for prospectors heading for gold country. The City of Firebaugh was incorporated in 1914. C.1.3 Economy Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Firebaugh are shown in Table C.1. Table C.1: City of Firebaugh’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Firebaugh Families below Poverty Level 27.8% All People below Poverty Level 33.5% Median Family Income $41,104 Median Household Income $39,150 Per Capita Income $12,490 Population in Labor Force 3,828 Population Employed* 3,354 Unemployment 12.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables C.2 and C.3 detail how the City of Firebaugh labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table C.2: City of Firebaugh’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 1,373 40.9 Service Occupations 627 18.7 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 533 15.9 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 463 13.8 Sales and Office Occupations 358 10.7 Total 3,354 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table C.3: City of Firebaugh’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,248 37.2 Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 491 14.6 Other Services, Except Public Administration 231 6.9 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 226 6.7 Manufacturing 221 6.6 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 217 6.5 Wholesale Trade 175 5.2 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 134 4.0 Retail Trade 131 3.9 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 129 3.8 Construction 108 3.2 Public Administration 43 1.3 Information 0 0.0 Total 3,354 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ C.1.4 Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2015 population for the City of Firebaugh was estimated at 8,084. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Firebaugh from the 2015 ACS are shown in Table C.4. Table C.4: City of Firebaugh Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Firebaugh Gender/Age Male 53.6% Female 46.4% Median age 25.6 Under 5 years 7.3% Under 18 years 34.8% 65 years and over 5.1% Race/Ethnicity* White 83.0% Asian 0.0% Black or African American 0.0% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.9% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 92.9% Education High school graduate or higher 41.6% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 10.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 98.3% reporting one race Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Firebaugh’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Firebaugh (see Table C.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are unique to Firebaugh. Table C.5: City of Firebaugh—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical High Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical High Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Likely Critical Medium Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Firebaugh’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the outreach process in 2017-2018. Firebaugh is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table C.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Firebaugh’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table C.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Firebaugh are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section C.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include agricultural hazards, dam failure, drought, flood/levee failure and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood • hazardous materials incident • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic • severe weather: fog; windstorm; winter storm • wildfire Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Firebaugh, those hazards are as follows: • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze, extreme heat, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado • soil hazards • volcano Additionally, the City’s planning team decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered not applicable to the City of Firebaugh. C.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Firebaugh’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, historic assets, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table C.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Firebaugh. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table C.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Firebaugh by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 0 $36,439 $36,439 $72,878 Commercial 113 193 $15,960,117 $15,960,117 $31,920,234 Exempt 29 235 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 48 66 $42,456,095 $63,684,143 $106,140,238 Multi-Residential 54 112 $16,678,150 $8,339,075 $25,017,225 Open Space 1 0 $1,944 $1,944 $3,888 Residential 1,313 1,418 $115,759,507 $57,879,754 $173,639,261 Total 1,559 2,024 $190,892,252 $145,901,471 $336,793,723 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Firebaugh is provided in Table C.7 and mapped in Figure C.2. Table C.7: City of Firebaugh’s Critical Facilities Critical Facility Type Count Airport 1 CalARP 2 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 9 Urgent Care 1 Total 15 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure C.2: City of Firebaugh’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic Resources The City of Firebaugh does not have any properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. However, the City is home to a historical jail. Completed around 1885, this jail is one of only two Lincoln-log style jails still in existence in California. This unique type of construction has no frame and uses square nails and wood plank floors. The partially restored jail had been placed at various locations throughout Firebaugh before being moved to its final resting place at the Firebaugh Rodeo Grounds, which is east of its original site on the northwest corner of P and 13th Street. Economic Assets Often referred to as the Hub of the Great West Side, Firebaugh is probably best known as an important agricultural area. Major crops grown in the area include fruits, vegetables, nuts and fiber crops including tomato, garlic, cantaloupes, and cotton. Along with agriculture, diversity has been developing Firebaugh; new growth in manufacturing, packing and processing plants has enhanced Firebaugh’s economic outlook. Growth and Development Trends The City’s 2030 General Plan Proposed Land Use Map is shown in Figure C.3. For the City’s Sphere of Influence, the General Plan proposes mostly industrial uses in the southwest as well as some expansion of residential, park, open space, and agricultural uses to the east. Table C.8 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. As of 2015, the population of Firebaugh was 8,084 with an average growth rate of 7.09 percent. Table C.8: City of Firebaugh’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 7,549 8,084 +7.09 2,096 2,248 +7.25 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates Of the 2,096 housing units in Firebaugh, 93.1 percent are occupied. Owner-occupied units account for 52.5 percent of all occupied housing. Single family detached homes comprise 62.8 percent of the housing stock in the City, and mobile homes account for another 8.5 percent of the housing stock. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure C.3: City of Firebaugh’s Proposed Land Use Map Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table C.6 above shows Firebaugh’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. In regard to these types of structures, there are currently 1,213 parcels in the 100- and 500-year floodplains in the City of Firebaugh. No further information on vulnerable structures is available. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County as a whole). Note: Earthquake, Epidemic/Pandemic, Fog, Windstorm, and Winter Storm are considered Medium priority hazards by the City of Firebaugh but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Agricultural Hazards Given that agriculture is the predominant industry in the City of Firebaugh, agricultural hazards such as pests and blight, as well as other natural hazards like extreme heat, drought, and flood, which can have secondary adverse effects on crop production, are significant hazards in the City. Dam Failure The City of Firebaugh is downstream from the Mendota Diversion dam, which could cause flooding in the event of a failure. Additionally, the HMPC reported that due to Firebaugh’s location on the San Joaquin River and the size of the Friant Dam impoundment on Millerton Lake, the City could also be impacted in the event of a failure of that structure. Drought While the HMPC noted that drought is a significant hazard to the City, the local risk and vulnerability to drought does not differ substantially from that of the overall county. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for overall risk and vulnerability to drought. Flood/Levee Failure The most recent FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) affecting the City of Firebaugh was updated in February 2009. According to the FIRM, large portions of the planning area are subject to 100-year (or 1-percent-annual-chance) flooding by the San Joaquin River and areas in the south of the planning area are subject to flooding by the Panoche Creek. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), damaging floods occurred in Firebaugh and the surrounding area in 1958, 1969, and 1983. Details on some of these events follow: • April 1958—The Panoche Creek flooded 9,700 acres and estimated damages totaled $457,000. Losses consisted of damage to crops and farm equipment, erosion, deposition of debris, and the costs of levee and road repairs. Saturated levees were reinforced to protect against possible flooding. • February 1969—Panoche Creek flooded 18,400 acres in 1969 resulting in $1,797,000 in damages. • 1983—Ponding due to seepage occurred at the local high school. Levee freeboard was less than 3 feet at this time. Flood losses were limited to bank erosion and costs of flood fighting. The City of Firebaugh is also vulnerable to levee failure. Portions of Firebaugh fall within both National Levee Inventory leveed areas and State leveed areas. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for a map of leveed areas in Fresno County. Values at Risk Exposure to levee failure was assessed by comparing parcel data to the mapped leveed areas. Tables C.9 and C.10 detail the properties at risk to levee failure in National Levee Inventory leveed areas and State leveed areas, respectively. Table C.9: City of Firebaugh’s NLI Levee Failure Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Multi-Residential 0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 Residential 11 11 $1,437,732 $1,437,732 $2,875,464 $718,866 Total 11 12 $1,437,732 $1,437,732 $2,875,464 $718,866 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; NLI Leveed Area Table C.10: City of Firebaugh’s State Levee Failure Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 38 87 $3,665,735 $3,665,735 $7,331,470 $1,832,868 Exempt 17 108 $0 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 18 23 $7,687,873 $3,843,937 $11,531,810 $2,882,952 Residential 941 1,004 $86,244,613 $43,122,307 $129,366,920 $32,341,730 Total 1,014 1,222 $97,598,221 $50,631,978 $148,230,199 $37,057,550 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; State Leveed Area Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure C.4: City of Firebaugh’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Firebaugh was created (see Figure C.4). Tables C.11 and C.12 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Table C.11: City of Firebaugh’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 19 38 $2,522,513 $2,522,513 $5,045,026 $1,261,257 Exempt 5 13 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 2 2 $12,834,356 $19,251,534 $32,085,890 $8,021,473 Multi-Residential 15 52 $2,675,394 $1,337,697 $4,013,091 $1,003,273 Open Space 1 0 $1,944 $1,944 $3,888 $972 Residential 422 437 $36,007,506 $18,003,753 $54,011,259 $13,502,815 Total 464 542 $54,041,713 $41,117,441 $95,159,154 $23,789,789 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table C.12: City of Firebaugh’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 40 52 $4,915,782 $4,915,782 $9,831,564 $2,457,891 Exempt 7 36 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 26 43 $2,479,229 $3,718,844 $6,198,073 $1,549,518 Multi-Residential 33 57 $8,674,096 $4,337,048 $13,011,144 $3,252,786 Residential 643 689 $62,499,899 $62,499,899 $124,999,798 $31,249,950 Total 749 877 $78,569,006 $75,471,573 $154,040,579 $38,510,145 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Firebaugh has substantial assets at risk to the 100-year and 500- year floods. A total of 464 improved parcels are located within the 100-year floodplain, with a total value at risk of over $95.1 million. An additional 749 improved parcels valued at over $154 million fall within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing nearly $23.8 million in damage in the City of Firebaugh and a 0.2 percent chance of a 500-year flood causing roughly $62.3 million in damage (combined from both floods). Actual loss for both flood scenarios would likely be higher due to the inclusion of the seven additional “exempt” parcels for which building value is unknown. Properties at risk to flooding in Firebaugh are shown in relation to the mapped floodplains in Figure C.5. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are likely below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure C.5: City of Firebaugh’s Properties at Risk in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In addition to the 100-year and 500-year floodplains mapped by FEMA, the California Department of Water Resources maintains Best Available Maps (BAM) which include the floodplains in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, based on a study performed in 2002 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Though limited to the San Joaquin River as a flood source and thus not as comprehensive as the FEMA FIRM, the USACE study shows additional differentiation in flood risk by modeling the 200-year floodplain (the flood with a 0.5 percent annual chance of occurring). Table C.13 summarizes the values at risk by property type within the 200-year floodplain and loss estimates to the 200-year storm using the same methodology described above. Table C.13: City of Fresno’s FEMA 0.5% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 89 151 $12,131,355 $12,131,355 $24,262,710 $6,065,678 Exempt 24 217 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 11 27 $2,887,362 $4,331,043 $7,218,405 $1,804,601 Multi-Residential 37 59 $13,259,756 $6,629,878 $19,889,634 $4,972,409 Residential 824 908 $69,399,956 $34,699,978 $104,099,934 $26,024,984 Total 985 1,362 $97,678,429 $57,792,254 $155,470,683 $38,867,671 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; CA DWR BAM; USACE Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County, the digital flood insurance rate map, and the mapped leveed areas, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods as well as for levee failure based on the number of residential properties at risk and the U.S. Census Bureau 2016 estimate for the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Firebaugh: • 100-year flood—1,385 people • 500-year flood—2,143 people • Total flood—3,528 people • National Levee Inventory levee failure—35 people • State levee failure—3,040 people Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Firebaugh joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on August 23, 1982. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were 159 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $31,729,100 of coverage. All but one of the policies were residential (157 were for single-family homes), and 145 policies were for A and AH Zones, while the remaining 14 policies were in B, C, and X zones. Of the 159 policies, 127 were for pre-FIRM structures and 32 were for post-FIRM structures. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. There have not been any historical claims for flood losses in the City of Firebaugh. Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. Table C.14 lists the critical facilities in the City’s 100- and 500-year floodplains. The impact to the community could be great if these critical facilities are damaged or destroyed during a flood event. Table C.14: Critical Facilities in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains: City of Firebaugh Critical Facility Type 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Airport - 1 CalARP 1 1 School 1 1 Urgent Care - 1 Total 2 4 Source: Fresno County GIS, HIFLD 2017, FEMA 2009 FIRM Wildfire Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a wildfire map for the City of Firebaugh was created (see Figure C.6). An analysis was performed using GIS software that determined that there are 213 parcels at risk to moderate wildfire severity within the City of Firebaugh. This wildfire risk is detailed in Table C.15 below. Table C.15: Property at Risk to Moderate Wildfire Severity: City of Firebaugh Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Commercial 1 16 $125,911 $125,911 $251,822 Exempt 2 2 $0 $0 $0 Multi-Residential 3 3 $490,684 $245,342 $736,026 Residential 207 228 $16,863,015 $8,431,508 $25,294,523 Total 213 249 $17,479,610 $8,802,761 $26,282,371 Most parcels at risk to wildfire in the City of Firebaugh are residential uses and are located in the eastern side of the City along the San Joaquin River. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure C.6: City of Firebaugh’s Wildfire Threat Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan C.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Firebaugh’s updated capabilities are summarized below. C.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table C.16 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Firebaugh. Table C.16: City of Firebaugh’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan yes Zoning ordinance yes Subdivision ordinance yes Growth management ordinance yes Floodplain ordinance yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) no Building code yes Fire department ISO rating yes Rating of 5 Erosion or sediment control program no Stormwater management program yes Site plan review requirements yes Capital improvements plan yes Economic development plan yes Local emergency operations plan yes Other special plans no Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams yes Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) yes C.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table C.17 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Firebaugh. Table C.17: City of Firebaugh’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices yes Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure yes Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards yes Personnel skilled in GIS no Full time building official no Part-time Floodplain manager yes Emergency manager yes Police Chief Grant writer no Other personnel no GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) no Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) yes C.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table C.18 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table C.18: City of Firebaugh’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants yes Capital improvements project funding yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes no Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services yes Impact fees for new development yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds yes Incur debt through special tax bonds yes Incur debt through private activities no Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Withhold spending in hazard prone areas yes C.4.4 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Firebaugh has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. Some of the possible opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. •Ensuring existing warning systems for levees are up to date and working efficiently •Developing an Evacuation Plan in partnership with the County and specific to levee failure •Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City of Firebaugh C.5 Mitigation Strategy C.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Firebaugh adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Public Works Department may utilize the hazard information when implementing Capital Improvement projects and the Community Development Department may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a site plan or other type of development application. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Firebaugh will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1982. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. C.5.2 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Firebaugh identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the City of Firebaugh will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Assess Levee System for Necessary Improvements Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: Firebaugh is located along the San Joaquin River and as a result has had to deal with flooding issues/dangers due to high river flows, low levees, and levee failures along the San Joaquin River. This project would assess the levee system for needed improvements to provide protection to the 100-year flood event. Specific repairs and enhancements would be completed as a result of the assessment. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: City of Firebaugh Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $2,000,000 Potential Funding: Grants, City Funding Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will reduce risk of flooding in the City of Firebaugh and prevent property damage. Schedule: Long-term 2023; on hold until funding is acquired Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Status: New project 2. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Delta-Mendota subbasin underlays the City of Firebaugh and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Firebaugh being a local agency (as defined by §10723 of the Water Code) which overlays the Delta-Mendota basin, the City has become a GSA for the portion of the basin which the city boundaries overlays. The Firebaugh GSA is required to develop and implement, no later than January 31, 2020, a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. The Firebaugh GSA is part of a multi-agency GSP that is being prepared by the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority. The City of Firebaugh and Firebaugh GSA will actively participate in the development and implementation of the planning process. The development of the City of Firebaugh GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Firebaugh. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: City Engineer, and Firebaugh GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Fresno County (Firebaugh) Annex C.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX D: CITY OF FOWLER Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan D.1 Community Profile Figure D.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Fowler and its Sphere of Influence. Figure D.1: The City of Fowler D.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Fowler is located in central Fresno County, approximately 10 miles south of the City of Fresno and 3 miles north of the City of Selma. The City sits along State Highway 99, which connects to major points north and south, but is otherwise surrounded by agricultural land. D.1.2 History The following historical background is reported in the City of Fowler Revitalization Plan: Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan “The community of Fowler was established in 1872 when State Senator Thomas Fowler implemented the “Fowler Switch” along the southern extension of the Central Pacific Railway. In its early years the community was a center for the cattle ranching industry, and activity surrounded the railroad tracks within the historic core. The City incorporated in 1908. The Sanborn Company produced Fire Insurance maps in the early years of Fowler’s development which provide insight on how the community grew and changed. In 1896 the City was contained largely within a 16- block area bordered by Mariposa Street to the north, the Southern Pacific railway tracks to the west, Fifth Street to the east, and Fresno Street to the south. Blocks were laid out in a uniform grid that measured 400’ long by 320’ wide and included north-south alleys measuring 20’ in width. Despite the small size of the community, Merced Street east of the railroad had already become a center of commercial activity, with several buildings lining the public right-of-way. By 1945 the City had expanded all the way to Adams Avenue to the north but had not grown much past Vine Street to the south. Although the gridiron pattern of rectangular blocks continued, the town remained compact and walkable in form. Merced Street east of the railway tracks continued as a commercial center, adding new businesses and institutions along its route.” D.1.3 Economy Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Fowler are shown in Table D.1. Table D.1: City of Fowler’s Economic Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Fowler Families below Poverty Level 22.6% All People below Poverty Level 23.9% Median Family Income $48,279 Median Household Income $47,572 Per Capita Income $18,305 Population in Labor Force 2,762 Population Employed* 2,491 Unemployment 9.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables D.2 and D.3 detail how the City of Fowler labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2016 American Community Survey. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table D.2: City of Fowler’s Employment by Occupation, 2016 Occupation # Employed % Employed Service Occupations 648 26.0 Sales and Office Occupations 606 24.3 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 585 23.5 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 363 14.6 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 289 11.6 Total 2,491 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table D.3: City of Fowler’s Employment by Industry, 2016 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 604 24.2 Retail Trade 339 13.6 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 315 12.6 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 303 12.2 Public Administration 203 8.1 Manufacturing 177 7.1 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 106 4.3 Construction 102 4.1 Wholesale Trade 96 3.9 Other Services, Except Public Administration 89 3.6 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 88 3.5 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 57 2.3 Information 12 0.5 Total 3,354 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ D.1.4 Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2016 population for the City of Fowler was estimated at 6,083. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Fowler from the 2016 ACS are shown in Table D.4. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table D.4: City of Fowler Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Fowler Gender/Age Male 50.6% Female 49.4% Median age 30.8 Under 5 years 8.8% Under 18 years 31.9% 65 years and over 10.6% Race/Ethnicity* White 67.0% Asian 11.8% Black or African American 0.4% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 69.5% Education High school graduate or higher 71.1% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 11.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 97.0% reporting one race D.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Fowler’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Fowler (see Table D.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are unique to Fowler. Table D.5: City of Fowler—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Low Drought Significant Likely Critical High Earthquake Significant Occasional Critical Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Critical Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Likely Limited Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact D.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Fowler’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the outreach process in 2017-2018. Fowler is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table D.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Fowler HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table D.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Fowler are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for the following hazards is located in Section D.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazard (High Significance) for mitigation is drought. • drought • flood/levee failure Note: agricultural hazards, earthquake, hazardous materials incidents, epidemic/pandemic, and windstorm are considered hazards of Medium Significance by the City of Fowler but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Fowler, those hazards are as follows: • dam failure • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze, extreme heat, fog, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado, winter storm • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered not applicable to the City of Fowler. D.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Fowler’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, historic assets, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table D.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Fowler. Table D.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Fowler by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 0 $330,857 $330,857 $661,714 Commercial 88 127 $30,650,189 $30,650,189 $61,300,378 Exempt 25 49 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 51 42 $59,105,587 $88,658,381 $147,763,968 Multi-Residential 46 68 $9,122,044 $4,561,022 $13,683,066 Open Space 2 0 $79,731 $79,731 $159,462 Residential 1,589 1,717 $232,217,149 $116,108,575 $348,325,724 Total 1,802 2,003 $331,505,557 $240,388,754 $571,894,311 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Fowler is provided in Table D.7 and mapped in Figure D.2. Table D.7: City of Fowler’s Critical Facilities Critical Facility Type Number CalARP 3 Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 School 9 Total 15 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure D.2: City of Fowler’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic Resources The City of Fowler does not have any properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. However, the City does have one property, Fowler’s Switch, listed on the California Register of Historic Resources. Fowler’s Switch was registered as a landmark on the California Register in 1973. Economic Assets The City of Fowler operates a Revolving Business Loan Program to support local businesses using economic development grants from the State’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Some of the businesses that have already benefited from this program are: Dave’s Auto Service, Bobby Salazar’s Taqueria, H & H Tire, Central Valley Honda-Polaris, Empire Equipment Company, and Picker Parts. The business loans are provided as “gap financing” in conjunction with the business’ own primary financing for their project. One of the requirements of qualifying for a business loan is that the project must create a minimum amount of jobs for a targeted income group, calculated at 80% of the area median income. The City has also used the CDBG funds to provide infrastructure improvement grants, which have helped make facilities available for businesses to locate to properties in Fowler. Growth and Development Trends The City’s 2025 General Plan Land Use Map is shown in Figure D.2. For the City’s Sphere of Influence, the General Plan proposes a ring of agricultural use, along with heavy industrial uses north and south along the Highway 99 corridor as well as some expansion of residential uses to the east and west. Table D.8 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population but has experienced a decline in the number of housing units between 2010 and 2016. As of 2016, the population of Firebaugh was 6,083 with an average growth rate of 9.21 percent. Table D.8: City of Fowler’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2016 2010 Population 2016 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2016 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2016 5,570 6,083 +9.21 1,842 1,803 -2.12 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates Of the 1,803 housing units in Firebaugh, 98.3 percent are occupied. This low vacancy rate indicates a need for additional units, which may suggest development will occur in the near future. Owner- occupied units account for 53.8 percent of all occupied housing. Single family detached homes comprise 71.8 percent of the housing stock in the City. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Figure D.3: City of Fowler’s Land Use Map Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan D.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table D.6 above shows Fowler’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. In regard to these types of structures, there are currently 69 parcels in the 100- and 500-year floodplains in the City of Fowler. No further information on vulnerable structures is available. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County as a whole). Drought Due to the importance of agriculture drought can have a significant impact on the local economy. Flood/Levee Failure The most recent FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) affecting the City of Fowler was updated in February 2009. According to the FIRM, small portions of the planning area along Highway 99 and the railroad are subject to 100-year (or 1-percent-annual-chance) and 500-year (0.2-percent-annual-chance) flooding. Based on the description of principal flood problems around the City of Fowler in FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), damaging floods primarily occur as a result of heavy rains overwhelming the storm drainage system capacity. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Fowler was created (see Figure D.4). Tables D.9 and D.10 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure D.4: City of Fowler’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table D.9: City of Fowler’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 5 5 $2,157,956 $2,157,956 $4,315,912 $1,078,978 Multi-Residential 3 3 $175,279 $87,640 $262,919 $65,730 Residential 45 49 $3,918,323 $1,959,162 $5,877,485 $1,469,371 Total 53 57 $6,251,558 $4,204,757 $10,456,315 $2,614,079 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table D.10: City of Fowler’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Residential 16 5 $1,449,011 $1,449,011 $2,898,022 $724,506 Total 16 5 $1,449,011 $1,449,011 $2,898,022 $724,506 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Fowler has limited assets at risk to the 100-year and 500-year floods but nonetheless is vulnerable to flooding. A total of 53 improved parcels are located within the 100-year floodplain, with a total value at risk of nearly $10.5 million. An additional 16 improved parcels valued at over $2.8 million fall within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing over $2.6 million in damage in the City of Firebaugh and a 0.2 percent chance of a 500-year flood causing roughly $3.3 million in damage (combined from both floods). Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are likely below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be higher than those included herein. Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County, the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the U.S. Census Bureau 2016 estimate for the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Fowler: • 100-year flood—342 people • 500-year flood—51 people • Total flood—393 people Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Fowler joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on September 24, 1984. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were 22 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $5,787,700 of coverage. Of the 22 policies, 18 were residential (for single- family homes), and 4 policies were non-residential. There were 17 policies in A Zones, while the remaining 5 policies were in B, C, and X zones (3 of these were preferred risk policies). Of the 22 policies, 18 were for pre-FIRM structures and 4 were for post-FIRM structures. There has been one historical loss in the City of Fowler, which occurred in a pre-FIRM structure in a B, C, or X Zone. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. There are no critical facilities located in the 100- or 500-year floodplain in the City of Fowler. D.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Fowler’s updated capabilities are summarized below. D.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table D.11 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Fowler. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table D.11: City of Fowler’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan Yes June 2004 Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) No Building code Yes Fire department ISO rating Erosion or sediment control program Stormwater management program Site plan review requirements Yes Capital improvements plan Economic development plan Local emergency operations plan Other special plans Yes Revitalization Plan Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams Yes Effective 1/20/2016 Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) D.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table D.12 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Fowler. Table D.12: City of Fowler’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Consultant Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Personnel skilled in GIS Full time building official Yes Floodplain manager Yes Emergency manager Grant writer Other personnel GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan D.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table D.13 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table D.13: City of Fowler Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Incur debt through special tax bonds Incur debt through private activities Withhold spending in hazard prone areas D.4.4 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Fowler has several existing mechanisms in place that already help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities for the City to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. Some of the possible opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will create a framework for drought response and mitigation. • Develop a stormwater management program to identify problem areas and mitigation alternatives. D.5 Mitigation Strategy D.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Fowler adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Building and Code Enforcement Department may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a building permit application. While the Economic Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Development Corporation, which contracts with the City in economic development opportunities will use the hazard information when working on expansion plans with existing business as well as when recruiting new businesses to the City. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Fowler will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1984. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. D.5.2 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Fowler identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the City of Fowler will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Install Back-up Power System for City Critical Facilities Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The City Hall, Police Department, and Fire Department have no generators for back-up power. It is important that essential services remain operational in the event of a large- scale power outage that often is associated with major hazard impacts. This project would result Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in installation of emergency generators at each facility. Each facility would be assessed for proper generator sizing and hook-up. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: City Hall Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $500,000 Potential Funding: Not yet identified Benefits (Avoided Losses): Generators will keep operation ongoing during outages at these critical facilities Schedule: 2020 Status: New Project 2. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Fowler and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Fowler has become a joint power authority of the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the City of Kingsburg, City of Parlier and City of Sanger. As a member of the South Kings GSA, the City of Fowler is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the South Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Fowler. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Fresno County (Fowler) Annex D.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Responsible Office: Public Works and South Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX E: CITY OF FRESNO Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan E.1 Community Profile Figure E.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Fresno and its Sphere of Influence. Figure E.1: The City of Fresno E.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Fresno and its Sphere of Influence encompass a 100,400-acre area in central Fresno County. Over the past decade, the City has expanded into the northern, northwestern, and eastern reaches of its Sphere of Influence. Except for the deep channel of the San Joaquin River at the northern boundary of the City, Fresno’s topography is generally level and slopes gently to the southwest. The upper San Joaquin River lies at the City’s northerly boundary and has carved a deep channel, confining the river between steep bluffs that range from 20 to approximately 100 feet in height. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno has a Mediterranean climate, averaging over 262 sunny days per year and little or no measurable precipitation from June through September. Annual rainfall typically totals 12-14 inches in episodic events lasting up to a few days at most. Fresno’s prevailing winds are typically light and from the northwest. Storms with strong weather disturbances (lightning and very agitated winds) may occur from autumn months through the spring, with the strength of the storm dependent upon temperature gradients between moving weather fronts. Winter mornings in December and January approach freezing but only rarely reach as low as, or below, 32ºF; winter daytime high temperatures almost always approach or exceed 40ºF. Snowfall is an extremely rare and transient phenomenon; the last recorded snowfall in Fresno was ½ inch on December 20, 1998. The Tule fog, a thick ground fog that settles in the San Joaquin Valley from late fall through early spring, is the leading cause of weather-related accidents in California. In addition to causing visibility issues, “black ice” from precipitated fog may temporarily affect some roadways and bridges during the winter. Summer daytime peak temperatures are high in Fresno. Some heat waves last over a week with daytime highs well over 100ºF and issuance of health advisories. Summer evenings provide for some cooling of 10-15ºF with the early morning daybreak hours cooling by 20-30ºF, depending on humidity (low humidity allows for more radiant cooling). Geography and climate combine to create a general accumulation of air pollutants in the San Joaquin Valley (and in the City of Fresno) that occasionally result in unhealthy air quality conditions. Air quality problems are exacerbated by dust storms, human activities (e.g., vehicle emissions and fireplace and wood stove use), atmospheric photochemical processes, and forest fires from local and regional fires. The City has chronically failed to attain some of the national and state ambient air quality standards, but due to the efforts of the California Air Resources Board and the regional San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, progress toward attainment of ozone (oxidant) and particulate matter standards is being made. Carbon monoxide standards were deemed to have been attained in the 1990s. E.1.2 History Development of what today is the City of Fresno began in 1871, when the Central Pacific Railroad chose the Fresno Station for its San Joaquin Valley rail line. The City soon became the County seat and the shipping and distribution hub for the region’s agricultural industry. An economic boom across California in the 1880s helped transform Fresno from a village to a city, and helped drive its incorporation in 1885. Today, the City of Fresno is the center of trade, commerce, finance, and transportation for the San Joaquin Valley. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan E.1.3 Economy The most comprehensive economic data available for the City of Fresno comes from the U.S. Census Bureau by way of the American Community Survey (ACS). Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Fresno are shown in Table E.1. Table E.1: City of Fresno’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Fresno Families below Poverty Level 24.4% All People below Poverty Level 29.8% Median Family Income $45,806 Median Household Income $41,531 Per Capita Income $19,465 Population in Labor Force 231,332 Population Employed* 198,113 Unemployment 14.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables E.2 and E.3 show how the City of Fresno’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on 5-year estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table E.2: City of Fresno’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Management, Business, Science and Arts Occupations 57,374 29.0 Management, Business, and Financial Occupations (20,767) (10.5) Computer, Engineering, and Science Occupations (6,018) (3.0) Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media Occupations (20,262) (10.2) Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations (10,327) (5.2) Sales and Office Occupations 49,752 25.1 Service Occupations 41,528 21.0 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 26,738 13.5 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 22,721 11.5 Total 198,113 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table E.3: City of Fresno’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care, and Social Assistance 48,557 24.5 Retail Trade 23,337 11.8 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 20,643 10.4 Professional, Scientific, and Management, and Administrative and Waste Management Services 16,742 8.5 Manufacturing 14,869 7.5 Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Industry # Employed % Employed Public Administration 12,030 6.1 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 10,875 5.5 Other Services, Except Public Administration 10,710 5.4 Construction 10,586 5.3 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 10,446 5.3 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 9,476 4.8 Wholesale Trade 7,158 3.6 Information 2,684 1.4 Total 198,113 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ With the depressed real estate and construction market and economic recession toward the end of the 2000-2010 decade, unemployment rates increased to a peak of 18.0 percent in 2010. Since then, the unemployment rate has steadily decreased. The most recent annual data from the State of California Employment Development Department indicates that in 2016 there were 238,400 people in the City of Fresno labor force. Of these, 214,000 were employed; 24,400 were not. The unemployment rate was 10.2 percent. E.1.4 Population According to the California Department of Finance, Fresno’s population was estimated to be 520,778 in 2016. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates are shown in Table E.4. Table E.4: City of Fresno’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015* Characteristic City of Fresno Gender/Age Male 49.2% Female 50.8% Median age 30.0 Under 5 years 8.9% Under 18 years 29.5% 65 years and over 9.9% Race/Ethnicity** White 52.2% Asian 13.0% Black or African American 7.9% American Indian/Alaska Native 1.1% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 48.5% Education High school graduate or higher 75.2% Disability Status Population 5 years and over 11.75% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Based on a 2015 estimated population of 510,451 **Of the 95.4% reporting one race Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan For information about how some of these demographics affect social vulnerability and how they compare to other Fresno County jurisdictions, California, and the United States, see “Social Vulnerability” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. A more in-depth look at the population of the City of Fresno, including the City’s special needs populations, is available in the City of Fresno General Plan 2015-2023 Housing Element commissioned by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department and prepared by MIG, Inc (available at www.fresno.gov/housingelement). E.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The City of Fresno’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Fresno (see Table E.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards unique to Fresno. Table E.5: City of Fresno—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Low Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Significant Unlikely Limited Medium Drought Significant Likely Critical High Earthquake Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Flood/Levee Failure Significant Occasional Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Critical Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Unlikely Negligible Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Occasional Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Limited Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact E.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the City of Fresno’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Fresno’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Fresno. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table E.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Fresno’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table E.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Fresno are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section E.3.2 Estimating Potential Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought, flood/levee failure, and hazardous materials incidents. • dam failure • drought • earthquake • epidemic/pandemic • extreme heat • flood/levee failure • fog • hazardous materials incidents • wildfire • windstorm Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Fresno, those hazards ranked Low are as follows: • agricultural hazards* • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • landslide • severe weather: heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado • soil hazards • volcano • extreme cold • winter storm Note on Agricultural Hazards*: Agricultural hazards are ranked Low in the City of Fresno than for the County overall (ranked High) because very little land in the City is used for agricultural purposes. Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche is considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of Fresno. E.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Fresno’s assets at risk, including values at risk; critical facilities and infrastructure; historic, cultural, and natural resources; economic assets; and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table E.6 shows the 2017 values at risk broken down by property type for the City of Fresno. Table E.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Fresno by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 76 53 $2,887,304 $2,887,304 $5,774,608 Commercial 6,110 24,004 $5,471,778,084 $5,471,778,084 $10,943,556,168 Exempt 1,012 3,881 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 2,575 5,630 $1,420,216,900 $2,130,325,350 $3,550,542,250 Multi-Residential 5,793 52,504 $2,416,885,833 $1,208,442,917 $3,625,328,750 Open Space 1 1 $150,882 $150,882 $301,764 Residential 113,468 117,771 $15,122,142,902 $7,561,071,451 $22,683,214,353 Unknown 2 2 $530,082 $530,082 $1,060,164 Total 129,037 203,846 $24,434,591,987 $16,375,186,070 $40,809,778,057 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Since the 2009 Plan, the City of Fresno has experienced notable increases in agricultural, commercial, and residential properties and property values at risk. Compared to improved values from the Fresno County Assessor’s Office’s 2007 Certified Roll Values, agricultural improved value has increased by 254.2 percent, commercial improved value has increased by 299.8 percent and total residential improved value has increased by 265.8 percent. Part of this dramatic increase in exposure of commercial and residential properties can be attributed to annexations of previously unincorporated County land that have occurred within the last decade. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Fresno from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table E.7 and mapped in Figure E.2. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table E.7: City of Fresno’s Critical Facilities Critical Facility Type Number Airport 3 Behavioral Health 4 CalARP 28 Colleges & Universities 14 Communications 1 County Government 4 Courthouse 1 Daycare 155 Department of Agriculture 2 Department of Public Health 4 Department of Public Works 1 Department of Social Services 9 Detention Center 4 District Attorney 2 Fire Station 21 General Services 3 Health Care 12 Nursing Home 27 Police 10 School 183 Sheriff 3 Supplemental College 4 Urgent Care 4 Total 499 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure E.2: City of Fresno’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The list of specific critical facilities and community assets is maintained by the City of Fresno Police Department. The Fresno Urban Area Critical Infrastructure List is considered confidential and may be accessed through the Fresno Police Department Homeland Security Division. Historic, Cultural, and Natural Resources Historic and Cultural Sites The Cultural Resource Facility located on the California State University, Bakersfield campus maintains a database, maps, and descriptive surveys of prehistoric sites in the Fresno area. Details of the locations are kept confidential due to the risk of theft or vandalism of artifacts. The general location of these sites is along the San Joaquin River and its bluffs, where permanent Native American settlements were established near a permanent water supply and seasonal salmon fishery. The City of Fresno maintains a local official register of historic resources (available from the historic preservation officer in the City’s Planning and Development Department). There are approximately 284 properties on the register. Twenty-one of the properties were demolished or destroyed by fire after being placed on the list, and three other properties have been relocated to sites outside the City of Fresno. The local register includes 31 properties that are on the National Register of Historic Places (see Table E.8). Table E.8: City of Fresno’s Properties on the National Register of Historic Places Property Name Address Date Listed Azteca Theater 836-840 F Street 4/21/2017 Bank of Italy 1015 Fulton Mall 10/29/1982 Brix, H. H., Mansion 2844 Fresno Street 9/15/1983 Einstein House 1600 M Street 1/31/1978 Forestiere Underground Gardens 5021 W. Shaw Avenue 10/28/1977 Fresno Bee Building 1555 Van Ness Avenue 11/1/1982 Fresno Brewing Company Office and Warehouse 100 M Street 1/5/1984 Fresno County Hall of Records 2281 Tulare Street 12/22/2011 Fresno Memorial Auditorium 2425 Fresno Street 5/10/1994 Fresno Republican Printery Building 2130 Kern Street 1/2/1979 Fresno Sanitary Landfill West and Jensen Avenues 8/7/2001 Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church 2226 Ventura Street 7/31/1986 Hotel Californian 851 Van Ness Avenue 4/21/2004 Kearney, M. Theo, Park and Mansion 7160 Kearney Boulevard 3/13/1975 Kindler, Paul, House 1520 E. Olive Avenue 10/29/1982 Maulbridge Apartments 2344 Tulare Street 5/6/1982 Meux House 1007 R Street 1/13/1975 Old Administration Building, Fresno City College 1101 University Avenue 5/1/1974 Old Fresno Water Tower 2444 Fresno Street 10/14/1971 Pantages, Alexander, Theater 1400 Fulton Street 2/23/1978 Physicians Building 2607 Fresno Street 11/20/1978 Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Property Name Address Date Listed Rehorn House 1050 S Street 1/8/1982 Romain, Frank, House 2055 San Joaquin Street 1/11/1982 San Joaquin Light & Power Corporation Building 1401 Fulton Street 1/3/2006 Santa Fe Hotel 935 Santa Fe Avenue 3/14/1991 Santa Fe Passenger Depot 2650 Tulare Street 11/7/1976 Southern Pacific Passenger Depot 1033 H Street 3/21/1978 Tower Theatre 1201 N. Wishon Avenue 9/24/1992 Twining Laboratories 2527 Fresno Street 3/26/1991 Warehouse Row 722, 744, and 764 P Street 3/24/1978 YWCA Building 1660 M Street 9/21/1978 Source: National Register of Historic Places, www.nps.gov/nr/ Other historic resources in the City of Fresno include the following historic districts: • The Porter Tract Historic District (45 homes) • The Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport Historic District (four historic structures) • The Wilson Island Historic District (78 homes) • The Huntington Boulevard Historic Districts (81 homes) As comprehensive as the City’s register may be, it does not include all properties in the City with potential historic or cultural significance. The list is continually being expanded as sites are discovered through routine analysis of proposed development areas and through proposed new listings of historic districts. The pool of potentially historic properties also changes through time, since federal law provides for a 50-year retrospective review, which now encompasses the post- World War II building boom era. Ten properties that were recommended for the City’s register but were denied inclusion by the Fresno City Council are still recognized for their historic/cultural significance (heritage properties), which is taken into account when any actions are undertaken on them pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. (Three of these properties have been since been demolished.) While a detailed assessment of seismic and flood risks for the listed properties in Fresno is currently beyond the available staff resources of the City’s Historic Preservation Office, it can be generally assumed that most of the structures have not been seismically reinforced and that their masonry is vulnerable to strong ground shaking. While many of the structures are in Fresno’s old downtown and were built when this area was largely within the 100-year floodplain of the Fresno Stream Group, efforts by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Fresno have provided for flood detention structures and ponding basins that have greatly reduced the size and extent of the floodplain in the downtown, helping to preserve these historic resources. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Natural Resource Areas San Joaquin River Corridor While the City maintains many community and neighborhood parks, its natural resources are primarily along the San Joaquin River. Owing to the year-round presence of water, the river bottom and bluffs host the richest aquatic and riparian forest biota in the City. It is in this area where migratory waterfowl and federally and state-listed endangered wildlife are most likely be encountered. These species include the valley elderberry longhorn beetle, the giant garter snake, and the American bald eagle (recently recommended for delisting from the National Endangered Species list). Over past decades, land in the river corridor has been purchased and aggregated by state agencies (Department of Fish and Game, San Joaquin River Conservancy), by nonprofit groups (San Joaquin River Parkway Trust, Fresno Sportsmen’s Club), and by the City and County (the City’s Woodward Park and Milburn Unit, the County’s Lost Lak e Park). The ultimate goal of the San Joaquin River Conservancy Plan is to fashion a regional parkway with continuity of wildlife corridors and to manage it for joint recreational, habitat conservation, and floodplain protection uses. Due to its location, this natural resource area is flood-prone. In some areas, this risk has been increased due to removal of massive amounts of sand and gravel (from mining), which lowered the ground surface over past decades. While the native riparian plants and animals have largely evolved with coping mechanisms for periodic severe flooding, any developed recreation facilities would be at risk. The face of the bluff is also very vulnerable to wildfire because of its vegetative overgrowth and nearly vertical slopes. Fire prevention efforts are difficult here because the soils are too unstable for vegetative removal projects or for irrigation that would keep the plants well- watered. Vernal Pool Areas In the northerly parts of the City, outside the river corridor, certain clay soils have the capacity to form impermeable hardpans and layers that do not allow rapid percolation of rainwater. During the rainy season, shallow vernal pools form that are populated by a host of specialized plants and animals. Many species associated with vernal pools are federally and state-listed species (e.g., the California tiger salamander, various types of fairy shrimp crustaceans, orcutt grass, button celery species, meadowfoam, and owl clover). Vernal pools are also heavily utilized by nonlisted species, such as migratory waterfowl, rodents, furbearing predators, and raptors that prey on other animals. Wildfire is not considered a major risk to these natural communities, because they evolved with dry season fires as a common occurrence (the plants have very resistant seeds and the crustaceans and amphibians go into protected parts of their life cycles such as deep dormancy). Human encroachment through agriculture and land development is the greatest risk to vernal pool areas. If the clay layers are disrupted by “deep ripping” plowing, water cannot accumulate on the surface and the pools will not form. If the land is subjected to year-round irrigation, specially adapted Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan vernal pool species will be out-competed by other species. Conversion of land to urban development with structures, paving, lawns, pets, and people will destroy vernal pool natural communities. Economic Assets The City of Fresno’s economic sector includes both private and public entities that have been compiled into clusters in order to identify key economic assets. These ten clusters, known as the Regional Job Initiative (RJI) clusters, are Advanced Manufacturing, Clean Energy, Construction, Food Processing, Healthcare, Info Processing (Call Centers, Logistics, and Distribution), Software Development, Tourism, and Water Technology. Among these clusters are major employers like Saint Agnes, Pelco, Gottschalks, and Ruiz Foods that both boost Fresno’s economic growth and provide employment opportunities. If a disaster struck the City, it could have a severe impact on Fresno’s economic assets. Sectors of greatest concern include all the RJI clusters, but in particular Food Processing, which includes the agricultural industry, and Healthcare. Growth and Development Trends The City of Fresno is growing at a rapid pace. Its expansion from incorporation in 1885 to the present day (August 2017) is illustrated in Figure E.3. Even more growth is anticipated in the years to come, based on current trends. Table E.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2011 and 2017 alone. Table E.9: City of Fresno’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2011-2017 2011 Population 2017 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2011-2017 2011 # of Housing Units 2017 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2011-2017 498,664 525,832 +5,49 172,171 178,819 +3.86 Source: California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure E.3: City of Fresno’s Annexation History Source: City of Fresno Development Department. This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data, however, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan By December 31, 2035 (the “Horizon” year of the most recent Fresno General Plan), it is estimated that 771,000 people will reside in the Fresno Metropolitan Area (which would include County islands and areas inside the City’s Sphere of Influence but not yet annexed). This figure of 771,000 would be 64 percent of the projected 2035 Fresno County population of 1,201,416 (State of California Department of Finance population projections). As of August of 2017, the City of Fresno comprised 115.3 square miles of annexed (incorporated) land within its 161.8-square mile Sphere of Influence. Development had reached the natural and political northerly boundary of the City, the San Joaquin River, and began expanding to the west and southeast through conversion of rural residential and agricultural land. Within the Sphere of Influence, there continued to be “County islands” and partially urbanized fringe areas. An urban unification annexation program may reduce the numbers and sizes of these enclaves in the coming decade. The Fresno General Plan made a concerted effort to revitalize the City’s downtown by balancing new growth areas to geographically recenter the downtown. With construction of a major sewer trunk along the Grantland Avenue alignment and proposed construction of new wastewater and water treatment plants in the southeastern area, the City’s future growth is expected to concentrate primarily to the west and southeast. The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) has commenced major flood control facility construction on Fancher Creek in the eastern portion of the City’s Sphere of Influence. Since the Fresno General Plan was completed in December 2014, the FMFCD will compile technical studies and update its master service plan in conjunction with the City’s land use plan for this new growth area. The Fresno General Plan also directed that new development be more compact and that single- family residential densities be higher than the City’s traditional 4± dwelling units/acre pattern for subdivisions. The recently adopted Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and other plan amendments and projects in process (and proposed in the future) feature smaller lots, multi-story housing, multi-family units, and reduced setbacks. Unless the cost of manufactured housing units would provide a substantial savings over site-built homes, it is not expected that the proportion of manufactured housing in the City of Fresno will greatly increase. It is possible that there will be some increase as producers of these units create models with appropriate roof pitches and other features to meet the City’s design review standards. More information about the City of Fresno’s growth and current housing stock is available in the City of Fresno General Plan 2015-2023 Housing Element commissioned by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department and prepared by MIG, Inc (available at www.fresno.gov/housingelement). More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan E.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table E.6 above shows Fresno’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. No further information on vulnerable structures is available. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Agricultural Hazards Agricultural hazards are ranked with a Low significance in the City of Fresno; lower than for the County overall (ranked High) because very little land in the City is used for agricultural purposes. Agricultural losses due to hazard events have greater economic impact on the small communities and rural areas of the County than on the City of Fresno. However, ornamental and garden plants in the City, and pets and incidental livestock kept within City limits, may become involved in any countywide responses to crop pests or infectious agents, because these urban plants and animals provide reservoirs for the diseases and crop pests that threaten the County’s agriculture. Dam Failure The National Inventory of Dams lists five dams located in the City of Fresno, including the Redbank Creek Detention basin, Fancher Creek Detention, Friant Millerton Road Embankment A, Redbank, and Friant Dike 3. Drought Annual rainfall in the City of Fresno is typically 12-14 inches. This makes the region vulnerable to episodic drought and to chronic drawdown of aquifer levels (the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has designated the groundwater below Fresno as a sole source aquifer). Water in this aquifer has historically flowed through permeable strata from north and northeast toward the south and west, but the aquifer has been so affected by drawdown that a “cone of depression” has been created, reversing the historic flow directions (the “groundwater gradient”) in portions of west and south Fresno. In the last 10 years the City of Fresno has made strides to reduce dependence on groundwater by setting a course to implement water plans, which include the Urban Water Management Plan, Recycled Water Waster Plan, and the recently adopted Water Capital Program. A surface water treatment plant is currently under construction in Southeast Fresno and should be completed by 2018. When operational, the plant will maximize use of Fresno’s surface water allocations during Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan normal years and allow the City to reduce overuse of groundwater. Recycled water use will also grow in Fresno with the new recycled water mains now being constructed. The City has plans to use 25,000 acre-feet per year of recycled water for irrigating open spaces, parks, street medians and golf courses. Earthquake The seismic hazard in the City of Fresno is low relative to California coastal and mountain communities and is lower than in the Sierra and western areas of Fresno County. There are no known earthquake faults underlying Fresno, and the City has never been the epicenter of a known seismic event. However, Fresno is considered to have a moderate risk of earthquake damage due to the presence of major fault systems to the west, south, and east and due to Fresno’s large population and number of buildings, critical facilities, and infrastructure and other development that could be vulnerable to more severe ground shaking. Historically, Fresno has sustained very little damage from major earthquakes occurring on California’s major faults: the Owens Valley earthquake of 1872 toppled an unreinforced masonry (brick) church steeple. More recent major earthquakes in the past four decades (with epicenters near Coalinga and the Bay Area) have resulted in perceptible tall building swaying in Fresno, minor injuries (attributable to shelved items falling), and slight damage (e.g., minor cracked plaster, etc.). To date, no soil liquefaction has been observed in Fresno from any seismic event. The most serious impacts of an earthquake in Fresno would probably arise from damage to large dams in the Sierra Nevada on the upper reaches of the San Joaquin River very close to active Long Valley Caldera-related faults. Should either of the two most easterly (and largest) dams in this area be severely damaged or breached, the resulting sequential dam failures could cause floodwaters to overtop Friant Dam northeast of the City. While the dam failure inundation map for Friant shows that most of the flooded area would be expected in the northwest part of town (where the confining river bluffs are not as high), there are some residences and important infrastructure in the river channel itself that would be inundated and gravely damaged (or destroyed), including highway bridges and the inlet of the Friant-Kern Canal, which supplies Bureau of Reclamation surface water to the Fresno area and to other communities in the southern San Joaquin Valley. Epidemic/Pandemic Fresno’s population includes many residents who have limited access to health care, with causes related to low household income levels, lack of insurance coverage, a limited number of primary health care facilities and acute care beds, a low ratio of public health and medical professionals to population, and language barriers. Highly communicable diseases tend to affect a large percentage of the City, perhaps due to large household size and the mobility of the population. If a highly communicable disease outbreak occurred that caused serious or life-threatening illness for most infected persons, health care and other public service systems would experience disruption or breakdown and would require outside intervention with resources from other communities, the state, or the federal government. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Extreme Cold/Freeze Freeze events occur occasionally in Fresno, but impacts are greater to the agriculture industry in the County than to the City. In January 2007, overnight minimum temperatures fell below freezing between January 6 and 10. The event led to a presidential disaster declaration due to the estimated $710 million in agricultural damage in the Central and South Valley. The 2007 event occurred in another eight-year interval after the devastating citrus freezes of 1998 and 1990. The event caused frozen pipes in Fresno but little other property damage. The City also has a plan for freezing temperature events and opens warming centers. These centers are primarily geared toward the homeless population. Extreme Heat Fresno uses a local version of the California State Plan for Extreme Heat. This plan was used during the extreme heat event during the summer of 2006 and worked well. The City operates cooling centers, which are primarily geared toward the homeless. Public notification for extreme heat events is conducted through the Public Affairs office in coordination with Fresno County. Expansive Soils These types of soils occur in northern Fresno in the far northeastern portions of its Sphere of Influence (in the “Copper River” area). Expansive clay soils can cause cavitation over time and require special construction standards for foundations. Flood As noted in the preceding section, there is some flood risk to the City from San Joaquin River major dam failure inundation, but the more common flood risk, repetitively experienced in Fresno, is that of shallow “sheet” flooding from major precipitation events. Except for the San Joaquin River, streams in the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area originate in the Sierra foothills to the east and extend into the valley floor west of State Route 99 by way of dual-use irrigation and storm runoff channels and disperse into numerous smaller irrigation canals. Overflow from these canals and urban stormwater from intense precipitation events is sent back to the San Joaquin River or to farmland southwest of Fresno via spillway channels. In the City of Fresno, these canals and channels are under control of the Fresno Irrigation District, an independent public agency, but their use during storm events is shared by another independent district, the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD). The FMFCD was created to develop flood control facilities to prevent further repetitive losses created by the Fresno Stream Group and to provide an urban drainage network. This District is responsible for administering a Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. The City’s municipal code supports these efforts by including a Drainage Fee Ordinance to ensure that grading and development comply with the FMFCD’s Master Plan and standards and provide proportionate shares of storm drain and ponding basin infrastructure. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The City of Fresno’s Floodplain Ordinance further coordinates and supports FMFCD efforts. This ordinance and the Fresno General Plan Safety Element policies require conformance to FEMA floodplain management policies and to those of California’s Central Valley Flood Prevention Board (which regulates the designated floodway along the San Joaquin River channel). Still, in areas not completely developed to urban standards, areas where the urban drainage network is not yet completed, and in some County “island” areas (land within the City that the County has authority over), stormwater drainage facilities may not prevent localized shallow flooding during intense runoff events. According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), the following major canals and ditches run through the City: • Central Canal flows southwest through the southeastern part of the City of Fresno. • Dry Creek Canal begins at the confluence of Mill Ditch and Herndon Canal, just downstream of North Millbrook Avenue, and flows southwest through the southwestern portion of the City. • Fancher Creek Canal flows southwest along the eastern corporate limits of the City of Fresno and joins Central Canal at the southeast corner of the City. • Herndon Canal begins at the confluence of Mill Ditch and Dry Creek Canal. It flows west through the center of the City of Fresno, then flows northwest through the northwestern part of the City. • Mill Ditch flows west along East McKinley Avenue to its confluence with Herndon and Dry Creek Canals. The FIS details the City of Fresno’s flood history as follows: In February 1884, flood flows from streams of the Fresno-Clovis group inundated the business section of the City of Fresno. Frequent flooding was a problem in the City throughout the 1880. Suburban areas of the City were flooded in spring 1920; the downtown area was inundated in 1923; flooding occurred in the Fig Garden area in 1936; and parts of the City, especially in the northeast section, were flooded in March 1938. Since the 1938 flood, which had an estimated discharge of 2,700 cubic feet per second (cfs) on Dry Creek at the Big Dry Creek Dam site, high flows occurred on that stream in December 1955 (3,800 cfs), January 1969 (5,700 cfs), and February 1969 (4,500 cfs). During December 1955, approximately 500 acres of agricultural and suburban land were flooded by overflow from irrigation canals, and damage, mostly to public facilities, totaled approximately $50,000. The largest and most damaging flood period was January and February 1969, when the combined discharges of Dry, Dog, Redbank, Fancher, and Mud Creeks flooded an estimated 14,500 acres and caused almost $4.7 million in damage. Most of the flooding was in the eastern and northeastern parts of the City. It occurred because many of the streams in the Fresno-Clovis group discharged floodwater into various irrigation canals, causing them to overflow. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Fresno was created (see Figure E.4). Tables E.10 and E.11 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure E.4: City of Fresno’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table E.10: City of Fresno’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 0 $60,933 $60,933 $121,866 $30,467 Commercial 23 210 $6,222,246 $6,222,246 $12,444,492 $3,111,123 Exempt 29 35 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 70 107 $30,681,072 $46,021,608 $76,702,680 $19,175,670 Multi-Residential 11 84 $2,529,983 $1,264,992 $3,794,975 $948,744 Residential 97 120 $23,269,875 $11,634,938 $34,904,813 $8,726,203 Total 231 556 $62,764,109 $65,204,716 $127,968,825 $31,992,206 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table E.11: City of Fresno’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 29 29 $746,974 $746,974 $1,493,948 $373,487 Commercial 2,814 9,030 $1,574,492,657 $1,574,492,657 $3,148,985,314 $787,246,329 Exempt 381 1,404 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 745 1,435 $309,126,790 $463,690,185 $772,816,975 $193,204,244 Multi-Residential 2,299 20,013 $797,001,401 $398,500,701 $1,195,502,102 $298,875,525 Residential 31,581 32,817 $2,677,387,750 $2,677,387,750 $5,354,775,500 $1,338,693,875 Total 37,849 64,728 $5,358,755,572 $5,114,818,267 $10,473,573,839 $2,618,393,460 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Fresno has significant assets at risk to the 100-year and greater floods. There are 231 improved parcels within the 100-year floodplain for a total value of roughly $128 million, including building and content value. An additional 37,849 improved parcels valued at roughly $10.5 billion fall within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing roughly $32.0 million in damage in the City of Fresno and a 0.2 percent chance in any given year of a 500-year flood causing roughly $2.65 billion in damage (combined damage from both floods). Properties at risk to flooding are shown in relation to the mapped floodplains in Figure E.5. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure E.5: City of Fresno’s Properties at Risk in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In addition to the 100-year and 500-year floodplains mapped by FEMA, the California Department of Water Resources maintains Best Available Maps (BAM) which include the floodplains in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, based on a study performed in 2002 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Though limited to the San Joaquin River as a flood source and thus not as comprehensive as the FEMA FIRM, the USACE study shows additional differentiation in flood risk by modeling the 200-year floodplain (the flood with a 0.5 percent annual chance of occurring). Table E.12 summarizes the values at risk by property type within the 200-year floodplain and loss estimates to the 200-year storm using the same methodology described above. Table E.12: City of Fresno’s FEMA 0.5% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 0 $60,933 $60,933 $121,866 $30,467 Commercial 3 139 $4,322,495 $4,322,495 $8,644,990 $2,161,248 Exempt 5 5 $0 $0 $0 $0 Residential 18 19 $12,103,507 $6,051,754 $18,155,261 $4,538,815 Total 27 163 $16,486,935 $10,435,182 $26,922,117 $6,730,529 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; CA DWR BAM; USACE Based on this analysis, there are 27 parcels within the 200-year floodplain valued at nearly $10.5 million. Applying the 25 percent damage factor, there is a 0.5 percent annual chance of a 200-year flood causing $6.73 million in damage in the City of Fresno. Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Fresno joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on December 1, 1982. In addition to providing insurance for properties at risk of flooding, the program collects and publishes statistics on flood-related losses in participating jurisdictions. NFIP insurance data for the City of Fresno indicates that as of March 30, 2017, there were 323 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $99,316,700 in coverage. This coverage represents a decline of nearly 200 policies over the last decade. Of the 323 policies, 277 were residential (267 for single-family homes) and 46 were nonresidential. 56 of the policies were in A zones (including A01-30, AE, AO, and AH), and the remaining 267 policies were in B, C, and X zones. Policies in B, C, and X zones have increased slightly over the past decade, while policies in the 100-year floodplain have dramatically declined. There have been 81 historical claims for flood losses totaling $765,183; 73 were for residential properties; 37 were in A zones and 36 were in B, C, or X zones; and 54 were pre-FIRM structures (17 of the 19 post-FIRM structures with reported losses were in a B, C, or X zone). According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there was one Repetitive Loss and no Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County, the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the U.S. Census Bureau 2016 estimate for the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Fresno: • 100-year flood—342 people • 500-year flood—107,400 people • Total flood—107,742 people Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. Table E.13 lists the critical facilities in the City’s 100- and 500-year floodplains. Table E.13: Critical Facilities in the 100- and 500-Year Floodplains: City of Fresno Critical Facility Type 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Airport - 1 Behavioral Health - 1 CalARP 1 12 Colleges & Universities - 5 Communications - 1 County Government - 2 Daycare - 52 Department of Agriculture - 2 Department of Public Health - 2 Department of Social Services - 6 District Attorney - 1 Fire Station - 7 General Services - 3 Health Care - 1 Nursing Home - 12 Police - 5 School - 68 Urgent Care - 2 Total 1 183 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Hazardous Materials Incident The following are the primary concerns for the City of Fresno related to hazardous materials release: • Train derailments Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan •Kinder-Morgan pipeline •Chevron petroleum pipelines •Storage facilities There are 28 CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Fresno. As detailed in Table E.14, there are 62 critical facilities located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table E.14: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Fresno Critical Facility Type Count Colleges & Universities 1 Communications 1 County Government 4 Courthouse 1 Daycare 11 Department of Public Health 2 Department of Social Services 4 Detention Center 4 District Attorney 2 Fire Station 4 Health Care 3 Nursing Home 4 Police 1 School 17 Sheriff 1 Supplemental College 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 62 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 For more information on this hazard please refer to the main plan, Section 4. Severe Weather: Fog The risk and vulnerability factors for fog in the City is not unique from the County at large. Please refer to the main plan’s discussion of the fog hazard in section 4. Severe Weather: Windstorm Fresno ’s prevailing winds are typically light and from the northwest. High wind conditions are occasionally created by strong weather fronts. Occasionally, there are funnel clouds of low intensity. Past structural damage has been light, infrequent, and very limited in geographic extent. Injuries have been extremely rare. Most of this damage has occurred secondary to large trees being blown over. The City’s design wind load, the level of wind force that new structures are required to be engineered to withstand, is 70 mph. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence Despite long-term over-drafting of groundwater that has lowered the static water table under Fresno by as much as 100 feet over the past century, ground level subsidence has not been noted in the vicinity of the City (this is probably due to the geologic strata underlying the City, which features layers of clay and hardpan interleaved with sand and gravel layers). Wildfire Similar to many areas of the County, Fresno has high temperatures in the summer with low rainfall creating fire hazard conditions. There is some wildfire risk in the San Joaquin River Bluff area in northern Fresno due to vegetation and steep slopes. Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a wildfire map for the City of Fresno was created (see Figure E.6). An analysis was performed using GIS software to determine where populations, values at risk, and critical facilities are located within wildfire threat zones. Table E.15 shows the values at risk in the moderate wildfire threat zone (there are no values at risk in the high or very high threat zones). There are not any critical facilities in wildfire threat zones in the City of Fresno. Table E.15: Values at Risk to Wildfire (Moderate Threat) in the City of Fresno Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 0 $60,933 $60,933 $121,866 Commercial 13 36 $24,379,836 $24,379,836 $48,759,672 Exempt 12 13 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 4 4 $2,105,480 $3,158,220 $5,263,700 Multi-Residential 1 16 $255,200 $127,600 $382,800 Residential 772 779 $180,172,709 $90,086,355 $270,259,064 Total 803 848 $206,974,158 $117,812,944 $324,787,102 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Based on this analysis, the City of Fresno’s moderate wildfire threat affects 2,450 people and 803 improved parcels valued at roughly $324,787,102. Almost all of the parcels at risk are in the San Joaquin River corridor, where development is very restricted due to flood risk and bluff instability. Other parcels are in industrial areas along the western edge of the City, where the City’s weed abatement ordinances (requiring vegetation control by April) would reduce the wildfire risk. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure E.6: City of Fresno’s Wildfire Threat Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan E.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Fresno’s updated capabilities are summarized below. E.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table E.16 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Fresno. Table E.16: City of Fresno’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General Plan Yes The Fresno General Plan has a Noise and Safety Element with policies for wildland fire hazards, seismic/geologic hazards, storm drainage and flood control, hazardous materials, airport safety, and emergency response Zoning Ordinance Yes Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15; Zoning Ordinance has requirements related to health and safety (e.g., dwelling unit density controls, building setbacks for fire protection, masonry walls along major streets) Subdivision Ordinance Yes Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15 requires multiple points of access for ingress/egress, fire protection provisions, etc. Development Permit (formerly Site Plan Review) requirements Yes Required for all nonresidential development projects and multi-family projects over two units; required for duplexes in some zone districts; plot plan review required for even single-family residential construction Growth Management Ordinance Yes Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 12 provides for extension of urban infrastructure and services including sewer treatment, water supply, and fire protection Floodplain Ordinance Yes Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 13 (local building codes) includes the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Yes - Within the Zoning Ordinance, there is a Bluff Preservation Overlay district with requirements for soil stability analysis and setbacks from the San Joaquin bluff edge Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments - Pretreatment Ordinance and environmental control program for wastewater system to prevent and abate any hazardous material releases Building Code Yes Version: 2016 California Building Code with a few City modifications: fire sprinkler ordinance, swimming pool ordinance, and security ordinance Fire Department ISO Rating Yes Rating: 3 Erosion or Sediment Control Program Yes The Bluff Preservation Ordinance, as well as grading plan review and stormwater pollution prevention plans, which are required for all development projects through project conditions and CEQA review Stormwater Management Program Yes In conjunction with Cal-EPA, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Capital Improvements Plan Yes Public Works Department and Department of Public Utilities formulate and administer these plans Economic Development Plan Yes Fresno Redevelopment Agency and Economic Development Division of the Planning and Development Department Local Emergency Operations Plan Yes Ratified by City Council in 2005 and last updated in 2015 Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2005 Fresno General Plan (Adopted December 18, 2014) The Fresno General Plan is a blueprint of how the City anticipates directing and managing growth while minimizing potential impacts for existing and future generations. It provides long-range planning strategies for the continued development, enhancement, and revitalization of the Fresno Metropolitan Area. The plan goals are the guiding principles and provide the framework for the objectives and policies that can be found in the plan elements. The following general plan goals directly or indirectly mitigate hazards identified in this plan: • Goal 9—Promote a city of healthy communities and improve quality of life in established neighborhoods. − Emphasize supporting established neighborhoods in Fresno with safe, well maintained, and accessible streets, public utilities, education and job training, proximity to jobs, retail services, health care, affordable housing, youth development opportunities, open space and parks, transportation options, and opportunities for home grown businesses. • Goal 12— Resolve existing public infrastructure and service deficiencies, make full use of existing infrastructure, and invest in improvements to increase competitiveness and promote economic growth. − Emphasize the fair and necessary costs of maintaining sustainable water, sewer, streets, and other public infrastructure and service systems in rates, fees, financing and public investments to implement the General Plan. Adequately address accumulated deferred maintenance, aging infrastructure, risks to service continuity, desired standards of service to meet quality-of-life goals, and required infrastructure to support growth, economic competitiveness and business development. • Goal 16— Protect and improve public health and safety. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Some of the elements of the General Plan also contain objectives and policies relevant to protecting human health and safety (e.g., supporting objectives and policies in the Public Utilities and Services Element direct that amendments to construction and fire codes to reduce the level of risk to life and property from fire commensurate with the City’s fire suppression capabilities and that fire and police services be provided). Because the Noise and Safety Element is the portion of the General Plan most relevant to hazard mitigation, select objectives and policies are extracted and included below. The Noise and Safety Element The Noise and Safety Element seeks to reduce deaths, injuries, illnesses, damage to property, and economic and social dislocation that could result from hazards. Of specific relevance to this plan, it addresses seismic and geologic conditions, flooding, hazardous materials, and emergency response. Seismic and Geologic Hazards NS-2. Objective: Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic risks. NS-2-a. Policy: Seismic Protection. Ensure seismic protection is incorporated into new and existing construction, consistent with the Fresno Municipal Code. NS-2-b. Policy: Soil Analysis Requirement. Identify areas with potential geologic and/or soils hazards, and require development in these areas to conduct a soil analysis and mitigation plan by a registered civil engineer (or engineering geologist specializing in soil geology) prior to allowing on-site drainage or disposal for wastewater, stormwater runoff, or swimming pool/spa water. NS-2-c. Policy: Landfill Areas. Require proposed land uses on or near landfill areas to be designed and maintained to comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 27, Section 21190, Post Closure Land Use. NS-2-d. Policy: Bluff Preservation Overlay Zone. Per the requirements of the Bluff Preservation Overlay Zone District and Policy POSS-7-f (Chapter 5, Parks and Open Space), the following standards shall be applicable for property located within the Bluff Preservation zone: • Require proposed development within 300 feet of the toe of the San Joaquin River bluffs to undertake an engineering soils investigation and evaluation report that demonstrates that the site is sufficiently stable to support the proposed development, or provide mitigations to provide sufficient stability; and • Establish a minimum setback of 30 feet from the San Joaquin River bluff edge for all buildings, structures, decks, pools and spas (which may be above or below grade), fencing, lighting, steps, etc. o An applicant may request to reduce the minimum setback to 20 feet from the bluff edge if it can be demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the City’s Building Official and the Planning Director, that the proposed building, structure, deck, pool and/or spas (which may be above or below grade), fencing, steps, etc., will meet the objectives of the Bluff Preservation Overlay Ordinance. In no case shall the setback be reduced to less than 20 feet. Flooding Hazards NS-3. Objective: Minimize the risks to property, life, and the environment due to flooding and stormwater runoff hazards. NS-3-a. Policy: Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. Support the full implementation of the FMFCD Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan, the completion of planned flood control and drainage system facilities, and the continued maintenance of stormwater and flood water retention and conveyance facilities and capacities. Work with the FMFCD to make sure that its Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan is consistent with the General Plan. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.33 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan NS-3-b. Policy: Curb and Gutter Installation. Coordinate with Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) to install curbing, gutters, and other drainage facilities with priority to existing neighborhoods with the greatest deficiencies and consistent with the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. NS-3-c. Policy: Dual Use Facilities. Support multiple uses of flood control and drainage facilities as follows: • Use, wherever practical, FMFCD facilities for groundwater management and recharge; and • Promote recreational development of ponding basin facilities located within or near residential areas, compatible with the stormwater and groundwater recharge functions. NS-3-d. Policy: Landscaped Buffer. City will support the development of FMFCD ponding basins including the landscaping and irrigation for the top one third of the side sloped areas consistent with the FMFCD Basin Design Criteria. NS-3-e. Policy: Pollutants. Work with FMFCD to prevent and reduce the existence of urban stormwater pollutants pursuant to the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems Act. NS-3-f. Policy: Flooding Emergency Response Plans. Work with responsible agencies to update emergency dam failure inundation plans, evacuation plans and other emergency response plans for designated flood-prone areas, including the San Joaquin river bottom. NS-3-g. Policy: Essential Facilities Siting Outside of Floodplains. Avoid siting emergency response and essential public facilities, such as fire and police stations, within a 100-year floodplain, unless it can be demonstrated that the facility can be safely operated and accessed during flood events. NS-3-h. Policy: Runoff Controls. Implement grading regulations and related development policies that protect area residents from flooding caused by urban runoff produced from events that exceed the capacity of the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan system of facilities. Place all structures and/or flood-proofing in a manner that does not cause floodwaters to be diverted onto adjacent property, increase flood hazards to other property, or otherwise adversely affect other property. NS-3-i. Policy: New Development Must Mitigate Impact. Require new development to not significantly impact the existing storm drainage and flood control system by imposing conditions of approval as project mitigation, as authorized by law. As part of this process, closely coordinate and consult with the FMFCD to identify appropriate conditions that will result in mitigation acceptable and preferred by FMFCD for each project. Commentary: The City recognizes the expertise and significant role of the FMFCD, and will give the highest deference to its recommendations for mitigation measures, consistent with applicable law. NS-3-j. Policy: National Flood Insurance Program. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by ensuring compliance with applicable requirements. Review NFIP maps periodically to determine if areas subject to flooding have been added or removed and make adjustments to the Land Use Diagram Figure LU-1. NS-3-k. Policy: 100-Year Floodplain Policy. Require developers of residential subdivisions to preserve those portions of development sites as open space that may be subject to 100-year flood events, unless the flood hazard can be substantially mitigated by development project design. NS-3-l. Policy: 200-Year Floodplain Protection. Promote flood control measures that maintain natural conditions within the 200-year floodplain of rivers and streams and, to the extent possible, combine flood control, recreation, water quality, and open space functions. Discourage construction of permanent improvements that would be adversely affected by periodic floods within the 200-year floodplain, particularly in the San Joaquin river bottom. NS-3-m. Policy: Flood Risk Public Awareness. Continue public awareness programs to inform the general public and potentially affected property owners of flood hazards and potential dam failure inundation. Remind households and businesses located in flood-prone areas of opportunities to purchase flood insurance. NS-3-n. Policy: Precipitation Changes. Work with FMFCD to evaluate the planned and existing stormwater conveyance system in light of possible changes to precipitation patterns in the future. Hazardous Materials NS-4. Objective: Minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, serious illness, and damage to property resulting from the use, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. NS-4-a. Policy: Processing and Storage. Require safe processing and storage of hazardous materials, consistent with the California Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City. NS-4-b. Policy: Coordination. Maintain a close liaison with the Fresno County Environmental Health Department, Cal-EPA Division of Toxics, and the State Office of Emergency Services to assist in developing and maintaining Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.34 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan hazardous material business plans, inventory statements, risk management prevention plans, and contingency/emergency response action plans. NS-4-c. Policy: Soil and Groundwater Contamination Reports. Require an investigation of potential soil or groundwater contamination whenever justified by past site uses. Require appropriate mitigation as a condition of project approval in the event soil or groundwater contamination is identified or could be encountered during site development. NS-4-d. Policy: Site Identification. Continue to aid federal, State, and County agencies in the identification and mapping of waste disposal sites (including abandoned waste sites), and to assist in the survey of the kinds, amounts, and locations of hazardous wastes. NS-4-e. Policy: Compliance with County Program. Require that the production, use, storage, disposal, and transport of hazardous materials conform to the standards and procedures established by the County Division of Environmental Health. Require compliance with the County’s Hazardous Waste Generator Program, including the submittal and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, when applicable. NS-4-f. Policy: Hazardous Materials Facilities. Require facilities that handle hazardous materials or hazardous wastes to be designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with applicable hazardous materials and waste management laws and regulations. NS-4-g. Policy: Hazmat Response. Include policies and procedures appropriate to hazardous materials in the City’s disaster and emergency response preparedness and planning, coordinating with implementation of Fresno County’s Hazardous Materials Incident Response Plan. NS-4-h. Policy: Household Collection. Continue to support and assist with Fresno County’s special household hazardous waste collection activities, to reduce the amount of this material being improperly discarded. NS-4-i. Policy: Public Information. Continue to assist in providing information to the public on hazardous materials. Emergency Response NS-6. Objective: Foster an efficient and coordinated response to emergencies and natural disasters. NS-6-a. Policy: County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. Adopt and implement the Fresno County Multi- Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex. Commentary: The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires that cities, counties, and special districts have a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to be eligible to receive FEMA hazard mitigation funds. Cities and counties can adopt and use all or part of a regional multi-jurisdictional plan, such as the one prepared by Fresno County, in lieu of preparing all or part of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. NS-6-b. Policy: Disaster Response Coordination. Maintain coordination with other local, State, and Federal agencies to provide coordinated disaster response. NS-6-c. Policy: Emergency Operations Plan. Update the City’s Emergency Operations Plan periodically, using a whole community approach which integrates considerations for People with access and functional needs in all aspects of planning. NS-6-d. Policy: Evacuation Planning. Maintain an emergency evacuation plan in consultation with the Police and Fire Departments and other emergency service providers, which shows potential evacuation routes and a list of emergency shelters to be used in case of catastrophic emergencies. Commentary: The evacuation plan will be flexible in order to consider many scenarios and multiple modes of transportation beyond private automobiles. It will provide special provisions for disadvantaged populations, such as those with physical disabilities or those with low or very low incomes, and for areas with fewer resources through neighborhood emergency preparedness programs. NS-6-e. Policy: Critical Use Facilities. Ensure critical use facilities (e.g. City Hall, police and fire stations, schools, hospitals, public assembly facilities, transportation services) and other structures that are important to protecting health and safety in the community remain operational during an emergency. • Site and design these facilities to minimize their exposure and susceptibility to flooding, seismic and geological effects, fire, and explosions. • Work with the owners and operators of critical use facilities to ensure they can provide alternate sources of electricity, water, and sewerage in the event that regular utilities are interrupted in a disaster. NS-6-f. Policy: Emergency Vehicle Access. Require adequate access for emergency vehicles in all new development, including adequate widths, turning radii, hard standing areas, and vertical clearance. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.35 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan NS-6-g. Policy: Emergency Preparedness Public Awareness Programs. Continue to conduct programs to inform the general public, including people with access and functional needs, of the City’s emergency preparedness and disaster response procedures. Fresno Flood Plain Ordinance The City of Fresno’s Flood Plain Ordinance was revised in the late 1990s and formally adopted by the Fresno City Council on September 20, 2005. (In late 2007, the Fresno Municipal Code was republished with its chapters somewhat reorganized. There was no change in the text of the Flood Plain Ordinance at that time, but due to the reorganization of its content, its most recent adoption effective date is January 17, 2008.) The Fresno Flood Plain Ordinance is Article 6 of Chapter 11 of the Fresno Municipal Code. The purpose of this ordinance is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to: • Protect human life and health; • Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; • Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; • Minimize prolonged business interruptions; • Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric, telephone, and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; • Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damage; • Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of flood hazard; and • Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions. In order to accomplish its purposes, the ordinance includes the following methods and provisions: • Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities • Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction • Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage • Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert flood water or which may increase flood hazards in other areas • Control the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.36 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This ordinance applies to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the City as identified by FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study for Fresno County, California and incorporated areas dated September 30, 2005, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and all subsequent amendments and/or revisions. It appoints the building official to administer, implement, and enforce the ordinance by granting or denying development permits in accord with its provisions. This ordinance includes the following standards of construction related to special flood hazard areas: • Anchoring • Construction materials and methods • Elevation and floodproofing • Residential construction • Nonresidential construction • Flood venting • Standards for utilities • Standards for subdivisions • Standards for manufactured homes • Standards for recreational vehicles • Floodways • Standards for storage of materials and equipment In conjunction with Fresno’s Drainage Fee Ordinance (Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 12, Article 19), which requires local grading and development to conform to the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Master Drainage Plan and to provide proportionate shares of drainage infrastructure, the Fresno Flood Plain Ordinance and its preceding Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance have reduced flood damage losses in the City. National Flood Insurance Program/Community Rating System The City of Fresno joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on December 1, 1982. It has been a member of the Community Rating System (CRS) since October 1, 1992. The City’s Floodplain Administrator duties are assigned to the building official. The Building and Safety Division of the Planning and Development Department works to improve the City’s CRS rating, which determines the price paid for flood insurance policies issued in the jurisdiction. The rating is based on detailed biannual audits conducted by FEMA and/or a designee agency (currently, the California Department of Water Resources). The primary means of improving and maintaining a good CRS rating is through administration of the Fresno Flood Plain Ordinance. As part of its efforts to improve its community rating, the City of Fresno has hosted periodic FEMA Region IX NFIP/CRS training. The City’s current CRS rating from October 2016 is Class 8, which reflects the loss of two class levels in the most recent audit. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.37 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan San Joaquin River Bluff Preservation Ordinance, 1980 After an interagency San Joaquin River Reconnaissance Plan was completed in the late 1970s, the City of Fresno adopted the San Joaquin River Bluff Specific Plan to preserve this important open space and habitat feature and to safeguard the bluff face, which is the most unstable geologic feature in the City. The San Joaquin River Bluff Specific Plan was later subsumed by the 1988 Bullard Community Plan, which carried forward protective policies for this area of Fresno. The regulation of land use, development, and grading in this portion of Fresno is ongoing pursuant to the Bluff Preservation Ordinance. This ordinance, part of the City’s zoning regulations, delineates an overlay zone district along the river bluff (the Bluff Preservation Overlay District), established allowable and prohibited land uses, and set forth conditions and requirements for using or modifying property in the district. The regulations of the district are deemed to be necessary for the preservation of the special qualities of the bluffs and for the protection of the health, safety, and general welfare of owners and users of property in the area. The Bluff Preservation Ordinance is administered by the Fresno Development and Resource Management Department through its special permit process and grading plan checks. Anyone applying for a building permit is required to submit a site plan review with accompanying soil investigation and evaluation report (prepared by an appropriately licensed professional engineer or registered geologist). The Department’s Code Enforcement Division also conducts periodic surveillance of bluff properties for grading and construction done without permits and institutes abatement actions when these conditions are discovered. Hazardous Material Incident Safeguards The Fresno Fire Department works with Fresno County Environmental Health to review hazardous material business plans that detail flammable, explosive, toxic, and otherwise hazardous materials used by businesses in the City. The Fire Department has its own permitting requirement for liquid and gaseous fuel tanks to ensure that they are installed and maintained safely. The City’s Hazardous Materials Response Unit (housed in a City fire station) maintains the capability to quickly characterize material releases and spills, to evaluate risks to life and property, and to implement appropriate controls and evacuation measures. Fire Prevention Policy The City of Fresno has some of the most progressive and effective fire prevention policies and regulations in the nation relating to water supply (fire flow) required for development, ingress and egress from developed buildings and subdivisions, on-site automatic fire suppression systems (sprinkler and on-site private hydrants), building addressing to facilitate rapid emergency response, marking of unsafe buildings (those older structures with hazardous conditions or a lack of water supply), and instant aid/mutual aid with adjacent fire departments belonging to Fresno County special districts and the City of Clovis. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.38 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In addition to its extensive network of well-trained and well-equipped firefighting stations, the Fresno Fire Department has a Fire Prevention Bureau, under supervision of the City’s fire marshal, to administer regulations adopted and referenced by the Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 6, Article 5 relating to fire prevention. The Fire Prevention Bureau carries out these responsibilities by conducting routine inspections of all public and commercial buildings, performing detailed development permit and construction plan checks, and investigating arson. Another component of the City’s overall fire protection program is the administration of its public nuisance ordinances to require properties to be kept clean and free of flammable debris and to annually abate weeds and overgrown vegetation before these materials can dry out in the spring to pose a wildfire hazard (Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 10, Article 6 relating to public nuisance abatement). The Planning and Development Department Code Enforcement Division and Department of Public Utilities Community Sanitation Division coordinate their efforts to enforce the nuisance abatement regulations and provide cleanup services when property owners do not take care of matters themselves. City of Fresno Emergency Operations Plan, 2015, Updated 2015 The City of Fresno Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) addresses the planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, excessive heat/cold, power outages, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City of Fresno. The Plan, which was updated in 2015, does the following: • Establishes the emergency management organization required to mitigate any significant emergency or disaster affecting the City of Fresno. • Identifies the policies, responsibilities, and procedures required to protect the health and safety of City communities, public and private property, and the environment from natural or technological disasters. • Establishes the operational concepts and procedures associated with initial response operations to emergencies, the extended response operations, and the recovery process. The EOP is designed to establish the framework for implementation of the California Standardized Emergency Management System/National Incident Management System for the City of Fresno, which is located within the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services’ Mutual Aid Region V. It is intended to facilitate multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional coordination, particularly between the City of Fresno and the Fresno County Operational Area, including special districts and state agencies, in emergency operations. This plan will be used in conjunction with the Fresno County EOP and the State of California Emergency Plan. The plan is designed to guide the reader or user through each phase of an emergency: preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.39 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Plans and Policies Other hazard mitigation-related policies and plans in place in and observed by the City of Fresno include the following: • California Code of Regulations Title 23 administrative law for development and use of land in designated floodway areas along the San Joaquin River administered by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, staffed by the California Department of Water Resources. • Standards for constructing and maintaining drainage basins and ponds to prevent mosquito breeding and to provide for mosquito control district access for inspection and abatement activities (jointly promulgated by the Planning and Development Department and Public Works Department in fall of 2005). • Dam failure inundation plans prepared and administered by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Southern California Edison, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company. • The California Environmental Quality Act, overseen by the Fresno City Attorney’s Office and administered by several City departments, requires consideration of health and safety impacts as they may relate to projects, which are defined as any action that may result in a change in the physical environment and that would include public facilities, and private development, and even adoption/amendment of land use plans and ordinances. An analysis of every project is conducted by the appropriate City department (the Development and Resource Management Department does the bulk of these analyses). Inquiries regarding project sites and features are distributed to departments and outside agencies that may have knowledge of, or which may regulate, aspects of the proposed project. The information obtained from these requests for comment and from other staff research is compiled into an informational document for decision-makers and the public. The information is also used to develop a list of mitigation actions to reduce or abate potential adverse impacts of the project. For those projects which may involve federal funds or require federal approvals, a parallel National Environmental Policy Act assessment is also prepared by the City. • The Development and Resource Management Department administers regulations in the California Building Code and in Uniform Electrical, Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes as those codes are modified through adoption by the state and City. Plan check and inspection activities of the Department ensure structural soundness and compliance with seismic and other regulations. E.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table E.17 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Fresno. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.40 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table E.17: City of Fresno’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Planning and Development Department (planners), Department of Public Utilities (engineers), Public Works Department (engineers), Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (engineers) Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Planning and Development Department (engineers), Department of Public Utilities (engineers), Public Works Department (engineers), Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (engineers) Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Planning and Development Department (planners and engineers), Department of Public Utilities (engineers), Public Works Department (engineers), Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (engineers) Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Planning and Development Department, Department of Public Utilities, Public Works Department, Information Services Department Full time building official Yes Planning and Development Department Floodplain administrator Yes Planning and Development Department Emergency manager Yes Fresno Fire Department Grant writer Yes Planning and Development Department, Police Department, Public Works Department, Fire Department Other personnel Yes California registered geologist (Department of Public Utilities), California registered environmental health specialist (Planning and Development Department), licensed water and wastewater treatment operators Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Yes State Emergency Alert System is coordinated by emergency management team through the National Weather Service Other Yes Emergency notification of San Joaquin River bottom residents in conjunction with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and Fresno County E.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table E.18 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table E.18: City of Fresno’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Geographically restricted to designated portions of Fresno based on area income Capital improvements project funding Yes Budgeted out of utility fees and often related to issuance of bonds; City also obtains grants, shares of state gas tax and sales taxes, ballot measure tax revenue, etc. Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Subject to California Proposition 218 restrictions on new and increased assessments Authority to levy fees and fines, and to recover costs through lien processes, for nuisance abatement Yes Subject to an appeal process that involves administrative law judges retained by the City Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Water, sewer, solid waste, code enforcement (cleanup) Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.41 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Impact fees for new development Yes Master Fee Schedule as originally chartered under the City’s Urban Growth Management Ordinance Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Would need vote of the taxpayers to enact. Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Special Assessment Districts that issue debt and incur the debt but the City only administers Incur debt through private activities Yes The City has the capability of doing them and have in the past Withhold spending or public infrastructure investment in hazard prone areas Yes The Department of Public Utilities retains jurisdiction over water and sewer services and determines its appropriate service areas with risk to facilities being one of the factors leading to a decision not to extend services to River bottom properties E.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The Fresno Department of Public Utilities, in conjunction with other agencies, provides water conservation and stormwater quality protection public information programs. The Fire Department provides personal preparedness outreach for heat and freeze emergencies and shelter-in-place information for hazardous materials emergencies. Additionally, the City has developed public service announcements for smoke detector battery life, canal safety, and fireworks safety. The City’s Joint Information System disseminates information in Spanish, and the City can obtain translation services for other languages when necessary. A Joint Information Center plan is an annex to the City of Fresno Emergency Operations Plan and provides comprehensive guidance for early warning notification in all languages and specifically the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) community. Preparedness Exercises afford the opportunity to include the City of Fresno ADA Committee. Members of the committee and volunteers from the ADA community role play for realistic first responder training. E.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts • The City is a certified StormReady community through the National Weather Service. • The Fire Department, Police Department, and Solid Waste Division are nationally accredited. • The City has installed security systems for the wastewater treatment facility and for its surface water treatment plant. Generators are installed in critical groundwater pumping stations and these facilities are secured. E.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Fresno has several existing mechanisms in place that already help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities for the City to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.42 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan the community. Future improvements may include providing training for staff members related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Additional training opportunities will help to inform City staff members on how best to integrate hazard information and mitigation projects into their departments. Continuing to train City staff on mitigation and the hazards that pose a risk to the City of Fresno will lead to more informed staff members who can better communicate this information to the public. In addition, the City could work to improve the CRS rating through additional floodplain management program enhancements. This could further lower the cost of flood insurance for residents. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.43 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan E.5 Mitigation Strategy E.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Fresno adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Public Works Department may utilize the hazard information when implementing Capital Improvement projects and the Planning and Development Department may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a site plan or other type of development applications. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Fresno will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the National Flood Insurance Program as specified in General Plan Policy NS-3-j: “National Flood Insurance Program. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by ensuring compliance with applicable requirements.” E.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Fresno did not complete any of the mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, implementation is in progress for several of these actions and will be continued as part of the mitigation strategy for this plan update. E.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Fresno identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information as well as information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are also included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Fresno will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.44 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: Establish a post-disaster action plan to be part of the City of Fresno Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) that will include the following elements: • Procedures for public information • Post-disaster damage assessment • Grant writing • Code enforcement • Redundant operations The plan will also include annexes from local businesses and large employers to improve economic and employment recovery. The plan will also identify a mechanism for the City to help businesses without COOPs develop a COOP to be incorporated, as an annex, into the City’s Emergency Operations Plan. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Fresno Emergency Preparedness Officer Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $150,000 Potential Funding: Local funds, grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will improve response/recovery during an event through pre- planning. A City COOP and local business COOPs will reduce the impact of a disaster to the local economy and employment. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 2. Improve the City’s Capabilities for Sheltering Animals in a Disaster Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.45 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Issue/Background: During a disaster, not only do people need to be rescued, but their pets do also. Hurricane Katrina showed the nation that shelters do not typically allow pets, so pets may be left behind when their owners evacuate. The care of the animals left behind falls to local animal shelters. Currently, the SPCA Animal Shelter does not have the supplies to handle a large scale animal emergency. The City has approximately 18,000 licensed dogs. If a disaster occurred, they would only be able to house a small percentage of them. Overcrowding of animals usually causes diseases and loss of animal life. Purchasing new cages would alleviate some of the overcrowding created by a disaster. Other Alternatives: Ask other agencies for supplies, if they have them available. Responsible Office: City of Fresno Emergency Preparedness Officer Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $50,000 Potential Funding: General fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will cut down on the spread of disease and animal loss during an emergency or disaster. Schedule: Short term Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 3. Train and Certify City Inspectors to Conduct Post-Disaster Damage Assessment Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, earthquake, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: City inspectors play a vital role in post-disaster building assessment and damage assessment. Pre-training and certification is vital in response and recovery to reduce loss of life, relocate populations, and ensure the rebuilding of local economies. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Fresno Emergency Preparedness Officer and Planning and Development Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $250,000 Potential Funding: Grants Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.46 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will improve response/recovery during an event through pre- training and certification of individuals responsible for performing assessment of structures and facilities impacted by disasters. Certification will also allow qualified staff to mobilize with the State of California Office of Emergency Services (Region 5) Urban Search and Rescue Task Force. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 4. Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: The City needs a program to educate flood-prone property owners along the San Joaquin River and in frequent annual flooding areas about the flood threat and how best to prepare, mitigate, and insure their properties. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Fresno Emergency Preparedness Officer and Planning and Development Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $15,000/year Potential Funding: General fund, grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will prevent the loss of human life and economic and property losses. Schedule: Long term Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 5. Southwest Fresno – Recycled Water Distribution System Construction Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: In 2009, the State of California adopted a recycled water policy establishing a mandate to increase the use of recycled water in California by 200,000 acre-feet per year by 2020 and an additional 300,000 acre-feet per year by 2030. The Recycled Water Master Plan prepared by the City of Fresno, Department of Public Utilities (DPU), identifies opportunities to assist with compliance of this law by reducing groundwater pumping and replacing groundwater with recycled water for non-potable purposes (i.e. outdoor irrigation, dust control, fountains, etc.). On April 11, 2013, the Council adopted the Recycled Water Master Plan and associated environmental documents. Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.47 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In 2017, the DPU commissioned a 5 MGD Tertiary Treatment Facility at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. DPU is currently constructing a Recycled Water Distribution System in Southwest Fresno to deliver recycled water to parks, cemeteries, schools, agricultural uses, etc., to offset potable water irrigation demands. This will help mitigate drought by enabling the use of recycled water for certain uses instead of tapping potable water supplies. Other Alternatives: DPU has a Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) which was updated in the City of Fresno’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan to manage water shortages including drought conditions. The WSCP consists of four stages allowing the City to ultimately reduce its water demand to a level commensurate with the water supplies available to a maximum reduction of 50 percent. Responsible Office: City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $75,000,000 Potential Funding: California State Water Resources Control Board – Clean Water State Revolving Fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): Reduced ground water pumping by using recycled water for non- potable purposes. Schedule: Ongoing with completion in 2019 Status: New project 6. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Fresno and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Fresno has become a joint power authority of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the County of Fresno, City of Kerman, City of Clovis, Biola Community Services District, Garfield Water District and International Water District. As a member of the North Kings GSA, the City of Fresno is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Fresno County (Fresno) Annex E.48 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the North Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Fresno. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: City Engineer and North Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX F: CITY OF KERMAN Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan F.1 Community Profile Figure F.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Kerman and its Sphere of Influence. Figure F.1: The City of Kerman F.1.1 Geography and Climate Kerman is located on the west side of Fresno County in the central portion of the San Joaquin Valley. Over the past decade, the City of Kerman has expanded its boundaries slightly, annexing land along the eastern reach of its Sphere of Influence. The City and its Sphere of Influence cover a 3,091-acre area. The City is bisected by State Route 145 (Madera Avenue), which runs north/south, and State Route 180 (Whitesbridge Road), which runs east/west. State Highway 99, the major highway through the San Joaquin Valley, is 15 miles east of Kerman. Kerman is 17 miles south of Madera, the county Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan seat of Madera County, and 15 miles west of Fresno, county seat of Fresno County. The smaller cities of San Joaquin and Mendota are about 13 miles southwest and 18 miles west, respectively. The mountains of the Coast Range and the Sierra Nevada are roughly equidistant from Kerman, about 35 miles to the southwest and northeast, respectively. The topography in and around Kerman is very level with a gentle, imperceptible slope to the southwest. Elevations in the planning area vary from about 210 feet to 225 feet. There are no natural waterways in the planning area. The largest nearby waterway of consequence is the San Joaquin River, about ten miles north. However, there are several irrigation canals that traverse the planning area. The climate of the Kerman area is described as Mediterranean, which is typified by hot, dry summers and mild winters. Temperatures recorded at Lemoore Naval Air Station (LNAS), located 41.2 miles south of Kerman, show the mean monthly high temperature for July to be 80.6°F, while the mean temperature for January is 45.1°F. It is not uncommon for maximum temperatures to exceed 100°F during the summer months; nor for temperatures to drop below freezing in the winter. The highest temperature ever recorded at LNAS was 113°F in July of 1975. The lowest temperature of record was 14°F in January of 1962. Approximately 90 percent of all rainfall in Kerman occurs between November and April. Average rainfall measured in Kerman is 6.08 inches per year compared to 7.83 inches in Coalinga and 9.5 inches in Fresno. Air movement through the San Joaquin Valley is in a southeasterly direction. Wind enters the valley over the passes east of the San Francisco Bay and exits through mountain passes at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. Meteorological data from LNAS indicates that the average wind speed is 4-6 knots with maximum gusts of 40-50 knots recorded from October to May. The prevailing wind direction is from the north and north-northwest, except in December and January, when the winds blow from the southeast or east-southeast. F.1.2 History The site of Kerman was first established by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company as a way station with a pump and watering tank in 1891. The site was originally named Collis in honor of the president of the railroad Collis P. Huntington. It was at this site in 1892 that the famous Sontag and Evans gang held up the San Francisco-Los Angeles passenger train, one of the last train robberies in the country and perhaps the most historical event to occur in Kerman. Settlement and cultivation of the Kerman area began and continued through the turn of the century as irrigation projects brought water to the area, primarily from the Kings River to the south. In 1900, William G. Kerckhoff and Jacob Mansar purchased some 3,027 acres of land from the Bank of California. These men formed the Fresno Irrigated Farms Company. In 1906, Collis was renamed Kerman from the men’s names (Kerckhoff and Mansar). Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan By 1914, Kerman had an estimated population of 400 people surrounded by 29,000 acres of producing crop land. The Kerman Creamery was producing about 1,600 pounds of butter daily. In 1921, Madera Avenue was paved from the Southern Pacific railroad tracks north to the San Joaquin River, and streetlights were installed from the tracks to Whitesbridge Road. By 1936, development of Kerckhoff Park had begun. Oil and gas exploration was being conducted several miles south of town and culminated in 1941 with the development of the largest gas well in the state (at the time). In 1946, the residents of Kerman voted to incorporate, and the City of Kerman was born. In the 1950s, new subdivisions began to develop, expanding the urban area outward from the original town site. New development and subdivision activity has continued to the present time. F.1.3 Economy Despite Kerman’s location in the center of a highly productive agricultural area, agriculture is not the dominant industry in the community. This position is occupied by the educational services, and health care and social assistance industry, employing 23.9 percent of the City’s work force. Agriculture is the next largest employer, with 18.0 percent of the City’s work force. Manufacturing is the third largest industry, but accounts for only 12.0 percent of employment. In contrast to some other cities in the region, Kerman does not have extensive packing houses and agricultural processing facilities in its industrial area. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Kerman are shown in Table F.1. Table F.1: City of Kerman’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Kerman Families below Poverty Level 23.5% All People below Poverty Level 25.6% Median Family Income $45,563 Median Household Income $41,820 Per Capita Income $14,523 Population in Labor Force 9,677 Population Employed* 5,707 Unemployment 9.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables F.2 and F.3 detail how the City of Kerman’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry, respectively, based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table F.2: City of Kerman’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 1,303 22.8 Service Occupations 1,302 22.8 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 1,188 20.8 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 1,007 17.6 Sales and Office Occupations 907 15.9 Total 5,707 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table F.3: City of Kerman’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 1,365 23.9 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,028 18.0 Manufacturing 683 12.0 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 475 8.3 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 424 7.4 Retail Trade 405 7.1 Public Administration 323 5.7 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 282 4.9 Construction 267 4.7 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 156 2.7 Wholesale Trade 144 2.5 Information 106 1.9 Other Services, Except Public Administration 49 0.9 Total 5,707 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan F.1.4 Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2015 population for the City of Kerman was estimated at 14,285. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Kerman from the 2015 ACS are shown in Table F.4. Table F.4: City of Kerman’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Kerman Gender/Age Male 48.6% Female 51.4% Median age 27.8 Under 5 years 12.0% Under 18 years 35.2% 65 years and over 7.8% Race/Ethnicity* White 72.0% Asian 5.7% Black or African American 0.0% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.1% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 79.1% Education High school graduate or higher 55.6% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 9.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 97.0% reporting one race Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan F.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Kerman’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Kerman (see Table F.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards unique to Kerman. Table F.5: City of Kerman—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Low Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Limited Occasional Significant Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Extensive Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Limited Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Highly Likely Limited Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan F.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Kerman’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Kerman’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Kerman. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table F.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Kerman’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table F.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Kerman identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section F.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • drought • earthquake • epidemic/pandemic • flood/levee failure • fog • hazardous materials incidents • windstorm • winter storm Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Kerman, those hazards are as follows: •dam failure* •human health hazards: West Nile Virus •severe weather: extreme cold, extreme heat, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado •soil hazards •volcano •wildfire** *Note on Dam Failure: Although the County ranking for dam failure is High, the City ranks it as Low; no dams are identified within Kerman, as indicated in Table 4.9, Fresno County Dam Characteristics. **Note on Wildfire: Although the County ranking for wildfire is High, it is ranked Low by the City of Kerman due to a lack of exposure to wildfire risk within the city boundaries. Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of Kerman. F.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Kerman’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table F.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Kerman. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table F.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Kerman by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 6 2 $2,947,885 $2,947,885 $5,895,770 Commercial 128 210 $59,212,673 $59,212,673 $118,425,346 Exempt 17 66 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 27 29 $31,409,557 $47,114,336 $78,523,893 Multi-Residential 89 342 $52,790,242 $26,395,121 $79,185,363 Residential 2,900 3,871 $366,404,305 $183,202,153 $549,606,458 Total 3,167 4,520 $512,764,662 $318,872,167 $831,636,829 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Kerman from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table F.7 and mapped in Figure F.2. This is the information that was used for mapping and analysis purposes. It should be noted that the City had different data, which is indicated in parentheses in the table. (City data was not used for analysis since it was not available in GIS format.) Table F.7: City of Kerman’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number* CalARP 2 Communications 1 Department of Social Services 1 Fire Station 1 Health Care 1 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 School 8 Total 16 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure F.2: City of Kerman’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table F.8 lists specific critical facilities and other community assets identified by Kerman’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table F.8: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by the City of Kerman’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info/ Comments City Hall 3 million n/a Police Station 1.2 million n/a Secondary emergency operations center United Health Center 3.7 million n/a EOP medical center Fire Station 6.4 million n/a Primary emergency operations center Community Center 3.1 million 400 EOP gathering point Economic Assets Table F.9 identifies the City’s largest employers, which are led by the Kerman Unified School District. Table F.9: Major Kerman Employers Name of Business Product/Service # of Employees Kerman Unified School District Education 425 Panoche Creek Packaging Almonds 100 Sebastian Communications 70 City of Kerman Municipal Government 60 Helena Chemical Chemical 50 Baker Commodities Rendering Plant 35 H & J Chevrolet Auto Sales 25 Hall Ag. Enterprise Labor Contractor 40 Perko’s Café Restaurant 23 Kerman Ag. Resources Agricultural Chemicals 27 Sun Empire Foods Candy 15 Source: 2007 Kerman General Plan Update Growth and Development Trends Table F.10 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2017. Table F.10: City of Kerman’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2017 2010 Population 2017 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010- 2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010- 2015 13,544 14,614 +7.90 3,908 4,144 +6.04 Source: California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/ Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan For the purposes of the 2007 Kerman General Plan Update, population projections were developed representing low and high estimates. By the year 2027, the estimates forecast a low population estimate of 26,613 and a high population estimate of 40,561 persons. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. F.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table F.5 above shows Kerman’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are unreinforced masonry buildings and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Note: Ranked Medium significance by both Kerman and the County, epidemic/pandemic, windstorm, and winter storm potential impacts are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in the main plan for details on the entire planning area’s risk and vulnerability to these hazards. Agricultural Hazards Agriculture is a significant component of the City of Kerman’s economy. Any pests, plant diseases, or weather events negatively affecting crop production could have substantial impacts on employment and the local economy. Drought Of High ranking significance to the entire planning area, Kerman’s High ranking is tied to the fact that groundwater is the only source of drinking water in the City. Water moving down gradient from the floodplains of the Sierra Nevada streams and rivers is the major source of groundwater recharge in this area. Over-application of imported irrigation water within the Fresno Irrigation District is another source of groundwater recharge. Rainfall provides only a minor percentage of total groundwater recharge in the area. Earthquake The City of Kerman is located in an area that is seismically active; however, the potential for dangerous seismic activity is slight. It is located in a seismic zone that is characterized by a relatively thin section of sedimentary rock overlying a granitic basement. Ground motion that could result from an earthquake would be high, but the distance to the faults that are the expected sources of the shaking is sufficiently great that the effects should be minimal. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Although Fresno County does not have any major faults within its boundaries, Kerman has been affected by earthquakes in the past. The most notable earthquake was the Coalinga earthquake in May 1983, which measured magnitude 6.7 on the Richter scale. Although no damage was reported in Kerman, the quake was strongly felt by local residents. Flood/Levee Failure According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study, the City of Kerman is not subject to floodwaters from a 100-year storm. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. However, areas of the 100-year floodplain are found adjacent to the City, particularly along California Avenue east of the City, as shown in Figure F.3. Therefore, although no property is at risk to damage from the 100- or 500-year floods, vehicular and rail transportation to and from the City could be impacted by flooding. Certain areas within the City are subject to localized flooding and ponding of stormwater. During rain events, flooding occurs in the area between Madera Ave and 9th St and between D St and California Ave within the southern section of the City of Kerman. The city has to sandbag intersections and low areas within this area or buildings will be inundated. The City has sandbagged 5 out of the last 10 years. The sandbagging has saved buildings from being flooded including a local Motel located on California Ave that sustained flood damage before the City started to sandbag the area. A medical center located across from the motel is also potentially affected. In total, 425 homes and businesses and an elementary school are potentially affected by localized flooding within the City. The value of these structures at risk to localized flooding is in excess of $42,000,000. Furthermore, new development, if not designed properly, can magnify drainage problems. New development must conform to standards and plans contained in the Kerman Stormwater Drainage Master Plan, which directs the location of new stormwater drainage lines, mains, and ponding facilities. Figure F.4 illustrates the areas most vulnerable to localized flooding. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure F.3: City of Kerman’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplain Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure F.4: City of Kerman’s Area of Localized Flooding Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazardous Materials Incident There are several uses of hazardous materials within the City that pose a threat to its citizens. These uses include industrial operations on the south side of the City, the state highways that carry large volumes of truck traffic, the railroad, and the wastewater treatment plant. Kerman has two state highways (State Routes 145 and 180) that carry a large amount of truck traffic. It is difficult to ascertain the number of trucks carrying hazardous waste. The American Avenue landfill lies about seven miles southwest of Kerman. Chemical Waste, Inc. operates a hazardous waste collection facility at Kettleman City, about 55 miles south of Kerman. There are 2 CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Kerman. As detailed in Table F.11, there is one critical facility located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table F.11: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Kerman Critical Facility Type Count Police 1 Total 1 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 F.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. The capabilities assessment is divided into three sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, and fiscal mitigation capabilities. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Kerman’s updated capabilities are summarized below. F.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table F.12 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Kerman. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table F.12: City of Kerman’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes 2007 Kerman General Plan Update Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance No Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) N/A Building code Yes 2007 California Building Standards Code Fire department ISO rating Yes ISO rating 3 Erosion or sediment control program No Stormwater management program Yes Storm Drain Master Plan Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016 2007 Kerman General Plan Update The 2007 Kerman General Plan Update expresses the City’s vision and expectations for the future. It is a development blueprint for the year 2027. The plan serves as a decision-making tool to guide future decisions on the physical development of Kerman to facilitate a well-planned community. Some of the plan elements (e.g., Land Use; Conservation, Open Space, Parks and Recreation; and Safety) have goals and policies that are directly or indirectly related to mitigation. The Safety and Conservation, Open Space, Parks and Recreation elements are the most relevant to hazard mitigation. As such, select goals and policies from these elements are extracted and included below. Safety Element The Safety Element is the primary vehicle for relating local safety planning to City land use decisions. Its main purpose is to reduce death, injuries, property damage, and the economic and social dislocation resulting from natural hazards. Goals • Prevent the loss of life and personal property due to natural and manmade hazards, including earthquakes, floods, and fires • Safeguard the economic resources of the City from losses due to natural and manmade hazards, including earthquakes, floods, and fires • Promote citizen awareness of the implications of natural and manmade hazards that exist in the region Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Policies Seismic and Geologic Safety 1. Policy: The City shall insure that all new and rehabilitated structures are constructed to meet adequate building standards. 2. Policy: The City shall review the State Mining and Geology Board’s publications, which define Special Studies Zones for areas along fault lines. 3. Policy: The City of Kerman shall continue the abatement/rehabilitation of dangerous buildings as defined by the Uniform Housing Code. Fire Safety 1. Policy: The City of Kerman shall coordinate with the North Central Fire District through Kerman’s site plan review process and the State’s environmental review process to insure that future development does not impose a burden on their services. North Central, with input and review from the City, should establish a 20-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for potential fire station/equipment in the Kerman area. The City should continue to charge Development Impact Fees for new growth to accommodate the CIP. 2. Policy: The City of Kerman shall coordinate with North Central Fire District to provide prevention and public education to the residents to reduce the demand for fire protection services. 3. Policy: The City shall require that yards and lots be maintained free of weeds and debris. Hazardous Land Use Relationships 1. Policy: Residential development in close proximity to industrial zones and the wastewater treatment plant shall be avoided. Development adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant shall be limited to industrial uses. 2. Policy: Residential land uses shall be limited adjacent to State Highway 145 and State Highway 180. 3. Policy: Businesses that use, produce, or generate any type of hazardous materials shall be conducted in a safe manner. Conservation, Open Space, Parks and Recreation Element The conservation portion of this element includes the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, including water, forests, soils, rivers and other waters, wildlife, and other natural resources. Goals • Conserve, restore, and enhance significant natural, cultural, and historic resources in Kerman • Create and preserve open space in the Kerman area to meet the needs of the community now and in the future Policies Water Quality and Conservation 1. Policy: Promote a community awareness program that will educate the community in water-saving methodologies at the home and the work place. 2. Policy: Require the use of native and drought-tolerant new landscaping in existing and future parks and medians. 3. Policy: Allow for adequate groundwater recharge by developing storm ponding and retention basins where feasible. In some areas these ponds or basins can be incorporated into a recreational area or used as wildlife habitat area. 4. Policy: The City should develop a secondary water source system (“purple pipe system”) that can be incorporated into new development in order to use less potable water for the irrigation of parks, schools, and public landscaping. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Kerman Master Storm Drain Plan In 1982, the City of Kerman developed a master storm drain plan that defined the existing storm drain facilities and provided a plan for the City of Kerman as it grew. Through annual updates, the plan has evolved into today’s comprehensive plan of system pipelines, drainage basins, and pump stations. In some locations, the basins are used as parks in the dry season. As new development takes place, the developers are required to construct master drainage facilities defined by the plan that impact their area of construction. F.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table F.13 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Kerman. Table F.13: City of Kerman’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Consultant—Yamabe & Horn Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Consultant—Yamabe & Horn Full-time building official Yes Planning and Development Services Floodplain manager No Emergency manager Yes Police Chief Grant writer Yes California Consulting Other personnel N/A GIS Data—Land use No GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data No Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study, the City of Kerman is not subject to floodwaters from a 100-year storm and thus is not required to participate in the NFIP. F.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table F.14 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table F.14: City of Kerman’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds No Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No F.4.4 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Kerman has existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. The opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. •Develop a Drought Contingency plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in Kerman. •Update the Storm Drain Master Plan •While the City of Kerman is not subject to floodwaters from a 100-year storm on a creek or river and thus is not required to participate in the NFIP, the City might consider the benefits of joining the program which would allow residents and businesses access to flood insurance, given the flood issues associated with stormwater drainage. F.5 Mitigation Strategy F.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Kerman adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Planning and Development Services may utilize the hazard information when reviewing site plan and building applications. The City Manager will use hazard information when working economic development specific projects and opportunities to recruit new businesses. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Kerman will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan F.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Kerman has not completed any of the actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, these actions will be carried forward in the mitigation strategy for this plan update. F.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Kerman identified the following mitigation action based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how the action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule is included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Kerman will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Construct California Avenue Parallel Storm Drain Line Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: When the City of Kerman constructed the first storm drain system in the early 1960s, a 20-inch storm drain line was installed in California Avenue to move the water that drained from the central part of Kerman to the main storm drain line that leads south to Church Avenue where the master storm drain basin was constructed. As Kerman grew so did the storm drain runoff and a master storm drain plan was developed in the early 1980s to allow storm drain impact fees to be collected on new growth and provide a plan to install the new infrastructure. The last section of the master planned storm drain system in the south part of Kerman is a parallel 30 inch storm drain line running west from 4th Street to 1st Street. Because this section of master planned SD has not been constructed, there is a potential for flooding in the drainage area feeding this part of the SD system. We have experienced continual problems throughout the area draining to this section of the SD system and we are required to sandbag when significant rain events occur. The map (Attachment A below) delineates the area that drains to this section of the SD system. Other Alternatives: No Action Responsible Office: Public Works Director Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $140,000 Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Potential Funding: Not yet identified Benefits (Avoided Losses): Possible flooding to approximately 425 homes and businesses and one elementary campus valued in excess of $42,000,000 Schedule: Within 2-5 years, dependent on funding. Status: 2009 project, not yet started Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2. Install Warning Lights for the Intersection of State Route 145 and Highway 180 Hazard(s) Addressed: Severe Weather: Fog Issue/Background: State Routes 145 and 180 are the two main roads leading into the City of Kerman. These roads are heavily trafficked by personal autos and commercial trucks. Each section of road leading into the City passes through agricultural/rural areas where vehicles often travel at maximum speeds. During winter fog events, the traffic lights become obscured, and the vehicles are not warned of the approaching intersection with enough time to stop. If flashing warning lights were installed on these roadways before the intersection, they would give drivers an opportunity to slow down and stop before they reach the intersection. This would save lives and reduce human injury and property damage. The specific priority location is on the southbound State Route 145 approach to the intersection. In 2007, there were 22 accidents at this intersection. Nine were injury accidents (seven people required an ambulance response). The nearest hospital is 20 miles away in the City of Fresno. Other Alternatives: Reduced speeds on state highways and routes leading into the City, speed bumps, traffic control by police during fog events Responsible Office: City of Kerman and the California Department of Transportation Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $35,000-50,000 Potential Funding: Possible assistance from the California Department of Transportation since they would maintain the lights Benefits (Avoided Losses): It is estimated that flashing intersection warning lights would reduce accidents at this intersection by 20 percent. It is estimated that, per year, 0.5 lives would be saved per year (one life @ $3.1 million=$1.5 million), seven injuries requiring ambulance dispatch would be avoided (1 hospital visit @ $15,000=$105,000), and property damage would be reduced (20 accidents involving 40 vehicles, average $5,000 per vehicle=$200,000). The benefits would approximate $2 million vs. a cost of $50,000. Schedule: 1-2 years Status: 2009 project, not yet started 3. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Fresno County (Kerman) Annex F.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Kerman and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Kerman has become a joint power authority of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the County of Fresno, City of Fresno, City of Clovis, Biola Community Services District, Garfield Water District and International Water District. As a member of the North Kings GSA, the City of Kerman is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the North Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Kerman. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: City Manager and North Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX G: CITY OF KINGSBURG Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan G.1 Community Profile Figure G.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Kingsburg and its Sphere of Influence. Figure G.1: The City of Kingsburg G.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Kingsburg is a corporate city in Fresno County in the San Joaquin Valley of California. It covers a 4,025-acre area, of which 2,245 acres are within the City limits and the rest comprises the City’s Sphere of Influence. Over the past decade, the City has annexed a significant amount of land in the northwestern reaches of its Sphere of Influence toward the City of Selma, along California State Highway 99 and the Union Pacific Railroad. Kingsburg is directly southeast of the City of Selma and approximately 20 miles south of the County seat, the City Kingsburg. Kingsburg sits directly adjacent to Tulare County on its eastern Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and southern boundaries, and Kings County is one mile to the south. The Union Pacific Railroad and California State Highway 99 both run through the middle of the City. The Kings River, a major waterway that starts in the Sierra Nevada Mountains and runs through the lower part of the San Joaquin Valley, is close to the City’s southern and eastern boundaries. Kingsburg’s climate can be described as Mediterranean. The summers are hot and dry, and winters are characterized by moderate temperatures and light precipitation. Temperatures and rainfall for Kingsburg are typical of that of the rest of Fresno County. G.1.2 History Kingsburg was established in the 1870s, when the now Union Pacific Railroad was laid through the heart of the San Joaquin Valley, and when cattle raising, and wheat production were the principal economic activities. The City was originally established in 1873 as a railroad stop called “Kings River Switch” and was settled primarily by Swedish immigrants. This culture persisted, earning the community the nickname “Little Sweden.” The City was later incorporated in 1908. The first highway was built around 1912 and connected Kingsburg to Sanger to the north. By 1925, raisin production and packing had become the City’s main industries. To this day, agriculture remains the integral to Kingsburg’s economy and Swedish influence can still be seen in the City’s architecture. G.1.3 Economy Kingsburg is primarily a bedroom community. Development in the City is 72 percent residential, 20 percent commercial, and 8 percent industrial, which limits the sales and property tax base. Kingsburg has diversified its economy over the past decade, though agriculture remains the primary industry around the City, and supports economic development within the City. The largest employers in Kingsburg include Sun-Maid Raisins (700 employees), Guardian Glass (297 employees), Kingsburg Elementary School District (268 employees) and Sacramento Container Company (121 employees). The City has developed an industrial park on Golden State Boulevard and Stroud Avenue at Highway 99 and a 45-acre commercial park west of Highway 99 and north of Sierra Street. The City’s downtown area, known as the “Swedish Village,” has specialty shops, restaurants, and businesses. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Kingsburg are shown in Table G.1. Table G.1: City of Kingsburg’s Economic Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Kingsburg Families below Poverty Level 13.5% All People below Poverty Level 17.8% Median Family Income $77,938 Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Characteristic City of Kingsburg Median Household Income $61,925 Per Capita Income $24,603 Population in Labor Force 5,448 Population Employed* 4,891 Unemployment 10.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables G.2 and G.3 show how the City of Kingsburg’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2016 American Community Survey. Table G.2: City of Kingsburg’s Employment by Occupation, 2016 Occupation # Employed % Employed Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 1,854 37.9 Sales and Office Occupations 1,101 22.5 Service Occupations 780 15.9 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 660 13.5 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 496 10.1 Total 4,891 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table G.3: City of Kingsburg’s Employment by Industry, 2016 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 1,292 26.4 Retail Trade 520 10.6 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 375 7.7 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 352 7.2 Public Administration 346 7.1 Wholesale Trade 341 7.0 Other Services, Except Public Administration 340 7.0 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 336 6.9 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 256 5.2 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 250 5.1 Construction 241 4.9 Manufacturing 225 4.6 Information 17 0.3 Total 4,891 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ G.1.4 Population In 2016, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, the total population for the City of Kingsburg was estimated at 11,716. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Kingsburg from the 2016 American Community Survey are shown in Table G.4. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table G.4: City of Kingsburg’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Kingsburg Gender/Age Male 47.8% Female 52.2% Median age 34.2 Under 5 years 6.1% Under 18 years 28.4% 65 years and over 12.4% Race/Ethnicity* White 83.0% Asian 2.3% Black or African American 0.1% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.8% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 39.5% Education High school graduate or higher 89.3% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 12.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 95.3% reporting one race Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan G.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Kingsburg’s planning team identified hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Kingsburg (see Table G.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards unique to Kingsburg. Table G.5: City of Kingsburg—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Highly Likely Limited Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan G.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Kingsburg’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Kingsburg’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Kingsburg. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table G.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Kingsburg’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table G.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Kingsburg are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section G.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation are drought and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • epidemic/pandemic • extreme heat • fog • hazardous materials incidents • flood/levee failure Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Kingsburg, those hazards ranked Low are as follows: • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: extreme cold; heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning; tornado windstorm; winter storm • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire* *Note: Although wildfire is ranked High in the County, Kingsburg ranks wildfire as Low due to a lack of exposure to wildfire risk within the city boundaries. However, some at-risk properties are located within the City’s Sphere of Influence (See section G.3.2, Figure G.7). Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of Kingsburg. G.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Kingsburg’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table G.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Kingsburg. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table G.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Kingsburg by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Commercial 174 244 $68,841,479 $68,841,479 $137,682,958 Exempt 17 22 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 43 61 $72,864,393 $109,296,590 $182,160,983 Multi-Residential 189 307 $38,481,741 $19,240,871 $57,722,612 Residential 3,202 3,365 $456,188,691 $228,094,346 $684,283,037 Unknown 1 4 $3,795 $3,795 $7,590 Total 3,626 4,003 $636,380,099 $425,477,080 $1,061,857,179 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Kingsburg from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table G.7 and mapped in Figure G.2. Table G.7: City of Kingsburg’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number CalARP 5 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 11 Total 18 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.2: City of Kingsburg’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table G.8 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by Kingsburg’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table G.8: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by the City of Kingsburg’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info. City Hall 376,531 28 Unreinforced masonry Fire Department—Downtown Station 2,224,747 n/a Unsecured perimeter Fire Department—Bethel Avenue Station 1,923,264 n/a Unsecured perimeter Police Department 2,285,821 n/a Close proximity to railroad system Kingsburg Elementary School District (five schools) n/a 2,445 Some campuses do not have secured facilities Kingsburg High School District (one main campus, one alternative education center) n/a 1,279 Open campus Growth and Development Trends Table G.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2016. Table G.9: City of Kingsburg’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2016 2010 Population 2016 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2016 2010 # of Housing Units 2016 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2016 11,382 11,716 +2.93 3,817 3,938 +1.03 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates; 2006-2010 5-Year Estimates Due to County boundaries on the east and south, all growth potential is in the west and north areas of the City. The City has developed a commercial/business park on the north side of Sierra Street in the northwest area of town. Also, there are two new industrial parks on the north area of town on the west side of Simpson Street (Golden State Boulevard). More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. G.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table G.6 above shows Kingsburg’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below in accordance with the criteria identified under section G.3 Vulnerability Assessment and Table G.5 Hazard Summaries above. (See Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Agricultural Hazards The lands surrounding Kingsburg (in Kingsburg, Kings, and Tulare counties) are all in agricultural production (dairy, citrus, grapes/raisins, and nuts). Crop losses in the surrounding area due to hazards have economic impacts in Kingsburg. Some of the primary businesses in Kingsburg are agricultural, including Del Monte and Sun Maid Raisin. Kingsburg’s agriculturally based economy is vulnerable to freezes, heat waves, flooding, and insect infestations. A freeze in the winter of 2006 affected the citrus industry and the heat wave in the summer of 2006 affected the dairy and poultry industries. Any time a hazard-related event results in reduced crop or product production, Kingsburg is negatively impacted by loss of revenue to major businesses. The associated unemployment affects the crime rate, housing market, local businesses, and the City’s sales tax revenues. Dam Failure Kingsburg is in the mapped inundation area of Pine Flat Dam. Pine Flat Reservoir is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, approximately 30 miles northeast of Kingsburg. The construction of the 429-foot Pine Flat Dam on the Kings River was completed in 1954. The project’s primary purposes are flood control, irrigation, water conservation, and recreation. When completely full, Pine Flat Reservoir is 20 miles long, holds 1 million acre-feet of water, and covers 5,790 acres with 67 miles of shoreline. The upper Kings River is the main tributary that fills the reservoir. According to the Kings River Conservation District, “in the event of a major release from Pine Flat Dam, downstream flooding could occur over agricultural lands near the riverbanks and possibly within the Cities of Reedley and Kingsburg.” The Kings River is located approximately one mile, at its closest, from Kingsburg’s eastern, southeastern, and southern boundaries. Drought Groundwater is the source of domestic water supply for Kingsburg. The groundwater basin is recharged primarily by rainfall and infiltration, stormwater runoff, infiltration from irrigated ditch flows and seepage in the Kings River bottom, and water conservation recharge to natural sloughs in the nearby agricultural area. In October 2007, the City’s water utility was operating at maximum peak performance due to drought conditions. Drought may also lead to agricultural losses in the surrounding area, which may impact the City economically. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Earthquake Kingsburg is located in Seismic Hazard Zone 3. The nearest active earthquake faults are located more than 55 miles to the east in the Sierra Nevada range. Kingsburg has experienced several noticeable ground movement incidents, such as from the 1983 Coalinga earthquake and the 1989 Watsonville earthquake, but no local damage was sustained. The existence and extent of soil liquefaction hazards in the area of Kingsburg are unknown. The planning team has identified approximately 36 unreinforced masonry buildings in the City. The majority of the unreinforced masonry buildings are downtown, which is very much a community asset. The downtown area, with its Swedish theme, is the community’s major attraction. It is referred to as Historic Swedish Village. City Hall is the only critical facility that is an unreinforced masonry building. Epidemic/Pandemic The risk and vulnerabilities in the City do not differ from the County at large for this hazard. Please consult the main HIRA in Section 4 in the main plan for more details. Flood Heavy rain can lead to problems with storm drainage and create localized flood problems. According to the City of Kingsburg Storm Drain Master Plan, there are several flooding problem areas in the City. These areas are primarily a result of undersized pipes where runoff exceeds pipe capacity even for minor storms, damaged curb and gutters where the flow lines have been disrupted due to raised gutters and other obstructions, or damaged drain pipes. Figure G.3shows the existing storm drain system deficiencies, Figure G.4 depicts potential stormwater flooding from a 100-year storm, and Figure G.5 depicts potential flooding from a 10-year storm. Most damaged lines are downtown, where the storm drain pipes are some of the oldest in the system. The undersized lines are located along Kern Street near Roosevelt Elementary School and along Mariposa Street near Lincoln Elementary School. Areas with curb and gutter flow line damage are generally in the older residential areas, including the areas south and west of Kingsburg High School. The downtown areas along Washington, Lincoln, and Lewis streets also have damaged curbs and gutters. Prior to the construction of the Pine Flat Dam in the 1920s, flooding occurred in the Kings River area. However, today there is no flood hazard area mapped by FEMA within the City of Kingsburg. The City does participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The City joined the program on November 30, 1983. NFIP insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were 10 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $3,220,000 in coverage. All 10 policies are residential preferred risk policies for properties in a B, C, or X zone. There have been no historical claims for flood losses and according to the FEMA Community Information System accessed Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Figure G.6 shows the FEMA mapped 100- and 500-year floodplain around the City of Kingsburg. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.3: Existing Storm Drain System Deficiencies: City of Kingsburg Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.4: Flooding in Kingsburg from a 100-Year Storm: City of Kingsburg Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.5: Flooding in Kingsburg from a 10-Year Storm: City of Kingsburg Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.6: City of Kingsburg’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Hazardous Materials Incident California State Highway 99 and the Union Pacific Railroad both run through the heart of Kingsburg. With these two main transportation corridors comes the potential and history of major incidents involving loss of life and property. Incidents such as those mentioned in the fog section above not only affect Highway 99, but also affect local streets and traffic due to detours through the City. Along with the potential for death and injuries from large-scale motor vehicle accidents, there is the potential for hazardous material spills or fires as numerous commercial transportation vehicles travel Highway 99 with various types and quantities of hazardous materials. The Union Pacific Railroad is a strictly commercial freight transportation system. Large quantities and numerous types of hazardous materials are transported through Kingsburg by rail on a daily basis. In 1947, a collision occurred between a passenger train and a semi-truck hauling gasoline at the Union Pacific railroad crossing and Sierra Street in Kingsburg, killing four people and injuring 129. The rail line was closed for several days, but the specific closures and damage are no longer Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan known. Warning devices have since been approved. However, due to the increased rail and vehicle traffic in the City, this type of accident may occur again in the future. Of particular concern is the large number of liquefied petroleum gas vessels that are transported on the system. A derailment and fire, with large exploding liquefied petroleum gas vessels, could cause widespread damage to the City, as has happened in other communities across the country. Large quantities of hazardous materials are used by the agricultural industry and thus travel through Kingsburg and are stored and used in the surrounding areas. Also, there is the potential for hazardous materials releases from large industrial plants in Kingsburg, such as Guardian Glass and Del Monte. There are five CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Kingsburg. As detailed in Table G.10, there are four critical facilities located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table G.10: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Kingsburg Critical Facility Type Count Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 2 Total 4 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Severe Weather: Extreme Heat The City does have a cooling station plan administered by the Community Services Department. The fire and police stations, city hall, and the senior center serve as cooling centers. Kingsburg has a high population of elderly residents that are vulnerable during extreme heat events. Severe Weather: Fog Severe fog events have contributed to multi-vehicle traffic accidents with multiple casualties along Highway 99 in Kingsburg. The most recent large events occurred in 1998 along Highway 99 and Avenue 384 (dense fog caused a chain-reaction accident involving 74 vehicles, killing two and injuring 51) and in 2000 along Highway 99, a major traffic artery in California, between Bethel and Mountain View avenues. The planning team reported that fatal accidents related to severe fog events occur in the area every year. About every five years, there is a major incident involving several vehicles. A similar event is highly likely to occur again in the future, especially with the expansion of Highway 99 from four to six lanes and the increase in highway usage. These incidents require assistance from the City’s emergency responders and also cause traffic to be diverted through the town, increasing the number of accidents there. Kingsburg does have a fog plan that involves constant replacement of signage and street striping to maintain visibility. The school districts implement a foggy day schedule when needed. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Wildfire Similar to many areas of the County, Kingsburg has high temperatures in the summer with low rainfall creating fire hazard conditions. Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a wildfire map for the City of Kingsburg was created (see Figure G.7). An analysis was performed using GIS software to determine where populations, values at risk, and critical facilities are located within wildfire threat zones. According to this assessment, there are no values at risk to wildfire within the city. However, there is some property at risk within the city’s Sphere of Influence. (See Figure G.7 below). There are not any critical facilities in wildfire threat zones in the City of Kingsburg. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure G.7: City of Kingsburg’s Wildfire Risk Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan G.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Kingsburg’s updated capabilities are summarized below. G.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table G.11 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Kingsburg. Table G.11: City of Kingsburg’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes Comprehensive General Plan for the Swedish Village of Kingsburg, 1992 Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Growth management ordinance Yes Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Yes Water Conservation Ordinance, 2003; Kingsburg Municipal Code 13.04.070 Building code Yes Version: 2001. Adopt 2007 California Code in January 2008 Fire department ISO rating Yes Rating: 5 Erosion or sediment control program No Stormwater management program Yes City of Kingsburg Storm Drain Master Plan, 2005 Capital improvements plan Yes Five-year plan; updated annually Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes Emergency Operations Plan, May 1992 Other special plans Yes Water Master Plan, 2007 Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Urban Water Management Plan (possible adoption summer 2008) North Kingsburg Specific Plan, 2005 (addendum to general plan) Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2005 Comprehensive General Plan for the Swedish Village of Kingsburg, 1992 The Kingsburg General Plan reflects the City’s long-range aspirations (15-20 years) of physical form and amenity and provides guidance for developmental regulations, such as zoning and subdivision ordinances. Two of the plans goals, in particular, support hazard mitigation. These goals and their policies are included below. Goal 8: Seismic Hazards Goals for achieving and maintaining safety from seismic events, include preventing serious injury, loss of life, serious damage to critical facilities involving large assemblies of people, and loss of continuity in providing services. • The City will inventory all buildings which are unsound under conditions of “moderate” seismic activity; buildings having questionable structural resistance should be considered for either rehabilitation or demolition. Structures determined by the City’s building official to be structurally unsound are to be reported to the owner and recorded with the County recorder to insure that future owners are made aware of hazardous conditions and risks. • All new building construction shall conform to the latest seismic requirements of the Uniform Building Code as a minimum standard. • The present building height limit of 50 feet shall be maintained, with a maximum of four stories. This policy should stay in force until such time that high rise construction is desired and capability for evacuation and fire fighting in upper stories is possible through the availability of appropriate equipment. • Facilities necessary for emergency service should be capable of withstanding a maximum credible earthquake and remain operational to provide emergency response. • Soil compaction tests, and geotechnical analysis of soil conditions and behavior under seismic conditions shall be required of all subdivisions and of all commercial, industrial and institutional structures over 6,000 square feet in area (or in the case of institutional structures, those which hold 100 or more people). • The City should adopt an Earthquake Disaster Plan in coordination with Fresno County and local special districts. The plan should identify hazards that may occur as the result of an earthquake of major magnitude. The plan should be sufficiently broad in scope to include the designation of evacuation routes and means to coordinate all local government agencies in assisting local residents in the event of a major earthquake, large-scale fire or explosion, or hazardous chemical spill or release of hazardous airborne gas. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • All lines which are part of the domestic water distribution system should be looped to assure adequate pressure in the event of major fire, earthquake, or explosion. Adequate emergency standby power generation capability should be available at water wells to assure water availability in the event of a major power failure. Goal 9: Public Safety Hazards Goals for public safety seek to reduce loss of life or property due to crime, fire, earthquake, or other disasters or hazards, provide adequate medical and emergency services to reduce the effects of natural or manmade disasters, promote citizen awareness and preparedness for emergency/disaster situations or potential for the incidence of crime, and implement adequate interagency disaster planning. • The City will continue to maintain and update emergency service plans, including plans for managing emergency operations, the handling of hazardous materials, and the rapid cleanup of hazardous materials spills. • The City will continue to cooperate with the County of Fresno and other agencies in pre- disaster planning activities, such as evacuation required in the event of a serious spill of hazardous chemicals. • The City will seek to reduce the risks and potential for hazards to the public through planning and zoning practices and regulations which avoid hazardous land use relationships and by the continued and timely adoption of new-edition building and fire codes. The general plan’s Hazard Management Element incorporates the Safety Element of the Fresno County General Plan by reference “to the extent that these original elements apply to the Kingsburg Planning area.” City of Kingsburg Storm Drain Master Plan, 2005 The primary purposes of the City of Kingsburg’s Storm Drain Master Plan were to assess the existing storm drain system, determine system deficiencies, recommend cost-effective improvements to correct identified deficiencies, and identify facilities and costs for planned orderly expansion of the system to provide for planned future growth within the planning area (for purposes of flood control and groundwater recharge). The 2005 plan is an update to the 1982 plan. It considers drainage system improvements and development that has occurred since the previous plan and incorporates the latest growth plans envisioned by the City. The current drainage system collects surface runoff in pipelines that drain to a series of retention basins located through the City. The plan includes recommendations for additional retention basins or improvements to provide the required capacity. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan North Kingsburg Specific Plan, 2005 The North Kingsburg Specific Plan serves as the primary instrument of the City of Kingsburg for carrying out urban development proposals of the Comprehensive General Plan for the Swedish Village of Kingsburg as they apply in North Kingsburg, where future development in the City is focused. The plan addresses stormwater drainage as an issue associated with proposed growth and states that all surface water drainage facilities will be designed in conformance with the City of Kingsburg Storm Drain Master Plan. Water Conservation Ordinance City of Kingsburg Municipal Code 13.04.070 addresses water conservation (water waste). It specifies when watering is allowed for irrigating lawns, shrubs and trees (i.e., days and times or restrictions). G.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table G.12 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Kingsburg. Table G.12: City of Kingsburg’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Planning and Development Director Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes City Engineer and Building Official Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards No Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Planning Department Full time building official Yes Building Official Floodplain manager Yes Emergency manager Yes Police Chief or Fire Chief Grant writer Yes Contract with outside consultant Other personnel No GIS Data—Land use GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No Other G.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table G.13 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table G.13: City of Kingsburg’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes With voter approval Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Water Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes With voter approval Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes With voter approval Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas n/a Other n/a G.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The City of Kingsburg has an existing water responsible program and annual fire safety programs in schools and throughout the year at special community events. The City of Kingsburg Fire Department recently agreed to an automatic aid agreement for fire and emergency medical services with the Fresno County Fire Protection District. They also have mutual aid agreements with Kings and Tulare county fire departments. G.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts The City has implemented mitigation efforts in the past. Examples that were not covered elsewhere in this section include the following: • The City has installed auxiliary power sources on three municipal water wells. • The City’s Building Department has standards on building elevations in reference to curbs and gutters based on past practice. • The City has designated cooling centers and secondary sites if needed during a heat emergency. City Recreation Department staff would assist in staffing these sites, and the City would provide for water and other basic needs. • The Kingsburg Police Department and the California Department of Transportation have a plan to divert traffic from Highway 99 in the event of fog-related traffic accidents. • Kingsburg has a fog plan that involves constant replacement of signage and street striping to maintain visibility. The school districts implement a foggy day schedule when needed. • The City requires, on average, pad elevation of 1 ½ feet above flow line of gutter in residential development, which prevents most flood damage. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan G.4.6 Opportunities for Improvement Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Kingsburg has existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. The opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will create a framework for drought response and mitigation. • Update the 2005 City of Kingsburg Storm Drain Master Plan G.5 Mitigation Strategy The City of Kingsburg modified the goals and objectives developed by the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to better fit the City’s needs. The City of Kingsburg’s mitigation goals and objectives are the following: G.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives Goal 1: Provide Protection for People’s Lives from All Hazards Objective 1.1: Provide timely notification and direction to the public of imminent and potential hazards. Objective 1.2: Protect public health and safety by preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the effects of natural or technological disasters. Objective 1.3: Improve community transportation corridors to allow for better evacuation routes for public and better access for emergency responders. 1.3.1: Minimize issues associated with California State Highway 99 and the Union Pacific Railroad. Goal 2: Improve Community and Agency Awareness about Hazards and Associated Vulnerabilities That Threaten Our Communities Objective: 2.1: Increase public awareness about the nature and extent of hazards they are exposed to, where they occur, what is vulnerable, and recommended responses to identified hazards (i.e. both preparedness and response). 2.1.1: Create/continue an outreach program, provide educational resources, and develop and provide training. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal 3: Improve the Community’s Capability to Mitigate Hazards and Reduce Exposure to Hazard Related Losses Objective 3.1: Reduce damage to property from an earthquake event. 3.1.1: Adopt/maintain building codes to meet required earthquake standards. Objective 3.2: Reduce flood and storm related losses. 3.2.1: Provide for better collection of data related to severe weather events. 3.2.2: Reduce localized flooding within the City’s storm drain systems. 3.2.2.1: Implement better drainage to accommodate heavy rains that cause flooding. Objective 3.3: Reduce hazards that adversely impact the agricultural industry. 3.3.1: Promote and protect the viability of agriculture and further the County’s economic development goals. 3.3.1.1: Control invasive species. 3.3.1.2: Identify and lessen freeze impacts. Objective 3.4: Minimize the impact to the City due to reoccurring drought conditions that impact both ground water supply and agricultural industry. 3.4.1: Develop an integrated City water management plan and groundwater management plan for the City of Kingsburg. Objective 3.5: Minimize the impact to vulnerable populations within the community that may be affected by severe weather-related events, such as long duration heat waves and hard freezes. 3.5.1: Develop community response plans, such as cooling centers, during heat waves. 3.5.2: Develop community response plans during hard freezes that damage plumbing and cause flooding. Goal 4: Provide Protection for Critical Facilities, Utilities, and Services from Hazard Impacts Goal 5: Maintain Coordination of Disaster Planning Objective 5.1: Coordinate with changing DHS/FEMA needs. 5.1.1: National Incident Management System (NIMS) 5.1.2: Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) planning 5.1.3: Emergency Operations plans Objective 5.2: Coordinate with community plans. 5.2.1: General plans 5.2.2: Drought plans 5.2.3: Drainage plans 5.2.4: Intergovernmental agency disaster planning. Objective 5.3: Maximize the use of shared resources between jurisdictions and special districts for mitigation/communication. Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 5.3.1: Develop Mutual/Automatic Aid agreements with adjacent jurisdictions and agencies. Objective 5.4: Standardize systems among agencies to provide for better interoperability. 5.4.1: Standardize communication technology and language. Goal 6: Maintain/Provide for FEMA Eligibility and Work to Position City Departments and Community Partners for Grant Funding Objective 6.1: Provide City departments and other agencies with information regarding mitigation opportunities. Objective 6.2: As part of plan implementation, review projects in this plan on an annual basis to be considered for annual FEMA PDM-C grant allocations or after a presidential disaster declaration in California for HMGP funding as well as for other local, state, and federal funding opportunities. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Economic Development Coordinator may utilize the hazard information when developing business incentives and the Public Works Department may utilize the information when implementing new infrastructure projects. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Kingsburg will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1983. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. G.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Kingsburg completed two mitigations actions identified in the 2009 plan. These completed actions are as follows: Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Conduct Disaster Response Training • Replace Storm Drains on Lewis and Washington Streets These completed actions have reduced vulnerability to hazards and increased local capability through improved hazard event preparation. G.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Kingsburg identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Kingsburg will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi- hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate the information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi- Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Enhance Traffic Diversion System Install permanent illuminating message and directional signs, improve street stripping, and possibly widen the detour route, Simpson Street through the City of Kingsburg. Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: severe weather Issue/Background: California State Highway 99 runs through the center of Kingsburg. Historically, when major issues (i.e., major motor vehicle accidents) shut the highway down, traffic is detoured through the City of Kingsburg. The street that traffic is normally diverted onto is Simpson Street (Golden State Boulevard) from Mendocino Avenue at the south to either Bethel or Mt. View avenues on the north. Simpson Street is one of two main north/south arteries that run through Kingsburg. Several times a year, a significant event occurs on Highway 99, and traffic is diverted onto Simpson Street, especially during the fog season. This diversion typically causes problems for the normal City traffic flow as well as the diverted traffic off of the highway. The City has taken measures to minimize the impact on local traffic by placing traffic signal lights at the two main east/west street arteries, Sierra and Draper streets. Assistance is needed to ensure the diverted traffic has a clear and adequate detour through the City with minimal impact on the community and its public safety entities. With the current road conditions and signage on Simpson Street, detoured traffic often gets off course and confused. There are then thousands of Highway 99 vehicles driving around the City, which causes problems for both the routine traffic patterns and Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan public safety. Local police must then deal with trying to keep diverted traffic on course and the problems associated with an influx of heavy traffic onto side streets that are not designed for the increased traffic load (i.e., additional motor vehicle accidents). Fire and ambulance services are also affected by slower responses due to the influx of traffic. Other Alternatives: The City could divert highway traffic through County side streets to minimize the impact on the heavier population of Kingsburg. There are no County streets that are clearly marked or as easily accessible as Simpson Street. Responsible Office: City of Kingsburg Public Works Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $154,780 (stripping cost: $40,000; four new electronic LED outdoor message signs: $114,780) Potential Funding: California Office of Traffic Safety grants; other available grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This would greatly reduce the impact to major state corridor Highway 99, motor vehicle accidents, injuries, City of Kingsburg public safety, and traffic flows. Schedule: Fall 2018 Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 2. Create Emergency Evacuation Plan for Large Scale Incident Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, flood, earthquake Issue/Background: Summer 2017 there was significant flooding around the Kings River area East of Kingsburg. Tulare County and Kingsburg City could have been better prepared to handle the evacuation. Kingsburg would benefit from a plan to evacuate during large scale incidents. Evacuation planning should include the evacuation of the City of Kingsburg as well as receiving evacuees into the City. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Kingsburg Fire Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $10,000 Potential funding: FEMA Grant Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): Having a plan in place will reduce the potential loss of life and property. Schedule: Plan in place by 2020 Status: New project 3. Identify High Risk and High Value Target Areas* Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: Human-caused Issue/Background: Due to the rise in mass shooting incidents, and ongoing terror threats both foreign and domestic, preplanning would be helpful in identifying target areas. Once identified, steps can be taken to minimize losses. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Kingsburg Fire Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $15,000 Potential funding: Homeland Security Grant Benefits (Avoided Losses): Once target areas are identified, threat assessments can be done for each site. Preplans can then be updated to reduce loss of life and property. Updates can be added to the city’s Emergency Operation Plan. Schedule: Plan updated by 2020 Status: New project 4. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Kingsburg and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Kingsburg has become a joint power authority of the South Kings Fresno County (Kingsburg) Annex G.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the City of Fowler, City of Parlier and City of Sanger. As a member of the South Kings GSA, the City of Kingsburg is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the South Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Kingsburg. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: Public Works and South Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX H: CITY OF MENDOTA Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H.1 Community Profile Figure H.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Mendota and its Sphere of Influence. Figure H.1: The City of Mendota H.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Mendota sits in the central part of the San Joaquin Valley. The City is approximately 40.6 miles west of the City of Fresno, where California State Highway 180 and Highway 33 meet. While surrounded by thousands of acres of agricultural lands, the City of Mendota does have some neighbors. The City of Firebaugh lies eight miles to the north, and Kerman and San Joaquin are also nearby to the east and southeast, respectively. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The City of Mendota and its Sphere of Influence cover a 2,902-acre area. The City boundary and the Sphere of Influence have expanded significantly over the past decade, with most growth occurring in the north of the City as well as some annexations in the west. The City of Mendota has a relatively flat terrain profile. Approximately 25-30 miles to the west is the Coast Range. In all other directions, the terrain is flat agricultural lands. Just north of the City is the conflux of the Delta-Mendota Canal (DMC), the Helm Canal, the San Joaquin River, and the Fresno Slough. These collect into the Mendota Pool, which discharges into the San Joaquin River and then on to the San Francisco Bay Delta. To the east is the 12,000-acre Mendota Wildlife Refuge for Pintail and Snow Geese species. Mendota has high temperatures that range from 40-50oF in the winter and 100-110oF in the summer. The average rainfall is 11.94 inches per year. H.1.2 History In 1891, the Southern Pacific Railroad established a storage and switching facility at the site of present-day Mendota, allegedly to avoid the unruly town of Firebaugh. This service point was unusually large and well-equipped and included a roundhouse and repair facilities. In 1868, under governmental pressure, the Mendota Pool was built to facilitate ship passage on the river, but regulations were eventually changed, and the turntable gate was never used. By 1900, a good-sized business district had grown around the train station. Development slowed abruptly in 1910 when the railroad discontinued use of the roundhouse. To make matters worse, the largest landowner sold off his holdings at about the same time, ending his support of the local economy. For a time, a diatomite mine operated in the area. That industry, together with the increasing number of farm workers who resided in the town, brought pressure for municipal services, and Mendota incorporated in 1942. In the 1950s, the State of California established the Mendota Wildlife Refuge, where, at the time, deer, elk, and migratory birds from Siberian breeding grounds would spend the winter. Although today the deer and elk are gone, the birds still migrate to the refuge for the winter. In 1964, the County established Mendota Pool Park at the site of the turntable gate, which includes an 85-acre park with launch ramp, playgrounds, and picnic areas. H.1.3 Economy The most up-to-date economic data available for the City of Mendota comes from the U.S. Census Bureau by way of the American Community Survey (ACS). Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Mendota are shown in Table H.1. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table H.1: City of Mendota’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Mendota Families below Poverty Level 40.9% All People below Poverty Level 46.5% Median Family Income $25,846 Median Household Income $25,862 Per Capita Income $8,949 Population in Labor Force 5,252 Population Employed* 3,859 Unemployment 26.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Table H.2 and Table H.3 show how the City of Mendota’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on 5-year estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table H.2: City of Mendota’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 2,248 58.3 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 769 19.9 Sales and Office Occupations 320 8.3 Management, Business, Science and Arts Occupations 282 7.3 Service Occupations 240 6.2 Total 3,859 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table H.3: City of Mendota’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 2,377 61.6 Educational Services, and Health Care, and Social Assistance 350 9.1 Retail Trade 252 6.5 Wholesale Trade 229 5.9 Manufacturing 188 4.9 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 152 3.9 Public Administration 88 2.3 Construction 82 2.1 Other Services, Except Public Administration 55 1.4 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 53 1.4 Information 17 0.4 Professional, Scientific, and Management, and Administrative and Waste Management Services 16 0.4 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 0 0 Total 3,859 100.00 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The City of Mendota’s economy has been largely based on agriculture. Approximately 61 percent of the City’s labor force have jobs in agriculture. Despite efforts to diversify the economy, the agriculture industry has grown in dominance as the primary employer in the City over the past 15 years. As a result, the City is particularly vulnerable to any hazards that could affect agricultural production, including agricultural hazards, drought, flood, and severe weather. Currently, the City of Mendota is suffering from a 26.5 percent unemployment rate. Though Mendota’s unemployment rate has dropped over the past decade, it is still roughly twice the unemployment rate of the County as a whole. H.1.4 Population According to the California Department of Finance, the Mendota’s population was estimated to be 11,828 at the beginning of 2017. Select demographic and social characteristics from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates are shown in Table H.4. Table H.4: City of Mendota’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015* Characteristic City of Mendota Gender/Age Male 51.0% Female 49.0% Median age 28.0 Under 5 years 10.8% Under 18 years 33.6% 65 years and over 6.0% Race/Ethnicity** White 84.7% Asian 0.6% Black or African American 0.7% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.1% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 98.0% Education High school graduate or higher 30.5% Disability Status Population 5 years and over 6.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Based on a 2015 estimated population of 11,402 **Of the 97.6% reporting one race H.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Mendota’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Mendota (see Table H.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are unique to Mendota. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table H.5: City of Mendota—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Critical Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Likely No Data Medium Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Mendota’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Mendota’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Mendota. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table H.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the Ci ty of Mendota’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table H.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium and High significance for the City of Mendota are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section H.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought and flood/levee failure. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic • severe weather: extreme heat; windstorm • soil hazards: expansive soils Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan •wildfire Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Mendota, those hazards are as follows: •human health hazards: West Nile Virus •landslide •severe weather: extreme cold/freeze; fog; heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning; tornado •soil hazards: erosion, land subsidence •volcano •winter storm Note: For the following three hazards, the risk and vulnerability factors in the City of Mendota are not unique from the planning area at large. Please refer to the main plan, Section 4, for more information on these hazards. •Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic •Severe Weather: Fog •Severe Weather: Windstorm Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche is considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of Mendota. H.3.1 Assets at Risk This section discusses Mendota’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table H.6 shows the 2017 values at risk broken down by property type for the City of Mendota. Table H.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Mendota by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 0 $187,067 $187,067 $374,134 Commercial 108 174 $22,095,970 $22,095,970 $44,191,940 Exempt 11 107 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 23 21 $8,475,093 $12,712,640 $21,187,733 Multi-Residential 94 278 $40,730,574 $20,365,287 $61,095,861 Open Space 4 0 $192,839 $192,839 $385,678 Residential 1,523 1,820 $115,268,169 $57,634,085 $172,902,254 Total 1,764 2,400 $186,949,712 $113,187,887 $300,137,599 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Mendota from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table H.7 and illustrated in Figure H.2. The City noted that there is also a police station (near airport) and an American Ambulance station (on 6th, north of Quince). Table H.7: City of Mendota’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number Airport 1 CalARP 1 Fire Station 1 School 7 Total 10 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure H.2: City of Mendota’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table H.8 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by Mendota’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. It should be noted that information from the Fresno County GIS does not match this information provided by the City. Table H.8: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by City of Mendota Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info. Water Treatment Plant $8 million 4.5 MGD Earthquake, manmade Wastewater Treatment Plant $5 million 1.24 MGD Earthquake, flood, manmade Sewer and Water System pipes $30 million Earthquake Mendota Municipal Airport $3-5 million Earthquake, flood, manmade (accidents) Natural Gas line at Water Treatment Plant $50,000 Earthquake, fire Mendota Wildlife Refuge N/A Flood, wildfire, manmade Growth and Development Trends Current growth trends are on three borders of the City. A new federal prison and Fresno County Library are to the south of the City in an area that has been annexed into the City limits, and new housing tracts are being built to the west and the north of the City. Some of the growth has come in the form of infill commercial development as well. The only large and critical infrastructure development being planned for the City is an expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. New housing construction is going in as mid-range homes with on- site construction. Only 2 percent of the buildings constructed in the last year have been pre- manufactured, all belonging to the City. Table H.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2017. Table H.9: City of Mendota’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2017 2010 Population 2017 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010- 2017 2010 # of Housing Units 2017 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010- 2017 11,014 11,828 +7.39 2,556 2,669 +4.42 Source: California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/Research/ More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table H.6 above shows Mendota’s total exposure to hazards in terms of population and the number and values of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. In regard to these types of structures: Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Agricultural Hazards Agricultural losses have cascading effects on the City of Mendota. The loss of crops from any hazard event results in loss productivity for farm owners, loss of jobs for farm workers, and loss of expendable income for use in stores. It also limits the City’s revenue. In a small city like Mendota, there is even more interdependency than in larger cities, and what affects one sector affects them all. Local crops include cantaloupe, broccoli, lettuce, and alfalfa. Dam Failure Mendota is in the mapped inundation areas for the Friant and Pine Flat dams. Containing 1 million acre-feet and 555,500 acre-feet respectively, these are the largest and second largest dams in the County. Drought Mendota’s water supply comes from groundwater. Extended droughts can cause decline in the local groundwater table, which can have impacts on the ability of current wells and pumps to extract necessary quantities of groundwater for use in the City. Earthquake Mendota is located in Seismic Zone 3 but near the boundary of the more hazardous Seismic Zone 4, which covers the foothills to the west. The Ortigalita fault is located approximately 30 miles northwest of Mendota. It is considered active and is designated an Earthquake Hazard Zone under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1994. Mendota’s planning team identified several important buildings that are vulnerable to seismic events and may be constructed of unreinforced masonry, which are particularly susceptible to earthquake shaking. These included the following: Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Water Treatment Plant • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Community Recreation and Public Works departments • Old Mendota Library The total number of unreinforced masonry buildings in the City is unknown. There are no hospitals built before 1973. Flood/Levee Failure According to the 2016 Flood Insurance Study, there are three basic areas of flooding in Mendota: along Belmont Avenue, the Hacienda Gardens area, and a ponded area west of Highway 33 and the railroad. There are no defined channels within the City limits of Mendota. Thus, the principal type of flooding in the City of Mendota area is sheetflow—broad, shallow, overland flooding, which is generally less than three feet deep and characterized by unpredictable flow paths. In addition, the City suffers flooding in certain residential areas, primarily along Naples Street from Second to Tenth Streets, where runoff from the westerly portion of the City itself is impeded by the elevated railroad and collects into puddles which can be as much as four feet deep. These are relieved only by the City’s temporary pumps, and water can persist for 48 to 72 hours after the end of a rain event. The main source of flooding in Mendota is heavy rains in the Coastal Range west of the City, which run off into Panoche Creek. The City of Mendota lies at an approximate elevation of 175 feet. Terrain in the study area slopes gently from the southwest to the northeast. The drainage basin of Panoche Creek originates in the Diablo Range approximately 30 miles west of the City of Mendota. The creek flows through steep mountain canyons in well-defined channels to the California Aqueduct (around the foothill line). From there to Mendota, the land is relatively flat, and the channel steadily decreases in size and carrying capacity due to siltation and vegetable growth, until it ends at Belmont Avenue. During high creek flows, stormwater floods vast tracks of agricultural land and drains into Belmont Avenue. Landowners along Belmont Avenue sometimes construct levees parallel to the road, which act as canal banks and channel flow along Belmont Avenue to Highway 33. There, water can continue easterly on Belmont, but can also flow north along Highway 33 to Seventh Street. At that point, it flows northeast through the downtown area and adds to the flooding along Naples Street mentioned above. In 1972, the City won a Superior Court injunction against the landowners which requires them to not build levees but to allow the Panoche Creek water onto their lands in preference to flooding the City. This injunction has been irregularly enforced over the years, though in the past five years the provisions have been vigorously enforced by the City, with a corresponding decrease in the number of Belmont Avenue flood events. The planning team for Mendota agreed that, on average, flooding occurs on Belmont Avenue twice per year but is relatively minor. Drains along Belmont Avenue become clogged with sedimentation Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan from flood events. The City pays to remove this build-up annually. Nevertheless, a significant flood occurs every two to three years. Urban runoff from just under 1,000 acres within the City of Mendota in general is surface flows across city streets in an east-northeasterly direction. The City of Mendota, as with much of the San Joaquin Valley, is relatively flat. Gutters have imperceptibly shallow slopes. Precise topographic surveys of various locations in the city show lengths of gutter with zero slope, others with more commonly shallow slopes of around 0.2% (0.002 feet of fall per foot.) The ground elevations fall towards the Fresno Slough and San Joaquin River to the northeast of the City, but there is currently no discharge of storm water runoff to these bodies of water. There are four storm water basins in newer developments around the perimeter of the city and those areas are not prone to flooding. The older downtown “triangle” – bounded by Derrick Ave (State Route 33) on the west, the Union Pacific Railroad to the northeast, and Belmont Avenue on the south – has very limited storm drain infrastructure. The infrastructure within the downtown triangle is limited to surface flow conveyances such as curbs and gutters. Runoff passes through street intersections via concrete valley gutters or “bubble- ups,” which are short systems comprised of an inlet, a short length of buried pipe, and an outlet. In these systems, storm water enters the inlet from a gutter on one side of the street, fills the pipe and outlet structure until the water reaches a depth sufficient to flow out of the outlet structure and down the next gutter. Several feet of water is often left standing for months in these systems as the structures of these old systems have solid walls and the heavy clay native soil does not allow percolation. Because of the high clay content, the City experiences only minimal percolation of standing water within basins, canals and other drainage structures. Removal of collected storm water runoff is by evaporation only. Groundwater levels under the city are 20- to 25-feet below ground surface. The railroad that trends northwest to southeast through the City is above grade and creates a major impediment to the flow of storm water runoff across the City. Naples Street which parallels the railroad on the southerly side sees extreme flooding centered around its intersections with 2nd Street and 9th Street. Flooding overtops curbs and flood waters have lapped up against the door thresholds of adjacent residential homes. During these events, the street is impassable and there is a threat to public safety due to pedestrian and vehicular mobility risks. There is a pump station at the intersection of 2nd and Naples that moves water from that intersection under the railroad tracks to a curb outlet structure at the 2nd and Marie Street intersection. The pumps are equipped with variable speed controllers, and when run at full speed their output can exceed the capacity of the 2nd Street gutter flow, but even that is not sufficient to dewater the Naples and 2nd Street intersection during even a moderate storm event. In an effort to mitigate this situation, the City constructed a small basin that, by the use of a diversion valve on the forcemain, can accept some of the water pumped from 2nd & Naples when, during big rain events, they need Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan to run the pumps at maximum speed. During less-intense rains, when a slower pump operating speed is adequate, they bypass this basin and direct all water down the 2nd Street gutter. The intersection of Naples and 9th Street is a local low spot. There is no pump station there, which means storm water begins to collect in every storm regardless of the intensity. This problem is exacerbated because when 2nd and Naples floods, water breaks over at 4th Street, and flows southeast along both sides of Naples, eventually reaching and adding to the flooding at 9th Street. At that intersection, there is a system of curb inlets and buried pipe which runs through a private property to the south to discharge into an open channel which runs through a second private property and then discharges on a third private property outside the southeast city limits. This pipe system does not have the capacity to handle even moderate-intensity rain events. When water floods the 9th Street intersection, the only relief currently available is by temporary pump either at the inlet at 9th Street or at the inlet at 10th Street. From 9th Street, water must be pumped over the adjacent railroad tracks to a curb and gutter, when then flows to the storm water retention pond at the Mendota Airport. From 10th Street, water can be pumped onto the private property mentioned above, where it eventually flows to the open channel. A major storm water management concern is the occasional flood of silty water that comes down Belmont Avenue when a storm in the Coast Range mountains causes Panoche Creek to flood. Flood waters spill over the creek banks 6.75 miles west of the City and flow eastward on Belmont Avenue. A court injunction dating to the 1970s has mandated that the farmers with land adjacent to Belmont must keep their earthen berms below the crown grade of Belmont Avenue, but this is often ignored. The result is causing silt-laden floodwaters to reach the City at the southwest corner of town. During especially high flows, the flood water over tops the intersection of Derrick Ave (State Route 33) and heads northeasterly along Derrick Avenue, across 7th Street, and then easterly through the heart of downtown. This water can easily cross Oller Street, compounding the flooding at 9th Street and Naples. There is a large (48”-72”) diameter storm drain in Belmont Avenue, running east from the west end of Derrick Avenue. This pipe largely provides detention of runoff as it discharges into an open channel at the southeast corner of town on the same private property mentioned above. The invert at the end of the pipe is lower than the flowline of the receiving open channel; therefore, water ponds up in the pipe (similar to the bubble-up systems) before it reaches the flowline elevation of the open channel. This causes both standing water in the pipe and a large build-up of sediment and debris from the Panoche Creek flood waters within the pipe. This is a burden to maintain. Flows from the two open channels at the southeast corner of town historically continued in an open channel about a mile southeast of town where it discharged into the Fresno Slough. Earthmoving operations on the agricultural land (orchard trees) blocked this discharge many years ago. In 2010, the City entered into an agreement with the San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) to drop water from this open channel into the San Luis Drain (SLD) via a gate valve where the channel crosses the SLD near Belmont Ave, east of State Route 180. This agreement was a good will gesture by the SLDMWA. The agreement has no specific term, and maybe Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan cancelled at any time. The City is currently allowed to store water in a 2-mile stretch of the SLD between the Belmont ditch and Bass Avenue to the north until the stored water reaches a depth of 8-feet. This threshold has been met before. When that happens, city staff must bring a temporary pump to relieve the SLD by pumping water into a future wastewater disposal pond at the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant. Without the SLD, the City would not have any means to sufficiently manage their storm water, but this arrangement won’t work at such time as the City begins utilizing more of the ponds at the Wastewater Treatment Plant to deal dispose of additional treated effluent from the growing city. The current system of storm water management does not include a discharge to the Fresno Slough, Mendota Pool, San Joaquin River or other regulated body of water. It relies on the SLD and vacant waste water treatment ponds; neither of which are sustainable. The planning team identified areas of localized stormwater flood problems. The drainage system for storm- and wastewater is an intricate system that spans across the entire City. There are only three pumps in the system, one that pumps the water from one gutter under the McCabe Elementary school grounds to the gutters on the other side, one to minimize the constant flooding across Highway 33 in town, and one to move water past the railroad tracks. The City often utilizes an additional temporary pump to minimize the flooding along the west side of the railroad tracks. The rest of the system relies on gravity and was not designed to convey typical stormwater flows. There are several points along the system that will pool water, as the slope is so minimal that the water does not move through the system quickly enough. The Chowchilla Canal Bypass, constructed by the State of California, reduces flood potential in the Mendota-Firebaugh area. The bypass starts approximately five miles east (upstream) of the City of Mendota and can carry approximately 9,000 cfs of San Joaquin River floodwater around the two communities to return it to the river at a point where channel capacity is great enough to carry the flow. Previous flood events that impacted the City include the following: • October 1, 1976—This flood damaged 15 homes and 12 businesses for an estimated $44,430 loss. Rains in the hills west of Mendota contributed to runoff in the Panoche-Silver Creek and water flooded into City limits. The flooding occurred along Belmont Avenue. Agricultural and infrastructure damage is unknown. According to a report from the American Red Cross, the organizations provided “canteen service” to about 300 people on the levee and sheltered 75 people at their church shelter. • 1991—Rains in the hills west of town caused massive flooding along Belmont Avenue and cut the high school off from the rest of the City. The flooding also limited the ability for Highway 180 traffic to pass through, which decreased potential business traffic in the City. Additional costs to the City were associated with temporary damns constructed by the Public Works Department. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • 1995—Floodwaters, caused by Panoche Creek runoff channeled along Belmont Avenue, filled streets and caused widespread damage. • July 2016 – A summer rain event that occurred in the Coastal Range overflowed Panoche Creek and flooded Belmont Avenue and downtown Mendota. This occurred with no rain falling in the vicinity of Mendota. Estimated cost of damages and clean-up was documented at $25,000. According to FEMA’s 2005 Flood Insurance Study, damaging floods also occurred in the area in April 1958 and January-February 1969. Details on these events follow: • April 1958—In this flood, a discharge of 5,090 cfs was recorded on Panoche Creek. Flooding began approximately 10 miles west of the City of Mendota and spread in a fan shape to the northeast for 5 to 10 miles. Approximately 9,700 acres of agricultural land (mostly west of the City of Mendota) and some residential property in the southwest part of the City were flooded. Damage was estimated at $460,000. Up to five feet of floodwater remained in some areas for as many as 30 days. Crops were destroyed, or production was severely reduced, extensive cleanup and restoration of agricultural land and improvements were required, streets and homes were damaged, and traffic was disrupted. Extensive flood fighting prevented flood damage that otherwise would have occurred. • January-February 1969—The largest known discharge on Panoche Creek (5,400 cfs) was recorded in February 1969, which was during the largest rainfall season on record. Flooding began approximately 10 miles west of the City of Mendota and spread in a fan shape to the northeast for 5 to 10 miles. Approximately 18,400 acres, predominantly agricultural, were flooded. Damage approximated $1.8 million. Large quantities of silt and debris were deposited on fields and orchards, and oil and gas pipelines were undermined. Residential damage in Mendota was minor due to flood fighting efforts. • February 1998—Runoff from heavy rains in the hills west of Mendota caused a major flood. The drainage system, which was designed to handle 300 cfs, received 7,000 cfs, causing three feet of water to flood and close Belmont Avenue. This event cut off the high school from the rest of City and severely limited the ability for traffic on Highway 180 to pass through. This event also caused business losses due to inability for most vehicles to access the City commercial area. The only recorded costs for the flood are from the Public Works Department: approximately $32,500 in labor and equipment was spent to fight and clean up the flood. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Mendota was created (see Figure H.3). Table H.10 and Table H.11 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table H.10: City of Mendota’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 1 1 $123,574 $123,574 $247,148 $61,787 Multi-Residential 2 1 $5,835,053 $2,917,527 $8,752,580 $2,188,145 Open Space 1 0 $156,044 $156,044 $312,088 $78,022 Residential 50 44 $4,120,393 $2,060,197 $6,180,590 $1,545,147 Total 54 46 $10,235,064 $5,257,341 $15,492,405 $3,873,101 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Table H.11: City of Mendota’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 1 7 $311,190 $311,190 $622,380 $155,595 Residential 12 17 $1,393,231 $1,393,231 $2,786,462 $696,616 Total 13 24 $1,704,421 $1,704,421 $3,408,842 $852,211 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Mendota has assets at risk to the 100-year and greater floods. There are 54 improved parcels within the 100-year floodplain for a total value of roughly $15.5 million. There are 13 additional improved parcels valued at $3.4 million within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 20 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing roughly $3.9 million in damage in the City of Mendota. There is a 0.2 percent chance of a 500-year flood causing roughly $4.7 million in damage (combined damage from both floods). Properties at risk to flooding are shown in Figure H.4. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure H.3: City of Mendota’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure H.4: Properties at Risk in the City of Mendota’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Mendota joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on September 1, 1981. NFIP insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were 17 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $4,630,900 of coverage. All 17 policies were for residential structures, 12 of them single-family homes. There were 9 policies in force in A and AH zones, and the remaining 8 were in B, C, and X zones. There have been three historical claims for flood losses totaling $2,572; two were for residential properties, one was nonresidential. Information was not provided on the location (zones) of these claims or their pre- or post-FIRM status. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Mendota: • 100-year flood—165 people • 500-year flood—38 people • Total flood—203 people Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. According to data from Fresno County GIS and the digital flood insurance rate map, there is only one critical facility in Mendota’s floodplains, which is a fire station in the 100-year floodplain. While Mendota High School itself is not in the floodplain, it is on Belmont Avenue, where Panoche Creek runs during big winter storms. The water can get more than one foot deep as it goes past the high school and can cut off the school from the rest of town (as has happened in the past). The locations of critical facilities were also compared to the USACE mapped 200-year floodplain. An airport and one CalARP hazardous materials facility are located within the 200-year floodplain. Hazardous Materials Incident There is one CalARP hazardous materials facility located in the City of Mendota. Based on a buffer analysis of this location, there is one critical facility (airport) located within a half mile of this CalARP facility. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Severe Weather: Extreme Heat Heat is one of the greatest threats to the migrant farm workers and elderly. The temperatures in the City of Mendota rise to over 100°F, occasionally exceeding 105°F, each summer. During the summer of 2007, the City of Mendota was asked by the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services to make available its City Hall and Senior Center as a cooling shelter for the better part of a week. The City works with the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services during extreme heat events. There are no designated shelters, but the Mendota City Hall often serves as a cooling center. These events can also affect the City economically due to increased water usage. Severe Weather: Windstorm The City of Mendota’s risk and vulnerability to windstorm is not unique as compared to the planning area at large. Please refer to the main plan’s review of this hazard in section 4. Soil Hazards: Expansive Soils Expansive soils occur throughout the City. In new buildings, a soils report is required prior to building, and appropriate measures are incorporated to address the hazard. In older buildings, these soils cause problems for foundations. Wildfire There is some wildfire risk in the Fresno Slough due to weedy vegetation growth. The slough is surrounded by agriculture, and a wildfire could put water wells at risk. There may also be some wildfire risk at the Mendota Wildlife Refuge. Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a wildfire map for the City of Mendota was created (see Figure H.5). An analysis was performed using GIS software that determined that there were not any critical facilities in wildfire threat zones in Mendota. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure H.5: City of Mendota’s Wildfire Threat Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Mendota’s updated capabilities are summarized below. H.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table H.12 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Mendota. Table H.12: City of Mendota’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Yes Water Conservation Ordinance Building code Yes Fire department ISO rating N/A No local fire department; County provides fire protection services Erosion or sediment control program No Stormwater management program No Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes Other special plans No Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016 Elevation certificates No City of Mendota General Plan The City of Mendota General Plan is the official statement of the City regarding future growth and quality of development in the planning area. The current general plan was adopted in August 2009. Policies contained in the plan’s Land Use Element are designed to enhance Mendota’s existing urban environment. Further, they seek to encourage new urban growth and development, provided that such growth will have minimal adverse impacts upon the environment (which will mitigate hazards), among other things. It is intended to serve as a basis for local decision makers to determine development and land utilization patterns in the City. Floodplain Management Ordinance The purpose of the Floodplain Management Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas. In order to accomplish this purpose, it includes methods and provisions to: • Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; • Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; • Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters; • Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development that may increase flood damage; and • Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers that will unnaturally divert floodwaters or that may increase flood hazards in other areas. The ordinance applies to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the City of Mendota. Notably, it requires that a permit be obtained before construction or other development begins within any area of special flood hazard. It appoints the City manager as floodplain administrator to administer, implement, and enforce the ordinance by granting or denying development permits in accord with its provisions and describes the accompanying duties and responsibilities. Water Conservation Ordinance The Water Conservation Ordinance regulates the use of water supplied by the City of Mendota. It identifies requirements that apply at all times (e.g., limiting wasteful uses and the use of hoses without a positive pressure nozzle on the end) and defines three stages of water conservation and the use restrictions associated with each. During stage 1 water conservation, there is a voluntary conservation to limit water from May through September. Stage 2 involves a mandatory ban on Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan water usage, such as limited times to wash vehicles, nonoperation of ornamental fountains, and limiting restaurants to only serve water when asked by customers. Stage 3 applies further limitations, including a ban on the times when vegetation may be irrigated and the prohibition of vehicle washings that are not in the immediate interests of public safety, health, and welfare, and the filling, refilling, or adding of water to swimming pools. Citations are used to enforce these regulations. Emergency Operations Plan The City of Mendota’s Emergency Operations Plan was prepared to ensure the most effective and economic allocation of resources for the maximum benefit and protection of the community in time of emergency. It establishes the emergency organization, assigns tasks, specifies policies and general procedures, and provides for coordination of planning efforts among the City’s emergency staff and service elements. The objective of the plan is to incorporate and coordinate City facilities and personnel in an efficient organization capable of responding to, and recovering from, any emergency. H.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table H.13 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Mendota. Table H.13: City of Mendota’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Contracted City Engineer Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Contracted City Engineer Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Contracted City Engineer Full time building official Director of Public Works Floodplain manager City Manager Emergency manager City Manager Grant writer Multiple people fill this role (no official position, depends on the nature of the grant) Other personnel Multiple/varied (various positions constitute the Emergency Management Team in accordance with the Mendota Emergency Plan) Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Fresno County Office of Emergency Services (the County can provide assistance in this capacity) As far as personnel resources, employees of the City of Mendota have diverse expertise, including engineering, risk management, and incident command. The City has an emergency operations plan (see above) that optimizes response to a disaster, and they have secured what technologies they can in regard to limiting the damage and risk from hazards, but they do not have GIS capabilities. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan H.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table H.14 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. There are currently no specific funding sources for hazard mitigation. Table H.14: City of Mendota’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Water and sewer Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Can, but currently do not Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Can, but currently do not Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No One of the challenges to mitigation in Mendota involves fiscal capabilities. Mendota is a small city with an agriculturally based economy and high unemployment that suffers from one of the lowest revenues in the state. Execution of mitigation actions is limited due to this financial limitation. H.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships Aside from the partnership to establish this multi-hazard mitigation plan with the County of Fresno, the City of Mendota is not engaged in many partnerships. The City has personnel trained in Incident Command and contracts with the Fresno County Sheriff’s Department for public safety services. Additionally, the City conducts limited education on hazards with the exception of the issues of water usage and West Nile virus. H.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts The City of Mendota has undertaken improvements to mitigate damage from flood, one of its most dramatic and regular hazard events. The City has installed a long running underground pipe along Belmont Avenue, one of the major floodways, in conjunction with the California Department of Transportation. The City has also built humps into the streets along this floodway to limit water flows entering residential streets and homes to the north. H.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Mendota has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. The opportunities for enhancement of the City’s mitigation program are listed below. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan •Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City of Mendota. •Improve stormwater drainage system capability through developing and implementing a Stormwater Management Program. H.5 Mitigation Strategy H.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Mendota adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Building Department may utilize the hazard information when reviewing building permit applications. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Mendota will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1981. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. H.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Mendota has not completed any mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, the City will carry forward, with minor revisions, the stormwater basin project which was in the initial phases of moving forward in 2018. H.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Mendota identified the following mitigation action based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how the action will be implemented Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the City of Mendota will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Build a Stormwater Detention/Desilting Basin Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: Mendota has historically experienced flooding during the rainy season, which has resulted in damage of approximately $75,000 (for those events that documentation is available). A contributing factor is the flood flows from the Panoche-Silver Creek, which runs heavy annually and often spills over and down into the City. Adding to this is the lack of an adequate storm drain system to capture and channel the water. Ideas for Implementation: The plan is to capture and channel the storm flows into a 40-acre detention basin. The system currently is not designed for the flows that come in from the Panoche- Silver Creek. The basin will allow for the collection of the excess water to keep water off the streets and out of homes and to restrict the flow so that it stays within the capacity of the City’s storm drain system. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Mendota Priority: High Cost Estimate: $2.25 million for the full 40 acres Potential Funding: Not yet identified Benefits (Avoided Losses): Already, there has been approximately $75,000 in damage. If one looks at the figures, the costs are increasing over time. The last documented event consumed roughly half this amount. Extrapolating from this data, one can assume that within the next 10 years, the project will likely save over $100,000, and more over time. Schedule: Approximately 12 months from funding based on environmental work, land acquisition, excavation, etc. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Status: 2009 project; implementation in progress and ongoing into 2020. 2. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Delta-Mendota subbasin underlays the City of Mendota and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Mendota being a local agency (as defined by §10723 of the Water Code) which overlays the Delta-Mendota basin, the City has become a GSA for the portion of the basin which the city boundaries overlays. The Mendota GSA is required to develop and implement, no later than January 31, 2020, a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. The Mendota GSA is part of a multi-agency GSP that is being prepared by the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority. The City of Mendota and Mendota GSA will actively participate in the development and implementation of the planning process. The development of the City of Mendota GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Mendota. Other Alternatives: Responsible Office: Public Works Director and Mendota GSA Priority: High Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Fresno County (Mendota) Annex H.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX I: CITY OF SANGER Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.1 Community Profile Figure I.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Sanger and its Sphere of Influence. Figure I.1: The City of Sanger I.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Sanger is located in central Fresno County southeast of the City of Fresno. The City and its Sphere of Influence encompass a 6,871-acre area; the City alone covers 3,688 acres. Over the past decade, the City boundary has remained relatively unchanged with the exception of an area along the western border of the City’s Sphere of Influence that was annexed into the City limits. Sanger has a Central Valley desert climate. The land is generally flat with surface slope of five feet per mile. The City is located on an alluvial plain formed by the Kings River drainage system. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Once largely an agricultural community, Sanger is currently undergoing residential development. Summers are hot and dry, and winters are cold and foggy. The annual average precipitation is 10.4 inches of precipitation. I.1.2 History The City of Sanger was founded in 1888 and incorporated in 1911. In 1926, the General Grant Tree was designated the Nation’s Christmas Tree by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge and the U.S. Department of the Interior. In 1949, the City of Sanger was designated as the Nation’s Christmas Tree City by the U.S. Postal Service, and 10 years later, the General Grant Tree was designated as a National Shrine by the U.S. Congress. The City was named after Joseph Sanger Jr., who at the time was secretary and treasurer of the Railroad Yardmasters Association. He was never in Sanger but was told at an annual convention in San Francisco that Southern Pacific Railroad officials had named a town in Fresno County for him. At the time, the town was being surveyed. The history of Sanger is housed in the Sanger Depot Museum, which is actually the Sanger Railroad Depot, once the hub of the town’s growth. Built in 1887, the Sanger Railroad Depot sat beside the Southern Pacific Railroad that ran between Fresno and Porterville, California. Among the cargo that passed through this depot was grain, citrus, and lumber brought down from the mountains by Sanger’s booming lumber operation. When Sanger’s commerce no longer needed the Depot, it was discovered that the building was the oldest in Sanger. It was purchased by a local business family and donated to the Sanger Historical Society. The museum opened in December 1977. I.1.3 Economy Sanger offers the conveniences and services of a major city as well as the rural lifestyle prized by so many. Sanger is a full-service city located minutes from California’s fifth largest and fastest growing urban center. Its award-winning school district is a magnet for families looking to combine educational excellence with smaller town amenities. Sanger business development and job growth are robust. Industrial residents come in all sizes, from Fortune 100 companies such as International Paper and Initiative Foods to numerous small and midsize manufacturers and food processors. Sanger is strategically situated to take advantage of the California market and its over 39 million customers. The five major employers for the City are Sanger Unified (1097 employees), Walmart (339 employees), Pitman Farms (325 employees), ADCO Manufacturing (150 employees and International Paper (125 employees). The City has three high schools, nine elementary schools, three charter schools, and one community day school. Enrollment in 2006 was 9,160. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Sanger’s location at the base of the Sierra Nevada mountain range provides limitless recreational opportunities. In less than an hour, residents can view the world’s largest trees in Sequoia National Park. A few minutes more will bring you to the bottom of the deepest river gorge in the United States, Kings Canyon National Park, or to the powdery slopes of nearby ski resorts. Numerous foothill parks, campgrounds, lakes, and streams provide families with ample choices for daytrips or extended vacations. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Sanger are shown in Table I.1. Table I.1: City of Sanger’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Sanger Families below Poverty Level 19.3% All People below Poverty Level 23.0% Median Family Income $49,903 Median Household Income $43,099 Per Capita Income $16,864 Population in Labor Force 11,459 Population Employed* 9,839 Unemployment 13.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables I.2 and I.3 detail how the City of Sanger’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table I.2: City of Sanger’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Sales and Office Occupations 2,347 23.9 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 2,179 22.1 Management, Business, and Financial Occupations (932) (9.5) Computer, Engineering, and Science Occupations (164) (1.6) Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media Occupations (858) (8.7) Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations (225) (2.3) Service Occupations 2,026 20.6 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 1,812 18.4 Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 1,475 15.0 Total 9,839 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table I.3: City of Sanger’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 2,204 22.4 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,214 12.3 Retail Trade 1,040 10.6 Manufacturing 1,002 10.2 Wholesale Trade 752 7.6 Public Administration 735 7.5 Other Services, Except Public Administration 542 5.5 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 503 5.1 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 458 4.7 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 442 4.5 Construction 437 4.4 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 386 3.9 Information 124 1.3 Total 9,839 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ I.1.4 Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2015 population for the City of Sanger was estimated at 24,700. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Sanger from the 2015 ACS are shown in Table I.4. Table I.4: City of Sanger’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Sanger Gender/Age Male 48.5% Female 51.5% Median age 31.9 Under 5 years 9.4% Under 18 years 31.5% 65 years and over 10.4% Race/Ethnicity* White 66.3% Asian 0.7% Black or African American 0.6% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.4% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 83.2% Education High school graduate or higher 63.8% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 11.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 96.5% reporting one race Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.2.1 Hazard Identification and Summary Sanger’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Sanger (see Table I.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards unique to Sanger. Table I.5: City of Sanger—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Low Avalanche Limited Likely Limited N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Highly Likely Critical Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Sanger’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Sanger’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Sanger. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table I.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Sanger’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table I.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Sanger are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section I.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought and flood/levee failure. • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incident • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Sanger, those hazards are as follows: • agricultural hazards* • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • landslide • severe weather (all) • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire** *Note on Agricultural Hazards: Agricultural hazards are ranked Low in the City of Sanger compared to the County overall (ranked High) because very little land in the City is used for agricultural purposes. **Note on Wildfire: Wildfire is a High significance hazard for the County overall, but is of Low significance to the City because there are no parcels or structures within the City or its Sphere of Influence that are at risk to any fire severity zones. (See the County’s wildfire severity risk map in Chapter 4 for locations of wildfire risk zones in Fresno county and its jurisdictions). Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate avalanche as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. I.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Sanger’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table I.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Sanger. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table I.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Sanger by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 3 2 $2,381,240 $2,381,240 $4,762,480 Commercial 351 590 $152,581,224 $152,581,224 $305,162,448 Exempt 30 89 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 95 134 $28,998,925 $43,498,388 $72,497,313 Multi-Residential 407 838 $66,139,922 $33,069,961 $99,209,883 Residential 4,903 5,796 $520,672,552 $260,336,276 $781,008,828 Total 5,789 7,449 $770,773,863 $491,867,089 $1,262,640,952 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Sanger from Fresno County GIS and the City of Sanger is provided in Table I.7 and mapped in Figure I.2. Table I.7: City of Sanger’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number Behavioral Health 1 CalARP 5 City Hall 1 Department of Agriculture 1 Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 2 Police 1 School 17 Total 27 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 The Police and Fire departments are not secured and fenced in. The City has sought grant funding in the past to fence these facilities but has not been successful thus far. Additionally, the City Wastewater Treatment Plant has security fencing but upgrades to the security systems in place are needed. The City operates and maintains the wastewater collection system, a domestic wastewater treatment plant, and an industrial wastewater treatment plant within the City limits. All of the wastewater that flows from the City is collected and treated at the Sanger wastewater treatment plants. Stormwater in Sanger is piped to stormwater percolation basins and is not treated at the Sanger wastewater treatment plant. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure I.2: City of Sanger’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Growth and Development Trends The City of Sanger, once largely an agricultural community, is currently undergoing significant residential development. All areas of the City are growing. However, growth is anticipated to be focused on the north and northwest sides of town. The State Road 180 project on the north side of town is expected to spur the major building activity over the next 20 years as the City expands up to the northern limits of the existing Sphere of Influence. Paced growth is also expected to the west, with nominal growth in the south and east. Table I.8 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. Table I.8: City of Sanger’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 24,270 24,700 +1.77 7,104 7,350 +3.46 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. I.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table I.6 above shows Sanger’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Note: Hazardous materials incidents and epidemic/pandemic are considered medium priority hazards by the City of Sanger but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Dam Failure The City of Sanger is downstream of the largest dam in the planning area, the Pine Flat dam at 1M acres-feet of capacity. The Pine Flat Dam, managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is 16 Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan miles northeast (upstream) of Sanger on the Kings River. Should it fail, a flood-tide would engulf the City in approximately one hour according to Corps inundation studies. Drought Groundwater is the sole water supply for the City. The Kings River recharges the groundwater, along with runoff from the foothills, which to date has been sufficient to meet the needs of the area. However, the groundwater storage level is decreasing at an alarming rate in the Sanger area and in the San Joaquin Valley. In an effort to reduce the effects of a drought, the City has constructed wastewater percolation ponds to help recharge the groundwater basin. The City currently percolates approximately 1.7 million gallons per day of final effluent back into the groundwater basin. The City recently spent approximately $3.6 million to replace a number of old water pipelines that were leaking excessively. The City is an active member of several water conservation groups in the San Joaquin Valley. These groups are reviewing and establishing measures to reduce the declining groundwater basin. According to the Urban Water Management Plan (2005), during a declared water shortage, the City will implement a 25 percent voluntary rationing water conservation program to ensure that the groundwater table does not drop to a dangerous level. Earthquake There are unreinforced masonry buildings in the downtown area and east of Academy between 5th and 9th Streets and west of “K” Street. Approximately 24 buildings are located in the downtown area, with other unreinforced masonry buildings located within the City limits. Critical facilities in the downtown include a telecommunications hub and a large natural gas line is located in the south end of the City. Flood According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), Sanger’s floodplains in general are residential, with some commercial development. Flooding in Sanger, which has flat terrain, is typically the result of local runoff from intense rainfall that exceeds the capacity of storm drainage facilities. There are no well-defined natural drainage channels that carry stormwater away from the City. Hence, the streets fill with water deep enough to impede traffic. Sanger’s only flood control structures are detention basins, several up to 20 feet deep that will fill and flood during a 100-year flood. Overflow from the Kings River has caused extensive damage to agricultural properties east and southeast of the City. According to the FIS, the flood history of Sanger is not well documented, but flooding reportedly occurred in the area in 1950, 1958, 1967, and 1978. Details on some of these events follow: • November 1950—The Kings River overflowed and drowned cattle and turkeys, damaged farm equipment, eroded agricultural land, and destroyed feed and grain. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • January 1969—More than three inches of rain fell in a two-day period and flooded streets and intersections in the City. Overflow was deep enough to stall vehicles and severely disrupt traffic. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Sanger was created (see Figure I.3). Tables I.9 and I.10 summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure I.3: City of Sanger’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table I.9: City of Sanger’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Commercial 11 17 $970,742 $970,742 $1,941,484 $485,371 Exempt 2 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 12 9 $8,241,782 $12,362,673 $20,604,455 $5,151,114 Multi-Residential 52 262 $7,450,475 $3,725,238 $11,175,713 $2,793,928 Residential 57 61 $5,149,439 $2,574,720 $7,724,159 $1,931,040 Total 134 351 $21,812,438 $19,633,372 $41,445,810 $10,361,453 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Note: The “Exempt” property type includes government, school, and church owned building for which building value is not given. Table I.10: City of Sanger’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Residential 49 50 $7,767,763 $7,767,763 $15,535,526 $3,883,882 Total 49 50 $7,767,763 $7,767,763 $15,535,526 $3,883,882 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Sanger has significant assets at risk to the 100-year and greater floods. There are 134 improved parcels within the 100-year floodplain for a total value of roughly $41.4 million. An additional 49 improved parcels valued at $15.5 million fall within the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year flood causing roughly $10.4 million in damage in the City of Sanger and a 0.2 percent chance in any given year of a 500-year flood causing roughly $14.2 million in damage (combined damage from both floods). Properties at risk to flooding are shown in Figure I.4. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure I.4: City of Sanger’s Properties at Risk to 100- and 500-Year Floods Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Sanger joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on December 1, 1982. NFIP insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were 54 flood insurance policies in force in the City with $10,931,700 of coverage. This represents a decrease in flood insurance policies of more than 50 percent over the past decade, likely due to cost increases. Of the 54 policies, 52 were residential (46 for single-family homes) and 2 were nonresidential. 41 of the policies were in A zones (the remaining 13 were in B, C, and X zones). There have been four historical claims for flood losses totaling $16,288.44; all were for residential properties; two were in A zones and two were in B, C, or X zones. Only one was for a post-FIRM structure. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Sanger: • 100-year flood—346 people • 500-year flood—155 people • Total flood—501 people Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. According to data from Fresno County and the digital flood insurance rate map, the following critical facilities, detailed in Table I.11, are located in Sanger’s floodplains: Table I.11: Critical Facilities in 100-/500-year Floodplains: City of Sanger Critical Facilities Type 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain CalARP 2 - School 1 - Total 7 - Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Hazardous Materials Incident There are five CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Sanger. As identified in Table I.12 (below), there are 15 critical facilities in Sanger located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Anhydrous Ammonia Within the City of Sanger, the use of anhydrous ammonia is necessary for food processing and refrigeration systems. Several facilities such as Del Monte Fresh, CaliFresh, Initiative Foods, Gibson Winery and Pitman Farms utilize anhydrous ammonia in their daily operations. However, the use of this toxic chemical has had a significant increase in accidental releases into the community over the last ten years. Between 2007 and 2010, there were four total responses for anhydrous ammonia leaks within the City. From 2010 to 2016 there were 23 separate incidents due to a release of anhydrous ammonia. In an effort to reduce the community’s risk to these incidents the Fire Department initiated a Community Risk Reduction program and hired a full time Community Risk Reduction Officer to help identify these particular risks and assist industry in abating accidental releases. Table I.12: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Sanger Critical Facility Type Count Behavioral Health 1 City Hall 1 Department of Agriculture 1 Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 1 Police Station 1 School 9 Total 15 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 I.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Sanger’s updated capabilities are summarized below. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table I.13 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Sanger. Table I.13: City of Sanger’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan Yes City of Sanger 2005 General Plan, 2003 (update underway) Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Growth management ordinance Yes Floodplain ordinance Yes 1995 Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) No Building code Yes Version: 2001 Fire department ISO rating Yes Rating: 3 Erosion or sediment control program Yes Stormwater management program Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes City of Sanger Emergency Operations Plan, 2000 Other special plans Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams Yes Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) Yes City of Sanger 2005 General Plan, 2003 The purpose of the 2005 City of Sanger General Plan is to guide growth, community change, and environmental conservation. It contains goals and policies that represent the community’s vision for how it wants to grow and develop over time. These goals and policies assist City staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in making decisions about projects that affect the use of land. Two of the plan’s elements that are largely related to hazard mitigation are the Conservation Element and the Safety Element. Mitigation-related goals and policies of these elements are included below. Conservation Element Goal 1: Hydrology and Water Quality: Manage the City's water resources to provide for urban uses while protecting the environment. Policy 1: Protect and preserve water resources in order to provide sufficient quantities of water that meet State quality standards to serve the domestic water demand for build-out of the General Plan. Policy 2: Protect and preserve watershed and recharge areas, including those critical for the replenishment of domestic water supplies. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Goal 2: Storm Drainage: Collect and convey storm water in a manner that least inconveniences the public, reduces or prevents potential water-related damage, and protects the environment. Policy 1: Maintain a reliable source of revenue to fund citywide storm drainage improvements, including replacement, repair, or relocation of storm drain facilities. Policy 2: Encourage the use of natural storm water drainage systems in a manner that preserves and enhances natural features and consider recreational opportunities and aesthetics in the design of storm water detention/retention and conveyance facilities. Policy 3: Improve the quality of runoff from urban and suburban development through use of appropriate and feasible mitigation measures or best management practices. Examine the impact of proposed urban developments with regard to water quality and effects on drainage courses. Goal 3: Geology and Soils: Preserve and enhance unique geologic features and soils for future generations to use and enjoy. Policy 1: Identify and protect geologic resources within the City limits. Policy 2: Coordinate the management of mineral resources adjacent to the planning area, working with mining operators, and County and state departments. Policy 3: Provide for the preservation of soil resources through the creation of an agricultural greenbelt. Conserve soil resources, particularly to provide a continuing base for agricultural productivity and the City’s economy by working with agricultural interests to develop practices that minimize the impacts of tilling and grading on soil erosion. Safety Element Policies of this element reduce the risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from hazards such as fires, floods, earthquakes, and other hazards. Goals and policies facilitate decision making for minimizing potential safety risks. In 1974, Sanger adopted the Five County Seismic Safety Element for the General Plans of Fresno, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, and Tulare Counties and their Respective Incorporated Cities. Goal 1: Protect the public health, safety, and welfare and minimize the damage to structures, property, and infrastructure as a result of geologic and flood hazards. Policy 1: Evaluate proposed projects and land use policy decisions based on the environmental hazards identified in this element. Low intensity/occupancy uses (such as agricultural production, recreational uses, or wildlife habitat preservation) shall be preferred in hazard areas. Policy 2: Utilize FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps to determine the general location of flooding hazard areas when reviewing development proposals. The City shall maintain FIRM maps to reflect currently available information on the Planning Area. Policy 3: Continue to maintain the City's Emergency Operations Plan to ensure the safety of residents and to prevent damage to the built and natural environment. Municipal Code Chapter 14 Buildings and Building Services, 2011 This ordinance adopts the building code of the City and lists the building conditions that must be met for the building inspector to authorize final connection of utility services and certificate of occupancy. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Municipal Code Chapter 26 Emergency Services, 1997 This ordinance provides for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of people and property within the City in the event of an emergency, the direction of the emergency organization established by the code, and the coordination of the emergency functions of the City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private people. The ordinance establishes the City’s disaster council and designates the membership of the council. Membership includes the mayor (chairperson), the director of emergency services (vice- chairperson), the assistant director of emergency services, and other people as provided for in the City’s current emergency plan. The council’s powers include the development of emergency and mutual aid plans and agreements and the ordinances and resolutions to implement them. Municipal Code Chapter 30 Fire Protection and Prevention, 2016 This ordinance provides for fire protection and prevention of fire relative to the adoption of the 2013 California Fire Code. Additionally, there are amendments to the California Fire Code to help mitigate hazards in the City of Sanger that are either reasonably necessary for local climatic, geographical or topographical conditions. These changes include variations on solar photovoltaic panel installations, fire sprinkler system requirements and regulations on woodworking, lumber yard, recycling and waste handling facilities. Municipal Code Chapter 34 Floods, 2001 The purpose of the flood ordinance is to promote health and safety and prevent public and private losses due to flooding in identified flood hazard areas. It designates the city manager as the floodplain administrator. Urban Water Management Plan, 2015 (Draft) The Urban Water Management Plan describes the vulnerability of the City’s water supply. It plans for measures taken for four stages of water shortage and includes projected water supply and demand comparisons through 2035. The plan also describes actions for flood, earthquake, and other types of catastrophes. Emergency Operations Plan, 2000 The City of Sanger prepared the Emergency Operations Plan in an effort to ensure the most effective and efficient use of all resources, material, and staff for the maximum benefit and protection of the Sanger community. The plan is designed to facilitate coordination and management of information and resources amongst City agencies and affected populations to effectively respond to a hazard event. Currently the EOP has been placed into a draft version and will be updated in 2018. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table I.14 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Sanger. Table I.14: City of Sanger’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Community Development Director, City Engineer, Senior Planner, Public Works Director Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Community Development Director, City Engineer, Senior Planner, Public Works Director Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Community Development Director, City Engineer, Senior Planner Personnel skilled in GIS Yes City Engineer Full-time building official Yes Building Official Floodplain manager Yes City Manager Emergency manager Yes City Manager Grant writer Yes City Lobbyist Other personnel No GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints Yes City Engineer Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) No I.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table I.15 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table I.15: City of Sanger’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Water, wastewater Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds No Incur debt through special tax bonds No Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The Sanger Fire Department provides education programs on fire safety, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training, and conducts other tours and presentations. The Fire Department has also implemented a Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) with disaster training provided to volunteers free of charge. The City promotes water conservation by distributing public information through bill inserts, brochures, community speakers, paid advertising, and many special events every year. City water bills show gallons used per billing period for the last billing period compared to the same period the previous year. The City continues to work with the Sanger Unified School District to promote water conservation and to educate students about these issues. The City has formally joined the Upper Kings Water Forum, a multi-agency effort to integrate the region’s water management plans and coordinated the development of the Urban Water Management Plan with the Sanger Chamber of Commerce, County of Fresno, Department of Health Services, Consolidated Irrigation District, and other public agencies. I.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts The City of Sanger has identified areas prone to flooding and made improvements to reduce it. The City sets up warming centers during extreme cold/freeze events and cooling centers during extreme heat events. I.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Sanger has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. The opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop landscaping ordinances that incorporate proper species selection that are drought resistant, and planting and maintenance practices that will not exacerbate the effects of drought. • Implement warning systems and develop an evacuation plan in partnership with the County. I.5 Mitigation Strategy I.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Sanger adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Building and Permits Department may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a building permit application. While the Community Development and Public Works Departments may utilize the information to review site plan applications or when developing or updating existing planning documents. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Sanger will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1982. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. I.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Sanger has not completed any of the actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, implementation has been started on five of the 2009 actions and will be continued as part of the mitigation strategy of this plan. There are three actions from the City of Sanger 2009 mitigation strategy that the City has decided not to carry forward and recommend for implementation in this plan. These deleted actions and the reasons for their deletion are as follows: •Implement a Flood Awareness Program for the Public – determined to no longer be a priority; the City implemented flood awareness programs targeted toward areas known for small, localized flooding from clogged storm drains instead •Install Battery Back-Up Systems at Traffic Signals in the City of Sanger on Major Transportation Routes – No longer considered a priority •Improve City’s Floodplain Management Program and Apply to Community Rating System – Participation in the CRS no longer considered a priority Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan I.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Sanger identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Sanger will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Establish Post-Disaster Action Plan for City Continuity of Operations Plan Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, drought, earthquake, flood, human health hazards, severe weather, volcano, wildfire Issue/Background: Establish a post-disaster action plan to be part of the City’s Disaster Plan that will include the following elements: • Procedures for public information • Post-disaster damage assessment • Grant writing • Code enforcement • Redundant operations The plan will also include annexes from local businesses and large employers to improve economic and employment recovery. The plan will also identify a mechanism for the City to help businesses not involved with post-disaster planning to be incorporated into the City’s plan. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Sanger Fire Department, Fire Chief Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $125,000 Potential Funding: Grants Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will improve response/recovery during an event through pre- planning. A City and local business post-disaster plan will reduce the impact of a disaster to the local economy and employment. Schedule: 1-4 years, dependent on funding Status: 2009 project, currently seeking grant funding opportunities with contracted grant writers. 2. Add Potable Water Storage Capacity (750,000 Gallon above Ground Tank) to the City of Sanger’s Water System Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: drought, flood, severe weather, earthquake, wildfire Issue/Background: The City needs a measure of reliability should sources fail or be lacking during drought or when unusual conditions impose higher demands than anticipated. Firefighters need quick access to large volumes of water to control and put out fires. While more water is generally better, the minimum water volumes and flow rates are recommended by the National Fire Protection Association. The City continues to manage potable water demands through the effective use of conservation programs and reclaimed water. In addition, the City informs the community periodically on the status of the available water supply and the need to conserve. Minimum volume and flow rates for adequate fire protection are calculated for each community. Local fire companies survey the number, type, construction material, contents, and proximity of structures in a community. The minimum water supply is calculated from the cubic feet of each structure, its occupancy hazard classification, and its construction classification. Sanger may have enough water to provide fire protection, but the water must be applied quickly to control a fire. The rate at which water flows to a fire is controlled by the capacity of the pipes, hydrants, and water pressure. The flow rate per water “stream” should be at least 500 gallons per minute and sustained for at least 60 minutes to control a fire. Large structures require more than one water stream, requiring more water. If structures are close together, the risk of a fire spreading increases, so higher minimum flow rates are recommended. The values increase by 1.5 times if structures are closer than 50 feet apart. The City spent approximately $3.6 million in grants to replace a number of smaller old water pipelines that were leaking excessively. This included upgrades to the distribution system to aid in fire protection requirements. Fire hydrants are generally spaced no more than 300 feet apart. The City has two aboveground water storage tanks with a total capacity of 140,000 gallons. More are required. One fire line flowing at the minimum flow rate would deplete storage, at maximum capacity, in just over 4.5 hours; two lines—2.3 hours; three lines—1.5 hours. It is typical to have multiple fire lines on a commercial fire, not to mention master stream lines flowing from aerial devices (ladder trucks). Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Like many communities, the City of Sanger experienced a rapid rate of growth. The City has increased public safety personnel and equipment and enhanced waste disposal and sewer capabilities. However, due to budget concerns, only one well was developed to manage the increased water demand. In 1979, the average residual water pressure in the City was 50 pounds per square inch (PSI). Today, that average pressure is 45 PSI. Groundwater storage levels are decreasing at an alarming rate in the Sanger area and in the San Joaquin Valley. In an effort to reduce the effects of a drought, the City has constructed wastewater percolation ponds to help recharge the groundwater basin. The City currently percolates approximately 1.7 million gallons per day of final effluent back into the groundwater basin. Other Alternatives: Drill more wells Responsible Office: City of Sanger Public Works Department, Director Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2,500,000 each Potential Funding: Grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will improve water capacity necessary during large fires, severe drought conditions, and power outages. This will help businesses that use large amounts of water, including the many packing houses within the City limits, stay in production. Schedule: Within one year or sooner, dependent on funding Status: Updated 2009 project, implementation in progress 3. Provide Backup Power to City Pumps/Wells Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: drought, flood, severe weather, earthquake Issue/Background: The City needs to ensure that its water distribution system can meet minimum fire flow and quality standards during emergency conditions. Protecting public health is the primary goal when considering the community’s drinking water system. The water distribution system must be pressurized to 20 pounds per square inch at all times to minimize cross-connection contamination concerns. The City’s total capacity of water storage is 140,000 gallons. In the event of a fire, this storage is quickly depleted as fire flows can reach 6,000 gallons a minute and more. This was the case in July of 2016during a large commercial fire at the Initiative Foods baby food processing facility in the City of Sanger. Water storage was quickly depleted as fire engines from over 15 different agencies within Fresno County tapped into the water distribution system and deployed their lines pumping an estimated 12,000 gallons per minute. With storage gone, City pumps were pushed to their limits while providing water to Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan combat the blaze. Citizens throughout the City found it difficult doing the dishes much less taking a shower. Additionally during this fire, the power to the well next to the Initiative Foods plant was disrupted during the fire, forcing fire crews to rely on a nearby canal for a water source. Other Alternatives: Building multiple elevated potable water storage tanks Responsible Office: City of Sanger Public Works Department, Director Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $200,000 per well, maximum $1.2 million Potential Funding: Grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Ensures water is available to protect public health and minimize damage to property due to fires; keeps water-dependent businesses operating Schedule: 1-4 years, dependent on funding Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 4. Replace Old Storm Drains in Drainage System to Prevent Flooding Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: During heavy rains, water threatens the homes and the vulnerable facility of Golden Living Center at 9th Street and Rawson Avenue. The proposed project will replace an old drainage system called in and out or siphon drainage. Basically, water is routed under the road at the intersection through a small pipe and then exits from a grated opening and is channeled to a larger drain inlet. Leaves accumulate under the grate, plugging the opening and making it necessary to remove the grate; this creates an unsafe situation and localized flooding. The City places barricades over the openings. However, from time to time, the barricades are removed by unauthorized personnel. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Sanger Public Works Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $220,000 Potential Funding: General fund, street funding Benefits (Avoided Losses): This project will keep homes from flooding. The new drain inlets are much safer for the public and pets. Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: Funding dependent Status: Updated 2009 project, implementation in progress 5. Provide Fire Department Office Security Hazard(s) Addressed: Other Issue/Background: Each day, the Fire Department is visited by many people for various reasons: ambulance billing, code enforcement issues, report retrieval, fireworks applications, site plan review, etc. For the most part, no conflict takes place. However, from time to time, irate people show up who are upset about imposed fees, citations, or services rendered. Maintaining accurate, effective access control is critical to protecting Fire Department personnel and equipment. This renovation of the Fire Department front office will be folded into a complete fire station remodel project to increase the size for current and future staff members. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Sanger, Fire Chief Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $3,000,000 Potential Funding: Community Facilities District Benefits (Avoided Losses): The proposed project will provide Fire Department office security, protecting personnel and equipment from potentially dangerous visitors. Schedule: 18 months Status: Updated 2009 project; needs assessment by outside consultant scheduled and to be completed during Spring of 2018, potential construction to begin Fall of 2018. 6. Provide Compound Security for Police and Fire Departments Hazard(s) Addressed: Other Issue/Background: The Sanger Police and Fire departments are located in close proximity of each other. Both departments are subject to uncontrolled foot traffic. Maintaining accurate, effective access control is critical to protecting the compound. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Sanger, Police Chief and Fire Chief Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cost Estimate: $100,000 Benefits (Avoided Losses): The proposed project will provide a good perimeter security system protecting police vehicles as they are a common target for vandalism and theft of the police radios. In addition, the system will protect fire and EMS equipment from unauthorized personnel, again, from theft and vandalism. Access to the Fire Department is a concern. When firefighters respond to incidents, apparatus doors are slow to close, allowing ample time for a hidden person to make access to the inside of the station. Potential Funding: Community Facilities District Schedule: 18 months Status: Updated 2009 project; construction will commence once needs assessment on fire station redesign is completed, slated for construction Summer of 2018. 7. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Sanger and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Sanger has become a joint power authority of the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, other members of the Agency include the City of Kingsburg, City of Parlier and City of Fowler. As a member of the South Kings GSA, the City of Sanger is required to participate in the development and implementation, no later than January 31, 2020, of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Participation in the South Kings GSA and the implementation of a GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Sanger. Other Alternatives: None, compliance required by law, failure to meet requirements will result in State intervention and oversight. Responsible Office: City Engineer and South Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Fresno County (Sanger) Annex I.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cost Estimate: Varies by GSA for preparation of the required GSP. Further expenses are anticipated to be accrued for the planning and construction of groundwater recharge projects. Potential Funding: Property owner assessments along with grant funding opportunities from the State. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Preparation and implementation of the GSP by the respective GSAs will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX J: CITY OF SELMA Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan J.1 Community Profile Figure J.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Selma and its Sphere of Influence. Figure J.1: The City of Selma J.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of Selma is located in the central San Joaquin Valley in Fresno County and is about 20 miles west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Selma is 19 miles south of the City of Fresno at the crossroads of State Highways 99 and 43. A major, busy railroad line runs diagonally through the City and parallel to State Highway 99. Neighboring communities include Kingsburg (5 miles south), Fowler (8 miles northwest), and Reedley (12 miles northeast). The City and its Sphere of Influence occupy an 8,194-acre area; the City alone comprises 3,316 acres. Over the past decade the City’s boundaries have changed minimally, with only a small annexation of land in the southwestern portion of the City’s Sphere of Influence. The landscape is generally flat. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The climate is mild year-round with average summer daytime highs in the 90s and winter daytime lows in the 40s. The summer months are very dry, while the winter months get the most rainfall and moisture. Selma’s average yearly rainfall is approximately 11.2 inches. J.1.2 History Selma was founded in 1893 as an incorporated, agricultural-based city because of the area’s mild and temperate climate and the presence of a Southern Pacific Railroad line. J.1.3 Economy Much of the area’s economy is agriculturally based. The City of Selma is known as the Raisin Capital of the World because the area has numerous vineyards that produce raisins and supporting packing companies. Other local produce includes tree fruits such as peaches. The retail industry in the City of Selma is growing. The leaders in retail sales include large car dealerships, building material and farming implement establishments, and other general retailers. The retail sales increase is due to population growth, Selma’s incorporation into the Fresno metropolitan area, and the volume of people that pass through the City on its major highways. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Selma are shown in Table J.1. Table J.1: City of Selma’s Economic Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Selma Families below Poverty Level 20.9% All People below Poverty Level 23.1% Median Family Income $45,303 Median Household Income $41,086 Per Capita Income $15,686 Population in Labor Force 10,430 Population Employed* 9,195 Unemployment 11.6% Number of Companies 7,100 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables J.2 and J.3 show how the City of Selma’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2016 American Community Survey. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table J.2: City of Selma’s Employment by Occupation, 2016 Occupation # Employed % Employed Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 2,203 24.0 Sales and Office Occupations 1,957 21.3 Service Occupations 1,776 19.3 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 1,700 18.5 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 1,559 17.0 Total 9,195 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table J.3: City of Selma’s Employment by Industry, 2016 Industry # Employed % Employed Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 1,752 19.1 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 1,392 15.1 Retail Trade 1,024 11.1 Manufacturing 925 10.1 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 723 7.9 Public Administration 649 7.1 Construction 573 6.2 Wholesale Trade 540 5.9 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 497 5.4 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 386 4.2 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 322 3.5 Other Services, Except Public Administration 317 3.4 Information 95 1.0 Total 9,195 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ J.1.4 Population The population was estimated at 24,597 in 2016 with a population density of 4,758 people per square mile. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Selma from the 2016 American Community Survey are shown in Table J.4. Table J.4: City of Selma’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2016 Characteristic City of Selma Gender/Age Male 50.0$ Female 50.0% Median age 30.7 Under 5 years 8.0% Under 18 years 30.4% 65 years and over 11.4% Race/Ethnicity* Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Characteristic City of Selma White 73.7% Asian 5.2% Black or African American 0.4% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.8% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 80.7% Education High school graduate or higher 61.1% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 9.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 95.7% reporting one race Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan J.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Selma’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Selma (see Table J.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are unique to Selma. Table J.5: City of Selma—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Unlikely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Medium Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Tornado Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan J.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Selma’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the City of Selma’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the City of Selma. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table J.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Selma’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table J.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Selma are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability related information for each of the following hazards is located in Section J.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include drought and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic* • severe weather: extreme cold; extreme heat; fog; heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning; windstorm* Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan *Note: Epidemic/pandemic and windstorm are considered Medium priority hazards by the City of Selma but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Selma, those Low priority hazards are as follows: • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • landslide • severe weather: tornado; winter storm • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire* Note*: Wildfire is of High significance for the County, but is of Low significance to the City because there are no structures within the City or its Sphere of Influence that are at risk to any fire severity zones. For more information about how wildfire affects the County as a whole, see Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in the main plan. Additionally, the City’s planning team decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence. Avalanche is considered not applicable to the City of Selma. J.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Selma’s assets at risk, including values at risk; critical facilities and infrastructure; historic, cultural, and natural resources; and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City, as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table J.6 shows the 2017 values at risk broken down by property type for the City of Selma. Table J.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Selma by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 3 2 $2,381,240 $2,381,240 $4,762,480 Commercial 351 590 $152,581,224 $152,581,224 $305,162,448 Exempt 30 89 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 95 134 $28,998,925 $43,498,388 $72,497,313 Multi-Residential 407 838 $66,139,922 $33,069,961 $99,209,883 Residential 4,903 5,796 $520,672,552 $260,336,276 $781,008,828 Total 5,789 7,449 $770,773,863 $491,867,089 $1,262,640,952 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Selma from Fresno County GIS is provided in Table J.7 and mapped in Figure J.2. This is the information that was used for mapping and analysis purposes. Table J.7: City of Selma’s Critical Facilities Critical Facilities Type Number* CalARP 2 Colleges & Universities 1 Fire Station 2 Health Care 2 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 School 11 Sheriff 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 22 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure J.2: City of Selma’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table J.8 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by Selma’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table J.8: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by City of Selma Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info Police Department 1,700,000 51 Located next to a railroad track, which is parallel to a gas line also. Fire Station 2 1,400,000 6 on duty 21 total Fire Station 1 1,400,000 4 on duty Located within half a block of a railroad track and a gas line. Selma Community Hospital 45,000,000 500 Hazardous materials located within City Hall 4,500,000 74 seated/ 159 standing Located within a block of a railroad track and a gas line Fire Administration Bldg. 584,246 50 Senior Center 1,200,000 232 Public Works Yard 1,500,000 16 Hazardous materials located within The City has four major medical facilities: Selma Community Hospital has 60 beds (including a 15-bed emergency wing), Kaiser Permanente Medical Clinical has an outpatient treatment facility, Bethel Lutheran Home has 87 beds, and Selma Convalescent Home has 34 beds. The City is planning to build a new police headquarters and will remodel the fire station #2 to accommodate more employees within the next three to five years. Historic, Cultural, and Natural Resources There are no registered state or federal historical sites in the City, although Pioneer Village is a historically based village where many community events are held. The City of Selma has some environmentally sensitive areas, which include Rockwell Pond and the Young Ponding area. Growth and Development Trends Selma is growing at a rapid pace and is likely to continue this trend for many years. Figure I.3 shows the location of new development in the City. Table J.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. Table J.9: City of Selma’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 2000 # of Housing Units 2007 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 23,219 24,017 3.44 6,813 6,984 2.51 Source: American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure J.3: Proposed Development in the City of Selma Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Currently, there are no manufactured housing developments in Selma and there are no planned housing developments that would be located in specified flood hazard areas or in areas with unstable soil. One possible development of concern may be the Tutelian Commercial Project that is located adjacent to the Rockwell Pond, which accepts stormwater runoff from the City. However, the grading and drainage plan will mitigate any localized flooding issues or other issues associated with Rockwell Pond. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. J.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table J.6 above shows Selma’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s assessor’s data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Agricultural Hazards Although there is not much agriculture in the City limits, the surrounding areas are mostly agricultural land. The City of Selma is greatly affected by any agricultural hazard, because the economy is largely based on this industry. Besides the obvious extreme weather hazards, such as drought, flood and heavy rains, and extreme heat, other agricultural hazards could be a major impact on Selma. Hazards such as pests on certain crops could be a major issue for the economy. Past pests on crops have cost millions of dollars in damage and have included the glassy-winged sharpshooter, olive fruit fly, and red imported fire ant. Other hazards from agriculture itself include air pollution, water shortages, and hazardous materials spills. Fresno County is one of the top counties in the nation in poor air quality. Often, citizens of the County have a higher chance of having respiratory problems, including asthma in children, than others in the United States. Each year, air quality is also responsible for crop losses. Water shortages are becoming a problem in the area, and crop irrigation, which is necessary to support the industry and thus the economy, adds to the problem. Agricultural sites that store hazardous materials that are close to the City could affect the City directly in the event of a spill or explosion. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Dam Failure According to the City’s 1991 Safety Element, information from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Office of Emergency Services, and Fresno County indicated that Selma would be in extreme danger in the event of a complete dam failure at Pine Flat Dam at a time that the facility is at full capacity. This would be a worst-case scenario and Selma would be located in the center of a floodway approximately 17 miles wide and 8 to 10 feet deep within three hours of the failure. No projections of a lesser extent have been made for this hazard and there has not been a reported past event of dam failure at Pine Flat Dam. Drought Drought would mostly affect the economy of Selma by limiting water resources available for the agricultural sector and human consumption. The agricultural sector would need more irrigated water than normal. During drought periods, surface water allocations are reduced which leads to higher groundwater pumping from an already limited aquifer and thereby lowers the water table. Low water levels and water conservation for the area are already an issue, so a drought could impact Selma and its economy greatly. Previous droughts happened between 1987 and 1992, which was statewide, and 1998-2004 (more of a dry spell than an actual drought). In 2007, there was an attempt to have a local state of emergency declared because of water supply shortages, especially for local farmers. There was also concern for an increase in West Nile virus because the breeding grounds were moving to urban areas with water due to the dry conditions in the rural areas. The period between late 2011 and 2014 was the driest in California history since record-keeping began. The drought led to Governor Jerry Brown's instituting mandatory 25 percent water restrictions in June 2015. Subsequently, the winter of 2016–17 turned out to be the wettest on record in Northern California, surpassing the previous record set in 1982–83. Earthquake The City of Selma is located in Seismic Zone 3. The planning team identified 15 to 25 unreinforced masonry buildings in town, primarily retail buildings in downtown. Specifically, the team identified City Hall and the Police Department as critical facilities that may be vulnerable to seismic events. Although from a historical perspective, the potential for secondary hazards caused by earthquakes have been considered minimal and rare in the Selma area, the potential for liquefaction and ground settlement instabilities are not well known. There has been some minimal structural damage in the past from earthquakes, in particular the 1983 Coalinga earthquake, which was felt in Selma. The damage done to an unreinforced masonry building was absorbed by the building’s owner. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood/Levee Failure Selma has not historically been subject to significant flooding. The mapped flood hazard area for a 100-year event includes one small area in the northwestern part of the City. The special flood hazard area contains 18 homes. There is often localized flooding during heavy rain events due to the sheer amount of precipitation and the limited capacity of storm drainage system facilities, capacity issues, or failed operation of storm drain pumps. The City of Selma received American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding to take a majority of the pumps off line and divert runoff from the Consolidated Irrigation District’s (CID) canal system to Rockwell pond. The City is also currently working to divert the remaining pump stations to master planned retention basins. The City has prepared emergency response action plans for the remaining pump stations still active. Areas of localized flooding are illustrated in Figure J.4. According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), the flood history of Selma is not well documented, but flooding reportedly occurred in the area in 1950, 1958, 1967, 1969, and 1978. In March 1958, nearly two inches of rain in less than a day clogged storm sewers and caused flooding in the central part of the City. In other floods, water has entered basements, sewer lines have backed up, and water has ponded in commercial and residential areas. Streets, lawns, and basements have been damaged; traffic has been disrupted; businesses have closed temporarily; and flood fighting has been necessary. Flooding has generally been short in duration (ponded areas being exceptions) and most damage has been considered minor. More recently there has been major damage and some localized flooding from storms: • May 2005—Drainage ditch almost overflowed; localized street flooding occurred. • January 2006—Heavy rain caused much damage to homes and businesses in Selma. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Selma was created (see Figure J.5). Table J.10 summarizes the values at risk in the City’s 100-year floodplain as well as loss estimates for the 1 percent annual chance flood event. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure J.4: City of Selma Hazard Mitigation Flooding Intersections Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure J.5: City of Selma’s 100-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table J.10: City of Selma’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Residential 16 18 $1,953,999 $977,000 $2,930,999 $732,750 Total 16 18 $1,953,999 $977,000 $2,930,999 $732,750 Sources: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Selma does have assets at risk to the 100-year flood. There are 16 improved parcels located in the 100-year flood hazard area for a total value of roughly $2.9 million. There are no additional improved parcels in the 500-year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 100-year (or 500-year) flood causing roughly $732,750 in damage in the City of Selma. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are well below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be significantly higher than those included herein. Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Selma has a flood insurance rate map but is not currently participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the average number of persons per household (3.17). The following are at risk to flooding in the City of Selma: • 100-year flood—51 people • 500-year flood—0 people • Total flood—51 people Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. According to data from Fresno County GIS and the digital flood insurance rate map, there are no critical facilities in Selma’s flood hazard area. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazardous Materials Incident Two major transportation arteries of statewide significance traverse Selma—a main line of the Southern Pacific Railroad and State Highway 99. These routes are both heavily used and are frequently used to transport hazardous materials that could represent a risk to the community if involved in a transportation accident. Land uses along the transportation routes are diverse. Of specific concern is the Police Department, which is located just a few feet from the railroad line and is the old train depot. One of the two fire stations is located one street way. Other areas of concern related to train derailment include the buried pipes and utilities that run along the tracks, poor crossings, and grade separation. Another transportation hazard is a small, two runway, privately owned airport located two miles northwest of Selma that provides service to private planes. The planning team identified two plane crashes and two major transportation-related hazardous materials spills in the past: • January 1991—Three big trucks, one loaded with toxic chemicals, collided on Highway 99 in Selma. This collision caused an explosion that closed down the highway and killed two people and injured a third. A nearby elementary school was closed the day after the accident. • October 1996—A freight train carrying household paint, batteries, compressed gas cylinders, and pesticides derailed north of Selma spilling 100 gallons of diesel fuel. There were no injuries; five area residents were evacuated. • November 2000—A plane crash at the Selma Airport resulted in one death and critically injured one person. • January 2008—A single plane crash on the edge of the City limits resulted in one death. There are two CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Selma. As identified in Table J.11, there are five critical facilities in Selma located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table J.11: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Selma Critical Facility Type Count Fire Station 1 Nursing Home 1 Police 1 Sheriff 1 Urgent Care 1 Total 5 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Severe Weather: Extreme Cold/Freeze The City of Selma experiences freezes that mostly affect the agricultural economy of Selma. Extreme cold also increases the energy demand, poses a threat to human health, and can cause damage to underground water piping throughout the City. Past freezes occurred in, 1990, 1991, 1998, and 2007. Warming centers were opened up for many of these freezes to help the public. • 1991 and 1990—These freezes caused catastrophic damage to the crops in the San Joaquin Valley and received presidential disaster declarations. • December 1998—A freeze, accompanied by black ice and snow, caused numerous vehicle accidents in the area and required response from Selma’s public safety services. The freeze was also devastating to the valley’s agricultural sector and resulted in a presidential disaster declaration. • January 11-17, 2007—This freeze, which received a presidential disaster declaration, had a huge economic impact on the City of Selma and many human service resources were used throughout the rest of the year. Impacts included crop damage and unemployment. • December 2016—California growers spent over $25 million in December to protect their crops from a post-rain cold snap. Though it was cold in the San Joaquin Valley – down to 23 degrees in parts of the of the Valley, according to the National Weather Service – it wasn’t the ice-box along the eastern foothills from Fresno County to Kern County. Severe Weather: Extreme Heat Extreme heat events are primarily an issue of human health in Selma, particularly for the homeless, senior citizens, agricultural workers, people with decreased health status, and lower income citizens. Along with the extreme heat comes worsened air quality for the Central Valley region, which increases the chances of respiratory emergencies. Other major impacts of extreme heat events are agricultural losses, which affect the local economy in Selma, and increased water and energy demand, which results in increased operating costs. The City operates cooling centers and uses the Connect CTY, a computerized telephone and e- mail notification system, to notify people of the issue and locations of the centers. The City also provides a transit system that can take citizens to the cooling centers. Summer temperatures in Selma can exceed 105°F and usually occur for a few days in a row, which is when cooling centers are opened. The Senior Center keeps a list of older adults to check up on, which is very helpful during this type of emergency as well as others. Cooling centers were opened for extreme heat in Selma in 2007 and 2005. Other extreme heat years include 2016, 2015, 2014, 2003, 2002, and 1999. In mid-July 2006, a stretch of days with 100°F plus temperatures damaged crops, especially tomatoes, tree fruit, and grapes. It also led to a sharp increase in the number of mosquitoes infected with West Nile virus in the valley. The time period of January 2016 through December 2016 was the 3rd warmest year on record for California, Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan according to NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). California saw 2014 as the warmest year on record. Severe Weather: Fog Fog is a yearly occurrence around Selma and is a hazard that the City of Selma has learned to respond to. The City itself has fog that reduces visibility and can cause vehicle accidents. In addition, Selma’s public safety personnel often have to respond to major accidents on the highways around Selma. This drains the local resources away from the City. To try to combat this issue, the Selma Unified School system is on a “foggy day” schedule, which entails starting school later in the morning after a fog has lifted. Also, the California Highway Patrol and California Department of Transportation work together on public education, press releases, pace cars, and signs for safer highway driving. Some major accidents in the area attributed to fog include the following: • November 26, 1989—21 vehicle pileup on Highway 99 near Selma, 14 people injured • January 23, 1990—60+ vehicle pileup on Highway 99 north of Selma, five deaths • February 7, 1991—Multiple vehicle pileup on Highway 99 between Selma and Fresno, three deaths, 30 people injured • January 1994—56 vehicle pileup on Highway 99 near Selma, two deaths, 42 people injured • November 1998—74 vehicle pileup on Highway 99, two deaths, 51 people injured • November 2000—Small private plane crash, 1 death, 1 critically injured person • February 2002—87 vehicle pileup on Highway 99 near Selma, three deaths, 51 people injured • November 2007—102 vehicle pileup on Northbound Highway 99, two deaths, over 30 people injured • January 2017—At least 40 vehicles were involved in multiple crashes in dense fog on Highway 198 in Kings County Severe Weather: Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning There has been major damage and some localized flooding from storms during February 1992, February 1998, April 1999, May 2005, January and March of 2006, and January and February of 2017(see also Flood section above). • February 1992—The City of Selma’s ambulance resources were used to respond to four accidents in a chain-reaction on Highway 99 due to heavy rain and hail. There were 12 vehicles involved in these near Fowler with only minor injuries to 12 people and no deaths. • February 1998—A storm downed trees and power lines, damaged cars and homes, and caused power outages. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • April 1999—A week of cold, wet, and windy weather with hail caused some crop damage in the area. • May 2005—A ditch almost overflowed, localized street flooding was reported, and houses were struck by lightning. • January 2006—Heavy rains caused much of the damage to homes and businesses. • March 2006—Extreme winds caused much of the damage, especially to a mobile home park. • January 2017—In Fresno County, west of Selma, the intersection of Clovis Avenue and Conejo intersection flooded with several inches of water all across the road. • February 2017—Heavy, persistent rainfall across northern and central California created substantial property and infrastructure damage from flooding, landslides and erosion J.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Selma’s updated capabilities are summarized below. J.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table J.12 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Selma. Table J.12: City of Selma’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes 2010, currently being updated Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Zoning ordinance Yes March 2008, currently being updated Subdivision ordinance No Site plan review requirements Yes Title XI, chapter 20.1 Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance No Other special purpose ordinance (storm water, water conservation, wildfire) Yes Water conservation ordinance adopted but cannot enforce Title VIII, chapter 9 Building code Yes 2016 California Building Standards Code Fire department ISO rating Yes Rating:3 Erosion or sediment control program No Storm water management program Yes Title IX, chapter 9 Sometimes cannot keep up with the large volumes that come with winter storms, especially if electricity is lost. Capital improvements plan Yes Title IX Economic development plan Yes 2003 Local emergency management plan Yes 1989 Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes FEMA Flood Insurance Study, 2016 Elevation certificates No City of Selma General Plan, 2010 The City of Selma’s General Plan guides the City’s development and growth. The Safety, Conservation and Open Space, and Safety, Public Services, and Facilities elements contain goals and policies related to mitigation. These mitigation-related goals and policies are included below. Safety Element The Safety Element was adopted to provide for the protection of residents of the Selma community from natural and manmade hazards. It identifies a range of hazards to life and property to which the City and its residents are subject. The goals for protection of life and property are common to each hazard and are, therefore, presented as the overall goals of the Safety Element. Goals • To prevent loss of life and serious injury, resulting from natural or manmade hazards, to the residents of the City of Selma. • To prevent serious structural damage to critical facilities and structures where large numbers of people are expected to congregate at one time. • To ensure the continuity of vital services to the Selma area in case of disaster. • To provide a leadership role in education on public safety. Hazard Specific Objectives and Policies Seismic Safety Objectives • Identify risks to the City of Selma from seismic hazards. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Establish and maintain a plan to minimize identified risks from seismic hazards. • Establish and maintain a plan for responding to seismic disaster and for the provision of emergency services. • To adopt a Seismic Impact Transportation Plan reflecting primary and secondary disaster access routes and designating appropriate evacuation routes. Seismic Safety Policies • The Safety Element shall be reviewed and updated periodically. Upon adoption of the Interim Safety Element, the City should review and update the plan within one year and every five years thereafter. • The City shall develop and adopt an Emergency Operations Plan which shall include action plans in the event of an earthquake disaster. Emergency evacuation routes should be included in the plan. • The City shall maintain and continue to update, with the County of Fresno and other agencies, an Emergency Services Plan. Included in the plan should be: − Provision for control and direction of emergency operations. − Provision for continuity of governmental services. − Program to coordinate the repair and restoration of essential systems and services. − Coordination of emergency operations with other jurisdictions, • The City should establish an inspection program to identify and inventory all existing unreinforced masonry structures in the City. • The City should implement a program to abate all identified dangerous buildings. • Emergency communication centers, fire stations, and other emergency service or critical facilities should be examined to determine earthquake resistance. A program to mitigate deficient facilities should be established. • Emergency procedures should be identified for public and private utility districts. • Primary and secondary hazards from seismic activity should be evaluated in all environmental assessment and reporting processes. • The list of critical facilities for the City of Selma in Appendix D of the Summary and Policy Recommendations of the Five County Seismic Report, shall be reviewed and updated. • Critical facilities shall be designed to the standards established by the Uniform Building Code for such facilities. Critical facilities means essential facilities as provided in the Uniform Building Code. • The City shall continue to adopt current issues of the Uniform Building Code and implement the seismic design standards provided by the Code. • Seismic safety information should be made available to the general public. School districts and agencies related to aged, handicapped, and seismically susceptible industries should be encouraged to develop education programs for seismic awareness. • The Technical Report of the Five County Seismic Study should be made available to planning projects in the City of Selma. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • The Seismic Impact Transportation Plan designates the following disaster transportation routes. Geological Safety Objectives • To provide a safe environment for building construction through knowledge and understanding of soil and land resources. Geological Safety Policies • Detailed mapping and analysis of identified areas of geologic hazard shall be provided. Areas identified with a “severe” rating for allowable soil pressures or high corrosivity soil characteristics should be mapped for City staff use in new development project consideration. • Continue to enforce the Uniform Building Code in all matters related to soil preparation and foundation requirements. Flood Safety Objectives • Minimize the hazards of localized sheet flooding resulting from prolonged rainfall and stormwater runoff. • Promote and become instrumental in coordinating the inclusion of a dam failure component to a regional disaster plan. Flood Safety Policies • The City of Selma shall evaluate territories within its sphere of influence to identify areas of potential localized flood hazards. • In areas identified as being potentially subject to flooding, where the exact area and depth of flooding is uncertain, the applicant or developer of an annexation or development proposal shall be responsible for the preparation of a civil engineering report evaluating the flooding potential. • The City of Selma shall continue to implement and administer the Master Plan for Storm Drainage as a means of offsetting increased storm water runoff from urbanization. • The City of Selma shall seek and petition the County of Fresno, Council of Fresno County Governments, and other agencies and cities impacted by potential dam failure to participate in the completion of a disaster plan dealing with dam failure. • The City shall prepare a local emergency evacuation plan responding to the complete failure of Pine Flat Dam at peak capacity. The evacuation plan shall be coordinated with other responsible and impacted jurisdictions. Transportation Safety Objectives • To maintain a responsive City staff trained in hazardous materials incidents. • To maintain a safe relationship between major transportation routes and urban land uses. • To provide for land use safety in areas influenced by airports. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Transportation Safety Policies • The City shall consider the impacts of potential transportation hazards upon adjacent land uses when considering proposals for new or changed urban uses. • New public use buildings, such as, schools and hospitals, should be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from mainline rail or freeway routes. • The City shall continue to staff, train, and equip an emergency response team to respond and coordinate public safety activities. The Selma Fire Department is designated as the City’s emergency response team for hazardous materials incidents. • The City shall continue to implement the airport land use plan for the Selma Aerodome. • New public use buildings should not be located within the flight path or approach zone of airports. • Adopted new speed survey Hazardous Materials Safety Objectives • To reduce and control the effects of hazardous wastes so as to promote the public health and welfare of the Selma community. Hazardous Materials Safety Policies • To coordinate and cooperate with other local, state, and federal agencies with expertise and responsibility for all aspects of hazardous wastes. • To educate the public on the subject of hazardous wastes. • To ensure that disaster planning for the City of Selma includes policies appropriate to problems associated with hazardous wastes. Conservation and Open Space Element This element provides guidance through policies, plans, and programs on the location and design of open space in the community and in the conservation and usage of natural resources. Goals • Protect the environment. • Provide for the usage of natural resources without causing their premature depletion. • Preserve prime agricultural land. • Preserve groundwater quality and reduce overdraft conditions. • Eliminate potential for soil erosion or degradation of its agricultural productivity. • Limit potential threats to human health and property, which may result from natural environmental hazards. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Policies • Areas with high erosion potential or soil instability which cannot be mitigated shall be designated for open space land uses. • Channel and slope modification shall be discouraged where they increase the rate of surface runoff and increase the potential for erosion. • The City shall endeavor to mitigate, to the fullest extent possible, activities which will exacerbate groundwater overdraft. • To the fullest degree possible, prime agricultural land shall be preserved for agricultural uses only. • Maintain Rockwell Pond as both a resource management area (water recharge) and community open space. • Require correction of local stormwater ponding conditions prior to development in such areas, either through off-site improvements provided by land developers, or through community storm drain facility capital improvement projects. • Require soil studies in localized areas known to have expansive or unstable soils. Safety, Public Services, and Facilities Element Goals • Reduce the threat to persons and property resulting from natural and manmade hazards including fire, crime, and flooding. • Provide a safe and sanitary physical environment. • Undertake required improvements of the sewer and storm drainage systems. Policies • Capital improvements shall be undertaken to eliminate existing flooding problems. • The adopted Urbanizing Area Master Plan for Storm Drainage shall be utilized to determine adequate facilities for new development. • All new developments shall be required to have community sewer, water, and stormwater systems. Water Conservation Ordinance The purpose of the Water Conservation Ordinance of the City of Selma is to minimize outdoor water use, control unnecessary water consumption, and to conserve water in landscaping to preserve the available potable water supply of the City. It prohibits waste of water as defined in the ordinance, sets water conservation stages for outdoor water use, and establishes design criteria for water conservation in landscaping. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan City of Selma Emergency Operations Plan, 1989 The City of Selma Emergency Operations Plan Emergency provides guidance for City response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense operations. The Basic Plan provides an overview of operational concepts, identifies components of the City Emergency Management Organization, and describes the overall responsibilities of federal, state, County, and City entities. Response and recovery functions, as well as specific guidelines for accomplishing these functions, are contained in the Functional Annexes. City of Selma Storm Drain Master Plan The City of Selma has as storm drain master plan to address localized flooding issues. The plan is illustrated in Figure J.6. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure J.6: City of Selma Storm Drain Master Plan Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan J.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table J.13 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Selma. Table J.13: City of Selma’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/Engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Community Development Department Currently hiring senior and principle planners Engineer/Professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Public Works Department/Engineer Planner/Engineer/Scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Public Works Department/Engineer Personnel skilled in GIS Yes GIS Coordinator Full time building official No Community Development Department; City Manager Floodplain Manager No Emergency Manager Yes Fire and Police Departments Low staffing Grant writer Yes Administrative Analyst Other personnel Yes Multiple roles are covered by city staff Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Yes Everbridge In Selma, the public is served by a seven department City government, which includes full-time Fire and Police departments. The City is also served by supporting groups of reserve firefighters and “volunteers in policing” that can be used in emergencies or major events. The Selma Fire Department provides ambulance services for the City and outside the City limits, encompassing a total of 150 square miles. The City of Selma has a mapped Special Flood Hazard Area but does not participate in the NFIP and has been sanctioned since 1975. After weighing the limited number of homes subject to the 1- percent-annual-chance flood hazard against the high cost of being a member of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), City Council determined that it is not in the City’s best interest to participate in the NFIP. J.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table J.14 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. There are currently no specific funding sources for hazard mitigation. Table J.14: City of Selma’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services No Private or other agencies/governments Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No J.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The Selma Fire Department provides fire safety education and overall fire prevention. The City of Selma is also developing a public disaster preparedness program that should be functional within the next three to four years. Existing strengths in the City of Selma are that community and local businesses are very generous in meeting the needs and/or volunteering themselves for community outreach programs and events. J.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts The City of Selma is involved in some targeted mitigation efforts, these include the following: • The City is currently working on its Disaster Management Plan, education and implementation of the plan throughout City government, and an educational outreach program for the citizens of Selma. This is estimated to take three to four years. • The City is working on getting a new police headquarters building, which will move the police leadership team away from the railroad tracks, which will hopefully mitigate the impacts that some of the manmade hazards could have on police response resources. Construction is expected to begin within the next three to five years. • The City has placed secondary points of connection and pads for emergency generators at strategic locations to pump stormwater during a citywide power failure. • The City is requiring new housing developments to put in better stormwater systems than what was previously required to minimize localized street flooding in those areas. J.4.6 Opportunities for Improvement Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Selma has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. The opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City of Selma. Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan J.5 Mitigation Strategy J.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Selma adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. All divisions within the Community Development Department, (Building, Planning and Housing) may utilize the hazard information when reviewing site plans or building permit applications. The Parks Division may utilize the hazard information to better understand the City’s vulnerability to drought and how to better maintain the City’s parks and landscaped medians in a way that will not exacerbate the effects of drought on the community. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Selma will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. J.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The City of Selma has not completed any mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, the City will carry forward, with some revisions, several actions that were deferred due to funding constraints and incorporate them into the mitigation strategy of this plan. There is one action from the City of Selma’s 2009 mitigation strategy that the City has decided not to carry forward and recommend for implementation in this plan. This deleted action and the reason for its deletion is as follows: •Construct a Railroad Crossing Underpass – project no longer planned by City J.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Selma identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the City of Selma will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Institute a Disaster Preparedness Education Program for the Public Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: dam failure, drought, earthquake, human health hazards, flood, severe weather, wildfire, hazardous materials Issue/Background: The public of Selma does not have any City-issued disaster preparedness education. Any knowledge they possess is from other sources, such as federal and state government agencies. Special populations targeted for this education are non-English speaking residents, senior citizens, and citizens living at or below the poverty level. Other Alternatives: Adding a smaller disaster preparedness education program onto the already strong fire prevention program; participation in Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program Responsible Office: City of Selma Fire and Police departments Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $6,500 per year Potential Funding: The program will be kicked off by an AmeriCorps volunteer (which will not cost the City, monetarily), and the actual program will be funded by donations and some budgeted money from the City of Selma. Benefits (Avoided Losses): By educating the public in disaster preparedness, the citizens will be better prepared during an actual disaster. This individual preparedness will help save lives and property. This also removes some of the constraints on the City’s emergency services, enabling them to do more for residents in the event of a disaster. Schedule: Within two years (2018-2020) Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 2. Install Back-up Power for Storm Drain Pumps Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: drought, flood, severe weather, earthquake Issue/Background: Most of the City of Selma’s storm drain pumps do not have back-up power sources. This causes localized flooding when there is heavy rain and power outages, which tend to Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.33 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan go hand and hand during major storms. To alleviate this problem, the City can make use of portable generators for the pumping stations. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Selma Public Works Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $27,540 per generator; the cost of three generators would be $82,620 (not including fees and taxes) Potential Funding: City budget, grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): By having back-up power sources, the storm drain pumps will be able to operate, to avoid localized flooding, in the event of a power failure. This could prevent property damage, including damage to cars parked on the streets. Damage costs could range greatly, but an estimate is $2,000-$3,000 per storm without power. Schedule: Within 3-4 years Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 3. Sheridan Street Pump Station Bypass and Retention Basin Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: There is often localized flooding throughout the City of Selma during large storms. The area that is particularly affected is downtown from Young St. to Highway 99, which starts at Rose Ave. and continues to Second St. (please refer to the localized flooding map in Figure J.4.). There are major intersections and areas that flood during storms with intense rains. This occurs because during rain events when storm water in this area flows into an underground storm drain system that ends up at a pumping station on Sheridan Street. The tributary area also contains a large section of State Highway 99 runoff. This drainage system does not currently have sufficient capacity to handle maximum storm flows. By not having enough capacity, this creates clogging and backflow in the area which causes major localized flooding, including surrounding citizens’ properties. This project will bypass the existing pump station and gravity feed runoff into a new master planned retention basin south of Valley View Avenue. Other Alternatives: No Action Existing Planning Mechanism(s) through which project will be implemented: The City of Selma Stormwater Master Plan Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.34 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Responsible Office: Public Works & Caltrans Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $4,200,000 total possible, which is comprised of land acquisition, excavation of the retention basin and piping. Potential funding: City Budget, Storm drain impact fees, Caltrans, Benefits (avoided Losses): The city can decrease damage caused by localized flooding during every single heavy rain storm. The average potential monetary loss could reach $9,000 per heavy rain storm which could equal out to more than $45,000 per year in damages. If an extremely heavy rain were to occur more than the average amount of rain, the extent and cost of damages would be much greater and could reach an upwards to $700,000 because 35 buildings (mostly homes) have flooding potential damage (up to $20,000 per building) and another possible $75,000 in other property damages. Examples of possible yearly damages include citizens’ vehicles parked in the streets and on properties, vehicles trying to get through the flooded areas, and other private property. These estimates also do not take into account the large amount of resources used in attempting to stop this localized flooding that could be used in other problems during these storms. Schedule: Within 3-5 years Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 4. Construct New Police and Fire Department Headquarters Hazard(s) Addressed: Hazardous Materials Issue/Background: Besides needing to update space and facilities for both departments, the police station is located directly next to the railroad line that runs through the City (it is actually the old train depot). There is also a pressurized natural gas line that runs along the tracks by the police station that is considered a hazard. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Selma Police department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $8 million Potential Funding: 50% funded via State Funding Allocation and 50% funded via voter approved G.O. Bond Benefits (Avoided Losses): Moving the police station away from the railroad line will reduce the impacts of a disaster, which could partially or completely destroy 50 percent of the City’s Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.35 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan emergency services response capabilities. It would also reduce the threat posed to the City’s dispatch communications, which dispatches both police and fire services. Schedule: Within the next 3 years (2018-2021) Status: 2009 project, revised, implementation not yet started 5. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Compliance including Groundwater Sustainability Planning and Implementation Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Issue/Background: The Kings subbasin underlays the City of Selma and like many groundwater basins throughout the State, this subbasin is in overdraft condition with underground aquifers adversely impacted by overuse. Such impacts include significant decline in water storage and water levels, degradation of water quality, and land subsidence resulting in the permanent loss of storage capacity. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) provides for the establishment of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to manage groundwater sustainability within groundwater subbasins defined by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The City of Selma is within the boundaries of the Central Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). The Central Kings GSA is comprised of local agencies including County of Kings, County of Fresno and County of Tulare, as well as a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Consolidate Irrigation District. As a community that is within the boundaries of the Central Kings GSA, the City of Selma will participate as a stakeholder in the planning process by attending meetings during the development of the Central Kings Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) which must be completed no later than January 31, 2020, to ensure a sustainable yield of groundwater, without causing undesirable results. Failure to comply with that requirement could result in the State asserting its power to manage local groundwater resources. Active participation in the development and implementation of the Central Kings GSP will allow the City to maintain sustainable groundwater supplies while providing insurance against periods of long-term drought, a high significance hazard for the City of Selma. Other Alternatives: None. Not participating in the development and implementation of the GSP that is within the boundaries of the City will put the community at risk of not having sustainable groundwater supplies during periods of long-term drought. Responsible Office: City Engineer and Central Kings GSA Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: None Potential Funding: N/A Fresno County (Selma) Annex J.36 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): Active participation in the implementation of the GSP by the Central Kings GSA will result in the management of groundwater in a manner that is sustainable and avoids undesirable results, as defined by the California State Department of Water Resources, for the City of Selma. Schedule: GSAs must complete and submit the required GSP to DWR by January 31, 2020, which is to be fully implemented and result in sustainability of the groundwater basin, with no undesirable effects, by the year 2040. Status: New project in 2018 ANNEX K: CITY OF REEDLEY Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan K.1 Community Profile Figure K.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of Reedley and its Sphere of Influence. Figure K.1: The City of Reedley K.1.1 Geography and Climate Reedley is situated approximately 25 miles southeast of the City of Fresno and equidistant from the City of Visalia, which is southeast of Reedley. Reedley and its Sphere of Influence cover a 4,817-acre area, 3,476 of which is within the Reedley city limits. Manning Avenue, a four-lane divided major arterial street, connects the City with State Highway 99 which is 12 miles to the west. State Highway 180 is located eight miles north of the City, and both highways are heavily used by local, regional, and national residents, travelers, and motor carriers. In addition to its location near these major highways, the community lies adjacent to the Tulare Valley Railroad and the Southern Pacific Railroad lines. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Reedley is located in the central San Joaquin Valley portion of California, lying inland between the State's coastal mountain ranges and the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Reedley's economy continues as predominantly based upon agricultural production and agriculturally oriented industry. The valley floor is the richest intensive agricultural production area in the world. Although there has been economic diversification in recent years, local economy continues to be significantly dependent upon the underlying agricultural character of the region. K.1.2 History The lands within the Planning Area have a long history of human habitation, including habitation by the Southern Valley Yokut Indians. The Reedley area was the territory of the Wechikit or Wechikit Yokuts. As was the case all over California, the arrival of the railroad, even miles away, stimulated commercial agricultural development. In 1884, Civil War veteran Thomas Law Reed moved to what is now Reedley and began farming more than 2,000 acres. Reed settled in the area to provide wheat for Gold Rush miners. Reed’s land included what was to become the entire Reedley town site of 360 acres. His donation of land for a railroad station site established the town as the center of the Valley’s booming wheat business. Railroad officials commemorated his vision by naming the fledgling City in his honor. When wheat demand slackened, Kings River water was diverted for crop irrigation, and the region began its over 100-year tradition of bountiful field, tree, and vine fruit harvests. With water and railroad services in place, farming families of European immigrants were recruited, and the settlement was incorporated in 1913, with Ordinance No. 1 adopting and prescribing the style of a Common Seal on February 25, 1913. An important element in the early town was a colony of German Mennonites, whose strong traditions and values still shape Reedley’s culture. K.1.3 Economy Reedley contributes a wide variety of agricultural products to the County's economy. The area's rich, fertile soil produces the finest fruit, nut, vegetable, grain and cotton varieties. Since 1946, Reedley has been known as the Fruit Basket of the World because it leads the nation in the shipping of fresh fruit. Thirty fruit and vegetable packing and cold storage facilities, including the world's largest plant, along with nearby wineries, supply tree and vine fruit products. Related manufacturing industries in Reedley include boxes and packing machinery, and automatic packing equipment. The Council-Manager form of government administers a general fund operating budget of over $4,700,000 with a total budget in excess of $15,000,000. The City has had a Planning Commission since the 1940s and provides full City services, including a municipal airport, water system, sewer plant, and trash collection. A modern, acute-care hospital with a new birthing center provides comprehensive medical coverage. The active Chamber of Commerce & Visitor's Bureau and Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Reedley Downtown Association are responsible for significant on-going revitalization and beautification. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of Reedley are shown in Table K.1. Table K.1: City of Reedley’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Reedley Families below Poverty Level 22.6% All People below Poverty Level 26.7% Median Family Income $43,818 Median Household Income $44,228 Per Capita Income $16,313 Population in Labor Force 11,999 Population Employed* 10,269 Unemployment 14.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables K.2 and K.3 detail how the City of Reedley’s labor force breaks down by industry and occupation based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table K.2: City of Reedley’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 2,986 29.1 Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 2,376 23.1 Retail Trade 825 8.0 Manufacturing 766 7.5 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 593 5.8 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 570 5.6 Other Services, Except Public Administration 434 4.2 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 424 4.1 Public Administration 358 3.5 Construction 357 3.5 Wholesale Trade 356 3.5 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 139 1.4 Information 85 0.8 Total 10,269 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Table K.3: City of Reedley’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 3,305 32.2 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 2,160 21.0 Management, Business, and Financial Occupations (715) (7.0) Computer, Engineering, and Science Occupations (148) (1.4) Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Occupation # Employed % Employed Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media Occupations (987) (9.6) Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations (310) (3.0) Service Occupations 1,806 17.6 Sales and Office Occupations 1,515 14.8 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 1,483 14.4 Total 10,269 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ K.1.4 Population Reedley is a community of many converging cultures and peoples, from Asian, African, Central American, European, Mexican, Native American and South American. This diverse community provides exposure to a mix of social and cultural influences. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2015 population for the City of Reedley was estimated at 25,092. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of Reedley from the 2015 ACS are shown in Table K.4. Table K.4: City of Reedley’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of Reedley Gender/Age Male 49.6% Female 50.4% Median age 30.7 Under 5 years 9.2% Under 18 years 29.7% 65 years and over 11.1% Race/Ethnicity* White 58.2% Asian 2.7% Black or African American 0.7% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.3% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 76.4% Education High school graduate or higher 60.9% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 10.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 97.0% reporting one race K.2 Hazard Identification and Summary Reedley’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Reedley (see Table K.5). In the context of the planning area, there are no hazards unique to Reedley. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table K.5: City of Reedley—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical High Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Medium Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Medium Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Medium Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Transportation and Rail Incidents were not assessed as a hazard to the planning area, thus they are not included in the table above. Nonetheless, it is important to note that transportation hazards are a concern for the City of Reedley. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan K.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess Reedley’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the outreach process in 2017-2018. Reedley is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table K.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of Reedley’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table K.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of Reedley are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section K.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include agricultural hazards, drought, and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic* • severe weather*: extreme heat; fog • soil hazards: erosion; expansive soils Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan *Note: epidemic/pandemic, extreme heat, and fog are considered Medium priority hazards by the City of Reedley but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of Reedley, those hazards are as follows: • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado, windstorm, winter storm • soil hazards: land subsidence • volcano • wildfire* *Note: Wildfire is of High significance for the County overall, but is of Low significance to the City because no parcels or structures within the City or its Sphere of Influence are at risk to any fire severity zones. (For more information on the wildfire hazard, see the County’s wildfire severity risk map in Chapter 4 of the main plan). Additionally, the City’s planning team decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence. Landslide and Avalanche are considered not applicable to the City of Reedley. K.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers Reedley’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, historic assets, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table K.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of Reedley. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table K.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of Reedley by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 7 5 $2,298,731 $2,298,731 $4,597,462 Commercial 306 528 $117,042,641 $117,042,641 $234,085,282 Exempt 47 67 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 89 100 $58,427,197 $87,640,796 $146,067,993 Multi-Residential 556 3,656 $127,816,315 $63,908,158 $191,724,473 Residential 4,673 5,538 $559,681,385 $279,840,693 $839,522,078 Total 5,678 9,894 $865,266,269 $550,731,018 $1,415,997,287 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Reedley is provided in Table K.7 and shown in Figure K.2 with greater detail in Figure K.3. Specific facilities and their hazard specific issues as identified by the city’s hazard mitigation planning team are listed in Table K.8. Table K.7: City of Reedley’s Critical Facilities Critical Facility Type Number Airport 1 Behavioral Health 1 CalARP 8 Colleges & Universities 1 Communications 1 Courthouse 1 Department of Social Services 1 Fire Station 1 Health Care 1 Nursing Home 2 Police 1 School 13 Total 32 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table K.8: City of Reedley’s Hazard Specific Issues for Critical Facilities Name of Asset Type* Hazard Specific issues Reedley City Hall / Police Dept. EI Security / Proximity to Rail Reedley Fire Department EI Security Reedley Municipal Airport VF Security Kings Canyon Unified School District (X Schools) VF Security Immanuel Schools VF Security Reedley College VF Security / Proximity to Rail Manning Avenue Bridge VF Major Transportation Route Olson Avenue Bridge VF Major Transportation Route Burlington Northern/ Santa Fe Railroad VF Vulnerability / Commerce Reedley Community Center VF Security Reedley Wastewater Treatment Facility EI Security Reedley Sports Park Hydropillar EI Security Reedley Municipal Well Sites (7) EI Security Central Valley Transportation Center VF Security Fueling Stations (8) VF Security Hamilton Packing / Cold Storage VF Food Processing (Economic) Aslan Packing / Cold Storage VF Food Processing (Economic) Thiele Manufacturing VF Manufacturing (Economic) Moonlite Packing / Cold Storage VF Food Processing (Economic) Gerawan Farming / Cold Storage VF Food Processing (Economic) Reedley Lumber Company VF Security City of Reedley Public Works Maintenance Yard VF Security / Proximity to Rail Adventist Hospital, Reedley EI Security Sequoia Safety Council (Ambulance Provider) VF Security Reedley Opera House VF Earthquake Collapse (Historic) Palm Village Retirement Center VF Security Golden Living Center VF Security Sierra View Homes VF Security Reedley City Museum VF Security / Proximity to Rail (Cultural) *EI: Essential Infrastructure; VF: Vulnerable Facilities Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure K.2: City of Reedley Critical Facilities Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure K.3: City of Reedley Critical Facilities Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic Resources According to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center at California State University Bakersfield, 30 recorded cultural resources are found in and within a 1-mile radius of the project area. Four of these sites are Native American archaeological sites or isolates, while the remainders are historic buildings and sites. Two sites are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and on the California Register of Historic Resources, the Reedley Opera House and the Old Bank of America Building. Economic Assets In 2016, Fresno County produced agricultural goods eclipsing $6.18 Billion in value. Thousands of local jobs – ranging from manufacturing, warehousing, transportation, technical services and beyond – are supported by this industry within the City of Reedley. The Fresno County Department of Agriculture, under the direction of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, is responsible for conducting regulatory and service functions pertaining to the multi- billion-dollar agricultural industry in Fresno County. These functions are mandated by state and federal laws and regulations and by local measures and ordinances by the Fresno County Board of Supervisors. The City works closely with Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments, the Fresno County Farm Bureau, and other local and regional agencies in the region to address legislation, regulations, and policies that that address preparations and response for public health emergencies, which includes the potential for agro-terrorism, in an effort to protect the area’s most significant economic asset. Growth and Development Trends Between 1990 and 2010, Reedley experienced an average annual growth rate of 2.73% per year. Since 2010, that number has ranged annually between 2.35% & 3.59% per year – with numbers trending consistently up in the most recent years. This trend is one of the major indicators of the City’s potential growth over the life of the Agency’s General Plan (2030). By analyzing past growth trends, in comparison to the State Department of Finance projections for growth in the San Joaquin Valley, an average annual growth rate of 3% was utilized in the Reedley General Plan. While the vast majority of housing structures in the community are traditional or “site-built”, the City permits manufactured housing on a permanent foundation in all zones allowing single family residential uses. Bounded by the Fresno County/Tulare County line along the southern portion of the City; as well as the Kings River to the West, paced and contiguous growth will take place to the north and east. These areas do not contain any known hazard-related concerns, such as soil hazards, excessive flooding or wildfire. Capacity for critical infrastructure is either in place or appropriately planned for. Design, placement and protection of these items will be a most crucial concern. Additionally, the protection and conservation of water resources will continue to be a major priority, as the area is prone to drought conditions. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The City’s General Plan Land Use Map, adopted in February 2014 and last updated in January 2016, is shown in Figure K.4. The General Plan projects that Reedley’s population will reach 47,369 by year 2030. Table K.9 illustrates how the City has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. As of 2015, the population of Reedley was 25,092 with an average growth rate of 3.71 percent. Table K.9: City of Reedley’s Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 24,194 25,092 +3.71 6,867 7,240 +5.43 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates Of the 7,240 housing units in Reedley, 95.2 percent are occupied. Owner-occupied units account for 59.5 percent of all occupied housing. Single family detached homes comprise 74.9 percent of the housing stock in the City. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure K.4: City of Reedley’s Land Use Designations Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan K.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table K.6 above shows Reedley’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. In regard to these types of structures, there are currently 140 parcels in the 100- and 500-year floodplains in the City of Reedley. No further information on vulnerable structures is available. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County as a whole). Agricultural Hazards Among the largest impacts to agricultural production is the changing weather patterns seen within the Valley over the past decade. More extreme weather threatens the proper growth and maintenance of crops, and harbors the introduction of pest infestation, various plant diseases, and increased fire hazards. Drought Groundwater is the source of domestic water supply for Reedley. The groundwater basin is recharged primarily by rainfall and infiltration, storm water runoff, infiltration from irrigated ditch flows and seepage in the Kings River bottom, and water conservation recharge to natural sloughs in the nearby agricultural area. Agriculture on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley relies largely on water transferred through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta from Northern California. The effects of a four-year drought have severely narrowed the periods in which massive pumps can be used to move water from north to south. Less water means less acreage planted, creating a spike in unemployment and economic hardship for farm laborers and their communities. The geologic drought has shown how agriculture affects many lives, impacting communities well beyond the farm sector. For the past several years, the City’s water utility has been operating at maximum peak performance due to the drought conditions. Dam Failure Reedley is in the mapped inundation area of Pine Flat Dam. Pine Flat Reservoir is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, approximately 20 miles northeast of Reedley. The construction of the 440-foot Pine Flat Dam on the Kings River was completed in 1954. The project’s primary purposes are flood control, irrigation, water conservation, and recreation. When completely full, Pine Flat Reservoir is 20 miles long, holds 1 million acre-feet of water, and covers 5,790 acres with 67 miles of shoreline. The upper Kings River is the main tributary that fills the reservoir. According to the Kings River Conservation District, the water management agency encompassing Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties, “In the event of a major release from Pine Flat Dam, downstream flooding could occur over agricultural lands near the riverbanks and possibly Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan within the Cities of Reedley and Kingsburg.” The Kings River runs through the western section of the City of Reedley limits. Dam failures can result from earthquakes, erosion of the face or foundation, improper sitting, rapidly rising floodwaters, structural/design flaws or acts of terrorism. The Pine Flat Dam is a concrete gravity designed dam. The Jeff L. Taylor Pine Flat Power Plant is a hydroelectric generation station operated by Kings River Conservation District and is located at the base of the dam. A dam failure will cause loss of life, damage to property, and other ensuing hazards, as well as the displacement of persons residing in the inundation path. Damage to electric transmission lines could impact life support systems in communities outside the immediate hazard areas. A catastrophic dam failure, depending on size of dam and population downstream, could exceed the response capability of local communities. Damage control and disaster relief support would be required from other local governmental and private organizations, and from the state and federal governments. Mass evacuation of the inundation areas would be essential to save lives, if warning time should permit. Extensive search and rescue operations may be required to assist trapped or injured persons. Emergency medical care, food, and temporary shelter would be required for injured or displaced persons. Identification and burial of many dead persons would pose difficult problems; public health would be a major concern. Many families would be separated, particularly if the failure should occur during working hours. These and other emergency/disaster operations could be seriously hampered by the loss of communications, damage to transportation routes, and the disruption of public utilities and other essential services. Governmental assistance could be required and may continue for an extended period. Actions would be required to remove debris and clear roadways, demolish unsafe structures, assist in reestablishing public services and utilities, and provide continuing care and welfare for the affected population including, as required, temporary housing for displaced persons. Earthquake A major earthquake and ground shaking can cause significant social disruption and damage to buildings and infrastructure in the City of Reedley due to the close proximity of earthquake faults. Earthquakes can cause structural damage, injury, and loss of life, as well as damage to infrastructure networks, such as water, power, gas, communication, and transportation. A significant earthquake could occur and exceed the response capabilities of the City of Reedley. Response and disaster relief support would be required from other cities, private organizations, and from the state and federal governments. Reedley has experienced several noticeable ground movement incidents, such as the 1983 Coalinga earthquake and the 1989 Watsonville earthquake, but no local damage was sustained. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood/Levee Failure The Kings River begins on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada and flows westerly to Pine Flat Reservoir. Twenty-five miles downstream of this reservoir, the river passes along the west side of Reedley as it flows to the Valley floor. The supply of surface water for the Kings River Basin area comes primarily from two sources, the Kings River and the San Joaquin River. The Kings River flows are regulated by Pine Flat Dam, with a storage capacity of 1,000,000-acre feet. Flows in the river at Reedley come from releases from Pine Flat Dam and tributary inflow. The dam, completed in 1954, was constructed for flood control, irrigation, recreation and water conservation. The annual flow in the Kings River, as measured at the Reedley Narrows gaging station located three miles upstream of Reedley for the period 1963 to 1987, averages approximately 1,000,000 acre-feet per year. The highest average monthly flows occur in late spring with a maximum flow of approximately 3,000 cubic feet per second (cuffs), while the lowest flows generally occur in late fall with a minimum flow of approximately 290 cfs. Flooding in the Reedley area can occur due to high flows in the Kings River or as a result of local runoff from intense rainfall. The most recent FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) affecting the City of Reedley was updated in February 2009. According to the FIRM, portions of the Planning Area west of Reed Avenue are subject to 100-year (or 1-percent-annual-chance) flooding by the Kings River, areas in the northern plan area are subject to a 100-year flooding by the Wahtoke Creek and areas in the eastern plan area are subject to 100-year flooding by the Travers Creek. According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), damaging floods occurred in Reedley and the surrounding area in 1867, 1914, 1950, 1958, 1967, 1969, and 1978. Details on some of these events follow: • January 1914—Kings River overtopped and damaged the Manning Avenue bridge. The river reached almost a half mile wide, and the river banks and surrounding agricultural land were scoured and eroded. • November 1950—High flows on the Kings River washed out the Olsen Avenue bridge and threatened the Manning Avenue bridge. • January-February 1969—A discharge of 17,100 cfs at the community of Piedra resulted in the City’s most costly flood. The City of Reedley’s objectives and policies for managing flood risk are based on the Fresno County Safety Element and on Federal Insurance Administration regulations. The similarity between the City and County Safety Elements should ensure that the City of Reedley and Fresno County follow a uniform approach toward the management of the Kings River flood-prone areas. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of Reedley was created (see Figure K.5). Tables K.10 and K.11 Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan summarize the values at risk in the City’s 100-year and 500-year floodplain, respectively. These tables also detail loss estimates for each flood. Table K.10: City of Reedley’s FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Exempt 3 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total 3 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Note: The “Exempt” property type includes government, school, and church owned building for which building value is not given. Table K.11: City of Reedley’s FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 2 $8,928 $8,928 $17,856 $4,464 Commercial 1 183 $260,000 $260,000 $520,000 $130,000 Residential 135 1 $29,437,171 $29,437,171 $58,874,342 $14,718,586 Total 137 186 $29,706,099 $29,706,099 $59,412,198 $14,853,050 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Based on this analysis, the City of Reedley has limited assets at risk to the 100-year and 500-year floods. Only three improved parcels are located within the 100-year floodplain, and due to their “exempt” property type, no building value is known, which means a loss estimate could not be calculated. An additional 137 improved parcels valued at over $59.4 million fall within the 500- year floodplain. Applying the 25 percent damage factor as previously described in Section 4.3.2, there is a 1 percent chance in any given year of a 500-year flood causing roughly $14.9 million in damage. Actual loss would likely be higher due to the inclusion of the three additional “exempt” properties for which building value is unknown. Limitations: This model may include structures in the floodplains that are elevated at or above the level of the base-flood elevation, which will likely mitigate flood damage. Also, the assessed values are likely below the actual market values. Thus, the actual value of assets at risk may be higher than those included herein. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure K.5: City of Reedley’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County and the digital flood insurance rate map, population at risk was calculated for the 100-year and 500-year floods based on the number of residential properties at risk and the average number of persons per household (3.17). This analysis found that approximately 428 people in the City of Reedley are at risk of having their homes flooded. Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of Reedley joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on September 30, 1982. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were eight flood insurance policies in force in the City with $2,345,000 of coverage. All eight policies were residential (for single-family homes), and all eight policies were Preferred Risk policies in B, C, and X zones. One policy is for a pre-FIRM structure and seven are for post-FIRM structures. There have not been any historical claims for flood losses in the City of Reedley and according to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. Critical Facilities at Risk Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of disaster as previously described. In the City of Reedley there are no critical facilities located in the 100- or 500-year floodplain. Hazardous Materials Incident The City of Reedley is susceptible to a hazardous materials release from the result of transportation accidents or spills of stored materials used at an industrial business. The significance of the problems to the environment, property, or human health is dependent on the type, location and quantity of the material released. Manning Avenue and the San Joaquin Valley Railroad both run through the heart of Reedley. There is the potential for hazardous material spills on these transportation routes. Numerous commercial transportation vehicles travel Manning Avenue with various types and quantities of hazardous materials. The San Joaquin Valley Railroad is strictly a commercial freight transportation system. Large quantities and numerous types of hazardous materials are transported through Reedley by rail on a daily basis. Of particular concern is the large number of liquefied petroleum gas vessels that are transported on the system. A derailment and fire, with large exploding liquefied petroleum gas vessels, could cause widespread damage to the City. Although warning devices have been installed to decrease the potential for a rail incident, increased rail and vehicle traffic in the City allow for the occurrence in the future. There are also stationary quantities of hazardous materials used by the agricultural industry that are stored and used within Reedley and in the surrounding areas. There is the potential for hazardous materials releases from large industrial plants in Reedley. Facilities such as these Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan throughout the City are less of a threat due to current laws and regulations requiring them to have contingency and evacuation plans. The Reedley Fire Department is responsible to check compliance of these facilities and maintain records of stored quantities of hazardous materials. Additional causes of hazardous materials spills could be clandestine dumping of toxic or hazardous waste on public or private property. As the costs and restrictions increase for legitimate hazardous waste disposal sites, illegal dumping of hazardous materials may also increase proportionately. Besides the immediate effect of hazardous materials incidents on scene, there are also ancillary effects such as the impact on waterways and drainage systems, and the evacuation of schools, business districts, and residential areas. There are eight CalARP hazardous materials facilities located in the City of Reedley. As identified in Table K.12, there are 12 critical facilities in Reedley located within a half mile of a CalARP facility. Table K.12: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of Reedley Critical Facility Type Count Colleges & Universities 1 Communications 1 Fire Station 1 Police 1 School 8 Total 12 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Soil Hazards: Erosion Because the topography of the Reedley area is relatively flat, erosion does not have a significant impact in the area. Moderate-to-severe water erosion potential does exist, however, along the bluffs of the Kings River as a result of the steep slope conditions found in that area. Gullies can be started at the onset of the rainy season; and, once started, they can cut back into the adjacent level soils. It is generally more difficult to control such gullies than to prevent them. In areas of the bluff where there are gopher or squirrel burrows, tunnel erosion may result since such burrows can collapse. As a result, water and rodent management may be needed on the bluffs. A band of Atwater (AoA) soil is found in the northeastern portion of the Planning Area. This soil consists of stabilized old dunes of wind-sorted materials which are susceptible to moderate-to- severe wind erosion during infrequent periods of high wind. Soil Hazards: Expansive Soils Severe expansive soil conditions which could cause heavy damage to buildings, roads, and other structures are rare within the Planning Area. They are limited to the Cometa (CzaD) soil, with its dense clay subsoil, which is found in the far northwestern portion of the Planning Area. Although, Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan according to the Soils Conservation Service, this soil has a severe limitation rating for most urban type land uses, its relatively isolated location will insure that it will not adversely impact Reedley’s future development. Moderately expansive soils – including soils in the Ramona (Rb; Rc) and San Joaquin (ScA; SeA) Series – are found in a relatively large area within the northeastern and eastern portions of the Planning Area. Although these areas are generally planned for urban uses, moderately expansive soils will usually cause damage only to substandard structures and to flatwork such as streets and patios. In addition, foundations can usually be especially engineered to minimize damage due to these moderately expansive soils. The Ramona and San Joaquin soils, however, also have a severe limitation rating for use as septic tank absorption fields and storm drainage basin sites because of their slow permeability. K.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of Reedley’s updated capabilities are summarized below. K.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table K.13 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in Reedley. Table K.13: City of Reedley’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan Yes Adopted by Resolution 2014-08 (Feb. 18, 2014) Zoning ordinance Yes Title 10, Chapter 1 Adopted Sept. 2, 1980 Subdivision ordinance Yes Title 11, Chapter 1 Adopted April 25, 2000 Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) Yes Water Conservation Ordinance 2015-002 Adopted May 26, 2015 Building code Yes 2016 California Building Code Adopted Dec. 13, 2016 Fire department ISO rating Erosion or sediment control program No Stormwater management program Site plan review requirements Yes Title 10, Chapter 19 Adopted Sept. 2, 1980 Capital improvements plan Yes Details in Annual City Budget Document Economic development plan No Local emergency operations plan Yes Other special plans No Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams No Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) Yes K.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table K.14 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in Reedley. Table K.14: City of Reedley’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Community Development Director Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes City Engineer Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes City Engineer Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Engineering Dept., Senior Engineering Assistant Full time building official Yes Building Official Floodplain manager Yes Emergency manager Yes Police Chief or Fire Chief Grant writer Yes Outside Agency Other personnel GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) Yes Community Development and Engineering Dept’s. Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) Yes All City Dept’s. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan K.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table K.15 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table K.15: City of Reedley’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No K.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships The City of Reedley administers a variety of outreach efforts to support mitigation. The City’s website offers ongoing and seasonal information pertaining to water conservation and general public safety and maintenance issues. The Reedley Fire and Police Departments provide year- round safety education at schools, downtown public events, service clubs and the annual open house. The Reedley Fire Department also administers the HomeSAFE program which provides smoke alarms for qualifying households. The “Reedley Communicator” is a quarterly publication by the City of Reedley issued to its residents with various helpful tips and safety information. K.4.5 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of Reedley has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. Some of the possible opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City of Reedley. • Develop a stormwater management program • Develop an Evacuation Plan in partnership with the County and specific to hazardous materials incidents. Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan K.5 Mitigation Strategy K.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of Reedley adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Community Development Department, specifically the Planning and Building Divisions may utilize the hazard information when reviewing site plan application or when reviewing a building permit application. The Engineering Department may use this information while managing the City’s Capital Improvement Program and help to focus future Capital Improvement Projects. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from Reedley will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1982. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. K.5.2 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of Reedley identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the City of Reedley will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on drought. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action Fresno County (Reedley) Annex K.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Develop Stormwater Detention Basin Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-hazard: drought, flood Issue/Background: The City has identified the need to improve the ground water table by redirecting storm water currently draining directly to the Kings River to detention ponds that will assist the City in replenishing the groundwater. Groundwater is the source of domestic water supply for Reedley. For the past several years (2013-2018), the City’s water utility has been operating at maximum peak performance due to the drought conditions. The City has identified approximately two acres to develop a storm water detention basin. The required property is owned by the City. The project has been designed and construction plans are 60% complete. As of 2018 the City is actively seeking to secure funding sources to use with development impact fees and complete the project. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: City of Reedley, Engineering Department Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2,820,000 Potential Funding: City Development Impact Fees, Cal OES 404 Hazard Mitigation Grant, Prop 18 Benefits (Avoided Losses): The project will increase the amount of available groundwater by mitigation for the City’s withdrawal of groundwater and will also mitigate flood impacts. Schedule: 1 to 2 years Status: New project ANNEX L: CITY OF SAN JOAQUIN Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.1 Community Profile Figure L.1 displays a map and the location within Fresno County of the City of San Joaquin and its Sphere of Influence. Figure L.1: The City of San Joaquin L.1.1 Geography and Climate The City of San Joaquin is situated in western Fresno County, approximately 11 miles southwest of the City of Kerman. San Joaquin is the smallest incorporated city in the County; the City and its Sphere of Influence cover a 962-acre area, 731 acres of which is within the City limits. Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.1.2 History The following is given in the City’s 2013 General Plan: San Joaquin was founded in the early 1900s and incorporated in 1920 as a general law city. The City developed with a traditional grid layout, oriented around the railway and served as a center for services in an agricultural area. Throughout its history, the city has been a small community with a strong agricultural presence. L.1.3 Economy According to the 2013 General Plan, San Joaquin faces difficulty covering the costs of public services due to lower than average per capita sales tax income, low wages among residents and poor proximity to major trade routes. The major industry in San Joaquin is agriculture; however, the local economy has suffered following a federal program to retire arid farmland around the City, which has greatly reduced employment opportunities. Select estimates of economic characteristics for the City of San Joaquin are shown in Table L.1. Table L.1: City of San Joaquin’s Economic Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of San Joaquin Families below Poverty Level 55.8% All People below Poverty Level 54.2% Median Family Income $22,540 Median Household Income $24,437 Per Capita Income $7,692 Population in Labor Force 1,275 Population Employed* 1,165 Unemployment 8.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Excludes armed forces Tables L.2 and L.3 detail how the City of San Joaquin’s labor force breaks down by occupation and industry based on estimates from the 2015 American Community Survey. Table L.2: City of San Joaquin’s Employment by Occupation, 2015 Occupation # Employed % Employed Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 751 64.5 Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 108 9.3 Service Occupations 79 6.8 Sales and Office Occupations 90 7.7 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 137 11.8 Total 1,165 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table L.3: City of San Joaquin’s Employment by Industry, 2015 Industry # Employed % Employed Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining 760 65.2 Educational Services, and Health Care and Social Assistance 88 7.6 Transportation and Warehousing, and Utilities 52 4.5 Manufacturing 51 4.4 Wholesale Trade 47 4.0 Retail Trade 34 2.9 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, and Accommodation, and Food Services 33 2.8 Other Services, Except Public Administration 32 2.7 Construction 24 2.1 Finance and Insurance, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 22 1.9 Professional, Scientific, and Mgmt., and Administrative and Waste Mgmt. Services 22 1.9 Public Administration 0 0 Information 0 0 Total 1,165 100.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ L.1.4 Population According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, the 2015 population for the City of San Joaquin was estimated at 4,008. Select demographic and social characteristics for the City of San Joaquin from the 2015 ACS are shown in Table L.4. Table L.4: City of San Joaquin’s Demographic and Social Characteristics, 2015 Characteristic City of San Joaquin Gender/Age Male 49.4% Female 50.6% Median age 22.7 Under 5 years 10.5% Under 18 years 41.5% 65 years and over 4.5% Race/Ethnicity* White 93.5% Asian 0.0% Black or African American 0.0% American Indian/Alaska Native 0.0% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 96.0% Education High school graduate or higher 28.1% Disability Status Population 5 years and over with a disability 4.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates, www.census.gov/ *Of the 99.5% reporting one race Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.2 Hazard Identification and Summary San Joaquin’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the City (see Table L.5). In the context of the plan’s planning area, no hazards are unique to San Joaquin. Table L.5: City of San Joaquin—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical High Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Low Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Limited Likely Negligible Low Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Medium Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Highly Likely Limited Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess San Joaquin’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the outreach process in 2017-2018. San Joaquin is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table L.5). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the City of San Joaquin’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table L.5 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the City. Those of Medium or High significance for the City of San Joaquin are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section L.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include agricultural hazards and drought. • agricultural hazards • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incident • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic* • severe weather*: windstorm, winter storm Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan *Note: epidemic/pandemic, windstorm, and winter storm are considered Medium priority hazards by the City of San Joaquin but are not unique to the City in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to these hazards. Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the City of San Joaquin, those low significance hazards are as follows: • dam failure* • human health hazards: West Nile Virus • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze, extreme heat, fog, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire** *Note on Dam Failure: Although the County ranks dam failure as High in significance, the City determined the hazard to be of Low significance because there is only one dam located in the City, the Mud dam owned by the James Irrigation District, and it is not a significant hazard dam according to the National Dam Inventory. **Note on Wildfire: Although the County ranks wildfire as High in significance, the City determined the hazard to be of Low significance because there are no structures exposed to wildfire risk within the city boundaries or Sphere of Influence. Additionally, the City’s Committee members decided to rate several hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and no probability of occurrence. Avalanche and landslide are considered Not Applicable (N/A) to the City of San Joaquin. L.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers San Joaquin’s assets at risk, including values at risk, critical facilities and infrastructure, historic assets, economic assets, and growth and development trends. Values at Risk The following data on property exposure is derived from the Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition 13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair market Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table L.6 shows the exposure of properties (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of San Joaquin. Table L.6: 2017 Property Exposure for the City of San Joaquin by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Agricultural 1 0 $12,673 $12,673 $25,346 Commercial 37 70 $6,658,928 $6,658,928 $13,317,856 Exempt 11 110 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 15 16 $6,573,243 $9,859,865 $16,433,108 Multi-Residential 10 105 $7,049,843 $3,524,922 $10,574,765 Residential 613 945 $40,052,026 $20,026,013 $60,078,039 Total 687 1,246 $60,346,713 $40,082,400 $100,429,113 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. An inventory of critical facilities in the City of San Joaquin identified by Fresno County GIS is provided in Table L.7 and mapped in Figure L.2. In addition to these facilities, the City also considers City Hall (21900 W. Colorado Avenue) and Veteran Memorial Hall (22001 W. Manning Avenue) to be critical facilities. Table L.7: City of San Joaquin’s Critical Facilities Critical Facility Type Number CalARP 1 School 2 Sheriff 1 Total 4 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure L.2: City of San Joaquin’s Critical Facilities Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Historic Resources The National Register of Historic Places does not list any sites within the City of San Joaquin. Economic Assets The City of San Joaquin has a base of ready to go industrial locations including undeveloped parcels that have easy to access infrastructure. The existing buildings in the industrial park have modern amenities and are amendable to easy conversion into a variety of different industrial uses. In addition to space, San Joaquin’s other site location strengths include its transportation infrastructure with direct railroad access and connections to I-5, State Highway 41 and U.S. Highway 99. The community’s location is in reasonable proximity to agricultural production and processing facilities and is well situated to serve agribusiness. Other community assets in San Joaquin include affordable housing, a rural quality of life and a business-friendly city staff ready to assist new businesses. Growth and Development Trends The average population increase for the past ten years has been 2.76% and the average increase for the most recent five years has been 3%. The need for construction of major facilities (i.e. water wells, sewage treatment plant expansion, and parks) will be directly proportional to growth. The City’s General Plan Land Use Map, revised in September 2013, is shown in Figure L.3. Table L.8 illustrates how San Joaquin has grown in terms of population and number of housing units between 2010 and 2015. As of 2015, the population of San Joaquin was 4,008 with an average growth rate of only 0.17 percent. However, despite minimal population change, the city experienced substantial development of housing units. Table L.8: City of San Joaquin Change in Population and Housing Units, 2010-2015 2010 Population 2015 Population Estimate Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 2010 # of Housing Units 2015 Estimated # of Housing Units Estimated Percent Change 2010-2015 4,001 4,008 +0.17 934 1,044 +11.8 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates Of the 1,044 housing units in San Joaquin, 91.2 percent are occupied. Renter-occupied units account for 62.0 percent of all occupied housing. Single family detached homes comprise 51.1 percent of the housing stock in the City, followed by 2-unit and 3- or 4- unit structures, which together account for 40.2 percent of all housing units. More general information on growth and development in Fresno County as a whole can be found in “Growth and Development Trends” in Section 4.3.1 Fresno County Vulnerability and Assets at Risk of the main plan. Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure L.3: City of San Joaquin’s Land Use Designations Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Table L.6 above shows San Joaquin’s exposure to hazards in terms of number and value of structures. Fresno County’s parcel and assessor data was used to calculate the improved value of parcels. The most vulnerable structures are those in the floodplain (especially those that have been flooded in the past), unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern day building codes. In regard to these types of structures, there are no parcels in the 100- or 500-year floodplains in the City of San Joaquin. No further information on vulnerable structures is available. Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are further discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County as a whole). Agricultural Hazards Agricultural hazards are of high significance for the City of San Joaquin due to the large proportion of the City’s economy devoted to agriculture. Agricultural pests or diseases that harm crop yields are likely to cause significant economic distress in the City. A threat to San Joaquin is the ongoing agricultural land retirements that would potentially reduce the commodity output and limit the growth in food processing or packing facilities. Drought The HMPC determined that while drought is a significant hazard to the City of San Joaquin, this risk and vulnerability does not differ substantially from the overall risk faced by the County. Details on risk and vulnerability to drought can be found in Chapter 4 Risk Assessment. Earthquake There are no known active faults that run through the City. The nearest active fault, the Coalinga Fault, is approximately 40 miles west of the City. The San Andreas Fault is located 50 miles to the west, and the Owens Valley Fault is located approximately 100 miles to the east. The Clovis Fault is northwest-trending and about five miles east of the City of Clovis. It has been determined that the greatest potential for a significant earthquake would be from the San Andreas Fault. The 2007 Uniform Building Code (UBC) indicates that the City is located within Seismic Risk Zone 3, although it is relatively close to Zone 4 located to the west. UBC states that buildings constructed in Zone 4 are subject to higher standards than other zone designation buildings. Places located on alluvial deposits, like the City, tend to experience more intense ground shaking than those located on solid rock. However, because the City is far from any active faults, it is relatively unlikely that ground shaking in the City would be more than minimal (San Joaquin General Plan, 1995). According to the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, the City has a 20 to 30 percent chance of shaking 10 percent in the next 50 years. Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood/Levee Failure According to FEMA’s 2016 Flood Insurance Study (FIS), San Joaquin faces minimal flood risk. The significance of flood is low compared to the planning area as a whole due to protection provided by a system of levees. According to the FEMA Community Information System accessed 9/17/2018 there are no Repetitive Loss or Severe Repetitive Loss properties located in the jurisdiction. However, the City of San Joaquin does face risk of flooding from levee failure. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for a map of leveed areas in Fresno County. Values at Risk Following the methodology described in Section 4.3.2 Vulnerability of Fresno County to Specific Hazards, a flood map for the City of San Joaquin was created (see Figure L.4). None of the City falls within the 100- or 500-year floodplain and no values are at risk from a 100- or 500-year flood event. However, all of the City falls within a leveed area. Properties at risk and loss estimates due to flooding are detailed in Table L.9. Figure L.4: City of San Joaquin’s 100- and 500-Year Floodplains Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table L.9: City of San Joaquin’s Levee Failure Flood Hazard by Property Type Property Type Parcel Count Building Count Improved Value Content Value Total Value Loss Estimate Agricultural 1 0 $12,673 $12,673 $25,346 $6,337 Commercial 37 70 $6,658,928 $6,658,928 $13,317,856 $3,329,464 Exempt 11 110 $0 $0 $0 $0 Industrial 15 16 $6,573,243 $9,859,865 $16,433,108 $4,108,277 Multi-Residential 10 105 $7,049,843 $3,524,922 $10,574,765 $2,643,691 Residential 613 945 $40,052,026 $20,026,013 $60,078,039 $15,019,510 Total 687 1,246 $60,346,713 $40,082,400 $100,429,113 $25,107,278 Source: Fresno County 2017 Parcel and Assessor data; FEMA 2009 FIRM Population at Risk Using parcel data from the County, population at risk was calculated for the National Levee Inventory leveed area based on the number of residential properties at risk and the U.S. Census Bureau 2016 estimate for the average number of persons per household (3.17). Based on this assessment, 1,975 people are at risk to flooding from levee failure in the City of San Joaquin. Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses The City of San Joaquin joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on April 30, 1982. NFIP Insurance data indicates that as of June 6, 2017, there were no flood insurance policies in force in the City. However, there have been three historic losses paid in the City, including two claims for residential structures and one claim for a commercial structure, with paid losses totaling $10,720. There are no repetitive loss structures in the City of San Joaquin. Hazardous Material Incident There is one CalARP hazardous materials facility located in the City of San Joaquin. As identified in Table L.10, there is one critical facility in San Joaquin located within a half mile of this CalARP facility. Table L.10: Critical Facilities within ½ mile of CalARP Facility: City of San Joaquin Critical Facility Type Count School 1 Total 1 Source: Fresno County, HIFLD 2017 Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the jurisdictional planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the jurisdictional planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The City of San Joaquin’s updated capabilities are summarized below. L.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table L.11 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in San Joaquin. Table L.11: City of San Joaquin’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan Yes Zoning ordinance Yes Subdivision ordinance Yes Growth management ordinance Yes Floodplain ordinance Yes Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) No Building code Yes Fire department ISO rating No Erosion or sediment control program No Stormwater management program Yes Site plan review requirements Yes Capital improvements plan Yes Economic development plan Yes Local emergency operations plan Yes Other special plans No Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams No Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) No Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table L.12 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in San Joaquin. Table L.12: City of San Joaquin’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Consultant Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Consultant Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards No Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Consultant Full time building official Yes Floodplain manager Yes Emergency manager No Grant writer Yes Consultant Other personnel GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) No Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) Yes L.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table L.13 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table L.13: City of San Joaquin’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities Yes Withhold spending in hazard prone areas Yes Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan L.4.4 Other Mitigation Efforts As the City nears buildout (24,330 persons), the demand for an additional fire station may be warranted. Property maintenance is enforced through General Plan policies that will reduce the potential and severity of fires. L.4.5 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the City of San Joaquin has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community. Some of the possible opportunities for enhancement of the City’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the City. • Develop landscaping ordinances that incorporate proper species selection that are drought resistant, and planting and maintenance practices that will not exacerbate the effects of drought. • Provide training opportunities for staff members related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Additional training opportunities will help to inform City staff members on how best to integrate hazard information and mitigation projects into their departments. L.5 Mitigation Strategy L.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The City of San Joaquin adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs and policies. The Public Works Department may utilize the hazard information when implementing new projects as well as when maintain city infrastructure. The Department of Parks and Recreation may utilize the hazard information to better understand the community’s vulnerability to drought and maintain the City’s park and community centers in a manner to that will not exacerbate the effects of drought. The City will also incorporate this LHMP into the Safety Element of their General Plan, as recommended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from San Joaquin will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Continued Compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program The City has been an NFIP participating community since 1982. In addition to the mitigation actions identified herein the City will continue to comply with the NFIP. This includes ongoing activities such as enforcing local floodplain development regulations, including issuing permits for appropriate development in Special Flood Hazard Areas and ensuring that this development mitigated in accordance with the regulations. This will also include periodic reviews of the floodplain ordinance to ensure that it is clear and up to date and reflects new or revised flood hazard mapping. L.5.2 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the City of San Joaquin identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the City of San Joaquin will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi- hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The City agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Construct A Water Storage Tank and Booster Pump Station; Including Emergency Generators to Be Installed at Water Storage Tank, Booster Pump and All Water Well Sites Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: drought, flood, severe weather, earthquake Issue/Background: The City currently does not have any water storage capacity, which makes us vulnerable to water shortages and system demands during drought and also susceptible to shortfalls related to fire flows. Additionally, in the event of an emergency and power goes out the City does not have any backup power sources to ensure the wells remain in operation. A number of hazards in the planning area could result in extended power outages. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: City of San Joaquin Fresno County (San Joaquin) Annex L.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $3 million Potential Funding: State Revolving Fund, Community Development Block Grant Benefits (Avoided Losses): Storage tank will help the City maintain its ability to meet system demands including fire flows and drought reserves. A dedicated emergency generator will ensure the tank and booster station will remain operational during power outages. Schedule: Construction to begin Fall 2018 Status: New project ANNEX M: FRESNO METROPOLITAN FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan M.1 District Profile The Fresno County Metropolitan Flood Control District service area is illustrated in Figure M.1. Figure M.1: Fresno County Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Service Area Source: Fresno County Metropolitan Flood Control District, www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/ Until June 5, 1956, the responsibility for stormwater management and related functions was vested individually in the Cities of Fresno and Clovis and the County of Fresno. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (District) is a “special act” district, created by the electorate to provide fully coordinated and comprehensive stormwater management and related services on a regional basis Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan through a quasi-joint powers relationship among the Cities of Fresno and Clovis and the County of Fresno. The District is located in the fertile San Joaquin Valley in the central part of California, about halfway between San Francisco and Los Angeles. The terrain in the Fresno area is relatively flat, with a sharp rise to the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains about 15 miles eastward. The climate in the Fresno area is sunny and dry in the summer and cool and wet in the winter months. Midsummer temperatures can occasionally top 100°F, but low humidity and gentle breezes help to make the high temperature more bearable. The mean July temperature is 82°F (mean high 99°F). Although temperatures drop below 32°F at times, the mean low temperature in the winter is 37°F degrees. Precipitation usually begins in October and ends in April, averaging 10.6 inches. The District is authorized to control stormwater within an urban and rural foothill watershed of approximately 400 square miles known as the Fresno County Stream Group. The watershed extends eastward into the Sierra Nevada to an elevation of approximately 4,500 feet above sea level. The District service area includes most of the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area (excluding the community of Easton) and unincorporated lands to the east and northeast. Figure M.1 displays the District’s service area and Figure M.2 displays the District’s Master Plan Map. Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure M.2: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Master Plan Map Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Before 1956, stormwater management generally consisted of independent, site-specific actions intended only to alleviate individual problem locations, failing to create comprehensive solutions. In response to the rapidly increasing number of stormwater management problems and the inability of the three independent jurisdictions to provide an effective, coordinated solution, a citizens’ committee formed to explore alternatives. The result of the citizens’ efforts was draft legislation creating a “special act” district designed to mandate a quasi-joint powers relationship among the Cities and County, which would provide the desired stormwater management service. The act is known as the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Act of 1955 and was signed into law on May 13, 1955. The District Act became law on September 17, 1955, subject to voter approval. On June 5, 1956, the District Act was ratified by a five-to-one majority vote (32,030 voting in favor, 5,974 voting in opposition) and was established as Chapter 73 of the California Water Code appendix. The mission of the District is to provide the approximately 700,000 citizens living within its boundaries the ability to control and manage the water resources of the area; to prevent damage, injury, and inconvenience; to conserve such waters for local, domestic, and agricultural use; and to maximize the public use and benefit of the District’s programs and infrastructure. The District works to address stormwater and related water resource problems and needs, while seeking to prevent the creation of new problems. The District strives to achieve these goals within the reasonable time and economic parameters established through collective community discussion and decision making as entrusted to the District’s seven-member Board of Directors. As a service agency, it is the District’s responsibility to respond to the community’s needs for technical information, resource conservation, and facility construction, operation, and maintenance. Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan M.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The District’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the District and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the District (see Table M.1). Table M.1: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Unlikely Limited Limited Low Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Unlikely Critical High Drought Extensive Likely Critical Medium Earthquake Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Flood/Levee Failure Significant Occasional Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Low West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Negligible Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Limited Occasional Limited Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). M.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the District’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the FMFCD’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the District. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table M.1). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the District’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table M.1 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the District. Those of Medium or High significance for the District are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section M.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include dam failure and flood/levee failure. • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • severe weather: heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the District, those hazards of low significance are as follows: • agricultural hazards • human health hazards: epidemic/pandemic; West Nile Virus • landslide • severe weather: extreme cold/freeze; extreme heat; fog; tornado; windstorm; winter storm • soil hazards • volcano • wildfire* *Note: Wildfire is considered a High significance hazard for the County, but is of Low significance to the District because wildfire risk within the District is addressed by the County and the Cities of Fresno and Clovis. Please refer to the wildfire risk maps for the cities of Fresno and Clovis for justification of the Low rating in the District. For more information about how hazards affect the County as a whole, see Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in the main plan. Additionally, the District’s planning team decided to rate certain hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence. Avalanche is considered not applicable to the District. For more information about how hazards affect the County as a whole, see Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in the main plan. M.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers the District’s assets at risk, specifically critical facilities and infrastructure, natural resources, and growth and development trends. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. Table M.2 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by the District’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. The District’s physical assets consist of the flood control and local drainage structures and real property, the operations center, and equipment. Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table M.2: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Occupancy/ Capacity # Comments Redbank-Fancher Creek Flood Control Project $125,000,000 n/a Provides protection from 200- year, 30-day rainfall event Local Stormwater Drainage System (153 basins in various stages of completion, 84 pump stations, 670 miles of pipeline) $320,000,000 n/a 2-year pipeline collection system and 6-inch,10-day basin capacity Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Operations Center $12,000,000 84 employees The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District has undertaken several mitigation actions to reduce vulnerability within the District. Fancher Creek Detention Basin (FCB) is an important component of the District’s Flood Control Master Plan. Not only does FCB provide flood control on a large channel, it also removed several floodplains from a flood insurance requirement for many Fresno residents. The major structures in FCB were constructed in 2006. However, the need for additional excavation of the basin and future improvements remains. The District recently acquired a Proposition 1 Grant that will fund the construction of a pipeline from the Gould Canal to FCB as well as a large capacity pump station in FCB. The pipeline will allow uncontrolled flows from Mud Creek and the Vernon Drain to be diverted from the Gould Canal to FCB. The pump station will provide rapid dewatering of FCB. These projects are scheduled to be constructed in 2018-2019. Natural Resources Several state or federally listed species may be found within the District boundary. These are identified, along with other species of concern found in the District, in Table M.3. Table M.3: Species of Concern in the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status State Status American Badger Taxidea taxus American (=pine) marten Martes Americana Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Endangered Beaked clarkia Clarkia rostrata Black-crowned heron Nycticorax nycticorax Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop Gratiola heterosepala Endangered Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia California horned lark Eremophila alpestris actia California linderiella Linderiella occindentalis California tiger salamander Ambystoma californiense Threatened Threatened Colusa grass Neostapfia colusana Threatened Endangered Dry Creek cliff strider bug Oravalia pege Elongate copper-moss Mielichhoferia elongate Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status State Status Foothill yellow- legged frog Rana boylii Candidate- Threatened Fresno kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides exilis Endangered Endangered Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos Great gray owl Strix nebulosa Endangered Greene’s tuctoria Tuctoria greenei Endangered Rare Hairy orcutt grass Orcuttia pilosa Endangered Endangered Hardhead Mylopharodon conocephalus Hartweg’s golden sunburst Pseudobahia behiifolia Endangered Endangered Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus Hoover’s calycaderia Calycadenia hoover Keck’s checkerbloom Sidalcea keckii Endangered Kings River buckwheat Eriogonum nudum var. regirivum Madera linanthus Linanthus serrulatus Mariposa cryptantha Crypantha mariposae Mariposa pussypaws Calyptridium pulchellum Threatened Midvalley fairy shrimp Branchinecta mesovallensis Molestan blister beetle Lytta molesta Orange lupine Lupinus citrinus var. citrinus Osprey Pandion haliaetus Oval-leaved viburnum Viburnum ellipticum Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus San Joaquin adobe sunburst Pseudobahia peirsonii Threatened Endangered San Joaquin kit fox Vulpes macrotis mutica Endangered Threatened San Joaquin pocket mouse Perognathus inornatus inornatus San Joaquin Valley orcutt grass Orcuttia inaequalis Threatened Endangered Sanford’s arrowhead Sagittaria sanfordii Sierra Nevada red fox Vulpes vulpes necator Candidate Threatened Spiny-sepaled button-celery Eryugium spinosepalum Spotted bat Euderma maculatum Succulent owl’s-clover Castilleja campestris ssp. Succulenta Threatened Endangered Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainson Threatened Tree-anemone Carpenteria californica Threatened Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor Candidate- Endangered Valley elderberry longhorned beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Threatened Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi Threatened Vernal pool tadpole shrimp Lepidurus packardi Endangered Western mastiff bat Eumops perotis californicus Western pond turtle Emys (=Clemmys) marmorata Western spadefoot Spea (=Scaphiopus) hammondii Western yellow- billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Threatened Endangered White-tailed Kite Elanus leucurus Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii Endangered Yosemite lewisia Lewisia disepala Source: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Services Plan, 2004 Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Sensitive habitats in the District include the following: • Central Valley drainage hardhead/squawfish stream • Great Valley mixed riparian forest • Northern basalt flow vernal pool • Northern claypan vernal pool • Northern hardpan vernal pool • Sycamore alluvial woodland Growth and Development Trends The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District completes technical studies and updates its master plan in conjunction with the growth patterns within its 400-square-mile service area. The District meets with the local Building Industry Association and planning departments to ensure knowledge of growth and development trends. Development requires the urban storm drain system to be expanded. As the urban sphere expands, the District’s storm drainage master plan expands as well. The District utilizes canals that are operated and maintained by the Fresno Irrigation District (FID) to pump stormwater when urban basins require additional stormwater management capacity. These canals have a fixed capacity. An expanded urban area also increases the total amount of runoff generated within the District boundaries; this runoff may also need to be managed by pumping to the FID system. M.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table M.2 above shows the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s critical facilities and assets that could be exposed to hazards. Specific losses for the Cities of Fresno and Clovis and the portion of the County of Fresno within the District’s boundaries are discussed elsewhere in this hazard mitigation plan. Note: Hazardous Materials Incidents are considered Medium priority hazards by the District but are addressed by the City of Fresno and the City of Clovis. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment, Annex B, and Annex C for details on vulnerability to this hazard. Dam Failure The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District has three earthen dams (Big Dry Creek, Fancher Creek, and Redbank Creek) that are identified in the Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan. The dams are maintained regularly for rodent and vegetation control and inspected regularly for operational integrity and security. They are also inspected annually by the Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the California Department of Water Resources Division of Safety of Dams. Drought The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District has nearly 420 acres of irrigated and landscaped basins that could be impacted in a prolonged drought. Earthquake The seismic hazard within the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s service area is relatively low compared to many other parts of California. However, the area is considered to have a moderate risk of earthquake damage due to the presence of major fault systems to the west, south, and east and due to the large population and number of buildings, critical facilities, and infrastructure and other development that could be vulnerable to more severe ground shaking. Flood The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s operation center is located outside of the 100- year floodplain and therefore should not be susceptible to damage in a large flood event. The Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project and local stormwater drainage system could sustain damage during a large flood event due to debris accumulation and high stormwater flows. Since it is a special district, participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does not apply to the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, thus NFIP Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties are not tracked for the jurisdiction; therefore, the District does not have this data available. Within the District’s boundaries the City of Fresno has one Repetitive Loss property but no Severe Repetitive Loss properties; Clovis has none of either type. Refer to those annexes for additional information. There are two Repetitive Loss properties in the unincorporated County, but further details to determine if these are within the District’s boundary are not available. There are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties in the County as detailed in Chapter 4 Section 4.3.2 of the base plan. Severe Weather: Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning Heavy rain, thunderstorm activity, and hail are usually of such duration that they have no adverse impact on the District’s Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project. However, the local stormwater drainage system, which is designed to accept the peak flow rate of runoff from a two- year intensity storm event (a storm which has a 50 percent probability of occurring in any given year) could be impacted. When storm events occur that exceed the two-year intensity, ponding occurs in the streets until the pipeline system can remove the water. If the storm is sufficiently intense to generate more water than the street can store, the water will continue to rise until it reaches a topographic outlet where it can escape down gradient. This escape route is a feature of the major storm routing system. There are multiple areas within the District’s service area that Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan were developed before the District was formed and therefore lack the major storm routing system. These areas could be susceptible to damage from heavy rain, thunderstorm, and hail. M.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into four sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, and mitigation outreach and partnerships. To develop this capability assessment, the District’s planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the District’s planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s updated capabilities are summarized below. M.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table M.4 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in the District. Table M.4: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes District Services Plan, 2004 (also, see general plans for Cities of Clovis and Fresno and Fresno County) Zoning ordinance Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Subdivision ordinance Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Site plan review requirements Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Other special purpose ordinance (storm water, water conservation, wildfire) Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Building code Yes 2001 California Building Code Erosion or sediment control program Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Storm water management program Yes Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Capital improvements plan Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Economic development plan Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Local emergency operations plan Yes Cities of Clovis and Fresno, Fresno County Other special plans Yes Strategic Plan Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes 2016 As indicated above, the District has several plans and programs that guide hazard mitigation. Some of these are described in more detail below. District Services Plan, 2004 The District Services Plan presents District goals, program objectives, current program descriptions, and implementation strategies. Comprehensive program descriptions provide reference and orientation information for District staff, Board members, and the public. Fresno County Flood Control District Strategic Plan The Fresno County Flood Control District Strategic Plan is a brief document that includes the District’s mission and vision statements and other guiding principles. The following goals are outlined in the plan: • Timely provision of needed services through fair and equitable financing • Prevention of future drainage/flooding problems • Operations and maintenance programs that ensure public safety and community aesthetics • Conservation of storm and other surface water to preserve groundwater and environmental resources • Augmentation of public open space and recreation resources through joint use of District facilities • Support of economic development within the Fresno/Clovis area • Achievement of program goals through close coordination with the County and the Cities of Fresno and Clovis District Programs Flood Control Program The flood control program relates to the control, containment, and safe disposal of stormwater that flows onto the valley floor from the eastern streams. It consists of a system of facilities and operations that is currently composed of eight major flood control facilities and many related streams and channels. The District is the local sponsor of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project, which consists of five of the flood control system’s major facilities. The District is responsible for construction cost sharing, land acquisition, operation, and maintenance related to the project. It is also responsible for construction, operation, and maintenance of additional, nonfederal flood control facilities required to control the stream Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan group, and for floodplain management. The eight major structural elements of the flood control system are Big Dry Creek Dam and Reservoir, Fancher Creek Dam and Reservoir, Redbank Creek Dam and Reservoir, Pup Creek Detention Basin, Alluvial Drain Detention Basin, Redbank Creek Detention Basin, Fancher Creek Detention Basin, and Big Dry Creek Detention Basin. Rural Streams Program The District has implemented a rural streams program to preserve, restore, and maintain rural stream channels and to complete any additional facilities necessary to safely convey storm flows through the rural area and the downstream urban area. It includes activities to secure and maintain drainage amenities necessary for rural lands within the watershed. Local Stormwater Drainage Program The District’s local drainage program relates to the collection and safe disposal of stormwater runoff generated within the urban and rural watersheds or “drainage areas.” The District’s local stormwater drainage system consists of storm drains, detention and retention basins, and pump stations. The system is designed to retain and infiltrate as much stormwater and urban runoff as possible. Other Programs Other District programs include a stormwater quality program, water conservation program, recreation program, and wildlife management program. M.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table M.5 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in the District. Table M.5: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/ No Department/Position Comments Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Engineering Department Various positions Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Engineering, Operations, and Environmental Departments Various positions Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Engineering and Operations Departments Various positions Personnel skilled in GIS Yes GIS Technician Two positions Full-time building official No Floodplain manager No Advisory agency Emergency manager Yes Operations Department Various positions Grant writer Yes Administration/Staff Analyst Three staff members can work as grant writers Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other personnel Yes Administration, Engineering, Facilities Departments Various support and maintenance positions GIS Data—Land use Yes GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data Yes Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No In addition to the above capabilities, the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District also has several programs and projects designed to reduce vulnerability. The District runs ongoing public outreach via a clean stormwater education program. The District also has several structural flood control projects ongoing, including significant completion of Fancher Creek Detention Basin (FCB), construction of flood control facilities at Pup Creek-Enterprise Basin (PEB), construction of the Big Dry Creek Detention Basin Pump Station (BDB), construction of the Dry Creek Extension Basin Pump Station (DCE), and ongoing excavation of FCB, BDB, PEB, and DCE. The District is also planning for upcoming construction of pump stations at urban stormwater basins in various locations. Board of Directors A seven-member Board of Directors governs the District. The Fresno City Council appoints four members, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors appoints two members, and the Clovis City Council appoints one member. Each director serves a four-year term and may be reappointed for consecutive terms. The Board must approve the District budget, fees, and assessments; direct matters of policy and enact ordinances; and perform other responsibilities authorized and required by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Act of 1955. M.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table M.6 identifies financial tools or resources that the District could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table M.6: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants No Capital improvements project funding Yes Included in our yearly budget Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes We have voter approved authority to tax properties within our boundaries that receive benefits from our services up to $.20/$100 assessed valuation Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services No Impact fees for new development Yes New development pays their proportional share of the storm drain system Incur debt through general obligation bonds No Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No Other Yes Grants, contributions, rents, service fees, and donations The financing program of the District includes five major categories of revenues. These include general property tax, assessments, bonds, fees and service charges, and grants and contributions. In addition to these, the District receives minor miscellaneous revenues such as rents and leases, interest, and gifts. The general authority to receive or collect such revenues is set forth in the District’s enabling legislation, other state legislation under which the District is an eligible participant, and through joint powers relationships in which the District participates. Economic Development Reserve In October of 1999, the Board of Directors established an annual economic development reserve for the purpose of accelerating funding of storm drainage infrastructure to support job-creating developments in the community. This policy allows up to 50 percent of the District’s annual budget reserve to be allocated as an economic development reserve. These funds may be used at the direction of the Board to support construction of master plan storm drainage facilities to service high priority economic development projects. Projects are considered on a first come, first served basis, and each project must: • Create additional leverage toward construction of master plan facilities by drawing additional public or private monies, • Effect construction of critical elements of the drainage system, and • Serve an economically targeted industry or area. M.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships As part of the rural streams program, the District has developed and distributed public information materials to increase public awareness and understanding of various issues related to clean stormwater, including stream and habitat values, flood water conveyance, water quality, and the adverse effects of human activities. The District partners with the Fresno Irrigation District and the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, which provide for dry season delivery of imported surface water into many of the District’s local stormwater drainage retention basins. M.4.5 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan further protect the communities the District serves. Some of the opportunities for enhancement of the District’s existing mitigation program are listed below. •Enhance existing public outreach strategy. As mentioned above the District has an outreach strategy that includes disseminating information to the public through their clean stormwater education program. The District may work to enhance their public outreach strategy to include information on flood/levee failure and dam failure and through existing partnerships with the County, City of Fresno, and City of Clovis. •Future improvements may include participation in training for staff related to hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. M.5 Mitigation Strategy M.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the District to help inform updates and the development of plans, programs and policies for the jurisdictions within the District. Hazard information will be incorporated in future updates to the District’s Service Plan and Strategic Plan. The information within this LHMP as well as the annexes of the jurisdictions the District serves, will help the District to better understand the vulnerabilities of each jurisdictions and better tailor projects within the District’s existing programs. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. M.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The District has not completed any mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan. However, implementation has been started for several of these actions and will be continued as part of the mitigation strategy for this plan update. There are two actions from the 2009 plan that the District is not carrying forward, because they have been replaced with new projects detailed in actions 1 and 2, below. The deleted actions are: Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Construct Control Structures and Flood Channel for Mud Creek Flows between Gould and Fresno Canals • Construct Improvements to the Vernon Drain between the Gould and Fresno Canals M.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. Actions with an ‘*’ are those that mitigate losses to future development. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The District agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi- Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1. Construct the Gould Canal to Fancher Creek Detention Basin Pipeline. Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: The Gould Canal is an FID facility that conveys rural stormwater and irrigation water through the Fresno/Clovis area. There are multiple uncontrolled rural streams that discharge into the Gould Canal upstream of this project component’s location. Along with the uncontrolled rural stream discharges, FMFCD has multiple urban basins, located downstream of Fancher Creek Detention Basin, that rely on discharging to the Gould Canal to prevent localized flooding. During major storm events, the uncontrolled flows in the Gould Canal can limit the ability to pump urban basins to the Gould Canal. FMFCD and FID monitor the Gould Canal closely to ensure the canal does not overtop. At times, the inability to discharge stormwater out of the urban basins creates a localized flooding issue. The stormwater that is conveyed in the canal, whether it is from the rural streams or urban basins, is routed out of the local region. The Gould Canal to Fancher Creek Detention Basin Pipeline will construct the facilities necessary to establish a connection between the Gould Canal and Fancher Creek Detention Basin, including roughly 2,900 lineal feet of 72” pipeline. The connection will allow FMFCD to divert the uncontrolled rural stream flows out of the Gould Canal and into Fancher Creek Detention Basin. These proposed improvements will reduce the risk of flooding along the canal downstream and will maintain capacity within the canal for urban basin discharges. This project component will also allow FMFCD to capture, retain and recharge stormwater in Fancher Creek Detention Basin that would typically be routed out of the local region. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $1,562,000 Potential Funding: This project is being funded by a 2017 Proposition 1 Grant. Benefits (Avoided Losses): The project would provide reduction of flooding that currently occurs in the rural and urban areas. Schedule: Three years Status: New project 2. Construct the Fancher Creek Detention Basin Pump Station and Telemetry System Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: Fancher Creek Detention Basin’s primary use is for flood control. This site is also used for groundwater recharge. However, recharge operations are very conservative (i.e. Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan smaller volumes for a limited time span) as the basin’s gravity relief system does not provide rapid dewatering of the basin. A necessity to better utilizing the basin for groundwater recharge is the ability to dewater the basin quickly, should a major storm event be forecasted. This project will include constructing a high discharge pump station and telemetry system, enabling expanded recharge operations. Once the pump station is constructed, FMFCD and FID will be able to divert and retain stormwater that would otherwise be routed out of the local region into the basin to retain for groundwater recharge purposes. Not only will local water conservation and water supply self‐ reliance be increased, but the ability to divert stormwater into this basin more frequently will decrease flood risk along the adjacent canals downstream. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $1,094,000 Potential Funding: This project is being funded by a 2017 Proposition 1 Grant Benefits (Avoided Losses): The project would provide reduction of flooding that currently occurs in the rural and urban areas. Schedule: Three years Status: New project 3. Provide for Local Stormwater Drainage System Infrastructure* Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: Drainage service for new development is funded through development fees paid upon approval of the development. Ideally, drainage services are provided concurrent with construction of the development project. However, system construction may occasionally be delayed due to insufficient fee revenue to fund all facilities required by a development project. The provision of service can also be delayed by the lack of street improvements necessary to convey runoff from the development to the collection points. Unless the developer or the District can advance funds to cover the necessary facilities or street improvements, the developer must provide temporary on-site storage of the project’s runoff until permanent service is available. There are also areas within the District that were developed before the District was established in 1956. Some of these areas are still without permanent drainage service due to the lack of development fee revenue. Other Alternatives: No action Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Responsible Office: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000-$2,000,000 per project Potential Funding: Pre-Paid Drainage Assessment Funds and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District General Fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): Ensures roads are passable for emergency vehicles and prevents repetitive structural damage. Schedule: Ongoing Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 4. Retain 200-Year Flood Control Protection* Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: There are currently 200-year flood control facilities (dams, detention basins, and bypass structures) east of the metropolitan area. As development occurs upstream of those facilities, the level of protection will diminish. The study and subsequent construction of additional flood control facilities (detention basins and bypass structures) upstream of new development will continue the 200-year protection level. Other Alternatives: Compromise 200-year protection level Responsible Office: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $50,000,000 Potential Funding: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Assessment Tax Fund, mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Retain current 200-year flood protection level Schedule: 5-10 years Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 5. Retrofit Areas with Surface Outlets to Protect Existing Structures Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: The District was not formed until 1956, and portions of the community were not annexed to the District immediately. There are a number of areas that were developed in low lying areas that are prone to flooding when large storms occur. Current standards establish the finished floors of structures be elevated above the surface outlet of an area. This project would retrofit areas with surface outlets to protect existing structures. Other Alternatives: Purchase repetitively flooded structures Responsible Office: City of Fresno and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $10,000-$250,000 each Potential Funding: City of Fresno, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District General Fund, mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Ensures roads are passable for emergency vehicles and prevents repetitive structural damage Schedule: Five years Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 6. Install Back-up Generators for Pump Only Facilities Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District was not formed until 1956, and portions of the community relied on pump only stations for protection from floods. If there was a power outage in these areas during a storm event, the streets would become impassable and potential structure damage would occur. Other Alternatives: Purchase repetitively flooded structures Responsible Office: City of Fresno and Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): Low Cost Estimate: $50,000-$100,000 per site; there are four such sites (WW, VV, MM, and AB2) Potential Funding: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District General Fund, mitigation grants Fresno County (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District) Annex M.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): Ensures roads are passable for emergency vehicles and prevents repetitive structural damage Schedule: Ten years Status: 2009 project, implementation not yet started 7. Big Dry Creek Diversion Additional Drop Structure Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: Big Dry Creek Diversion routes flows out of the base of Big Dry Creek Reservoir, the District’s largest flood control structure. The Diversion Channel helps de-water stormwater captured in Big Dry Creek Reservoir and is operated within the framework of the U.S. Army Corps Water Control Manual for the Redbank and Fancher Creek Project. The construction of an additional drop structure within the channel will decrease velocity in the Diversion Channel, reducing erosion and improving the safety of the Project. Other Alternatives: None. Responsible Office: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $700,000 Potential Funding: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District General Fund, mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Reduces channel erosion, improves operational safety and reduces maintenance. Schedule: Five years Status: New project ANNEX N: LOWER SAN JOAQUIN LEVEE DISTRICT Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan N.1 District Profile The Lower San Joaquin Levee District (the District) was created by the state legislature in 1955. The purpose of the District is to operate and maintain levees, bypasses, channels, control structures, and other facilities in connection with the Lower San Joaquin River Flood Control Project and provide protection to the people and the property of the District. A brief history of the San Joaquin River helps clarify the District’s purpose: The San Joaquin River and its tributaries have historically caused flood problems that have been a threat to life and property. Flooding problems have been lessened, but not eliminated, through activities of federal, state, and local governments and the sacrifices and efforts of affected landowners. Completion and operation of the Friant Dam in 1947 reduced flow volumes, but contributed to a major sedimentation problem in the river. Sedimentation has reduced the river’s flow capacity and increased the potential for flooding and erosion problems as well as vegetation encroachment, which further accelerates channel constriction. Years of planning, engineering, and public hearings resulted in the approval of the Lower San Joaquin River Flood Control Project plan. The project was designed and constructed by the California Department of Water Resources between 1959 and 1967. The project’s purpose is to provide flood protection along the San Joaquin River and tributaries in Merced, Madera, and Fresno counties. The plan covers 108 river miles, contains 191.4 miles of levees, and protects over 300,000 acres. The project is a series of bypasses built to collect San Joaquin flood flows, as well as floodwater from the Kings River System. The bypasses divert flows around stretches of the San Joaquin where constrictions impair its capacity. The District, in accordance with its agreement with the State Reclamation Board, is obligated to maintain not only the bypasses, but the channel of the San Joaquin River within the project, in a condition where the channel will carry flood flows in accordance with the maximum benefits for flood protection. The District boundaries were based on historical data as to areas subject to actual flooding and/or receiving benefit from the project related to the designed capacity of the bypass system. The boundaries were established along existing section lines, roads, canals, drains or other permanent lines that were reasonably close to the probable floodplain. Figure N.1 depicts the San Joaquin River System and the waterway channels that make up the natural and manmade system. Channel topography relates the manner in which flows are directed. Reservoir capacities are important in that flood releases are made when those capacities are at risk, affecting the channels’ rated capacities; Figure N.2 depicts the reservoirs and water courses that contribute flows into the flood project; Figures N.3 through N.5 display the levee units that make up the flood project (each unit is depicted by a number and its length (levee mile)); and Figure N.6 Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan shows the project levees, channels, structures, and appurtenances that make up the flood project (channel rated capacities are also shown). Figure N.1: San Joaquin River System Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure N.2: Project Contributory Streams Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure N.3: Project Map—Northern Portion Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure N.4: Project Map B—Central Portion Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure N.5: Project Map—Southern Portion Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure N.6: Project Plan Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan N.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The District’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the District and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the District (see Table N.1). Table N.1: Lower San Joaquin Levee District—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards N/A N/A N/A N/A Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical High Drought Significant Likely Critical Medium Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Low Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Limited Low Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic N/A N/A N/A N/A West Nile Virus N/A N/A N/A N/A Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze N/A N/A N/A N/A Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A Fog N/A N/A N/A N/A Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Medium Tornado N/A N/A N/A N/A Windstorm N/A N/A N/A N/A Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Medium Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano N/A N/A N/A N/A Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). N.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the District’s vulnerability separate from that of the whole planning area, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the FMFCD’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the District. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table N.1). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the District’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table N.1 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the District. Those of Medium or High significance for the District are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section N.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include dam failure and flood/levee failure. • dam failure • drought • flood/levee failure • severe weather: heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning • soil hazards: erosion Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the District, those hazards are as follows: • earthquake • hazardous materials incidents • landslide • winter storm • soil hazards: expansive soils and subsidence Additionally, the District’s planning team decided to rate certain hazards as Not Applicable (N/A) to the planning area due to either a lack of exposure, vulnerability, and probability of occurrence, or may occur within the geographic limits of the District but are addressed under the jurisdiction of the County and its incorporated municipalities. Agricultural hazards, avalanche, human health hazards, extreme cold/freeze, extreme heat, fog, tornado, windstorm, volcano, and wildfire are considered not applicable to the District. N.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers the District’s assets at risk, which include real property; levees, structures, and appurtenances that make up the flood project; and other equipment and automobiles used in District operations (see Table N.2). It should be noted that the real property and flood project are owned entirely by the State of California. The District has ownership of a 3.5-acre parcel and various equipment and automobiles that are used for operation and maintenance of the flood project. Table N.2: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Community Assets Identified by the Lower San Joaquin Levee District’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Hazard Specific Info. Property: Flood Project 3,721,080 Flood, Erosion, Drought Equipment 492,345 Flood Automobiles 342,800 Flood N.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table N.2 above shows the San Joaquin Levee District’s critical facilities and assets that could be exposed to hazards. Specific losses for the City of Firebaugh and the portion of the County of Fresno within the District’s boundaries are discussed elsewhere in this hazard mitigation plan. Note: severe weather: heavy rain/ thunderstorm/hail/lightning is considered a Medium priority hazard by the District but is not unique to the District in the context of the full planning area. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to this hazard. Dam Failure Dam failure is a significant hazard in the District, as it may result in increased strain on remaining flood control facilities, including the levee system. Drought Drought conditions can also cause problems in the District, as dry, cracking soil can compromise the integrity of the levee system. The cracking of the levee material (clay soil) is regularly observed during dry times when no water is present in the channels. Water in the channels allows the clay in the levee soil material to absorb the water and close the cracking. Flood/Levee Failure Flood is clearly the hazard of greatest concern to the District. The California Department of Water Resources defines the flood season as November 15 to June 15. In the early part of the season, the San Joaquin Valley is in danger of flood from rain-flood runoff. In the latter part of the season, there is danger of flooding from snowmelt runoff. Heavy rains and thunderstorms occur annually and increase the risk of damaging floods occurring within District boundaries. Every three to four years, on average, flood flows in the District (along San Joaquin, Kings, Fresno, Chowchilla rivers and numerous streams) exceed the design level of protection of the levees. These events result in infrastructure damage (e.g., to the levees themselves); property damage throughout the district in agricultural, rural, and urban areas; and crop damage. For more information about flooding in the District, see Section N.1 District Profile. While there is no history of past occurrences, a failure of one or more upstream dams could cause significant flooding and be catastrophic in nature to the District and surrounding areas. Since it is a special district, participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does not apply to the Lower San Joaquin Levee District, thus NFIP Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties are not tracked for in the jurisdiction; therefore, the District does not have this data available. There are two Repetitive Loss properties in the unincorporated County, but further details to determine if these are within the District’s boundary are not available. There are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties in the County as detailed in Chapter 4 Section 4.3.2 of the base plan. Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Soil Hazards: Erosion Related to flooding, erosion along the banks of the channels is also a concern of the District. Ongoing maintenance is required to mitigate the effects of erosion caused by high waters. N.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the District’s planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the District’s planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The San Joaquin Levee District’s updated capabilities are summarized below. N.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table N.3 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in the District. Table N.3: Lower San Joaquin Levee District’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan No Zoning ordinance No Subdivision ordinance No Site plan review requirements No Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance No Other special purpose ordinance (storm water, water conservation, wildfire) No Building code No Fire department ISO rating No Erosion or sediment control program Yes Operation and maintenance manual Storm water management program No Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Capital improvements plan No Economic development plan No Local emergency operations plan Yes Operation and maintenance manual Other special plans No Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams No Elevation certificates No The District’s primary capability is the Lower San Joaquin River Flood Control Project, which is described in more detail in Section N.1 District Profile. The District’s operations and maintenance rules are as follows: •No encroachment or trespass, which will adversely affect the efficient operation or maintenance of the project works, shall be permitted upon the rights of way for the protective facilities. •No improvement, excavation or construction shall be permitted within the limits of the project right of way, nor shall any change be made in any features of the works without prior determination by the State Reclamation Board that such improvement, excavation, construction, or alteration will not adversely affect the functioning of the protective facilities. Such improvements or alterations as may be found to be desirable and permissible under the above determination shall be constructed in accordance with standard engineering practice and to the design criteria of the project. •The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) makes semiannual inspections of all features of the project and reports its findings to the District and the State Reclamation Board. The inspection objectives are to determine if proper maintenance items are being adhered to (i.e., that all brush, trees, and wild growth, other than sod, are removed from the levee crown and slopes; that all burrowing animals have been exterminated; that an active channel maintenance program is being carried out; that all bridges and control structures of the project are in good conditions and working order). Following the inspection findings a joint field inspection is made with the District and the DWR to review and discuss the report. •The channel as defined for this project is that area lying along the waterway between the waterward toe of one levee and the waterward toe of the opposite levee. In cross sections this includes the drainage channel and banks, and the area from the top of the bank to the toe of the levee which is called the berm or floodway. •The channels consist of natural drainage channels and bypass channels constructed as part of this project. These channels extend along and adjacent to the San Joaquin River from the Merced River to Mendota Dam, and from the junction of the Chowchilla Canal Bypass to Gravelly Ford. The river reach from Mendota Dam to the Chowchilla Canal Bypass is not part of the project facilities. •Inspections by the District shall be made to be certain that the channel floodway is clear of debris, weeds, and wild growth; the capacity of the channel or floodway is not being reduced by the formation of shoals. Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • The channels of-the project shall be maintained and kept clear of regrowth of vegetation. This is necessary as regrowth of vegetation will change the flood flow characteristics of the project channels. The purpose of channel maintenance is to ensure that the channel is kept in as good a condition as when the project was constructed. A regular program of channel maintenance shall be instituted by the District. Tree and brush growth in the channel shall be cleared and removed along with any debris that may be present. A strip of brush and small trees may be retained, through application to the State Reclamation Board, on the floodplain within 10 feet of the levee on the waterward side where necessary to prevent erosion and wavewash. Suitable riprap material shall be placed to repair existing slope protection or in other locations found to be critical trouble points to stabilize the channel alignment and preserve the general uniformity of the bank lines. Additionally, federal and state regulations require that all flood projects undergo an inspection of facilities every 90 days. Two of these inspections are done by the DWR (in the fall and spring), and two are done by the District (in the winter and summer). All inspections are done to specific standards developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the DWR. Inspections result in ratings of either “compliant” or “noncompliant.” Records by DWR that show the District has maintained their flood facility to “compliant” standards. DWR publishes an annual report on such inspections. N.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table N.4 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in the District. Table N.4: Lower San Joaquin Levee District’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices No Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure No Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Summers Engineers Consultant Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Full time building official No Floodplain manager No Emergency manager Yes Manager Personnel Grant writer No Other personnel Yes Supt, Foreman Personnel GIS Data—Land use No GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data No Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The District is governed by a seven-member Board of Directors and appointments are by the Board of Supervisors of the appropriate counties. The District operates with an unpaid Board, minimal staff, no investment in real property, and only the absolute necessities in equipment. The philosophy of the District Board is to provide the best flood protection with minimal funds. District personnel are given flood-fight methods training, per the DWR/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers standards, every three years (length of time is determined by employee turnover). N.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table N.5 identifies financial tools or resources that the District could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table N.5: Lower San Joaquin Levee District’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants No Capital improvements project funding No Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Yes Annual operations and maintenance budget assessments Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services No Impact fees for new development No Incur debt through general obligation bonds No Incur debt through special tax bonds No Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No From 1963 to 1978, all lands within the District were assessed a tax for maintenance. This was through the assessor offices of the three counties. The tax was a flat rate based on assessed valuation, land only. After the voter approval of Proposition 13 in 1978, all tax assessments were eliminated. This resulted in substantial decreases in District income to funds amounting to half the District’s average annual budget for routine maintenance. To continue financing the maintenance and operation costs of this service, a benefit assessment was implemented. The assessment is in proportion to the benefit received as it relates to each parcel’s ability to be put into use and its size. (Use refers to the use of the land, e.g., swamp and overflow, pasture, row crops and permanent crops, residential, commercial, or industrial. Each land use is given a weighted factor for determining the assessment charged to that parcel.) N.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships Cooperation from local agencies (districts, counties), landowners, the DWR, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is essential in the flood-fight activities needed to operate and maintain the flood facilities during an event. Needed manpower for patrolling and/or flood fighting is a cooperative effort from stakeholders (those who have a vested interest in maintaining levee stability for flood protection). Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan N.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts Annual maintenance activity includes vegetation control (herbicide, handwork), rodent control, fence/gate repairs, erosion repairs, levee roadway graveling, levee slope repairs, channel repairs, livestock grazing monitoring, and structure inspections (operation-electronic). During high water periods, the District patrols the levees. N.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the Lower San Joaquin District has existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the communities the District serves. Some of the possible opportunities for enhancement of the District’s existing mitigation program are listed below. •Develop an Evacuation Plan in case of dam or levee failure in partnership with the County and jurisdictions within the District. •Develop and implement warning systems. To further enhance mitigation efforts the District may partner with the jurisdictions in the District to develop and implement warning systems for existing levees and dams that may impact these communities in an event of a failure. N.5 Mitigation Strategy N.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The Lower San Joaquin Levee District adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the District to help inform updates and the development of plans, programs and policies for the jurisdictions within the District. The hazard information will be used to inform the District’s Lower San Joaquin River Flood Control Project including reviewing and if necessary revising the project’s operations and maintenance rules. The information contained with this annex as well as the hazard information within the jurisdictional annexes that are served by the District, will help the District to better understand the vulnerabilities of the communities they serve and help to mitigate those risks where possible. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from the Lower San Joaquin Levee District will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan N.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The Lower San Joaquin Levee District has not completed any of the mitigation action identified in the 2009 plan. However, implementation of these actions is underway and will continue as part of the mitigation strategy of this plan update. N.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the Lower San Joaquin Levee District identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation actions below the Lower San Joaquin Levee District will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The District agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Institute a Dredging Management Program for the Purpose of Flood Damage Reduction Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Issue/Background: At any given point, channel flood stage is determined, in part, by the size and shape of the cross-sectional area of the floodway channel. Impediments that can affect the floodway cross-sectional area create undesirable conditions. Typically, in the San Joaquin River, in-channel shoaling results when the channel flow is unable to transport the amount of material being carried by the current (capacity), or the size of the transported material exceeds the ability of the current to move it (competency). When either of these conditions exists, transported sediment is deposited by the river and accumulation begins to occur. This will eventually build-up to the point that it diminishes the channel depth and restricts the passage and/or reduces flow capacity of the river. This accumulation slows flow velocity, contributing to longer durations of exposure of levees to erosion and saturation, affecting levee foundation issues. These in-channel sediment deposits can also cause overbank flooding to occur more frequently. Dredging to remove sediment deposits can reduce the frequency of overbank topping and shorten flow durations, which will minimize levee foundation integrity issues. It should be noted that while dredging can temporarily restore channel capacity, it does not change the pre-existing conditions that caused the sediment to be deposited in the first place. In fact, dredging re-creates those original Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan conditions, resulting in continued sediment deposition at that location. This will continue to occur as long as an upstream sediment source exists (particularly erosion-prone banks and lands). Consequently, dredging must be repeated regularly to maintain the effectiveness of reducing flood stages. Regulatory agencies with responsibilities to maintain ecosystem values in river environments can prevent and/or hinder program attempts to manage this sediment accumulation. The environmental effects of removing this sediment may require more mitigation for habitat losses than the District can provide. There are land and water rights that will need to be addressed before a viable program can be implemented, which will take time. These time constraints result in increased risk of loss of life and property in a future disaster. A comprehensive approach to all the issues pertaining to river sediment accumulation that incorporates habitat and flood values needs to be developed, with a focus on protecting life and property. This can be accomplished through committed efforts of responsible agencies along with adequate funding. This would have to be an ongoing process as the river system will continue to deposit sediment. Other Alternatives: Constructing a new setback levee would allow the river sediment processes to remain in the main channel. This would address channel capacity requirements by increasing the cross-sectional area of the channel for flood flows. The associated costs (land acquisitions, water rights, levee construction, levee removal, etc.) would be higher than a suitable dredging management program. Responsible Office: Lower San Joaquin Levee District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2.5 million/mile (106 miles of river) Potential Funding: CA DWR grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Flood damage in Mendota and Firebaugh will be avoided. Damage to viable agricultural crops that will affect economies in surrounding communities and statewide markets will also be avoided. Schedule: Annually, when river channel is seasonally dry (June-October), depending on river reach Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 2. Institute an Invasive Vegetation Management Program for the Purpose of Flood Damage Reduction Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Issue/Background: At any given point, channel flood stage is determined, in part, by the size and shape of the cross-sectional area of the floodway channel. Impediments that can affect the floodway cross-sectional area create undesirable conditions. Unmanaged invasive vegetation is an impediment within the San Joaquin River that can reduce the ability of the channel to pass the designed flood flows, thus reducing flow velocity and increasing the water stage elevation. Proper management of vegetative growth is essential in lessening flood damage. The impact of vegetation on the flow carrying capacity of the San Joaquin River depends on the location, density, height, and vegetation type as well as the depth, velocity, and timing of the flood flows. Unmanaged vegetation within the river’s main channel causes drag, or a resistance to flow. Dense vegetation located throughout the river channel is likely to cause significant resistance and increase flow stage, whereas a narrow band of trees and shrubs parallel to the channel may have little impact on the channel’s ability to carry flood flows. However, even acceptable woody trees and shrubs that have rigid stems will attempt to resist flows and may become uprooted and add to the debris carried by the flood flows. Vegetation along levees needs to be removed or otherwise managed as part of routine flood management system maintenance. This practice can prevent trees from becoming established that may harm the integrity of the levee and facilitates visual inspection of the levee. Managing vegetation requires knowledge of the river system relative to acceptable retention of certain vegetation. A vegetated buffer zone between the main channel and the levee can benefit the reliability of the flood management system by protecting the levee without significantly impacting stage or flow capacity. Unfortunately, regulatory agencies with responsibilities to maintain ecosystem values in river environments can prevent and/or hinder program attempts to manage this vegetation. Unmanaged vegetation can become habitat for species listed under the endangered species acts. The environmental effects of removing this vegetation may require more mitigation than the District can provide. The result is increased risk of loss of life and property in a future disaster. A comprehensive approach to all the issues pertaining to habitat and flood values needs to be developed, with a focus on protecting life and property. This can be accomplished through committed efforts of responsible agencies along with adequate funding. This would have to be an ongoing process, as the river system will continue to develop vegetative growth. Other Alternatives: Constructing a new setback levee would allow vegetation to remain in the main channel by increasing the cross-sectional area of the channel for flood flows. The associated costs (land acquisitions, water rights, levee construction, levee removal, etc.) would be higher than a suitable vegetative management program. Responsible Office: Lower San Joaquin Levee District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Fresno County (Lower San Joaquin Levee District) Annex N.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cost Estimate: $500,000–10 million Benefits (Avoided Losses): Flood damage in Mendota and Firebaugh will be avoided. Damage to viable agricultural crops that will affect economies in surrounding communities and statewide markets will also be avoided. It would also create a balanced aquatic habitat ecosystem that can support environmental values along with flood management. Potential Funding: CA DWR grants Schedule: Annually, November to April (conditions permitting) Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress. ANNEX O: KINGS RIVER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan O.1 District Profile In 1951, the Kings River Conservation District (KRCD) was formed through special legislation by the State of California in order to manage and protect the resources of the San Joaquin Valley. Today, KRCD is a leading resource management agency for the Kings River region serving agriculture, business, and residential communities within 1.2 million acres spanning portions of Fresno, Kings, and Tulare counties. The mission of KRCD is to provide flood protection, cooperate with other agencies to achieve a balanced and high quality water supply, provide on-farm support in efficient water conservation practices, and develop power resources for the public good. Additionally, KRCD has partnered with the Kings River Water Association and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to implement the Kings River Fisheries Management Program. The Kings River Fisheries Management Program is dedicated to improving and enhancing the lower Kings River watershed and fishery habitat through habitat enhancements, scientific studies, monitoring, and public outreach and education. The KRCD consists of seven divisions, each represented by an elected director who together comprise the KRCD’s governing body. The KRCD’s area and its seven divisions are shown in Figure O.1. The District is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. The Fresno County communities participating in this plan update that fall within the KRCD boundaries are the cities of Clovis, Fowler, Fresno, Kerman, Kingsburg, Reedley, San Joaquin, and Sanger. Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure O.1: Kings River Conservation District Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan O.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The Kings River Conservation District’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the District and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the Fresno County area (see Table O.1). Table O.1: Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical High Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical High Drought Significant Likely Limited High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Medium Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical High Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Medium Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Low West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Medium Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Medium Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). O.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the District’s vulnerability separate from that of the whole planning area, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the outreach process in 2017-2018. The district is a new jurisdiction that participated in the 2017-2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, as well as to rank the hazards and identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table O.1). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the District’s HMPC member input and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table O.1 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the District are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section O.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include agricultural hazards, dam failure, drought, and flood/levee failure. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • earthquake • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • soil hazards: erosion, land subsidence • wildfire Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the District, those hazards considered of low significance are as follows: • avalanche • human health hazards • landslide • severe weather • soil hazards: expansive soils • volcano O.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers the District’s assets at risk, which include critical facilities and infrastructure, natural resources, and potential future growth and development throughout the District’s Boundary. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. Table O.2 lists particular critical facilities and other community assets identified by the District’s planning team as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table O.2: Critical Facilities and Other Assets Identified by District’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Hazard Specific Info. Jeff L. Taylor Pine Flat Power Plant $142,337,545 Flood, Dam Failure Kings River Channel Improvement Levees $3,100,00 Flood, Erosion, Drought, Land Subsidence Riverdale District Office $300,000 Flood, Earthquake Equipment $700,000 Flood Automobiles $400,000 Flood Natural Resources In partnership with the Kings River Water Association (KRWA) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), the KRCD runs the Kings River Fisheries Management Program, which is intended to protect and enhance fishery habitat within the lower Kings River. Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Growth and Development Trends KRCD does not monitor for potential growth of urban and rural communities nor does KRCD participate in planned development of communities and infrastructure. Growth and development trends can be referred to in each city and county’s General Plan. O.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses and Risk Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table O.2 above shows the Kings River Conservation District’s critical facilities and assets that could be exposed to hazards. Specific losses for the incorporated communities and the portion of the County of Fresno within the District’s boundaries are discussed elsewhere in this hazard mitigation plan. Note: both earthquake and hazardous materials incidents are considered Medium priority hazards by the District but are addressed by the affected cities and unincorporated Fresno County in the respective jurisdictional annexes and main plan risk assessment. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to this hazard. Agricultural Hazards The KRCD works with growers in the district to improve water management. Agricultural hazards that require an increase in irrigation could strain groundwater supplies in the region, which would be of concern to the District. Additionally, the KRCD is concerned with water quality. Any pests, crop diseases, or noxious weeds that could result in a widespread increased application of fertilizers, pesticides, or other chemicals could negatively impact water quality in the watershed. Dam Failure The KRCD operates the Pine Flat Power Plant, which generates electricity through irrigation and flood control releases from the Pine Flat Dam. Failure of the dam would halt power generation and put this asset at risk. Additionally, failure of the dam would result in uncontrolled flows from the reservoir and would have a potential to overtop the levee and canal systems below the dam. At risk would be the inundation of agricultural lands and urban and rural communities located in close proximity to the Kings River. Drought Drought vulnerability within the KRCD is related to land subsidence and the structural integrity of the District’s flood control structures. The recent drought from 2012 to 2017 resulted in an increase in groundwater pumping, which accelerated land subsidence in several locations Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan throughout the District. Subsidence, discussed below, threatens the structural integrity of the District’s levees. Flood/Levee Failure Flood is the primary hazard of concern for KRCD. Before Pine Flat Dam was developed, Kings River flooding was always a threat. The Kings River is prone to two types of flooding, stormwater and snowmelt. Downpours of rain over the foothills and mountains can create extremely high peak flows, though generally of brief duration. The maximum natural flow ever measured or calculated on the Kings River occurred on January 3, 1997 and amounted to 112,000 cubic feet per second. Snowmelt runoff flows in the April through July period do not reach such extreme peaks, but yield a much greater total volume of water over a longer period. Pine Flat Dam has largely controlled flood flows originating above the reservoir; however, during heavy storm events, uncontrolled flows from eastern small streams like Mill Creek and Hughes Creek (located between one to three miles below Pine Flat Dam) are capable of generating substantial peak flows which would then be pushed through the network of canals and levees in the Kings and Tulare Subbasins. The 2017 deluge of floodwater releases from Pine Flat Dam caused flooding to communities and businesses along parts of the Kings River. On June 22, 2017, KRCD responded to a levee breach on the South Fork of the Kings River between Grangeville Blvd. and Highway 198. The breach was a 40-foot wide break that flooded 400 acres of alfalfa. The KRCD works to protect the flood carrying capacity of Kings River channels and levees through maintenance of approximately 140 miles of levee systems along the river from below Kingsburg near 8½ Avenue in Kings County to Highway 41 near Stratford on the South Fork, and to McMullin Grade (Highway 145) on the North Fork. The KRCD’s flood control systems are shown in Figure O.2. KRCD staff conduct year-round maintenance to eliminate the danger of flood and erosion hazards, including controlling weeds and brush along the levee banks, and clearing downed trees from the channels. During flood releases, the flood control maintenance crew maintains 24-hour patrols monitoring the levee banks for sloughing, erosion and boils. Also, during high water, the staff assists other irrigation districts in removing debris from the various weirs and structures along the river. Since it is a special district, participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does not apply to the Kings River Conservation District, thus NFIP Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties are not tracked for the jurisdiction; therefore, the District does not have this data available. Within the District’s boundaries the City of Fresno is the only jurisdiction that has a Repetitive Loss property (one property) but no Severe Repetitive Loss properties; The Cities of Clovis, Fowler, Kerman, Kingsburg, Reedley, San Joaquin or Sanger do not have either type; Refer to those annexes for additional information. There are two Repetitive Loss properties in the unincorporated County, but further details to determine if these are within the District’s boundary Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan are not available. There are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties in the County as detailed in Chapter 4 Section 4.3.2 of the base plan. Figure O.2: KRCD Flood Control System Soil Hazards: Erosion KRCD staff regularly conduct maintenance on the levee systems to minimize erosion. Erosion of levees and river banks can compromise the structural integrity of the flood control systems and clog the river channels, exacerbating flood impacts. Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence During the 2012 to 2017 drought, farmers relied heavily on groundwater pumping, which caused acceleration in land subsidence in several locations throughout the Kings River service area. Subsidence threatens the structural integrity of the KRCD Channel Improvement Levees. Wildfire Wildfire is not of high significance to KRCD. On occasion, KRCD would prescribe controlled burns to the interior of the levees to rid the channel of dead and overgrown brush as a way to Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan maintain a clear channel for effective conveyance of flood flows and to mitigate for potential wildfires. O.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the District’s planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the District’s planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The Kings River Conservation District’s updated capabilities are summarized below. O.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table O.3 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in the District. Table O.3: Kings River Conservation District’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan No Zoning ordinance No Land Use No Site plan review requirements No Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance No Other special purpose ordinance (storm water, water conservation, wildlife) No Building code No Fire department ISO rating No Erosion or sediment control program No Storm water management program No Capital improvements plan No Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments Economic development plan No Local emergency operations plan Yes KRCD Emergency Action Plan Other special plans Yes Operations & Maintenance Manual for Kings River Channel Improvement Project Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams No Elevation certificates N0 O.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table O.4 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in the District. Table O.4: District’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to infrastructure Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Varies Personnel Licenced UAV Pilot Yes Water Resources Personnel Floodplain manager No Emergency manager Yes Manager of Flood Operations & Maintenance Personnel Grant writer No Other personnel Yes Flood Maintenance Crew Personnel GIS Data—Land use Yes Varies Personnel GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data No Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No O.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table O.5 identifies financial tools or resources that the District could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table O.5: District’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants No Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy costs for specific purposes Yes Fees for water No Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Impact fees for new development No Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds Yes Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No O.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships KRCD has a partnership with the Kings River Water Association (KRWA) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to implement the Kings River Fisheries Management Program in order to protect and enhance fishery habitat. The KRCD also works through the Southern San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board to address water quality issues in the Tulare Lake Basin watershed. O.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts KRCD has conducted studies and preliminary assessments for several water supply enhancement projects, including Rodgers Crossing, Mill Creek, groundwater banking, and Raised Pine Flat Dam. O.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the Kings River Conservation District has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the communities the District serves. Some of the opportunities for enhancement of the District’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop and implement warning systems. To further enhance mitigation efforts the District may partner with the jurisdictions in the District to develop and implement warning systems for existing levees and dams that may impact these communities in an event of a failure. • Partner with jurisdictions within the District including the County to develop a Drought Contingency plan that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation in the District. • Provide training opportunities for staff members related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Additional training opportunities will help to inform staff members on how best to integrate hazard information and mitigation projects into their daily duites. Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan O.5 Mitigation Strategy O.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The Kings River Conservation District adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the District to help inform updates and the development of plans, programs and policies for the jurisdictions within the District. The hazard information may be incorporated into updated to the District’s Emergency Action Plan and well as inform existing projects such as the Kings River Fisheries Management Program. The information contained with this annex as well as the hazard information within the jurisdictional annexes that are served by the District, will help the District to better understand the vulnerabilities of the communities they serve and help to mitigate those risks where possible. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from the Kings River Conservation District will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. O.5.2 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the KRCD identified and prioritized the following mitigation action based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how the action will be implemented and administered, including the responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost and schedule are included. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the Kings River Conservation District will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The District agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Analysis of Levee Integrity and Improvement Project Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-hazard: flood, drought, soil hazards – land subsidence Issue/Background: KRCD has the responsibility to operate and maintain the Kings River Channel Improvement Levees - 140 miles of flood protection levees in Fresno and Kings Counties. Fresno County (Kings River Conservation District) O.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Recent consecutive years of drought moved farmers to heavily rely on groundwater pumping, causing acceleration in land subsidence in several locations throughout the Kings River service area. Subsidence threatens the structural integrity of the KRCD Channel Improvement Levees. Additionally, the 2011 and 2017 flood event on the Kings River added stress to the levees and tested its ability to efficiently convey excess flood waters away from the Kings subbasin. This project contains a LiDAR survey for the Kings River from Pine Flat Dam out to Mendota Pool and south to Empire Weir No.2 on the South Fork. The LiDAR data would be utilized with the GEI Consultant’s hydrologic model to generate surface water elevation profiles. Not only will this project enable better understanding of flooding in the District and better planning for flood emergency response, but also collecting LiDAR data will enable KRCD to identify structural projects to address findings related to targeted areas in the levees that need improvement. This could include identification of areas affected by land subsidence. KRCD anticipates that this LiDAR data collection will enable follow-up structural projects to strengthen and improve the effectiveness of the Kings River Channel Improvement Levees. Additionally, a Flood Safety Plan would be developed for the Channel Improvement Levees. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: Kings River Conservation District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $463,000 Potential Funding: DWR Statewide Flood Emergency Response Program; KRCD local fund Benefits (Avoided Losses): Benefits of this project include accurate modeling of the physical conditions of the Kings River Channel Improvement Levees. KRCD would be able to identify sections of the Channel Levees that need improvement. Furthermore, a complete LiDAR set for the entire Kings River system is critical to understanding how physical changes and various flood flows upstream affect the downstream river system. Additionally, the Flood Safety Plan would clearly outline the responsible agencies and actions necessary to respond to a flood incident in a timely and effective manner. KRCD is taking a preventive approach to flood planning by making the necessary improvement to our levee systems before the start of the wet season. We hope by being proactive in levee management and hydrologic modeling, we will be able to decrease the likelihood of a levee failure, thus avoiding the loss of crops, livestock, homes, and lives. Schedule: Anticipated start date is June 2018. Project completion estimated to take 14 months. Status: New project ANNEX P: SIERRA RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.1 District Profile The Sierra Resource Conservation District (SRCD or the District) has partnered under separate Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with the Highway 168 Fire Safe Council and the Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council in the further development and update of this annex. For more information about the Councils, please see Section P.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships. According to the Sierra Resource Conservation District Long Range Plan 2015-2020, the primary purposes of the SRCD (as legislated by the state) are to secure the adoption of conservation practices including but not limited to farm, range, open space, urban development, wildlife, recreation, watershed, water quality, and woodland and to save the basic resources, soil, water, and air of the state from unreasonable and economically preventable waste and destruction. Its mission is to take available technical, financial, and educational resources, whatever their source and focus, or coordinate them at the local level, to meet the present and future natural resource needs of the local land user. Formed in 1957, the SRCD originally encompassed 1,179,173 acres and over 1,843 square miles in eastern Fresno County (almost one-third of the total acreage of Fresno County). In 2009, the District successfully incorporated the consolidation the Navelencia Resource Conservation District through the Fresno County LAFCo (Local Agency Formation Commission). The District now encompasses 1,847,537 acres equivalent to 2,887 square miles. This is nearly 50 percent of Fresno County’s 6,000 square miles. In 2016, again through Fresno County LAFCo, the District detached 130,000 +/- acres that were within Tulare County to the Tulare County Resource Conservation District. The District is now bounded on the north by the San Joaquin River with Madera County, on the east the crest of the Sierra Nevada with Inyo and Mono County, on the south by the Tulare County line, and extends west into the fertile valley areas near Orange Cove, Reedley, Sanger, and then Clovis and the northern part of the City of Fresno. More than 1,000 square miles of the District are public lands, which include portions of several wilderness areas, McKinley Grove, and portions of the Sierra National Forest, Sequoia National Forest and Giant Sequoia National Monument, Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Sequoia Kings Canyon National Park, Squaw Leap Recreational Area, Millerton Lake State Park, and Pine Flat Reservoir. There are three Indian rancherias within the district: Big Sandy Mono Rancheria, Cold Springs Mono Rancheria which are federally recognized – and the Dunlap Band of Mono Indians which is a non-federally recognized tribe. The boundaries of the Sierra Resource Conservation District are shown in Figure P.1. Figure P.1: Sierra Resource Conservation District Approximately 15 percent of the District is on the valley floor with heavy urbanization, production agriculture, and a few public lands. The terrain here is predominately flat. As one heads east, the terrain changes to rolling foothills that cover 20 percent of the District, and the land is predominately eastside rangeland and oak woodlands, then oak/conifer intermix with low-density residential to the 4,000-foot elevation. Continuing east, the remaining 65 percent of the District extends to the 14,000-foot elevation Sierra Nevada crest and is timberland intermixed with lower density rural residential with additional Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). The rapid rise in elevation from 2,000 feet to 5,000 feet creates steep valleys, rapid runoffs, and associated soil movements. Rapid water runoff from the upper watershed portions of the District Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has under certain conditions caused downstream flooding on both the San Joaquin and Kings rivers. It can be sunny on the valley floor on the west side of the District and snowing on the east side. Vegetation types run full spectrum from sensitive citrus fruit and nut orchards, specialty crops on the valley floor, open eastside rangeland, extensive oak woodlands and brush in the foothills, and heavily forested mountains and alpine areas above timberline. The forested lands are abundant with wildlife. Summer range for some wildlife species like deer is on public lands, but the winter range is on predominately private lands in the foothill zone. Fresno County is the largest agricultural production County in California and the nation. There are about 2,272 farms in the District. Primary agricultural products include oranges, strawberries, nuts, grapes, olives, Asian market crops, truck garden crops, cattle, dairy products, and honey. Timber and rangeland also contribute to the District’s economy. Valuable recreation areas in the District include the Sierra Heritage Scenic Byway and the China Peak Ski Area. High country packing, camping, hiking, water sports, boating, horseback riding, skiing, and bicycling are a few of the activities enjoyed in the District. The Highway 180 corridor is heavily used to bring tourists from around the world to the world-famous Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks and Sequoia National Forest. Figure P.2 shows the area’s topography. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure P.2: Sierra Resource Conservation District Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The SRCD’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the District and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to the District (see Table P.1). Table P.1: SRCD—Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical Medium Avalanche Limited Likely Limited Low Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical Medium Drought Significant Likely Limited Medium Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Low Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical High Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Medium West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Medium Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Medium Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Medium Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Occasional No Data Low Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). P.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the District’s vulnerability separate from that of the planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. The information to support the hazard identification and risk assessment for this Annex was collected through a Data Collection Guide, which was distributed to each participating municipality or special district to complete during the original outreach process in 2009. Information collected was analyzed and summarized in order to identify and rank all the hazards that could impact anywhere within the County, and used to rank the hazards and to identify the related vulnerabilities unique to each jurisdiction. In addition, the SRCD’s HMPC team members were asked to validate the matrix that was originally scored in 2009 based on the experience and perspective of each planning team member relative to the District. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table P.1). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects the overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the District’s HMPC member input from the Data Collection Guide and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table P.1 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the District. Those of Medium or High Significance for the District are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section P.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include wildfire and hazardous materials incidents. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • flood/levee failure • hazardous materials incidents • severe weather: extreme cold; winter storm Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • soil hazards: erosion • wildfire Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the Sierra Resource Conservation District, those hazards are as follows: • avalanche • earthquake • human health hazards • landslide • severe weather: extreme heat, fog, heavy rain/thunderstorm/hail/lightning, tornado, windstorm • soil hazards: expansive soils, land subsidence • volcano For more information about how hazards affect the County as a whole, see Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in the main plan. P.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers the District’s assets at risk. Table P.2 lists District assets, including natural resources, identified by representatives from the SRCD as important to protect in the event of a disaster. Table P.2: SRCD—Critical Facilities and Other District Assets Name of Asset Replacement Value Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info Forest timber Billions n/a Timber belt subject to devastating wildfires; stand replacing fires destroy this critical resource and jobs Wildland ecosystems Billions or priceless n/a Loss of critical ecosystems destroyed by unnatural wildfire events Endangered and threatened species Priceless n/a Wildfire threatens 172 listed threatened and endangered species in eastern Fresno County Powerhouses and associated facilities, including Big Creek community 100 million to billions 16 power facilities, 120 employees, 260 residents Wildfire or floods could destroy one or more facilities during a major event Watershed and water quality of upper San Joaquin and Kings Rivers Hundreds of millions n/a Wildfire and to a lesser extent flooding threaten water quality and availability along with other watershed values Wish-I-Ah Care Center (live- in nursing home for mentally challenged) 5 million 100+ This facility is only hospital like facility within District boundaries Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Name of Asset Replacement Value Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info Sierra High School 70 million 800 students 50 staff School is also primary emergency operations center for District surrounded by wildland susceptible to fire Auberry Elementary 20 million 300 students Surrounded by wildland susceptible to fire Sierra Elementary 20 million 300 students Surrounded by wildland susceptible to fire Big Creek Elementary 12 million 150 students Surrounded by wildland susceptible to fire 21 dams (large and small) 100 million to 1 billion n/a Subject to damage or failure during flood events Foothill Middle School 30 million 300 students Surrounded by wildland susceptible to fire, alternate operations evacuation center Highway 168 in eastern Fresno County 1-200 million depending on damage Primary and in some cases only route for over 15,000 residents and up to 25,000 summer visitors Subject to frequent (multiple times yearly) closers due to primarily wildfire and semiannually due to slides and rock fall during major storm events. Shaver Lake sewage treatment plant 50 million 5 employees At risk for both wildfire and flood 18 fire stations 3 million each 4 employees each Most at risk of wildfire damage or loss Auberry sheriff’s substation $500,000 10 deputies At risk of wildfire loss 8 U.S. Forest Service offices/facilities $400,000 to 15 million 12 to 40 employees per facility All at risk from wildfire; some at risk from flood Kaweah Watershed Dunlap and Miramonte Elementary Schools Dunlap Leadership Academy State Highways 180 & 245 Squaw Valley Sheriff’s Substation Fresno County Library – Bear Mountain Branch Hume Lake Ranger District Office and Work Center SEKI Park Service Facilities Hume Lake Christian Camp Hume Lake Dam Wonder Valley Resort Project Survival’s Cat Haven CAL FIRE Stations in Piedra, Squaw Valley and Sand Creek Fresno County Wonder Valley Fire Station Hume Lake Fire Department Mountain Valley Volunteer Fire Department Caltrans Yard Fresno County Public Works Yard Unknown # of wooden bridges (~200) $500,000-? All at risk of wildfire damage and loss Communications towers Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Growth and Development Trends Population growth within the SRCD is widespread but not uniform. The areas closest to the largest cities and communities are growing fastest and have higher housing densities. The foothill areas are growing the next fastest, with most of the growth in widely scattered single family homes within a very high fire hazard environment. An exception to this is the area near Millerton Lake, outside the Town of Friant, known as Millerton New Town. This high-density development when built out will have thousands of homes with a large exposure to the WUI. The mountainous region is the third fastest growing area in the District. Only the limited availability of private land and some issues with water availability are limiting growth in the mountain areas. Many new homes and cabins are built each year, especially along the mountainous portion of the Highway 168 corridor and near the community of Shaver Lake. Approximately 70 percent of new construction in the mountain area is second homes. Growth within the SRCD on the valley floor is primarily in the form of subdivisions along primary transport corridors. The City of Fresno is the hub of jobs and retail. Growth is spreading outward from that hub. In general, new growth is not being permitted in flood zones, so most flooding in these areas has been minor and primarily due to rain events exceeding the capacities of the flood control drainage infrastructure. There are levees and irrigation canals within the lower elevation portions of the District. Historically, there have not been flooding problems related to these structures, but they are aging (some are over 100 years old). A flood event from the failure of one of these structures could cause widespread damage depending on the location of the break. The foothill and mountain areas continue to grow and add complexity to the wildland fire issues within the District. Currently, there is no serious effort to control growth in these areas. Projections are for population within these areas to more than double in the next 10 years. Due to the widely scattered housing in this part of the District, the wildfire problem is more one of wildland-urban intermix rather than the more easily defined wildland-urban interface, as is the case with Millerton New Town. This greatly increases the probability of wildland fire starts, and the complexity of protecting homes is multiplied many times over that of protecting more concentrated populations. The probability of major losses of homes and property in these areas is very high. The SRCD completed its consolidation with the Navelencia Resource Conservation District (Navelencia RCD). The Navelencia RCD in 2009 encompassed 781,075 acres (1,222 square miles), approximately one fifth of Fresno County’s total acreage. The Navelencia RCD is bounded on the north and west by the Kings River, on the south by the Fresno-Tulare county line and the Sequoia National Park boundary, and on the east by the Fresno-Inyo and Fresno-Mono county lines. The former District is fairly indicative of the boundaries for the Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council (See Figure P.4). This largely agricultural area is rural with an estimated population between 30,000 and 50,000 people. Together, the combined RCDs cover 2,887 square miles. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table P.2 above shows the sierra Resource Conservation District’s critical facilities and assets that could be exposed to hazards. Specific losses for the Cities of Fresno and Clovis and the portion of the County of Fresno within the District’s boundaries are discussed elsewhere in this hazard mitigation plan. Agricultural Hazards Agricultural land and rangeland are primary elements of the SRCD and are vital to the economy and important to consider when addressing issues related to groundwater, watersheds, and wildfire. Most of the agricultural hazards in the District are weather related (e.g., freeze, hail, wind, rain (flood), drought. Other hazards include insects and disease. Avalanche During an extreme snow year in 1927, two avalanches hit Camp 72 within five hours of each other and killed 13 people. Camp 72 was a work camp associated with the Big Creek Hydroelectric Project located north of modern day Shaver Lake and west of the Town of Big Creek. The avalanches destroyed the majority of two-story wooden structures in the camp and caused $200,000 in damage (1927 dollars). Phone lines, tunneling equipment, and work rail lines were also damaged or destroyed. The damage also delayed work on the Big Creek project. Deforestation in the area was a contributor to the avalanche. An avalanche in the same location today would likely have limited impact due to the regrowth of the timber. Today, the likely impact of an avalanche would be quite limited. Backcountry skiers and snowmobilers are most at risk. If they are caught in a backcountry avalanche and someone is not on hand to dig them out, the situation is likely to be fatal. China Peak (formerly Sierra Summit) Ski Resort monitors and controls the avalanche danger within the recreation area. There are areas along Highway 168 and the few secondary routes open in the winter that could be hit by avalanche; however, there is very little history of avalanches in these areas. If a person is not caught in an avalanche, then the only likely impact would be from road closures and damage to above ground facilities such as power lines. A long-term road closure and loss of power could strand some small communities, such as Lakeshore at Huntington Lake and China Peak Ski Resort, for extended lengths of time. This could require emergency evacuations or delivery of emergency supplies by snowmobiles or aircraft. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Dam Failure Multiple dams on the San Joaquin and Kings rivers provide hydroelectricity, recreation, and flood control. Failure of any of these dams could endanger lands within the Sierra RCD. Drought The canals and irrigation districts on the valley floor provide agricultural water during the dry summer months. Their boundaries and practices can affect the SRCD conservation efforts. A number of flood control districts and groundwater recharge basins are within the District’s boundaries. Groundwater issues are a recurring theme on private lands within the District and are specifically addressed in the Fresno County General Plan. In the foothills, most residents get water from wells, but groundwater is not overly abundant. Parts of the District are in state recognized groundwater basins and are now affected by new legislation that was enacted in September of 2014 by Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. when he signed a three-bill package known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Crop losses and reduced plantings have occurred during past droughts. Generally, irrigation and ground pumping were used to offset the impacts of past droughts. Both of these alternatives are becoming less reliable as surface water is diverted to other uses, and groundwater is already being over pumped, leading to lower underground water levels. The District had prolonged drought from 2012 through 2016. The winter and spring of 2017 brought a significant amount of precipitation after which the Governor declared the official end of the 5-year drought in April, 2017. However Executive Order B-40-17 lifts the drought emergency in all California counties except Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Tuolumne, where emergency drinking water projects will continue because of depleted groundwater. Additionally, this water year from October 2017 to date has seen precipitation totals severely below average. Flood/Levee Failure The District has two primary watersheds: the San Joaquin River and the Kings River watersheds, which greatly affect the foothills and valley floor. Flooding and soil erosion due to heavy rains and snow runoff have been a historical problem. Abundant snowfall in the mountains combined with rain and steep terrain can mean rapid runoff and flooding. In the foothills, many streams are seasonal. Water flow can be high in peak runoff periods with historical downstream flooding. Much of the area on the valley floor is subject to flooding and ponding from the San Joaquin and Kings rivers and from several lesser watershed drainages. Severe thunderstorms and heavy rain in the summer also cause flooding. Because of widespread tree mortality, large fires, and the efforts to recover from the impacts of these fires, there is the potential for debris flows and increased erosion and sediment coming off of forestlands and flowing into the major reservoirs – in particular Millerton Lake and Pine Flat Dam. Major past flood events are described below: Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • December 1955—A rain on snow event caused local and downstream flooding. It occurred on the western side of the Sierras and eastern Fresno County, affecting the entire valley region. An unknown number of homes were damaged, and roads, bridges, and some dam facilities were destroyed or damaged. School and road closures resulted. • January 1997—A regionwide high elevation rain on snow event caused local flooding and downstream valleywide flooding. Homes and a trailer park flooded, but numbers and values are unknown. Bridges, roads, and other infrastructure near waterways washed out. The event caused hundreds of millions in damage in the valley. In the District, fisheries and wildlife were impacted. Damage occurred to much of the flood control/dam system on the San Joaquin River as water threatened to overtop the dams. Spillway gates were opened to prevent that occurrence. This created flooding to about a dozen mobile homes and resulted in the evacuation of approximately 500 people. In the aftermath of the event, debris and mud had to be cleared from structures, roads, and facilities throughout the District. Many culverts failed, washing out roads, and the approach to one major bridge in the District on the San Joaquin River connecting Fresno and Madera County was washed away, closing that vital route for over a month. Washouts, mudslides, plugged culverts, and rockfalls along roads required months of work to clean up and correct. Some secondary mountain roads on the Sierra National Forest have never been repaired due to the cost. Exact costs are not available, but costs to infrastructure repairs within the District were easily in the tens of millions. Value of damage to habitat and fisheries within the District were never quantified, and costs to mitigate damage to the environment are also not available. In most cases, the environment was left to recover on its own due to lack of available funds. • July 2006—A flash flood from thunderstorms in drainages above the north end of Huntington Lake caused flooding in Huntington Lake, Rancheria Creek, Kaiser Pass Road, and Eastwood Powerhouse. The powerhouse was inundated, the primary road washed out, and boat docks damaged at an estimated cost of $200,000. An estimated $250,000 in damage to private boats occurred. The event resulted in loss of power output for three weeks, closure of the primary summer road, closure of Huntington Lake to recreation for one week, and approximately $350,000 in damage. Clean-up costs were $150,000, and search and rescue costs were $25,000. Four people were injured. Insured losses were $100,000. No federal or state disaster relief was received for this event. Based on these past events, major rain on snow events occur every 10-15 years. The primary impacts from flooding within the district include loss of fisheries and wildlife habitat; damage to roads, hydroelectric facilities, dams, bridges; and some flooding of homes. Winter road closures could require large scale evacuations and create difficulties in providing emergency services to areas cut off by flooding. There are quite a few communities that are at the end of one primary access road. In the winter, secondary or emergency roads are usually impassable. If the primary road is closed by a flood, it is likely that secondary roads will also be impacted as well. If the repair time is extended, emergency services may be required to protect the population until repairs can be made. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Since it is a special district, participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does not apply to the Sierra Resource Conservation District, thus NFIP Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties are not tracked for the jurisdiction; therefore, the District does not have this data available. Within the District’s boundaries the City of Fresno has one Repetitive Loss property but no Severe Repetitive Loss properties; The Cities of Clovis, Reedley and Sanger do not have either type. Refer to those annexes for additional information. There are two Repetitive Loss properties in the unincorporated County, but further details to determine if these are within the District’s boundary are not available. There are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties in the County as detailed in Chapter 4 Section 4.3.2 of the base plan. Hazardous Materials Incident The SRCD is vulnerable to transportation-related hazardous materials releases because only one road serves the communities of Shaver Lake, Big Creek, and Huntington Lake. The road is steep, narrow, and winding. There is a seven-mile stretch of Highway 168 that is very vulnerable to road closure due to accidents, wildfires, or bad weather. No safe alternate routes for this section exist. Closures cut off 700 homes and 400 square miles of the Sierra National Forest open to the public. On July 26, 2002, Highway 168 closed for two days due to a gas tanker spill during peak summer use season and cut off more than 700 residences and stranded 7,000-10,000 summer visitors to the area. The driver was injured, and direct access to the hospital was not available. The accident damaged the roadbed and culvert, and underground power lines needed to be relocated. The 10,000-gallon spill caused environmental damage to streams and surrounding timber—one-half acre of timber was lost. It caused economic losses to businesses, and people were unable to get to or from work. Most direct losses were covered by the truck company’s insurance. Severe Weather: Extreme Cold/Freeze Of particular concern to the District is the vulnerability of citrus orchards in the western part of the District to extreme cold/freeze events. This vulnerability increased when the District consolidated with the Navelencia Resource Conservation District. Severe Weather: Winter Storm In January 2005, a major winter snowstorm caused regionwide closure of roads and loss of power for up to three weeks in three communities. The impacts occurred in eastern Fresno County above 4,000 feet in elevation. Damage included the following: • Eight injuries from storm and poor road conditions • Estimated $3.5 million in damage to trees falling on homes and other structures • Estimated $2.5 million in damage to power distribution grid • $250,000 to open and repair road system • 10,000-15,000 merchantable trees damaged or killed • $250,000 in miscellaneous damage from heavy snow and falling trees Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • All businesses closed and without power, estimated $500,000 in loss of business and product or inventory • $3 million in insured losses • Schools closed for over two weeks Similar storms are highly likely to occur in the future. The 2016/2017 weather year had extremely high precipitation, and due to warmer temperatures, the snow/rain transition occurred at higher elevations. Soil Hazards: Erosion With the population moving to the foothills, road and home construction is increasing. The popularity of horses and family livestock with families new to the area, combined with the zoning practice of “parceling” is contributing to an increase in soil erosion and compromising wildlife habitats and native animal populations. Soil erosion due to heavy rains and snow runoff is also a problem. Wildfire All communities within the District are listed on the National Fire Plan’s “Communities at Risk” list. Over one hundred years of aggressive fire suppression under the national fire suppression policy has rendered wildlands severely overgrown. Much of the private land in the foothills area is in the wildland-urban interface with increasing residential development on steep terrain in the brush on highly erodible soils. According to the Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Community Wildfire Protection Plan, the following areas of the District were prioritized for projects because of their dense population, values at risk, and fuel availability: Burrough Valley of Tollhouse, Peterson Road Subdivision, Dogwood Subdivision, Routt Mill Road, Big Sandy Rancheria, Beal fuel break, and Sugarloaf fuel break. As more people move into the area and impacts from recreational demands increase, there will be more human-caused wildfire starts each year. And, the increased number of widely scattered homes within the District adds greatly to the danger, complexity, and cost of fighting these fires. Currently, many of the communities in the District are limited to one route access and egress in the event of a major wildfire. Historically, these routes are closed during major events, stranding many people, including visitors, away from their families and homes. So far there has been no loss of life attributed to the limited evacuation routes, but it is likely only a matter of time before people are cut off and trapped by a major fire event. Low intensity natural fires kept the Sierra forest from becoming overgrown. Forest overgrowth due to the efficiency of modern firefighting techniques, and to society’s current election to limit forest thinning and harvesting, is a serious problem. If wildfire does not impact the forest first, native insects will eventually kill millions of trees as has been clearly demonstrated since 2012. Explosions in insect populations usually start during a drought, when the lack of water combined Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan with too many trees per acre render the trees too weak to fight off the insect attacks. This has resulted in the Tree Mortality Crisis of over 5 years as declared in October 2015 by the Governor of California with his State of Emergency Declaration, which is still in effect as of March 2018. Major past wildfires are described below: • 1933—The Tollhouse fire started when a local resident was cutting, stacking, and burning brush in late August along Lodge Road. The fire burned across fields and grazing lands and encircled the Town of Tollhouse, which at that time was a large and important hub for the timber industry in eastern Fresno County. The Town of Tollhouse was evacuated for safety. The fire burned portions of the flume that carried logs and boards from Shaver Lake to the valley floor. The fire raced up the hill and burned into Jose Basin and over Burrough Mountain into Blue Canyon, burning very hot and destroying conifers. The once abundant conifers that grew on the slopes did not grow back; the hill is barren of good timber. It is mostly brush now. Stables of mules and horses were scared and had to be controlled by handlers. • 1955—McGee fire. “The 1955 heat wave began with very hot weather and fires on August 27th. As the heat wave wore on, fires increased in number until Labor Day weekend when 139 fires were reported throughout the region.” While ten large fires were being fought in Northern CA, the McGee Fire broke out in the Sequoia Forest. This fire “was not the largest but was the most damaging.” Though fire danger was extreme, a rancher conducted a controlled burn a half-mile outside the forest boundary. It spread rapidly up Milk Ranch Creek to the East towards Pinehurst. The fire burned near Pinehurst, Miramonte, Cedarbrook and the Sequoia Lake community. “The most severe damage was to mixed stands of pine, fir and giant sequoia in the upper Mill Creek and Converse Basin.” (Source: July 2005 R5-FR- 003 USDA Forest Service, California, “Fire in the Forest: A History of Forest Fire Control on the National Forests in California 1896-1956”) • 1987—A number of large wildfires in eastern Fresno County caused over $1 million in damage to roads, bridges, and other improvements and over $1 million in damage to resources. Suppression costs were estimated at another $1 million. • 1989—A wildfire burned 21,000 acres near the Town of Auberry. It started near the Fresno and Madera county line on the Fresno side of the San Joaquin River. It was never determined what caused the fire; arson was suspected. The fire raced up the canyon skirting Powerhouse Road in Auberry, traveling midslope behind the settlement of Jose Basin. Fingers of the fire touched New Auberry and the Town of Auberry. The fire burned across the front of Bald Mountain into Mile High and threatened Meadow Lakes and all the homes in its path. An all out assault by air and ground stopped the fire at Sugarloaf Road at 3,800 feet in elevation. This fire caused an enormous amount of stress on local residents and businesses. Roads were blocked, people did not know if they had homes to return to, and pets were a big concern. • 1994—A large wildfire burned 9,000 acres near the Town of Big Creek and resulted in the evacuation of the entire community of Big Creek (for one and a half weeks) and portions of Lakeshore community at Huntington Lake. Damage was estimated at $2 million to roads and miscellaneous improvements in the national forest and $500,000 to the power grid. The Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan estimated cost to recover the forest was $200 million. Mudslides due to fire caused $500,000 in damage. Scenic values and wildlife were also compromised. Firefighting costs approximated $50 million. Tourism losses due to damage are still a problem in the affected area. Annual losses to local businesses are estimated at $10,000. • 2013 – Aspen Fire, High Sierra District of the Sierra National – burned nearly 23,000 acres in the upper San Joaquin River Watershed. • 2015—The Rough Fire was a devastating fire that burned 151,623 acres of land, making it the largest fire of the year in California, involving up to 3,742 firefighters. (Source: Wikipedia) • 2016 – Goose Fire, State Responsibility Area (SRA) 2,340 acres near the towns of Auberry, Prather and Tollhouse • 2017 – Two fires occurred in 2017. These were the Silver Fire and the Highway Fire. These are only examples of events in eastern Fresno County. There are other smaller incidents that have been occurring with increasing frequency. In 2017, the fire season had extended itself into late fall. P.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the District’s planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the District’s planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. The SRCD’s updated capabilities are summarized below. P.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table P.3 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in the SRCD. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.17 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table P.3: SRCD’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan Yes See Fresno County Zoning ordinance Yes See Fresno County Subdivision ordinance Yes See Fresno County Site plan review requirements Yes See Fresno County Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance Yes See Fresno County Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Yes See Fresno County Building code Yes Version: Fresno County Building Code (2001 California Building Code) Erosion or sediment control program Yes See Fresno County Storm water management program No Capital improvements plan No Economic development plan TBD District is developing ED Plan based upon tree mortality and utilization of excess biomass as a useable renewable resource Local emergency operations plan No Other special plans Yes SRCD Long Range Plan 2015-2020; Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) by Highway 168 FireSafe Council and updated in 2018; Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council development of first CWPP in 2018 Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams Yes See Fresno County Sierra Resource Conservation District Long Range Plan 2015-2020 Sierra Resource Conservation District’s current Long Range Plan describes the physical setting of the District, the history of the organization, and data and personnel resources; identifies the critical issues of the District; and develops a program of action and an annual summary report. This plan identifies several critical issues that must be addressed if the natural resource base for sustained use is to be maintained. These issues include soil erosion, watershed/wetlands, agriculture and rangeland, vegetative management, wildlife habitat, environmental education, and air quality. More recently, due to the impacts of wide-spread tree mortality, the LRP was updated to include the critical challenges associated with millions of dead and dying conifers. Additionally, due to the increase of large and unpredictable fires – with the potential to destroy communities and the surrounding environment, the District has focused most of its resources towards this challenge. The LRP reflects the effort to move from recovery to prevention, working with the FireSafe Councils, CAL FIRE and the U.S. Forest Service and others. Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Community Wildfire Protection Plan The Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) summarizes wildfire dangers and issues on a community by community basis within the Council’s area of influence. The CWPP also catalogs community wildfire protection needs and identifies corrective Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.18 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan action and community projects that will mitigate some of the problems. The CWPP is currently under revision with the Sierra RCD and is to be completed in September 2018. Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council Community Wildfire Protection Plan Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council is in the process of developing their first Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) under the auspices of Sierra RCD. The plan is expected to be completed by September 2018. P.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities The SRCD is a “Local State Agency” under California Public Resources Code (PRC) 9003. It has at this time five (5) part-time staff, including the District Manager, and also relies upon other outside governmental/non-governmental resources and volunteers. The Board of Directors (currently 3 members, with 2 vacancies) are under a standing resolution by the Fresno County Board of Supervisors and come from private land owners and other conservation-conscious citizens from within the District who often have expertise in a variety of natural resource fields. Each director serves a four-year term. Additional nonvoting associate directors are also appointed, of which there are currently two (2). The District works closely with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), California Department of Conservation (DOC), Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC) and U.S. Forest Service under interagency agreements, as well as with many other local, state, and federal agencies, research and academic institutions. Volunteers are an important strength in the District. The community is very aware of the wildfire issues in particular, and many within the community are motivated through the two FireSafe Councils and other entities to help by donating time and talent to improve the situation. Volunteers especially enjoy the educational aspects of teaching wildland fire safety to help prevent fire starts and educating homeowners on how to maintain their property to reduce the hazards from wildfire. Landowners are also generally ready to allow fuel breaks across their property in support of community fuel breaks that mitigate the impact from any fires that do start. P.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities The SRCD is eligible for various wildfire, watershed, and community development grants from County, state, and federal agencies and programs as a local state agency under PRC9003. There was no taxing authority by agreement at the time the District was established. The District does not have a designated funding source for mitigation but seeks to implement multi-objective projects that incorporate mitigation activities and considerations. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.19 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships Highway 168 Fire Safe Council The Highway 168 Fire Council is a critical partner for the SRCD and has served as a primary partner in the development and update of this annex. It is a volunteer-based nonprofit organization that was formed as one of currently over 150 local chapters of the California Fire Safe Council. The Highway 168 Fire Safe Council was founded in 1997 by local volunteers, businesses, and agency representatives to reduce the risk of wildfire damage to improvements and natural resources within its area of influence. Using education, project grants, and grassroots action, the Council continues to be the primary resource for local efforts to live safely with fire and reduce community risks within the wildland-urban intermix. The Council has successfully administered over $1.5 million in community project grants to build wildfire fuel breaks and educate the community on living safely in a fire-prone ecosystem. These projects have been credited with saving over a dozen homes and millions in firefighting costs to date. The Council’s area of influence resides entirely within the boundaries of the SRCD, with which the Council has a formal memorandum of understanding to partner on the Fresno County Multi- Hazard Mitigation Plan and other efforts that are to be undertaken. Specifically, the Council represents the portion of the San Joaquin River watershed in eastern Fresno County from the community of Friant in the west to the headwaters of the San Joaquin River in the east. The boundaries of the Highway 168 FireSafe Council are shown in Figure P.3. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.20 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure P.3: Sierra Resource Conservation District / Highway 168 Fire Safe Council The Highway 168 Fire Council has one part-time paid staff member that acts as project coordinator (grant specific) to supplement the predominantly volunteer efforts of the group. Volunteers include wildfire prevention and suppression experts and prescribed burn and fuel break construction experts. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the U.S. Forest Service provide additional technical assistance and resources. Currently, all hazard mitigation planning and review is being performed by volunteers. The Council has developed education materials for distribution and conducts various wildland fire education programs throughout the year at schools, town hall meetings, homeowners associations, and at the annual Fire Safe Festival. They also contribute two wildfire educational pieces a month for publication in local newspapers and have developed a serial story of a fictitious local major fire. The Council maintains a storefront office that provides fire safety information and has a library of wildfire education publications and films. Highway 168 Fire Safe Council (PO Box 639, Prather CA 93651) Patricia Gallegos (Project Coordinator) (559) 855-3144 Howard Hendrix (Council President) Ryan Stewart (Council Vice President) Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.21 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The three council members above, along with Craig Jones, Project Manager for the Sierra RCD new constitutes the Highway 168 CWPP Update Committee. This committee now meets two times per month to help expedite the update process. Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council Within the Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council’s boundary are State and Federal lands, private homes, ranches, schools, churches, youth camps, businesses, and wildlife refuges, and the communities of Piedra, Tivy Valley, Wonder Valley, Squaw Valley, Dunlap, Miramonte, Pinehurst, and Sequoia to Hume Lakes. Its territory lies within the Kings and Kaweah River watersheds, which offer an array of wildlife habitats and recreational activities, as well as being a vacation destination for visitors from all over the world. Figure P.4 shows the Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council’s boundaries. Figure P.4: Sierra Resource Conservation District / Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council The Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council (OTFSC) is a key organization for the overall wildfire mitigation effort within its organizational boundaries and its contiguous neighbors and cooperators. It serves as the conduit for information, resources, and communication for the landowners, businesses, communities and residents within its area of influence. The OTFSC has Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.22 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan recently partnered under a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with the SRCD to develop its Community Wildfire Protection Plan through funding provided by the California FireSafe Council. OTFSC is a volunteer-based, nonprofit organization that was formed as one of currently over 150 local chapters of the California Fire Safe Council. OTFSC was founded in 2005 by local volunteers, businesses, and agency representatives to reduce the risk of wildfire damage to improvements and natural resources within its area of influence. Using education and outreach efforts, project grants, and community action, the Council is a primary resource for local efforts to learn and live safely within the wildland-urban interface. OTFSC serves a diverse region ranging from 500' to 6500' elevation. From the grasslands, through the brush and oak of the foothills, and all the way to the timberlands of the Giant Sequoias, the Council's service area encompasses nearly 217,000 acres of public and private lands. Since 2015, the Council has successfully administered over $475,000 in project grants from CAL FIRE and PG&E to fell dead trees along county and feeder roads in Fresno County, fell and remove logs from the Hartland and Eshom areas, and clear 1000’ around PG&E assets. OTFSC relies entirely on volunteers, who include wildfire prevention and suppression experts, grant seekers experienced in writing federal grants, and local business people. CalFire, USFS, and Fresno County Office of Emergency Services provide additional technical assistance and resources. Currently, all hazard mitigation planning and review is being performed by volunteers. The Council is developing education materials for distribution and offers wildland fire education programs at schools, town hall meetings, homeowners associations, and Mountain Rodeo Association events. They distribute an online monthly newsletter, maintain an active Facebook page, and have an informative and dynamic website. As a community based, non-profit organization, OTFSC is prepared to fulfill its mission to “promote fire safety by providing information, education, support incentives, and projects that encourage fire safety in our communities east of the Friant-Kern Canal and south of the Kings River, from Oak to Timberline.” Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council (PO Box 762, Squaw Valley, CA 93675) Jon Lovewell, chair (559) 471-6983 Jack Huneke, CWPP committee chair (559) 336-9985 oaktotimberline.org facebook.com/oaktotimberline Other Outreach and Partnerships The SRCD has working relationships with several federal, state, and county agencies and private landowners. Historically, the District has worked with conservation agency partners like the Natural Resources Conservation Service to provide technical assistance, cost-share programs to encourage use of conservation practices on agricultural and rangeland, and educational activities. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.23 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Over the years, the SRCD has been active in conservation partnerships on a variety of field projects with other agencies, including the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), California Department of Conservation (DOC), the U.S. Forest Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the University of California Cooperative Extension. Multiple conservation plans have been developed and implemented on private lands. The District also works with other agencies on wildfire-related matters. Working with professional fire experts from the U.S. Forest Service and CAL FIRE helps ensure that the District’s work complements state and federal efforts and is up to standard for controlling wildfires. The following lists the resource groups and governmental agencies that are partnered with the SRCD to address resource issues within the District: • Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) • California Department of Conservation (DOC) • California Association of Resource Conservation Districts (CARCD) • Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (GOPR) • California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) • Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC) • Dinkey Creek Landscape Collaborative • California Department of Water Resources (DWR) • California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) • Yosemite/Sequoia Resource Conservation and Development (YSRC&DC) • Fresno County Resource Advisory Council (RAC) • Sierra/San Joaquin Noxious Weed Alliance • Highway 168 Fire Safe Council • Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council • Sierra and Sequoia National Forests • Fresno County Board of Supervisors • Sierra Foothill Conservancy (SFC) • Back Country Horsemen of California • San Joaquin River Trail Council • Sierra Club • CSU Fresno – Lyles College of Engineering The District supports youth workshops, the Envirothon, and adult stewardship training programs. The District has sponsored Fresno County’s Resource Conservation District Day, a “Living among the Oaks” landowner workshop, and a Rangeland Water Quality workshop series. It provides support for minority farmers in the Hmong and Punjabi communities in partnership with the NRCS. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.24 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.4.5. Other Mitigation Efforts The SRCD, in partnership with the Highway 168 Fire Safe Council, has completed 11 fuel break projects. Three other fuel break projects are in various stages of completion. All projects were funded through various federal, state, and County grants along with the donation of thousands of hours of volunteer time. The fuel break projects are only possible with the cooperation of private property owners, so partnerships with landholders are absolute necessities. Already, two of the fuel break projects have helped stop the spread of major fires: • The Peterson fire started on Peterson Road, one-half mile downslope and downwind from the community on Cressman’s Road, where a shaded fuel break project had been completed only two months prior. The fire quickly became a major wind- and slope-driven crown fire with flame lengths of over 250 feet. As explained by on-site firefighters, there was no way they were going to stop that fire, and there were close to one hundred homes in the path the fire was expected to take in its first day alone. When the flame front hit the “Cressman” fuel break, it was cut off from its ability to spread through the tree tops as a crown fire. It immediately “went to ground” with a flame length of only one to two feet, and firefighters were able to stop its spread at the road running through the middle of the fuel break. All homes were saved, only minor injuries were reported, and the fire was controlled within one burn period instead of the expected multi-period fire. It was estimated that at least two dozen homes with a replacement value of over $10 million were saved by this fuel break. Using best case estimations, an additional 2,000 acres of timberland would have burned over two additional burn periods. Additional suppression costs would likely have exceeded $2 million. Not a bad return on a $50,000 fuel break grant from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and lots of volunteer time. • In the second incident, a major fire burning up a very steep slope was imminently threatening 20 homes with 50 more in its path. Working from the safety of the “Beal” fuel break, which was still under construction at the time, firefighters were able to stop the fire before it could reach the homes. Property loss prevention was estimated at $1-2 million and suppression cost savings at $250,000 to $500,000. And, an estimated 1,000 acres of pine and brush woodland were saved. This project was funded by an $80,000 Proposition 40 watershed protection grant. The District has been active in vegetation management projects, including prescribed burns, to reduce fuel loads and fire risk. Additionally, the District has taken a leadership role in the development of voluntary Oak Woodland Guidelines for Fresno County and Rangeland Water Quality Guidelines. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.25 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan P.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the Sierra Resource Conservation District has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the communities the District serves. Future improvements may include providing training for staff members and volunteers related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Continuing to train staff and volunteers will lead to more informed staff and volunteers who can better communicate this information to the public. P.5 Mitigation Strategy P.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The Sierra Resource Conservation District adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the District to inform future mitigation projects and planning efforts. The hazard information and mitigation projects will be useful when updating the District’s Long Range Plan as well as updating the Community Wildfire Protection Plans. The District is involved in several wildfire mitigation projects including fuel break projects and vegetation management projects. The information contained in this plan will help the District to focus on areas that are most vulnerable to wildfire. The District has focused on wildfire mitigation in the past, due to it being a high significant hazard for the District. This plan will help to inform staff and volunteers to understand the connection between wildfire and other hazards, such as drought and flooding and think holistically when developing future mitigation project and planning efforts. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from the Sierra Resource Conservation District will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. P.5.2 Completed 2009 Mitigation Actions The Sierra Resource Conservation District completed two of the mitigation actions identified in the 2009 plan, which were as follows: •Create an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for Eastern Fresno County •Conduct a Fractured Rock Groundwater Capacity Study for Eastern Fresno County Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.26 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan These actions have increased the SRCD’s capability to implement future mitigation actions and have reduced vulnerability to hazards in the District. SRCD has also begun implementation of several other 2009 actions, which will be continued with the incorporation of these actions in the mitigation strategy for this plan update. P.5.3 Mitigation Actions The planning team for the SRCD identified and prioritized the following mitigation actions based on the risk assessment. Background information and information on how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation, responsible office, partners, potential funding, estimated cost, and schedule are included. The Sierra Resource Conservation District, in coordination with the Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council and Highway 168 FireSafe Council, will be participating in the new multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program, with an emphasis on wildfire, drought, flood and severe weather hazards. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The District agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the multi-jurisdictional public education and awareness action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy. 1. Strengthen Non-Native Noxious Weed Control Efforts Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: wildfire, drought Issue/Background: The incursion of noxious weeds into California has been a concern for many years, however, in the rural and mountain regions of the County, the populations of various California Department of Food and Agriculture “A” and “B” rated weeds are still at a point that control and in some cases, eradication is possible. These weeds typically alter the water cycle and increase the threat of wildfire in the foothill and mountains. The threat of these noxious weeds has been termed by one noted weed scientist as “a disaster in slow motion.” While work is in progress on this threat, funding is very short. The Fresno County Department of Agriculture (FCDA) and the SRCD are currently partnering with landowners and other agencies to combat the spread of selected weeds, but the threat continues to grow as new weeds are introduced and less common weed populations remain undetected. Education of landowners, agencies, and utilities is a daunting task that must be done to stem the tide of invasive weeds. Agriculture, ecosystems, waterways, and wildlife habitat are in jeopardy because of this often overlooked threat. Control and detection of noxious weeds is very expensive and time consuming for a single agency to undertake. The FCDA has attempted to fulfill underfunded mandated control responsibilities. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.27 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: Fresno County Department of Agriculture, California Department of Food and Agriculture Priority (High, Medium, Low): Low Cost Estimate: $2-5 million per year for detection and control, $200,000 per year for education and workshops for 5-10 years Potential Funding: Limited funding has been secured from the California Department of Food and Agriculture, watershed grants, Resource Advisory Council, and the U.S. Forest Service. Benefits (Avoided Losses): Estimates of reduced agricultural production currently run into several millions of dollars each year for the County. Current control and education costs approximate $150,000. Destruction of habitat, ecosystems, and waterways has not been established. Estimated benefits of noxious weed control may be in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the County. Schedule: Work is ongoing as funding is available. Future, reliable funding would ensure that the weeds present now are controlled and future infestations would be detected and eradicated. Status: 2009 project, implementation postponed due to low priority 2. Strengthen Dam Failure/Flood Planning, Coordination, and Training Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-hazard: flood, dam failure Issue/Background: Dam failure and flood planning are done as required by law. However, due to lack of funding, most of this knowledge and planning are kept at the top levels. Mid- and lower- level first responders are not part of coordination planning and do not receive significant training in procedures, key downstream hazard locations, access routes, alternate evacuation routes, and where to set up roadblocks. While the probability of a dam failure is low, the potential impact is extreme. Flooding from the inability to control water during extreme weather events is much more likely, and response procedures are similar. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council, Fresno County Sheriff’s Office, Madera County Sheriff’s Office Priority (High, Medium, Low): Low Cost Estimate: $25,000 Potential Funding: Grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.28 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Tremendous amounts of time will be saved and safety for first responders will be greatly enhanced. • 10 lives saved (including first responders) • 50 injuries avoided • Savings from dispatching too many personnel to wrong locations or lost equipment estimated at $100,000 Schedule: 1-3 years Status: 2009 project, implementation postponed due to low priority 3. Improve Alternate Emergency Access Roads Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The communities of Shaver Lake, Big Creek, and Lakeshore (Huntington Lake) and 250,000 acres of the Sierra National Forest open to public use are accessed by only one main transportation route, Highway 168. This highway has a history of being closed from three days to a week almost every year because of wildfires. It also has a history of closures for up to three weeks at a time about once every five years due to vehicle accidents and washouts. Lesser closures of one-three days happen almost every two years. Two- to six-hour temporary closures happen an average of twice per month. During all of these closures, emergency responders, including ambulances, must seek alternate routes to reach emergency sites or transport patients to medical care. In many cases, the only alternate routes into or out of the area are narrow mountain back roads, which residents and visitors (thousands on busy summer day) are using to evacuate, reach stranded family members or pets, get into the area for recreation, or get home or to work. This can create a traffic jam and stop all traffic on these alternate routes. The following can make traffic problems worse: when two large vehicles meet on a narrow section of road, an accident occurs, or a vehicle breaks down at a choke point. Traffic could cause a second emergency/disaster if (for example) a vehicle went off road and caused a wildfire. At the very least, it is unsafe and impairs the movement of emergency equipment and personnel. In some cases, the back roads cannot handle large vehicles, such as buses and structure protection fire trucks, even when there is no traffic. With relatively low expense, improvements could be made to these back roads, located primarily in the Sierra National Forest, that would allow for the reasonable flow of public traffic and access for emergency vehicles. Two roads, one east and one west of Highway 168 would need to be improved to cover the high probability of both 168 and one of the alternate routes being closed by a major wildfire, which most experts agree is inevitable. Other Alternatives: Close all side roads to all but emergency traffic, stranding thousands and requiring evacuation centers and large numbers of emergency personnel to reach stranded residents Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.29 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and transport them to safe locations. Buses and other large vehicles would not be able to reach the cut-off area. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council, Sierra National Forest Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $1 million Potential Funding: Alternate funding unknown Benefits (Avoided Losses): • More than 20 lives saved • 20 or more incidents of reduced injury due to prompt emergency response, estimated savings $500,000 • More than 100 homes saved with a value of over $40 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $20-100 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $600 million • Savings of $20-100 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure $4 million • Reduced need for emergency response and fewer emergency responders required, estimated savings $500,000-$1 million • Reduced need to set up evacuation centers and reduced cost to operate centers when needed Schedule: Two years, April-November Status: 2009 project; implementation in progress 4. Conduct Community Fuel Break Construction and Maintenance on a Landscape Scale Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: There is a high occurrence of wildland fires in rural areas of eastern Fresno County and a heavy urban intermix of homes and businesses in very high and extreme fire danger zones. All communities in the foothill and mountain region of eastern Fresno County were included on the National Fire Plan’s list of Communities at Risk. Historically, community fuel breaks have proven to be the most effective pre-fire treatment available for lessening the impact of wildfires. These fuel breaks have proven themselves time and again in stopping the spread of even major fire events and saving lives, homes, businesses, resources, ecosystems, and suppression costs. In two recent local examples, fuel breaks were credited with saving dozens of homes, hundreds of acres, and millions of dollars in losses and suppression costs. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.30 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Current fuel break projects are effective, but due to lack of sufficient funding, there are large gaps in the system that need to be addressed before maximum benefit can be realized. Due to re-growth after 5 to 6 years, unmaintained fuel breaks start to lose some of their effectiveness, and after 10 to12 years, unmaintained fuel breaks need to be reconstructed. Relatively inexpensive treatments with herbicides or other methods can maintain these important community projects indefinitely. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council, Sierra National Forest Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2.5 million for new construction, $200,000 annually to maintain system Potential Funding: Grants from other sources to complete proposed landscape-scale system of community fuel breaks, in-kind volunteer labor Benefits (Avoided Losses): Over 20 years: • More than 10 lives saved • More than 500 homes saved with a value of over $200 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $100-500 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimate value $3 billion • Savings of $100-500 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure, estimated $20 million • Reduced need for emergency response and fewer emergency responders required, estimated savings $5-10 million Schedule: 10 years, as weather permits each year Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress 5. Create a Fuel Break Along Highway 168 Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Several communities and half a million acres of heavy recreation use land are served by the two-lane state Highway 168 in eastern Fresno County, which offers the only year- round access and egress from the area. During peak-use periods, the area served by this highway may hold close to 20,000 people on a weekend day. A ten-mile stretch of the highway has a history of closures due to emergencies (wildfires, washouts) and transportation accidents, closing the area for access by emergency responders (including ambulances) and repair crews. Closures along this portion of highway prevent evacuation from the area and access by delivery vehicles (food). They also prevent people from reaching work or homes. Any evacuation centers set up above the closure may require aircraft to bring in supplies. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.31 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Other Alternatives: Develop safe alternate year-round road to service the area. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $450,000 Potential Funding: $50,000–From alternate grant opportunities Benefits (Avoided Losses): A fuel break will limit the spread of wildfires caused by vehicle accidents and malfunctions from spreading into residential areas and business districts on this portion of the highway. A fuel break along the corridor will reduce the frequency and duration of closures. Also, a fuel break along this corridor will serve as a line of defense providing a place for fire crews to safely make a stand against major wildfires in the San Joaquin River drainage area that threaten the community of Shaver Lake. • More than 5 lives saved • 20 or more incidents of reduced injury due to prompt emergency response, estimated savings $500,000 • More than 50 homes saved with a value of over $20 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $10-50 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $300 million • Savings of $10-50 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure, estimated savings $2 million • Reduced need for emergency response and fewer emergency responders required, estimated savings $500,000-$1 million • Reduced need to set up evacuation centers and reduced cost to operate centers It will also have the benefit of lessening traffic hazards and closures due to weather-related tree falls blocking the highway. Schedule: Three years, April-November Status: 2009 project, implementation not started 6. Implement a Neighborhood Chipper Program Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Rural areas in the County are subject to high incidence of wildfires. In the areas where natural growth is other than grass (i.e., brush and trees), the fire hazard and intensity are much higher. Improvements (i.e., structures, infrastructure) in these areas are subject to damage Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.32 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and destruction on an annual basis. The larger the fire, the more significant the loss potential. Often, the fires originate from the improvements or from operations associated with the improvements. Emergency responders must spend far more time defensively protecting improvements that do not have adequate clearance of flammable vegetation, which delays them from directly attacking the main fire. This typically results in a larger more destructive fire than would otherwise have occurred. Even with state laws, clearances are often not maintained to an adequate distance to protect improvements or prevent fires that originate at the improvement from spreading to the wildlands. Currently, a very short season for hazard-reduction burning is the only viable option for elimination of the flammable material. Most of the year (10 months), this is not an option. Providing on-site chipping of the material removed by the party responsible for the improvement, (homeowner, business, agency etc.) has been shown to be an effective way to encourage proper clearances are maintained, thus reducing fire damage, frequency, and size. Operation of a small crew in year one requires the purchase of a commercial quality chipper, necessary supplies, and insurance as well as provision of labor expenses. Supplies, insurance, maintenance, and labor expenses are also required for each additional year. Other Alternatives: • More aggressive enforcement of clearance regulations would work in some cases. In many instances, the minimum requirements are inadequate to protect the improvement or the surrounding wildlands. • Development of alternate disposal options within the areas in jeopardy. Composting, biomass generation, and other options for utilization or disposal of the material have been exhaustively explored and so far rejected as economically unviable. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $120,000 first year, $70,000 each additional year Potential Funding: In-kind matching (labor, etc.), $20,000 annually Benefits (Avoided Losses): • More than two lives saved • More than 25 homes or business saved with a value of over $10 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $5-20 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $50 million Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.33 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Savings of 1-5 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure, estimated savings greater than $10 million • Reduced need for emergency response and fewer emergency responders required, estimated savings $50-500,000 annually Schedule: Year round as weather and funding permit Status: 2009 project, implementation under development 7. Conduct Prescribed Fires Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Historical natural fire regimes have been disrupted, which has led to ever increasing fuel loadings and disruptions of natural processes, changing the natural mix of vegetation. This increased fuel loading poses a severe threat to the communities of eastern Fresno County. In many cases, the lack of fire in a given area has led to the suppression (or extinction) of endangered species and the introduction and spread of invasive non-native species. In addition to extreme threat to life and property that modern wildfires pose, they also destroy ecosystems that had once been able to survive the occasional natural fire. The careful reintroduction of fire to the landscape through prescribed burning offers the only environmentally sound method of addressing all these issues in one cost-effective treatment. Other Alternatives: The reduction of the fire hazard can be addressed through other expensive projects, but only prescribed fire addresses the role that fire naturally played in maintaining healthy, less fire hazardous ecosystems. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 annually Potential Funding: Funding from burn program funds on national forest lands, vegetation management program funds through the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for private lands Benefits (Avoided Losses): • More than one life saved • Suppression of nonnative invasive species, estimated savings $5 million • More than 10 homes saved with a value of over $2 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $2-5 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $30 million • Savings of 5-25 million in forest and habitat restoration Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.34 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Reduced damage to infrastructure $500,000 • Restoration of natural systems and native species, estimated value $15 million Schedule: Annually, April-December, as weather and air quality dictates Status: 2009 project, implementation under evaluation 8. Establish a System of Fire Pumper/Tanker Fill Stations and Water Storage Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-hazard: drought, wildfire Issue/Background: Water is a scarce commodity in many portions of rural Fresno County. During fires (wildland and structure), the nearest available water source can be more than a half hour away, requiring an hour or more turnaround time to return to fires with a load of water. Fires could be stopped or kept smaller if the turnaround times could be reduced. During drought years, when wildfires are at their worst, potential locations for water sources are scarcest. There are many locations with available water that can be accessed if pre-arranged agreements are in place and/or road work is done to allow trucks to access the source. Other locations have undeveloped year-round spring or creek access that would only require some basic development and installation of a hydrant or storage tank to make them usable. In some cases, property owners are willing to provide well water to maintain a fire storage tank. Maps of all available fill locations would further increase the effectiveness of current equipment and staff. Responsible Office: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, U.S. Forest Service Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $500,000 construction, $25,000 annual maintenance Potential Funding: Grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): • Improve water availability during times of drought • More than five lives saved • 20 fewer serious injuries • More than 50 homes saved with a value of over $20 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of $10-50 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $300 million • Savings of 10-50 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure, estimated savings $2 million Schedule: Five years, May-November each year Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.35 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Status: 2009 project, implementation under evaluation 9. Implement a Public Fire Prevention, Survival, and Mitigation Education Program Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Each year, more people move into the wildland-urban intermix, and communities expand, which increases Fresno County’s wildland-urban interface. Wildfire threats to homes and communities in these areas increase every year, which taxes the abilities of fire agencies to protect them. Also, fire occurrences increase as fires that originate from human encroachment spread into the surrounding wildlands. Ignorance of the hazards associated with living in these extreme fire hazard locations and prevention measures needed to prevent the accidental start of fires and increase individual and structural survivability during a fire event is ever increasing. Programs, literature, and outreach for new residents and children have proven effective. There is also a great need to develop and distribute emergency evacuation plans, including how to stay informed, what to do, and alternate evacuation routes. Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District, Highway 168 Fire Safe Council, Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sierra National Forest Priority (High, Medium, Low): Medium Cost Estimate: $20,000 annually Potential Funding: Agency fire prevention budgets (currently inadequate and shrinking) Benefits (Avoided Losses): • Fewer wildfires • More than 20 lives saved • More than 50 homes saved with a value of over $20 million • Reduced fire suppression costs of 5-10 million • Reduced losses to natural resources and ecosystems, estimated value $50 million • Savings of $1-25 million in forest and habitat restoration • Reduced damage to infrastructure, estimated savings $500,000 • Reduced need for emergency response and fewer emergency responders required, estimated savings $50-$300,000 Schedule: Annually, April-October Status: 2009 project, implementation in progress Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.36 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 10. Update Highway 168 FireSafe Council’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan through CA FireSafe Council Funding Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The Highway 168 FireSafe Council (FSC) CWPP needs to be updated as per requirements of National CWPP protocols. Other Alternatives: None – this is needed to continue the efforts of the Highway 168 FSC. Responsible Office: Sierra RCD in cooperation with the Highway 168 FSC and its partners Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: As per current grant funding Potential Funding: CA FireSafe Council, CalFire Benefits (Avoided Losses): Losses to life, property, and ecological resources Schedule: Initiated in October 2016 - Completion by September 2018 Status: New project 11. Develop Wildfire Protection Plan with Oak to Timberline FireSafe Council through CA FireSafe Council Funding Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The Southern part of Fresno County is not covered by a CWPP. The current effort and updates will allow the entire forested portion of the County to be covered. Other Alternatives: This is the only viable alternative to ensure the entire Fresno County forested area is covered by a CWPP. Responsible Office: Sierra RCD Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: As per current grant funding Potential Funding: CA FireSafe Council, CalFire Benefits (Avoided Losses): Losses to life, property, and ecological resources Schedule: Initiated in October 2016 - Completion by September 2019 Status: New project Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.37 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 12. Implement a Biomass Utilization and Dispositioning Program for Excessive Forest and Rangeland Vegetation Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-Hazard: wildfire, severe weather – winter storm and wind Issue/Background: Program initiated in 2016 to begin addressing cost-effective approach with review of processing equipment. Other Alternatives: None. The District has been significantly impacted by the Tree Mortality Crisis which has been officially declared under a State of Emergency Proclamation by the Governor of California. Nearly two-thirds of the District overlays private and public forest land. Responsible Office: This is a combined multi-agency responsibility, including the Sierra RCD, CALFIRE in State Responsibility Areas (SRA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) under EQIP (Environmental Quality Improvement Program) for private landowners and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) for public lands. Sierra RCD is looking towards the integration of efforts to assure that there are no gaps that impact public safety due to extreme fuel load. The District has been working with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to identify cost-effective technologies for increasing the utilization of these excess hazardous fuels materials for beneficial uses such as community scale electrical production, small scale biodiesel production and carbon sequestration in the form of biochar. Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $15 to $25 million for initial remediation, rehabilitation, and restoration efforts. May take over $100 million to minimize public and environmental impacts. Potential Funding: Sources include CALFIRE, California Energy Commission (CEC), USFS, NRCS, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), and Southern California Edison (SCE). Benefits (Avoided Losses): Losses to life, property, and ecological resources Schedule: Initiated in October 2016 - Completion by September 2019 Status: New project Benefits (Avoided Losses): Hundreds of millions of dollars and potentially over $1 billion or more dollars to human life, property, businesses, and destruction to foothill and mountain communities; impact to water quality and quantity. Additionally, the benefits include avoided losses to the complex and heavily invested hydroelectric production infrastructure, including transmission lines as a significant part of the electrical grid within the District and impacts to electrical production and transmission within the whole state of California. Removing standing dead trees also has the added benefit of mitigating damage to electrical transmission lines and transportation corridors by reducing the potential for trees to be blown down from wind and winter storms. This also has a public safety benefit. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.38 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: Phase 1 – January 2018 through December 2022 / Phase 2 – January 2023 through December 2027 Status: New project; Started in 2014 with initial funding for feasibility studies. Currently in three- year initial phase on biomass conversion efforts of excess forest materials which officially commenced in January 2018 with USFS Sierra National Forest under 5-year Participating Agreement with funding for determining new approaches for managing excess biomass. Concurrently, SRCD is expecting to receive funding in mid-2018 to support private landowners through the California Association of RCDs which received $10 million dollars from the NRCS in which to implement what is known as the RCPP (Resource Conservation Partnership Program) to address tree mortality crisis in 10 counties over the next 5 years. 13. Partner with U.S. Forest Service to Reduce Fire Risk in Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Partnered with Sierra National Forest with project through March 2020 and to receive initial funding for processing equipment as a proof of concept as noted in prior project. This project will determine the ability to prevent burning of debris piles and the resultant impact to air quality and human health through alternative approaches. Other Alternatives: None known. Responsible Office: U.S. Forest Service Sierra National Forest under 5-year Participating Agreement with Sierra RCD. Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $5 to $10 million Potential Funding: Other funding from CALFIRE and California Energy Commission (CEC) Benefits (Avoided Losses): Hundreds of millions of dollars and potentially over $1 billion or more in avoided losses to human life, property, businesses, and destruction to foothill and mountain communities; impact to water quality and quantity. Additionally, the benefits include avoided losses to the complex and heavily invested hydroelectric production infrastructure, including transmission lines as a significant part of the electrical grid within the District and impacts to electrical production and transmission within the whole state of California. Schedule: 2017- 2020 Status: New project Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.39 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 14. Removal of Illegal Marijuana Grows to Reduce Fire Risk in Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Many mountain and foothill residents have illegal pot grows on their properties – many do not know that they do. Pot grows have caused wildfires because of their use of stolen electricity. They also illegally use waterways and well water and make residents fearful of leaving their properties in a wildfire because of potential looting. Other Alternatives: None Responsible Office: Fresno County Sheriff in coordination with SRCD Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: Low; can be done with existing staff Potential Funding: County budget Benefits (Avoided Losses): This will reduce fire risks, reduce polluted water and soil, and eliminate fear of illegal activity that may cause problems during evacuations or ordinary hazard removal by property owner. Schedule: Status: New project 15. Burns Flat Fuel Break Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The region below Pinehurst and Miramonte CA is very heavily vegetated with highly flammable fuels, having last burned in or before the McGee Fire of 1955 and is a serious wildfire threat to these villages. Other Alternatives: Complete in small sections over a longer period of time which is a much less viable approach Responsible Office: Sierra Resource Conservation District with Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $21,150 for 25 acres of clearing at $850/acre Potential Funding: CALFIRE Grant Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.40 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Benefits (Avoided Losses): A fuel break extending from Dunlap Road to Todd Eymann Road widening existing access roads, fire roads and natural fuel breaks (Burns Flat) will greatly mitigate the progress of wildfire out of the canyons below and toward the more heavily populated villages. Schedule: Completion 2 years following funding Status: New project 16. Whispering Springs Fuel Break Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: Lower elevation project off Lodge Road in Tollhouse. We cleared this area a few years ago but it could use some work. It is mostly brush and annual grass that is highly flammable. The area is filled with homes and is located on a steep slope. The Goose Fire threatened this area in 2016 but according to residents some of the work the FSC did help avert the fire away from a certain areas. Other Alternatives: Alternatives are minimal. Short sections could be completed over a period of time but this results in a less effective fuel break and would require more maintenance over time. Responsible Office: Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $150,000 Potential Funding: Grant money Benefits (Avoided Losses): The area is high in values at risk, lives, homes, livestock. It is better to be prepared than worry. Schedule: 2018 Status: New project 17. The Beal Fire Road Fuel Break Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The Historical Beal Fire Road has been in existence since 1933 when it was constructed by the CCC's under the direction of President Roosevelt. The Beal has over the years been credited with helping halt or slowing down a wildland fire. The area at mid-slope from Auberry Road has homes along the Beal for a couple of miles then turns in to Forest Service Land then picks back up with homes again before connecting with Highway 168 at mid-slope. The values at risk are high here, if a fire gets past this area it could travel into Meadow Lakes, the many Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.41 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan subdivisions along Highway 168 and enter Shaver Lake and possibly higher. Types of fuel include brush, annual grass and ladder fuels and some dead trees. Other Alternatives: Few viable alternatives exist. Shorter sections over time or implementing completely new fuel breaks closer to the values at risk but both are far less effective. Responsible Office: Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 to $150,000 Potential Funding: Grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): Avoid losing lives, structures, businesses, infrastructure Schedule: 2018/2019 Status: New project 18. Peterson Road Fuel Break Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire Issue/Background: The Council has worked on Peterson twice in masticating and removing ladder fuels. Even with tree work going on we feel there is still clearing that needs to be done. The road is narrow and some three mile long and requires a lot of work to provide a safe environment for residents and homes. If a fire were to break out, it would be very difficult to safely evacuate the residents and allow firefighters to enter. Other Alternatives: Other than doing shorter sections over time, the proposed action is the most cost effective and will result in a more effective fuel break. Responsible Office: Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $100,000 Potential Funding: Grant money Benefits (Avoided Losses): In 2004 a fire was started by a welder near dry grass that traveled up slope to Cressman Road just above. The fire burned 75 acres and came to a halt when it hit the FSC Cressman fuel break. This is an effective strategy for controlling wildfires and minimizing potential damages. Fresno County (Sierra Resource Conservation District) Annex P.42 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Schedule: 2018/2019 Status: New project ANNEX Q: WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Q.1 District Profile The mission of Westlands Water District (District) is to provide timely, reliable and affordable water supply to its landowners and water users, and to provide drainage service to those lands that need it. To this end, Westlands is committed to the preservation of its federal contract, which includes water and drainage service, and to the acquisition of additional water necessary to meet the needs of its landowners and water users. Westlands formed under California Water District Law in 1952 upon petition of landowners located within the District's proposed boundaries. Westlands Water District consists of nearly 1,000 square miles of prime farmland between the Diablo Range of the California Coast Range Mountains and the trough, or lowest point, of the San Joaquin Valley in western Fresno and Kings Counties. Westlands averages 22 miles in width at its widest point and stretches about 67 miles from the City of Mendota in the north to Kettleman City in the south. When the original Westlands was organized, it included approximately 376,000 acres. In 1965, it merged with its western neighbor, Westplains Water Storage District, adding 210,000 acres and Broadview Water District, adding 10,000 acres. Additionally, lands comprising about 18,000 acres were annexed to the District after the merger to form the current 614,000-acre District with an irrigable acreage of 568,000 acres. Westlands encompasses more than 600,000 acres of farmland and serves approximately 700 family-owned farms that average 875 acres in size. Westlands is a Central Valley Project (CVP) contractor with water service contracts for 1,196,948 AF. Westlands receives water through the Delta Division/San Luis Unit of the CVP. Major conveyance CVP facilities used for delivering water to Westlands include the Delta Mendota Canal (DMC) and the San Luis Canal (SLC). Water is delivered directly to lands in the San Luis Unit or is stored temporarily in San Luis Reservoir (SLR) for later delivery. Once diverted from the CVP facilities, water is delivered to farmers through 1,034 miles of underground pipe and over 3,300 metered delivery outlets. In addition to the CVP supply, landowners in Westlands rely on groundwater pumping, water transfers, and water acquisitions to supplement the CVP supply. If the water portfolio is insufficient to farm all land, land is fallowed. The District’s boundaries, surrounding communities, and nearby water infrastructure are shown in Figure Q.1. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.1: Westlands Water District Westlands Water District is in western parts of both Fresno and Kings Counties. The only communities within the District are Huron in Fresno County and Lemoore Naval Air Station in Kings County. Huron’s 2010 population was 6,754 with a population-projected increase of 25 percent by 2030. The population growth for Fresno and Kings Counties were 28 percent and 34 percent, respectively, during the period 1990 to 2010. Table Q.1 summarizes the population projections for selected communities within the District’s boundaries through 2030. Table Q.1: Community Population Projections Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 Firebaugh 5,743 7,549 9,700 11,700 Huron 6,306 6,754 7,500 9,000 Mendota 7,890 11,014 14,000 17,000 Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Q.2 Hazard Identification and Summary The District’s resources team identified the hazards that affect the District and summarized their frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Fresno County (see Table Q.2). Table Q.2: Hazard Summaries Hazard Geographic Extent Probability of Future Occurrences Magnitude/ Severity Significance Agricultural Hazards Limited Highly Likely Critical High Avalanche Limited Likely Limited Low Dam Failure Extensive Occasional Critical High Drought Significant Highly Likely Critical High Earthquake Significant Occasional Catastrophic Low Flood/Levee Failure Extensive Likely Critical Medium Hazardous Materials Incident Significant Likely Critical Low Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Extensive Occasional Catastrophic Low West Nile Virus Limited Highly Likely Negligible Low Landslide Limited Occasional Limited Low Severe Weather Extreme Cold/Freeze Significant Highly Likely Negligible Low Extreme Heat Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Fog Extensive Likely Negligible Low Heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/ Hail/Lightning Extensive Highly Likely Limited Low Tornado Extensive Occasional Negligible Low Windstorm Extensive Likely Limited Low Winter Storm Extensive Highly Likely Negligible Low Soil Hazards: Erosion No Data Likely No Data Low Expansive Soils No Data Occasional No Data Low Land Subsidence Limited Highly Likely Critical High Volcano Extensive Unlikely Negligible Low Wildfire Extensive Highly Likely Critical Low Geographic Extent Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Probability of Future Occurrences Highly Likely: Near 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or happens every year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% chance of occurrence in next year, or has a recurrence interval of 10 years or less. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% chance of occurrence in the next year, or has a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% chance of occurrence in next 100 years, or has a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. Magnitude/Severity Catastrophic—More than 50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than 30 days; and/or multiple deaths Critical—25-50 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for at least two weeks; and/or injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Limited—10-25 percent of property severely damaged; shutdown of facilities for more than a week; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable do not result in permanent disability Negligible—Less than 10 percent of property severely damaged, shutdown of facilities and services for less than 24 hours; and/or injuries/illnesses treatable with first aid Significance Low: minimal potential impact Medium: moderate potential impact High: widespread potential impact Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Impacts of past events and vulnerability to specific hazards are discussed below (see Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their impacts on Fresno County). Q.3 Vulnerability Assessment The intent of this section is to assess the District’s vulnerability separate from that of the whole planning area, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability Assessment in the main plan. This vulnerability assessment analyzes the assets at risk to hazards ranked of medium or high significance that may vary from other parts of the planning area. Each participating jurisdiction was in support of the main hazard summary identified in the base plan (See Table 4.1). However, the hazard summary rankings for each jurisdictional annex may vary slightly due to specific hazard risk and vulnerabilities unique to that jurisdiction (See Table Q.2). Identifying these differences helps the reader to differentiate the jurisdiction’s risk and vulnerabilities from that of the overall County. Note: The hazard “Significance” reflects overall ranking for each hazard, and is based on the District’s HMPC member input and the risk assessment developed during the planning process (see Chapter 4 of the base plan), which included a more detailed qualitative analysis with best available data. The hazard summaries in Table Q.2 reflect the hazards that could potentially affect the District. Those of Medium or High significance for the District are identified below. The discussion of vulnerability for each of the following hazards is located in Section Q.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses. Based on this analysis, the priority hazards (High Significance) for mitigation include agricultural hazards, dam failure, drought, and land subsidence. • agricultural hazards • dam failure • drought • flood/levee failure • soil hazards: land subsidence Other Hazards Hazards assigned a Significance rating of Low and which do not differ significantly from the County ranking (e.g., Low vs. High) are not addressed further in this plan, and are not assessed individually for specific vulnerabilities in this section. In the District, those hazards considered of low significance are as follows: • avalanche • earthquake Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • hazardous materials incidents • human health hazards • landslide • severe weather • soil hazards: erosion and expansive soils • volcano • wildfire Q.3.1 Assets at Risk This section considers the District’s assets at risk, which include real property; structures, and appurtenances throughout the District’s Boundary (see Table Q.3). It should be noted that real property and impact locations are maintained and operated entirely by the District. The District encompasses 614,000-acres, 1,034 miles of distribution pipeline, and 3,300 ag deliveries that are used for operation and maintenance. Table Q.3: Specific Critical Facilities and Other Assets Identified by District’s Planning Team Name of Asset Replacement Value ($) Hazard Specific Info. Distribution Pipeline 500,000,000 Drought Q.3.2 Estimating Potential Losses and Risk Note: This section details vulnerability to specific hazards, where quantifiable, and/or where (through HMPC member input) it differs from that of the overall County. Table Q.3 above shows the Westlands Water District’s critical facilities and assets that could be exposed to hazards. Specific losses for the incorporated communities and the portion of the County of Fresno within the District’s boundaries are discussed elsewhere in this hazard mitigation plan. Note: flood/levee failure is considered a Medium priority hazard by the District but is addressed for the cities and unincorporated Fresno County in the jurisdictional annexes and main plan risk assessment. See Chapter 4 Risk Assessment for details on vulnerability to this hazard. Since it is a special district, participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does not apply to the Westland Water District, thus NFIP Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties are not tracked for the jurisdiction; therefore, the District does not have this data available. There are two Repetitive Loss properties in the unincorporated County, but further details to determine if these are within the District’s boundary are not available. There are no Severe Repetitive Loss properties in the County as detailed in Chapter 4 Section 4.3.2 of the base plan. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Agricultural Hazards Due to the extent of customers that are farmers within the district, agricultural hazards can have significant impact the local economy. Dam Failure There are several dams within or that could affect the district facilities if a failure were to occur. Drought Due to the extent of customers that are farmers within the district, drought can have significant impact on the district’s income and the local economy. Drought also exacerbates land subsidence as noted below. Land Subsidence The groundwater basin underlying Westlands is comprised generally of two water-bearing zones: (1) an upper zone above a nearly impervious Corcoran Clay layer containing the Coastal and Sierra aquifers and (2) a lower zone below the Corcoran Clay containing the Sub-Corcoran aquifer. The location of these water-bearing zones is depicted on a generalized cross section of the District shown on Figure Q.2. These water-bearing zones are recharged by subsurface inflow from the east and northeast, the compaction of water-bearing sediments, percolation of pumped groundwater, and percolation from imported and natural surface water. Land subsidence due to groundwater overdraft ranged from one to 24 feet between 1926 and 1972 (U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1988). Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.2: Generalized Hydrogeological Cross Section of Westlands Surface water deliveries from the San Luis Unit (SLU) began in 1968 and largely replaced by groundwater for irrigation. However, extensive pumping occurred in 1977, a drought year when deliveries of CVP water amounted to only 25 percent of the District’s entitlement. In response to the surface water shortfall, farmers reactivated old wells and constructed new wells, pumping groundwater to irrigate their crops. During 1977, groundwater pumping rose to nearly 600,000 AF and the piezometric surface declined about 90 feet, resulting in localized subsidence of about 4 inches according to USGS officials. With less groundwater use the surface level recovered through the 1980’s. This cycle of groundwater use and recovery continues as groundwater pumping in the District fluctuates annually and the variation depends primarily on the amount of CVP surface water allocation. Groundwater pumping increased to about 300,000 AF in 1989-90 because of decreased CVP water supplies caused by the drought. Pumping during 1990-91 and 1991-92 estimated to be about 600,000 AF annually. This occurred again in 2009 and for a four-year period 2012-16 (see Figure Q.3). The current piezometric groundwater elevation has dropped from a high of 89 feet to a current low of -120 feet for a total decline of 209 feet. With 100% CVP allocation in 2017 the level has increased some with less than 60,000 AF of groundwater pumped. The current 2018 water year is trending to be another critically dry year. The initial CVP surface water allocation is only 20% and groundwater pumping is again projected to greatly increase. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.3: Historic Average Groundwater Elevation vs. Groundwater Pumping Westlands does not supply groundwater to District farmers nor does the District regulate or control groundwater pumping; individuals pump their own groundwater. The District however, does survey the static water levels in the wells and the water quality and quantity of the pumped groundwater, as part of the Groundwater Management Plan completed under provisions of AB 3030 in 1996. More recent District analyses of these data indicate that a better-estimated safe yield may be b etween 135,000 and 200,000 AF. Going forward to protect the aquifer as a source of water supply groundwater use may be limited to levels closer to the safe yield. Groundwater sustainability legislation will begin to implement management of the groundwater resource. Overdraft of the underlying basin in the San Joaquin Valley continues to be the major cause of subsidence in Westlands as ground water pumping increases. Consequently, land subsidence is the cause of many problems which include; (1) elevation and slope changes to the California Aqueduct that encompass a portion through the District (Figure Q.4); (2) the District’s delivery system consisting of pipelines, access roads, drains, canals, and metering deliveries; (3) damage to electrical utility infrastructure; (4) groundwater well casing from forces generated by compaction of fine grained materials in the aquifer systems. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.4: Subsidence in San Luis Field Division between July 2013 and March 2015, from UAVSAR (NASA 2015) The California Aqueduct runs through the District from Check 13 to Check 21. NASA’s figure above suggests elevation drops along the California Aqueduct, the estimates include subsidence data between July 2013 and March 2015, from O’Neill Forebay to Kettleman City, in yellows (- 1.5 inches to -3.0 inches), oranges (-3.0 inches to -5.0 inches) and reds (-5.0 inches to -8.0 inches). Subsidence caused from groundwater overdraft over the years has notable consequences to the District’s distribution system, as shown below. Figure Q.5 shows an example of fracture and pipeline blow (visible in background) caused by subsidence. Figure Q.6 shows the strain on an intake structure, demonstrating how subsidence can affect key conveyance facilities and cause structure failure. Both observations are examples of the damage reported by the District’s Field Engineer from a previous inspection of both sites. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.5: Lateral 7r-4.5 Subline Earth Movement Caused Fracture and Pipeline Blow Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure Q.6: Lateral 1R-4.0-1.0C Sunk Intake Structure Q.4 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capabilities assessment is divided into five sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities, fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts. To develop this capability assessment, the District’s planning representatives used a matrix of common mitigation activities to inventory which of these policies or programs were in place. The team then supplemented this inventory by reviewing additional existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs to determine if they contributed to reducing hazard-related losses. During the plan update process, this inventory was reviewed by the District’s planning representatives and Amec Foster Wheeler consultant team staff to update information where applicable and note ways in which these capabilities have improved or expanded. Additionally, in summarizing current capabilities and identifying gaps, the jurisdictional planning representatives also considered their ability to expand or improve upon existing policies and programs as potential new mitigation strategies. Westlands Water District’s updated capabilities are summarized below. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Q.4.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Table Q.4 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates those that are in place in the District. Table Q.4: Westlands Water District’s Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan No Zoning ordinance No Land Use Yes CUP Site plan review requirements No Growth management ordinance No Floodplain ordinance No Other special purpose ordinance (storm water, water conservation, wildlife) Yes USACE 404, CEQA, NEPA, MND Building code No Fire department ISO rating No Erosion or sediment control program No Storm water management program No Capital improvements plan No Economic development plan No Local emergency operations plan Yes Operation and Maintenance Other special plans Yes Dust Control Flood Insurance Study or other engineering study for streams No Elevation certificates No In order to implement the mitigation action identified and detailed in Section Q.5.2, Westlands will obtain the appropriate regulatory permits. The regulatory permits include: Biological Evaluation, Land Use application, Army Corps 404, Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan, Dust Control Plan, Encroachment permit, Building Permit, California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and National Environmental Protect Act. Westlands would develop a Dust Control Plan as prescribed and approved by San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) to minimize and control fugitive dust during construction. Q.4.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities Table Q.5 identifies the personnel responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in the District. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table Q.5: District’s Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Resources Division Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to infrastructure Yes Senior Field Engineer Personnel Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Consultant Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Associate Resource Personnel Full time building official No Floodplain manager No Emergency manager Yes Manager Personnel Grant writer Yes Resources Engineer Personnel Other personnel Yes Associate Resource Personnel GIS Data—Land use Yes Associate Resource Personnel GIS Data—Links to Assessor’s data No Warning systems/services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) No The District is governed by a nine-member Board of Directors and elected to four-year terms of office. The District’s Board manages and conducts the business and affairs of the District. The philosophy of the District is to provide for communities and farms dependent on water deliveries commitment for the preservation of its federal contract water supply and to conduct the maintenance, operational and administrative functions of Westlands in an efficient and effective manner. Q.4.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Table Q.6 identifies financial tools or resources that the District could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Table Q.6: District’s Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants No Capital improvements project funding Yes Authority to levy costs for specific purposes Yes Fees for water Yes Impact fees for new development Yes Incur debt through general obligation bonds Yes Incur debt through special tax bonds No Incur debt through private activities No Withhold spending in hazard prone areas No Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The District’s fiscal year begins on March 1 and ends on the last day of February. The budget adopted in February may be changed during the year as necessary. Westlands raises annual operating revenue from water sales that are billed monthly. In a normal year, its water sales revenue is used for all operating expenses. In addition, assessments are collected for non-operating costs such as repayment for the District’s distribution and drainage collector systems. The District’s O&M component of the water rate covers all costs associated with supplying and distributing water to customers, in addition to acquisition of capital assets and preventive maintenance programs. Rates may subsequently be adjusted if water supplies change. District O&M is added to the cost of CVP water. Q.4.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships Cooperation from landowners, DWR, and the Bureau is essential in the drought mitigation activities needed to operate and maintain the facility during an event. Needed manpower for running equipment such as pumps and conveyance will be a cooperative effort by District personnel. Q.4.5 Other Mitigation Efforts Annual maintenance activity includes vegetation control (herbicide, handwork), fence/gate repairs, erosion repairs, basin roadway graveling, basin slope repairs, pump/pipeline repairs, and structure inspections. During basin replenishment and recovery periods, the District personnel will oversee the basin operations. Q.4.6 Opportunities for Enhancement Based on the capabilities assessment, the Westlands Water District has several existing mechanisms in place that will help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are also opportunities to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the communities the District serves. Some of the opportunities for enhancement of the District’s existing mitigation program are listed below. • Develop a Drought Contingency Plan in partnership with the County that will help to create a framework for drought response and mitigation for the District and individuals the District serves. • Provide training to staff members and the Board of Directors related to hazards or hazard mitigation grant funding in partnership with the County and Cal OES. Continuing to inform and train staff on mitigation and the hazards that pose a risk to the communities in the District and the potential impacts to the service the District provides will lead to more informed staff members who can better communicate hazard related information to the public. Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Q.5 Mitigation Strategy Q.5.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives The Westlands Water District adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The information contained within this plan, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment, and the Mitigation Strategy will be used by the District to help inform updates and the development of plans, programs and policies. The District is dependent on continued cooperation with landowners to implement projects and better serve the communities. The hazard information contained in this plan will help to inform the ongoing outreach strategy the District has in place. As noted in Chapter 7 Plan Implementation, the HMPC representatives from the Westlands Water District will report on efforts to integrate the hazard mitigation plan into local plans, programs and policies and will report on these efforts at the annual HMPC plan review meeting. Q.5.2 Mitigation Actions The Westlands Water District planning team identified and prioritized the following mitigation action. In addition to implementing the mitigation action below the Westlands Water District will be participating in the county-wide, multi-jurisdictional action of developing and conducting a multi-hazard seasonal public awareness program. The county-wide project will be led by the County in partnership with all municipalities and special districts. The District agrees to help disseminate information on hazards provided by the County. More information on the action can be found in the base plan Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy (see Section 5.3.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions, Action #1. Develop and Conduct a Multi-Hazard Seasonal Public Awareness Program). 1. Institute a Groundwater Replenishment and Drought Resiliency Project Hazard(s) Addressed: Multi-hazard: drought, flood, soil hazards – land subsidence Issue/Background: The history of land subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley is integrally linked to the development of agriculture and the availability of water for irrigation. Further agricultural development without accompanying subsidence is dependent on the continued availability of surface water, which is subject to uncertainties due to climate and regulatory decisions. Construction of a 60-acre recharge basin on District land. The recharge basin could be used to percolate and seasonally store Kings River Floodwater, CVP Section 215 and rescheduled water. The recharged water could then be recovered and used in drought years. Kings River non-project water conveyed through the James Bypass will enter the Mendota Pool/Fresno Slough and pumped Fresno County (Westlands Water District) Q.16 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan from Lateral 7 Pumping Plant into the San Luis Canal (SLC) at milepost 115.43. CVP Section 215 water from the San Joaquin River can also be conveyed in this manner. These diverse sources of supply would be pumped from the SLC via the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant at milepost 143.16 into the Coalinga Canal (CC). This water would then be delivered through Lateral PV8P to the Project site. CVP Section 215 water will be conveyed when available and water users are not irrigating. This CVP Section 215 water would be requested and banked in the basin project. The 60-acre basin will have a recharge design capacity for up to 10,800 AF/year. After a five- year-period the amount of surface water recharged could range from 10,000 AF to as much as 50,000 AF. During drought periods, or when the lack of CVP allocation creates increased burden on groundwater supplies, the stored water would be recovered, less approximately 10% for basin losses. Other Alternatives: No action Responsible Office: Westlands Water District Priority (High, Medium, Low): High Cost Estimate: $2.6 million Potential Funding: District Reserve Funds, O&M, FEMA mitigation grants Benefits (Avoided Losses): The Project will enable water storage as a long-term resiliency plan by recharging the basin with Kings River floodwater, CVP Section 215 and rescheduled water when available to minimize potential risks caused by overdraft during dry periods. This would help mitigate land subsidence from over-drafting of wells during drought, and also has the benefit of alleviating flood flows on the Kings River. Schedule: Construction completed by Dec. 2020. Water conveyed annually. APPENDIX A: ADOPTION RESOLUTIONS Fresno County A.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Sample model resolution is provided below: Resolution # ______ Adopting the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 Whereas, (Name of Government/District/Organization seeking FEMA approval of hazard mitigation plan) recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people and property within our community; and Whereas, undertaking hazard mitigation actions will reduce the potential for harm to people and property from future hazard occurrences; and Whereas, an adopted Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is required as a condition of future funding for mitigation projects under multiple FEMA pre- and post-disaster mitigation grant programs; and Whereas, (Name of Government/District/Organization) fully participated in the FEMA-prescribed mitigation planning process to prepare this Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan; and Whereas, the California Office of Emergency Services and Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX officials have reviewed the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan ( ) and approved it ( ) contingent upon this official adoption of the participating governing body; Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the (Name of Government/District/Organization) adopts the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan as an official plan; and Be it resolved that the (Name of Government/District/Organization) adopts the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference into the safety element of their general plan in accordance with the requirements of AB 2140, and Be it further resolved, (Name of Government/District/Organization) will submit this adoption resolution to the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX officials to enable the plan’s final approval in accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and to establish conformance with the requirements of AB 2140. Passed: (date) Certifying Official APPENDIX B: LHMP CONTACT LIST Fresno County B.1 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended County Departments CAO Office CAO Jean Rousseau X 7/12/17 Public Health Director David Pomaville X OES Manager Kenneth Austin X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Analyst Angel Lopez X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Senior Analyst Darrel Schmidt X 7/12/16 10/6/17 11/16/17 Assistant OES Steven Crump X OES Gabriel De La Cerda X Analyst Adan Ortiz X 7/12/17 EH Manager Wayne Fox X Public Works Director Steve White X 7/12/17 Assistant Director Bernard Jimenez X Assistant Director John Thompson X 7/12/17 Development Services Manager William Kettler X Chief Building Inspector Chuck Jonas X 7/12/17 Public Works Division Engineer Robert Palacios X 7/12/17 Public Works Division Engineer Randy Ishii X Road Superintendent Armando Mendoza X 7/12/17 10/6/17 Road Superintendent John Coffman X 7/12/17 Engineer D'Andra Buchanan X 7/12/17 Supervising Engineer Dale Siemer X 10/6/17 Business Manager Lemuel Asprec X 7/12/17 11/16/17 Sr Engineer Seabastion Artal X County Surveyor Kevin Nehring X 7/12/17 Supervising Inspector Dan Mather X 10/6/17 11/16/17 Agriculture 1 Those that are not listed as attending a meeting participated in the planning process in other ways such as emails, phone calls and face-to-face meetings with the County Emergency Manager and consultants. Fresno County B.2 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended Ag Commissioner Les Wright X 7/12/17 Internal Services Department Director Robert Bash X Division Manager Jill Barr X 7/12/17 Analyst Ahla Yang X 10/6/17 11/16/17 Sheriff Department Sheriff Margaret Mimms X Captain John Zanoni X 7/12/17 Lieutenant Kathy Curtice X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Public Information Public Information Officer Jordan Scott X 11/16/17 Fresno County Fire Protection / Cal Fire Chief Mark Johnson X District Sup Ronald Bass X Assistant Chief Jim McDougal X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Battalion Chief Chris Christopherson X 7/12/17 Cities City of Fresno City Manager Wilma Quan-Schecter X EPO Dan Vasquez X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Fresno Fire Chief Kerri Donis X City of Clovis City Manager Luke Serpa X 7/12/17 Life Safety Manager Chad Fitzgerald X 7/12/17 11/16/17 Clovis Fire Chief John Binaski X City of Coalinga City Manager Marissa Trejo X Public Works Director Pete Preciado X 11/16/17 Coalinga Fire Chief Dwayne Gabriel X 11/16/17 City of Firebaugh City Manager Ben Gallegos X Police Chief Salvador Raygoza X 11/16/17 Firebaugh Fire Chief John G. Borboa X City of Fowler City Manager Jeannie Davis, MMC X Fowler Fire Chief Manuel Lopez X 7/12/17 11/16/17 City of Huron City Manager Jack Castro X Police Chief George Turegano X City of Kerman City Manager John Kunkel X Police Chief Joseph Blohm X City of Kingsburg City Manager Alexander J. Henderson X Fresno County B.3 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended Kingsburg Fire Chief Tim Ray X Captain Wayne Osborne X 7/12/17 City of Mendota City Manager Vince DiMaggio X City of Orange Cove Interim City Manager Anthony B. Lopez X City of Parlier City Manager Samuel A. Escobar X Police Chief Rick Ehle X City of Reedley City Manager Nicole R. Zieba X City Engineer John Robertson X 11/16/17 Reedley Fire Chief Jerald Isaak X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 City of San Joaquin City Manager Elizabeth Nunez X 11/16/17 City of Sanger City Manager Tim Chapa X Sanger Fire Chief Greg Tarascou X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 City of Selma City Manager David Elias X Police Chief Myron Dyck X 11/16/17 Selma Administrative Analyst Frankie Olivares X 10/6/17 Selma Fire Chief Mike Kain X Additional Fire Protection Agencies Hume Lake Fire Chief Thomas Warner X Laton Fire Chief Andrew Barkley X Bald Mountain Fire Chief Cam Donnahoo X Bald Mountain Fire Captain Matt Furrer X Bald Mountain Fire Advisory Fire Chief Don Ashbrook X Big Creek Fire Chief LaDonna Crane X 10/6/17 Auberry Fire Chief Rick Schacher X Pine Ridge Fire Chief Gary Martin X Orange Cove Fire Chief Ralph Michaels X Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council Forester Craig Jones X 7/12/17 Oak to Timberline Fire Safe Council Chair, CWPP Development Committee John Huneke X 7/12/17 Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Pat Gallegos X Highway 168 Fire Safe Council President Howard Hendrix X Orange Cove Fire Protection District Chief Ralph Michaels X Community Service District Big Creek Community Service District Kristi Loman X Biola Community Service District Edith M. Forsstrom X Fresno County B.4 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended Caruthers Community Service District Marie Mains X Del Rey Community Service District Hilda Ortiz X Easton Community Service District Luke Hoekstera X Laton Community Service District JoAnne Rempp X Sierra Cedars Community Service District Todd Bristol X Drainage District Panoche Drainage District Julie Cascia X Silver Creek Drainage District Jeff Bryant X Flood Control District Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Senior Analyst Andrew Remus X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Operation Engineer Brent Sunamoto X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Irrigation District Alta Irrigation District Irma Faria X Alta Irrigation District Interim Superintendent Stanley Saski X 10/6/17 Central California Irrigation District Chris White X Consolidated Irrigation District Margaret Macias X Consolidated Irrigation District Phillip Desatoff X Fresno Irrigation District September Singh X Fresno Irrigation District Chief Engineer Lawrence Kimura X 7/12/17 10/6/17 Fresno Irrigation District Engineer Sen Saetern X 11/16/17 James Irrigation District Steve Stadler X Laguna Irrigation District Scott Sills X Orange Cove Irrigation District John Sanders X Riverdale Irrigation District Kim Mayfield X Tranquility Irrigation District Elizabeth Reeves X Levee District Lower San Joaquin Levee District Reggie Hill X 10/6/17 11/16/17 Mosquito Abatement District Consolidated Mosquito Abatement District Steve Mulligan X Fresno County B.5 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended Fresno Mosquito and Vector Control District Julia Laciste X Public Utility Pinedale Public Utility District Jim Tsuruoka, General Manager X Riverdale Public Utility District Ronald Bass X Tranquility Public Utility District Laurie Siliznoff X Reclamation District Reclamation District #1606 Steven Stadler X Zalda Reclamation #801 District Ray Carlson X Resource Conservation Districts Excelsior & Kings River RCD Bill Longfellow X Kings River Conservation District Resource Analyst Soua Lee X 11/16/17 Kings River Conservation District Director of Resources Rick Hoelze X 11/16/17 Kings River Conservation District Dave Merritt X Firebaugh Resource Conservation District Jeff Bryant X James Resource Conservation District Steven Stadler X Los Banos Resource Conservation District Jennifer Gerstenberg X Panoche Resource Conservation District Julie Cascia X San Luis Resource Conservation District Michael Cannon X Sierra Resource Conservation District District Manager Steve Haze X 7/12/17 10/6/17 Sierra Resource Conservation District CWPP Project Manager Craig Jones X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 Tranquility Resource Conservation District Danny Wade X Westside Resource Conservation District Sargeant Green X Water Districts Broadview Water District Bobbie Ormonde X Firebaugh Canal Water District Madison Medeiros X Fresno Slough Water Danny Wade X Kings River Water District Richard Cosgrave X Liberty Water District Kevin Johansen X Mercy Springs Water District Julie Cascia X Mid Valley Water District Randy Hopkins X Fresno County B.6 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended Oro Loma Water District Steve Sloan X Pacheco Water District Julie Cascia X Panoche Water District Julie Cascia X Pleasant Valley Water District Donna Wilt X Raisin City Water District R. Gere Gunlund X San Luis Water District Martin McIntyre X Stinson Water District Herb Simmons X Tri-Valley Water District Richard Cosgrave X Westlands Water District Bobbie Ormonde X Westlands Water District Deputy General Manager Jose Gutierrez X 7/12/17 Westlands Water District Resources Engineer Israel Sanchez X 11/16/17 Waterworks District No. 18 Dan Pearce X Pinedale County Water District Jim Tsuruoka X Freewater County Water District Debbie Moglia X Malaga County Water District Laurie Cortez X Malaga County Water District Env Compliance Thomas Siphonsay X 7/12/17 Malaga County Water District Jim Anderson X 10/6/17 Malaga County Water District Supervisor Jesse Alvarez X 11/16/17 Other Districts and Agencies San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority Larry Freeman X San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Seyed Sadredin X San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Roger McCoy X State of California Public Health Drinking Water Division Carl Carlucci X California Department of Transportation Sharri Bender Ehlert X California Department of Transportation Chief Environmental Shane Gunn X 7/12/17 California Department of Transportation North Region Manager Dan Ryan X 7/12/17 10/6/17 Fresno County B.7 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Agency/Jurisdiction Title Name Participating Jurisdiction Stakeholder Meetings1 Attended California Water Resource Department Iris Yamagata X California Water Resource Department Paul Romero X California Water Resource Department Kevin Faulkenberry X Table Mtn Rancheria Frank Marquez Jr X USFS Sierra National Forest Sunshuri Littlebuck- Naylor X USFS Sierra National Forest Carolyn Ballard X USFS Sierra National Forest Fire Chief John Goss X 7/12/17 Army Corp of Engineers Thomas Jehrke X Army Corp of Engineers Mike Erskine X Army Corp of Engineers Park Manager Jeromy Caldwell X 10/6/17 Bureau of Reclamation Sup Civil Engineer Gil Reyes X 7/12/17 10/6/17 11/16/17 USGS Seismologist Susan Hough X CAL-OES ESC Terri Mejorado X 7/12/17 10/6/17 Amec Foster Wheeler (consultant) Project Manager Jeff Brislawn Env. Scientist Leslie Purvis Mintier Harnish (subconsultant) Larry Mintier Bob Lagomarsino Robert Olson APPENDIX C: MITIGATION STRATEGY Fresno County C.1 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Categories of Mitigation Measures Considered PREVENTION: Preventive measures are designed to keep the problem from occurring or getting worse. Their objective is to ensure that future development is not exposed to damage and does not increase damage to other properties. • Planning • Zoning • Open Space Preservation • Land Development Regulations − Subdivision regulations − floodplain development regulations • Storm Water Management • Fuels Management, Fire-Breaks • Building Codes − Fire-Wise Construction • (See Property Protection also) EMERGENCY SERVICES measures protect people during and after a disaster. A good emergency services program addresses all hazards. Measures include: • Warning (floods, tornadoes, ice storms, hail storms, dam failures) − NOAA Weather Radio − Sirens − Reverse 911 • Evacuation & Sheltering • Communications • Emergency Planning − Activating the emergency operations room (emergency management) − Closing streets or bridges (police or public works) − Shutting off power to threatened areas (utility company) − Holding children at school/releasing children from school (school district) − Passing out sand and sandbags (public works) − Ordering an evacuation (mayor) − Opening evacuation shelters (Red Cross) − Monitoring water levels (engineering) − Security and other protection measures (police) • Monitoring of Conditions (dams) Fresno County C.2 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan • Critical Facilities Protection (Buildings or locations vital to the response and recovery effort, such as police/fire stations, hospitals, sewage treatment plants/lift stations, power substations) − Buildings or locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters, such as hazardous materials facilities and nursing homes − Lifeline Utilities Protection − Health & Safety Maintenance PROPERTY PROTECTION: Property protection measures are used to modify buildings subject to damage rather than to keep the hazard away. A community may find these to be inexpensive measures because often they are implemented by or cost-shared with property owners. Many of the measures do not affect the appearance or use of a building, which makes them particularly appropriate for historical sites and landmarks. • Retrofitting/disaster proofing − Floods Wet/Dry floodproofing (barriers, shields, backflow valves) Relocation Acquisition − Tornadoes Safe Rooms Securing roofs and foundations with fasteners and tie-downs Strengthening garage doors and other large openings − Drought Improve water supply (transport/storage/conservation) Remove moisture competitive plants (Tamarisk/Salt Cedar) Water Restrictions/Water Saver Sprinklers/Appliances Grazing on CRP lands (no overgrazing-see Noxious Weeds) Create incentives to consolidate/connect water services Recycled wastewater on golf courses − Earthquakes Removing masonry overhangs, bracing other parts. Tying down appliances, water heaters, bookcases and fragile furniture so they won’t fall over during a quake. Installing flexible utility connections that won’t break during shaking (pipelines too!) − Wildfire, Grassfires Replacing building components with fireproof materials − Roofing, screening Create “Defensible Space” Installing spark arrestors Fuels Modification − Noxious Weeds/Insects Mowing Fresno County C.3 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Spraying Replacement planting Stop overgrazing Introduce natural predators • Insurance NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION: Natural resource protection activities are generally aimed at preserving (or in some cases restoring) natural areas. In so doing, these activities enable the naturally beneficial functions of floodplains and watersheds to be better realized. These natural and beneficial floodplain functions include the following: • storage of floodwaters • absorption of flood energy • reduction in flood scour • infiltration that absorbs overland flood flow • groundwater recharge • removal/filtering of excess nutrients, pollutants, and sediments from floodwaters • habitat for flora and fauna • recreational and aesthetic opportunities Methods of protecting natural resources include: • Erosion & Sediment Control • Wetlands Protection • Riparian Area/Habitat Protection • Threatened & Endangered Species Protection • Fuels Management • Set-back regulations/buffers • Best Management Practices Best management practices (“BMPs”) are measures that reduce nonpoint source pollutants that enter the waterways. Nonpoint source pollutants come from non-specific locations. Examples of nonpoint source pollutants are lawn fertilizers, pesticides, and other farm chemicals, animal wastes, oils from street surfaces and industrial areas and sediment from agriculture, construction, mining and forestry. These pollutants are washed off the ground’s surface by stormwater and flushed into receiving storm sewers, ditches and streams. BMPs can be implemented during construction and as part of a project’s design to permanently address nonpoint source pollutants. There are three general categories of BMPs: 1. Avoidance: setting construction projects back from the stream. 2. Reduction: Preventing runoff that conveys sediment and other water-borne pollutants, such as planting proper vegetation and conservation tillage. Fresno County C.4 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 3. Cleanse: Stopping pollutants after they are en route to a stream, such as using grass drainageways that filter the water and retention and detention basins that let pollutants settle to the bottom before they are drained • Dumping Regulations • Water Use Restrictions • Weather Modification • Landscape Management STRUCTURAL PROJECTS have traditionally been used by communities to control flows and water surface elevations. Structural projects keep flood waters away from an area. They are usually designed by engineers and managed or maintained by public works staff. These measures are popular with many because they “stop” flooding problems. However, structural projects have several important shortcomings that need to be kept in mind when considering them for flood hazard mitigation: • They are expensive, sometimes requiring capital bond issues and/or cost sharing with Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Natural Resources Conservation Service. • They disturb the land and disrupt natural water flows, often destroying habitats. • They are built to a certain flood protection level that can be exceeded by a larger flood, causing extensive damage. • They can create a false sense of security when people protected by a structure believe that no flood can ever reach them. • They require regular maintenance to ensure that they continue to provide their design protection level. Structural measures include: • Detention/Retention structures • Erosion and Sediment Control • Basins/Low-head Weirs • Channel Modifications • Culvert resizing/replacement/Maintenance • Levees and Floodwalls • Fencing (for snow, sand, wind) • Drainage System Maintenance • Reservoirs(for flood control, water storage, recreation, agriculture) • Diversions • Storm Sewers Fresno County C.5 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan PUBLIC INFORMATION: A successful hazard mitigation program involves both the public and private sectors. Public information activities advise property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. These activities can motivate people to take protection • Hazard Maps and Data • Outreach Projects − (mailings, media, web, speakers bureau) • Library Resources • Real Estate Disclosure • Environmental Education • Technical Assistance Alternative Mitigation Measures per Category Prevention Preventive measures are designed to keep the problem from occurring or getting worse. Their objective is to ensure that future development is not exposed to damage and does not increase damage to other properties. • Planning • Zoning • Open space preservation • Land development regulations − Subdivision regulations − Floodplain development regulations • Stormwater management • Fuels management, fire breaks • Building codes − Firewise construction • (also see Property Protection) Emergency Services Emergency services protect people during and after a disaster. A good emergency services program addresses all hazards. Measures include: • Warning (floods, tornadoes, ice storms, hail storms, dam failures) − NOAA weather radio all hazards − Sirens − Reverse 911 • Evacuation and sheltering Fresno County C.6 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan • Communications • Emergency planning − Activating the emergency operations room (emergency management) − Closing streets or bridges (police or public works) − Shutting off power to threatened areas (utility company) − Holding children at school/releasing children from school (school district) − Passing out sand and sandbags (public works) − Ordering an evacuation (mayor) − Opening evacuation shelters (red cross) − Monitoring water levels (engineering) − Security and other protection measures (police) • Monitoring of conditions (dams) • Critical facilities protection (buildings or locations vital to the response and recovery effort, such as police/fire stations, hospitals, sewage treatment plants/lift stations, power substations) − Buildings or locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters, such as hazardous materials facilities and nursing homes − Lifeline utilities protection − Health and safety maintenance Property Protection Property protection measures are used to modify buildings subject to damage rather than to keep the hazard away. A community may find these to be inexpensive measures because often they are implemented by or cost-shared with property owners. Many of the measures do not affect the appearance or use of a building, which makes them particularly appropriate for historical sites and landmarks. • Retrofitting/disaster proofing − Floods Wet/dry floodproofing (barriers, shields, backflow valves) Relocation Acquisition − Tornadoes Safe rooms Securing roofs and foundations with fasteners and tie-downs Strengthening garage doors and other large openings − Drought Improve water supply (transport/storage/conservation) Remove moisture competitive plants (tamarisk/salt cedar) Water restrictions/water saver sprinklers/appliances Grazing on CRP lands (no overgrazing—see noxious weeds) Create incentives to consolidate/connect water services Fresno County C.7 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Recycled wastewater on golf courses − Earthquakes Removing masonry overhangs, bracing other parts Tying down appliances, water heaters, bookcases and fragile furniture so they will not fall over during a quake. Installing flexible utility connections that will not break during shaking (pipelines, too) − Wildland fire Replacing building components with fireproof materials (roofing, screening) Creating “defensible space” Installing spark arrestors Fuels modification − Noxious weeds/insects Mowing Spraying Replacement planting Stop overgrazing Introduce natural predators • Insurance Natural Resource Protection Natural resource protection activities are generally aimed at preserving (or in some cases restoring) natural areas. In so doing, these activities enable the naturally beneficial functions of floodplains and watersheds to be better realized. These natural and beneficial floodplain functions include the following: • Storage of floodwaters • Absorption of flood energy • Reduction in flood scour • Infiltration that absorbs overland flood flow • Groundwater recharge • Removal/filtering of excess nutrients, pollutants, and sediments from floodwaters • Habitat for flora and fauna • Recreational and aesthetic opportunities Methods of protecting natural resources include: • Erosion and sediment control • Wetlands protection • Riparian area/habitat protection • Threatened and endangered species protection • Fuels management Fresno County C.8 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan • Set-back regulations/buffers • Best management practices—Best management practices (“BMPs”) are measures that reduce nonpoint source pollutants that enter the waterways. Nonpoint source pollutants come from non-specific locations. Examples of nonpoint source pollutants are lawn fertilizers, pesticides, and other farm chemicals, animal wastes, oils from street surfaces and industrial areas and sediment from agriculture, construction, mining and forestry. These pollutants are washed off the ground’s surface by stormwater and flushed into receiving storm sewers, ditches and streams. BMPs can be implemented during construction and as part of a project’s design to permanently address nonpoint source pollutants. There are three general categories of BMPs: − Avoidance—Setting construction projects back from the stream. − Reduction—Preventing runoff that conveys sediment and other water-borne pollutants, such as planting proper vegetation and conservation tillage. − Cleanse—Stopping pollutants after they are en route to a stream, such as using grass drainageways that filter the water and retention and detention basins that let pollutants settle to the bottom before they are drained • Dumping regulations • Water use restrictions • Weather modification • Landscape management Structural Projects Structural projects have traditionally been used by communities to control flows and water surface elevations. Structural projects keep flood waters away from an area. They are usually designed by engineers and managed or maintained by public works staff. These measures are popular with many because they “stop” flooding problems. However, structural projects have several important shortcomings that need to be kept in mind when considering them for flood hazard mitigation: • They are expensive, sometimes requiring capital bond issues and/or cost sharing with Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Natural Resources Conservation Service. • They disturb the land and disrupt natural water flows, often destroying habitats. • They are built to a certain flood protection level that can be exceeded by a larger flood, causing extensive damage. • They can create a false sense of security when people protected by a structure believe that no flood can ever reach them. • They require regular maintenance to ensure that they continue to provide their design protection level. Structural measures include: • Detention/retention structures Fresno County C.9 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan • Erosion and sediment control • Basins/low-head weirs • Channel modifications • Culvert resizing/replacement/maintenance • Levees and floodwalls • Fencing (for snow, sand, wind) • Drainage system maintenance • Reservoirs (for flood control, water storage, recreation, agriculture) • Diversions • Storm sewers Public Information A successful hazard mitigation program involves both the public and private sectors. Public information activities advise property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. These activities can motivate people to take protection • Hazard maps and data • Outreach projects (mailings, media, web, speakers bureau) • Library resources • Real estate disclosure • Environmental education • Technical assistance Mitigation Alternative Selection Criteria The following criteria were used to select and prioritize proposed mitigation measures: STAPLE/E • Social—Does the measure treat people fairly? (different groups, different generations) • Technical—Will it work? (Does it solve the problem? Is it feasible?) • Administrative—Do you have the capacity to implement and manage project? • Political—Who are the stakeholders? Did they get to participate? Is there public support? Is political leadership willing to support? • Legal—Does your organization have the authority to implement? Is it legal? Are there liability implications? • Economic—Is it cost-beneficial? Is there funding? Does it contribute to the local economy or economic development? • Environmental—Does it comply with environmental regulations? Fresno County C.10 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Sustainable Disaster Recovery • Quality of life • Social equity • Hazard mitigation • Economic development • Environmental protection/enhancement • Community participation Smart Growth Principles • Infill versus sprawl • Efficient use of land resources • Full use of urban resources • Mixed uses of land • Transportation options • Detailed, human-scale design Other • Does measure address area with highest risk? • Does measure protect … − The largest # of people exposed to risk? − The largest # of buildings? − The largest # of jobs? − The largest tax income? − The largest average annual loss potential? − The area impacted most frequently? − Critical infrastructure (access, power, water, gas, telecommunications)? • What is timing of available funding? • What is visibility of project? • Community credibility Mitigation Action Selection and Prioritization Criteria Does the proposed action protect lives? Does the proposed action address hazards or areas with the highest risk? Does the proposed action protect critical facilities, infrastructure, or community assets? Does the proposed action meet multiple objectives (multi-objective management)? Fresno County C.11 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan STAPLE/E Developed by FEMA, this method of applying evaluation criteria enables the planning team to consider in a systematic way the social, technical, administrative, political, legal, economic, and environmental opportunities and constraints of implementing a particular mitigation action. For each action, the HMPC should ask, and consider the answers to, the following questions: Social Does the measure treat people fairly (different groups, different generations)? Technical Will it work? (Does it solve the problem? Is it feasible?) Administrative Is there capacity to implement and manage project? Political Who are the stakeholders? Did they get to participate? Is there public support? Is political leadership willing to support it? Legal Does your organization have the authority to implement? Is it legal? Are there liability implications? Economic Is it cost-beneficial? Is there funding? Does it contribute to the local economy or economic development? Does it reduce direct property losses or indirect economic losses? Environmental Does it comply with environmental regulations or have adverse environmental impacts Fresno County DRAFT C.12 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Example Mitigation Action Items by Community Rating System Mitigation Category and Hazard Alternative Mitigation Actions Human Health hazards (Pan flu, West Nile) Dam Failure Floods Land slides/ Land Subsidence /Soil hazards Weather Extremes (hail, lightning, wind, temps, fog, drought, tornadoes) Earthquake Wildfires Winter Weather PREVENTION Building codes and enforcement ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Comprehensive Watershed Tax ■ Density controls ■ ■ ■ ■ Design review standards ■ ■ ■ ■ Easements ■ ■ ■ Environmental review standards ■ ■ ■ ■ Floodplain development regulations ■ ■ Hazard mapping ■ ■ ■ ■ Floodplain zoning ■ ■ Forest fire fuel reduction ■ Housing/landlord codes ■ Slide-prone area/grading/hillside development regulations ■ ■ Manufactured home guidelines/regulations ■ ■ ■ ■ Multi-Jurisdiction Cooperation within watershed ■ ■ Open space preservation ■ ■ ■ ■ Performance standards ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Special use permits ■ ■ ■ ■ Stormwater management regulations ■ Subdivision and development regulations ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Surge protectors and lightning protection ■ Tree Management ■ ■ ■ Transfer of development rights ■ ■ ■ Utility location ■ ■ ■ PROPERTY PROTECTION Fresno County C.13 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Alternative Mitigation Actions Human Health hazards (Pan flu, West Nile) Dam Failure Floods Land slides/ Land Subsidence /Soil hazards Weather Extremes (hail, lightning, wind, temps, fog, drought, tornadoes) Earthquake Wildfires Winter Weather Acquisition of hazard prone structures ■ ■ ■ ■ Construction of barriers around structures ■ ■ Elevation of structures ■ ■ Relocation out of hazard areas ■ ■ ■ ■ Non structural improvements (safety film on windows, bookshelf anchoring, critical equipment bracing etc.) ■ ■ Structural retrofits (e.g., reinforcement, floodproofing, bracing, etc.) ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ PUBLIC EDUCATION AND AWARENESS Debris Control ■ Flood Insurance ■ ■ Hazard information centers ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Public education and outreach programs ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Real estate disclosure ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Crop Insurance ■ ■ NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION Best Management Practices (BMPs) ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Forest and vegetation management ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Hydrological Monitoring ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Sediment and erosion control regulations ■ ■ ■ Stream corridor restoration ■ ■ Stream dumping regulations ■ Urban forestry and landscape management ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Wetlands development regulations ■ ■ ■ EMERGENCY SERVICES Critical facilities protection ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Emergency response services ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Fresno County C.14 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Alternative Mitigation Actions Human Health hazards (Pan flu, West Nile) Dam Failure Floods Land slides/ Land Subsidence /Soil hazards Weather Extremes (hail, lightning, wind, temps, fog, drought, tornadoes) Earthquake Wildfires Winter Weather Hazard threat recognition ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Hazard warning systems (community sirens, NOAA weather radio) ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Health and safety maintenance ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Evacuation planning ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ STRUCTURAL PROJECTS Channel maintenance ■ Dams/reservoirs (including maintenance) ■ ■ Levees and floodwalls (including maintenance) ■ Safe room/shelter ■ ■ ■ Snow fences ■ Water supply augmentation ■ Post-disaster mitigation ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ APPENDIX D: REFERENCES Fresno County D.1 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2006 Fresno County Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report. County of Fresno Department of Agriculture. 2006. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/agricultural-commissioner/crop- report-history. 2007 Fresno County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan. Draft. Council of Fresno County Governments. 2007. www.fresnocog.org/. 2015 Fresno County Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report. County of Fresno Department of Agriculture. 2015. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/agricultural-commissioner/crop- report-history. California Department of Conservation Farmland. Mapping and Monitoring Program. www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/. California Department of Finance, www.dof.ca.gov/. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. http://calfire.ca.gov. California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation. http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/. California Department of Public Health, https://www.cdph.ca.gov/. California Department of Water Resources. www.water.ca.gov/. California Employment Development Department. www.edd.ca.gov/. California’s Forests and Rangelands: 2010 Assessment. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/. California Geological Survey. www.conservation.ca.gov/CGS/. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. www.caloes.ca.gov/. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program. http://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes-divisions/fire-rescue/hazardous-materials/california- accidental-release-prevention. California Institute of Technology, Southern California Earthquake Center. https://www.scec.org/. California Natural Diversity Data Base. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB. Fresno County D.2 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan California Volcano Observatory. U.S. Geological Survey, Volcano Hazards Program. https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/observatories/calvo/. California West Nile Virus Web Site. www.westnile.ca.gov/. Cities/Counties Ranked by Size, Numeric, and Percent Change, 2011-2016 Estimates with 2010 Census Benchmark, State of California Department of Finance. http://www.dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/Estimates/E-4/2011-20/. City of Clovis. www.ci.clovis.ca.us/. City of Coalinga. www.coalinga.com/. City of Fresno. www.fresno.gov/. City of Kerman. www.cityofkerman.net/. City of Kingsburg. www.cityofkingsburg-ca.gov/. City of Mendota. http://ci.mendota.ca.us/. City of Sanger. www.ci.sanger.ca.us/. City of Selma. www.cityofselma.com/. Communities at Risk. California Fire Alliance. http://osfm.fire.ca.gov/fireplan/fireplanning_communities_at_risk /. Community Rating System. Federal Emergency Management Agency National Flood Insurance Program. www.fema.gov/. Council of Fresno County Governments. www.fresnocog.org/. County of Fresno Heat Emergency Contingency Plan. Draft. Fresno County Community Health. 2007. Disease Maps 2015. U.S. Geological Survey. http://diseasemaps.usgs.gov/. Enhanced Fujita Scale. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Prediction Center. www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/. Economic Development Corporation Fresno County. www.fresnoedc.com/. Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Fresno County. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2016. Fresno County D.3 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Fire Hazard Severity Zones DRAFT, 9-2007, Very High zones in LRA. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire and Resource Assessment Program. 2007. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fire_prevention_wildland_zones. Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California. 1988. https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/5views/5views.htm. The Flood Insurance Study for the County of Fresno. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2016. Fresno County, CA. www.co.fresno.ca.us/. Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner. http://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/agricultural- commissioner Fresno County Assessor’s Office. www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/assessor. Fresno County Assessor’s Office, 2017 Certified Roll Values. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/assessor/assessment-roll. Fresno County Department of Community Health. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/public-health/community-health. Fresno County Drought Related Tree Mortality Zones: Tiers 1 and 2. Fresno County, CA; FRAP, US Forest Service, 2017. http://www.fire.ca.gov/treetaskforce/. Fresno County General Plan. 2000, Draft update 2017. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/public-works-planning/divisions-of-public-works-and- planning/development-services-division/planning-and-land-use/general-plan-maps. Fresno County Local Agency Formation Commission. www.fresnolafco.org/. Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan. Fresno County Office of Emergency Services. 2017. Fresno County Operational Area Dam Failure Evacuation Plan, 2003; Fresno County Operational Area Master Emergency Services Plan, 2003. Fresno County Office of Emergency Services. Fresno County Ordinance Code. LexisNexis Municipal Codes. 2018.https://library.municode.com/ca/fresno_county/codes/code_of_ordinances. . Fresno County D.4 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Fresno County Public Works and Planning. www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/public-works- planning. Fresno County Zoning Ordinance. Department of Public Works and Planning, Development Services Division. 2011. https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/board-of- supervisors/ordinance-code. Fresno History. Fresno Convention and Visitor’s Bureau. www.fresnocvb.org/about/history.asp. Fresno-Kings Unit Pre-Fire Management Plan. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2009. Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/. Future Eruptions in California's Long Valley Area—What’s Likely? U.S. Geological Survey. Fact Sheet 073-97. 1997. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs073-97/. Getting Started: Building Support for Mitigation Planning. Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA 386-1. 2002. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1521-20490- 3966/howto1.pdf. Golden Gate Weather Services. http://ggweather.com/. The Great Pandemic: The United States in 1918-1919. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://cybercemetery.unt.edu/archive/allcollections/20090305004013/http://vietnamese.pandemi cflu.gov/pandemicflu/envi/24/_1918_pandemicflu_gov/your_state/california.htm. Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance Program. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). July, 2013. https://www.fema.gov/media-library- data/15463cb34a2267a900bde4774c3f42e4/FINAL_Guidance_081213_508.pdf HAZUS-MH 4.0 Federal Emergency Management Agency. www.fema.gov/. Highway 168 Fire Safe Council Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Revised. Highway 168 Fire Safe Council. August 2006. Historic American Buildings Survey. National Park Service. www.nps.gov/history/hdp/habs/. Historic American Engineering Record. National Park Service. www.nps.gov/history/hdp/haer/. HSIP Freedom-National Dam Inventory, 2015 Fresno County D.5 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Influenza. World Health Organization Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response. www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/en/. Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning. Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA 386-7. 2003. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1524-20490- 3869/howto7.pdf. Introduction to Hazard Mitigation. Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA IS-393.A, 2006. https://training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=IS-393.b. Kings River Conservation District. www.krcd.org/. Levees In History: The Levee Challenge. Dr. Gerald E. Galloway, Jr., P.E., Ph.D., Water Policy Collaborative, University of Maryland, Visiting Scholar, USACE, IWR. 2008. http://www.floods.org/ace-files/leveesafety/lss_levee_history_galloway.ppt Local Mitigation Planning Handbook. Federal Emergency Management Agency. March, 2013. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1910-25045- 9160/fema_local_mitigation_handbook.pdf Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/7251. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). https://www.nasa.gov/ National Center for Environmental Information Storm Events Database. www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ National Flood Insurance Program. Federal Emergency Management Agency. https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program. National Inventory of Levees. FEMA NFHL and the California Department of Water Resources. 2016 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. www.noaa.gov National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for Environmental Information – State Climate Summaries. https://statesummaries.ncics.org/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Storm Prediction Center. www.spc.noaa.gov National Register Database and Research. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/database-research.htm. Fresno County D.6 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan National Weather Service Forecast Office, San Joaquin Valley/Hanford, California. www.wrh.noaa.gov/hnx/. Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study to Assess the Future Savings from Mitigation Activities. National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council. 2005. Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study to Assess the Future Savings from Mitigation Activities. National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council. 2017. https://www.nibs.org/page/ms2_dwnload. The Online Tornado FAQ. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Prediction Center. www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/. PandemicFlu.gov. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. www.pandemicflu.gov/. Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2011-2018, with 2010 Benchmark. State of California Department of Finance. 2018. http://www.dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/Estimates/E-5/. Population Projections for California and Its Counties 2000-2050, by Age, Gender and Race/Ethnicity. State of California Department of Finance. 2007. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California. California Geological Survey. Open-File Report 96-08. 1996. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Pages/PSHA/OFR9608/psha-ofr.aspx. Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act. Public Law 93-288, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207. August 2016. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/15271. Sierra Resource Conservation District. www.sierrarcd.com/. Social Science Data Analysis Network. www.censusscope.org/. Social Vulnerability Index. University of South Carolina Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute. 2000. http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/geog/hvri/sovi%C2%AE-2000-32-variables. Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS).Arizona State University Center for Emergency Management and Homeland Security. . https://cemhs.asu.edu/sheldus/. State of California, Commission on Local Governance for the 21st Century. State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. www.conservation.ca.gov/. Fresno County D.7 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan State of California Enhanced Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP). California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2013. www.hazardmitigation.oes.ca.gov/. State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2007. www.hazardmitigation.oes.ca.gov/. Thompson, E. Paving Paradise: A New Perspective on California Farmland Conversion. American Farmland Trust. 2007. https://www.farmlandinfo.org/paving-paradise-new- perspective-california-farmland-conversion. U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2012 - 2016. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. www.usace.army.mil/ US Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/ U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 American Community Survey (2015 estimates). www.census.gov U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census. U.S. Coast Guard, National Response Center. www.nrc.uscg.mil/ U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Risk Management Agency U.S. Drought Monitor. University of Nebraska-Lincoln National Drought Mitigation Center. http://drought.unl.edu/. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Climate and Land-Use Scenarios (ICLUS) https://www.epa.gov/iclus U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Office, www.fws.gov/sacramento US Forest Service, Wildland Fire Assessment System. http://www.wfas.net U.S. Geological Survey. https://www.usgs.gov/ U.S. Geological Survey, Cascades Volcano Observatory. http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov Western Regional Climate Center. www.wrcc.dri.edu/. APPENDIX E: PLANNING PROCESS From: Lopez, Angel <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017 5:13 PM To: miribarren@alvina.k12.ca.us; twaite@fcoe.net; thybee@burrel.k12.ca.us; orschkorn@caruthers.k12.ca.us; janetyoung@cusd.com; bmannlein@fcoe.net; rcash@chusd.k12.ca.us; rfreitas@fldusd.org; ecederquist@fowlerusd.org; armand.chavez@fresnounified.org; karen.temple@fresnounified.org; aarredondo@gpusd.org; robert.frausto@kermanusd.com; garzaj@kcusd.com; mford@kingsburg‐elem.k12.ca.us; jmarcum@laton.k12.ca.us; grossette@fcoe.net; smanser@monroe.k12.ca.us; warrhm@att.net; mmrodriguez@parlier.k12.ca.us; ebitter@fcoe.net; bramirez@raisincity.k12.ca.us; ecash@riverdale.k12.ca.us; marc_johnson@sanger.k12.ca.us; Kevin_edwards@sanger.k12.ca.us; msutton@selma.k12.ca.us; jharris@sierrausd.org; ddrew@washingtoncolony.k12.ca.us; jpestorich@wusd.ws; stacy_s@wpesd.org; baldo945@aol.com; sean.bradbury@fresno.edu; dhuerta@csufresno.edu; joecallahan@scccd.edu; frankgornick@whccd.edu; barbara.hiocco@reedleycollege.edu; bcservices218@gmail.com; office@biolabcd.org; carutherscsd@sbcglobal.net; drcsd@pacbell.net; emailccservices@gmail.com; latonwater@sbcglobal.net; SierraCedarsCSD@gmail.com; sstadler@krcd.org; jcascia@panochewd.org; brayant_jeff@sbcglobal.net; ashbrook.don@gmail.com; ocfpd@hotmail.com; terris@fresnofloodcontrol.org; ipf@altaid.org; cwhite@ccidwater.org; mmacias@cidwater.com; pdesatoff@cidwater.com; ssingh@fresnoirrigation.com; sstadler@jamesid.org; scott@lagunaid.com; jsanders@orangecoveid.org; riverdaleid@sbcglobal.net; liz@trqid.com; lsjld@elite.net; smulligan@mosquitobuzz.net; Julia@fresnomosquito.org; ppud@att.net; rpud@sbcglobal.net; jandlsiliznoff@outlook.com; sstadler@jamesid.org; bryant_jeff@sbcglobal.net; sstadler@jamesid.org; gerstenb@jps.net; jcascia@panochewd.org; cannon@bfarm.com; sandrits@netptc.net; danny@trqid.com; hydrobuffalo@sbcglobal.net; bormonde@westlandswater.org; firebaughcanal@sbcglobal.net; danny@trqid.com; donnahrc@aol.com; rcozzie@aol.com; kjohansen@ppeng.com; jcascia@panochewd.org; rhopkins@ppeng.com; stevesloan31@yahoo.com; jcascia@panochewd.org; jcascia@panochewd.org; donna_cfy@yahoo.com; gunlund@sbcglogal.net; associate@slwd.net; hsimmons@ppeng.com; rcozzie@aol.com; bormonde@westlandswater.org; terri@jpprop.org; danpearce@waterworksdist18.com; pe‐pcwd@sbcglobal.net; mogdeb@aol.com; lcortez@malagacwd.org; lfreeman@sjrecwa.net; Seyed.Sadredin@valleyair.org; roger.mccoy@valleyair.org; carl.carlucci@cdph.ca.gov; sharri_bender_ehlert@dot.ca.gov; irisy@water.ca.gov; promero@water.ca.gov; faulkenb@water.ca.gov; fmarquez@tmr.org; ajmasovero@fs.fed.us; nmetcalf@fs.fed.us; thomas.jehrke@usace.army.mil; michael.r.erskine@usace.army.mil; mjackson@usbr.gov; dstroup@usbr.gov; lzaninovich@usbr.gov; shanna@usgs.gov; hough@usgs.gov; dgabriel@coalinga.com; mlopez@ci.fowler.ca.us; eacres07@yahoo.com; jerry.isaak@reedley.ca.gov; schacher@netptc.net; firechief@ci.firebaugh.ca.us; fiore_warner@yahoo.com; firechief@cityofkingsburg‐ca.gov; gregt@ci.sanger.ca.us; chief@hlvfd.org; mlcranes@netptc.net; andrewb_latonfire@att.net; kerri.donis@fresno.gov; mark.a.johnson@fire.ca.gov; rpud@sbcglobal.net; matt_furrer@emcorgroup.com; camahoo@yahoo.com; chief@pineridgefire.org; r.michaels@orangecovefire.com; michaelk@cityofselma.com Cc: Brislawn, Jeff P; Austin, Kenneth; Ortiz, Adan; Crump, Stephen; De La Cerda, Gabriel Subject: Fresno County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan‐Request for Participation Attachments: Jeff Brislawn.vcf; AB 2140 Authorities Fact Sheet 06172015 (2).pdf Good afternoon everyone, Fresno County is beginning the process of updating its Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) to meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000). The primary purpose of the Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and human-caused hazards and their effects on the County Operational area. With an approved plan or annex local agencies become eligible to apply for federal mitigation grant funding. The 2009 plan is expired and needs a comprehensive update to comply with the DMA 2000 requirements. The emphasis of DMA 2000 is on creating an ongoing, community-wide planning process that involves the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee, the public, and other key stakeholders. The Fresno County Office of Emergency Services is taking the lead on the project in coordination with a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) comprised of various County departments, municipalities, special districts and other stakeholders. Professional planning assistance is being provided by AMEC Foster Wheeler. The effort will begin in June and a timeline of the planning schedule will be discussed at the kickoff meeting later this month. At this point, we are soliciting input from those jurisdictions that did not participate in the 2009 plan to determine if they will be full participants in the 2017 update. The jurisdictions that participated in 2009 include: • City of Clovis • City of Coalinga • City of Fresno • City of Huron • City of Kerman • City of Kingsburg • City of Mendota • City of Sanger • City of Selma • Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District • Lower San Joaquin Levee District • Sierra Resource Conservation District/Highway 168 Fire Safe Council It is important that the update effort has full participation in the planning process, including representation and input, from each of the participating jurisdictions. Participation requirements include: • Attending and participating in the HMPC meetings (three anticipated over next several months) • Creating jurisdictional annexes based on a template from AMEC Foster Wheeler, and providing other updated information and requested data (as available) • Identifying mitigation actions specific to the jurisdiction • Reviewing and providing comments on plan drafts • Informing the public, local officials, and other interested parties about the planning process and providing opportunity for them to comment on the plan • Coordinating, and participating in the public input process • Coordinating the formal adoption of the plan by the entity’s governing board Please reply to this notice indicating a willingness to participate in the 2017 update and provide a point(s) of contact for your Department/Agency. Please also reply if you decline to participate. As the lead coordinator on this project, Ken Austin can be contacted at (559) 600-4065 or by email at KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us. Jeff Brislawn is the planning consultant project manager with AMEC Foster Wheeler and can be contacted at 303-820-4654 or by email at jeff.brislawn@amecfw.com. A kickoff meeting will be scheduled in the near future with details forthcoming. The purpose of the meeting is to introduce and outline the process, identify hazards, collect information, plan for stakeholder and public involvement, and answer any questions. Please plan to attend or send an alternate if you cannot. Sincerely, Angel Lopez Staff Analyst | Fresno County Department of Public Health | Office of Emergency Services : 559.600.4499 fax 559.600.7630| : angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us | 1 Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Jurisdictional Annex Requirements and Outline This document provides a suggested template for jurisdictional annexes to Fresno County’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Suggested section headings and regulatory requirements are provided in an outline format, as well as brief descriptions and sample tables for the content needed. The outline is designed to be integrated with the planning process and timeline of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) for the multi-jurisdictional plan. Additional planning guidance can be referenced in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (Handbook) which is a tool for local governments to use in developing or updating local hazard mitigation plans (https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/31598). Section 1: Prerequisites 201.6 (c)(5) The plan shall include the following…Documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council). For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been formally adopted. Include the resolution or other documentation of your jurisdiction’s adoption of the LHMP. This will occur after the plan has been submitted to CA OES and FEMA and received conditional approval. Section 2: Jurisdictional or Community Profile Develop a concise (1-2 pages) profile describing your jurisdiction. Include sections on the following: •Geography and climate •History •Economy •Population If a special district, describe information on size and location, purpose, history, and customers served. Include a map of your community or district. 2 Section 3: Risk Assessment 201.6(c)(2) The plan shall include…A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. 201.6(c)(2)(iii) For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section must assess each jurisdiction’s risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire planning area. 3.1 Hazard Identification and Profiles 201.6(c)(2)(i) The risk assessment shall include…A description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. The jurisdiction should identify hazards that could affect it, where they vary from risks facing the entire planning area and develop a hazard profile for each of these hazards. Complete the table that follows to summarize your information; the definitions for the rankings can be found on the following page. Table x: City of XX—Hazard Profiles Hazard Frequency of Occurrence Spatial Extent Potential Magnitude Significance Agricultural Hazards Avalanche Dam Failure Drought Earthquake Expansive Soils Extreme Heat Flood Freeze Fog Hail Heavy Rain/ Thunderstorm Landslide Land Subsidence Severe Weather Soil Erosion Soil Liquefaction Tornado Volcano Wildfire Windstorm Winter Storm 3 Guidelines for Hazard Rankings Frequency of Occurrence: Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year or at least one chance in ten years. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years. Spatial Extent: Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Potential Magnitude: Catastrophic: More than 50% of area affected Critical: 25 to 50% Limited: 10 to 25% Negligible: Less than 10% Significance (your subjective opinion): Low, Medium, High For each hazard type, describe past events and their impacts. Provide maps of hazardous areas, if possible. Include information on the following to justify your rankings: • Type, location, and date of event • Nature and magnitude of event • Deaths and injuries • Property and infrastructure damage • Crop losses • Other economic/business losses • Road and/or school closures • Federal and state disaster relief Example: Extreme Heat During the extreme heat event in summer 2006, human safety, agricultural crops, and livestock were impacted in Corcoran. There were four fatalities, of which most were elderly citizens. The cotton yield was smaller than normal, and 20 percent of the tomato crop was lost. The extreme heat also caused death in livestock and created a problem in carcass disposal. Power outage was also a problem. The city opened cooling centers during this event. 4 3.2 Vulnerability Assessment 201.6(c)(2)(ii) A description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of: (A) The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas; The vulnerability assessment analyzes the population, property, and other assets at risk to natural hazards by using the best available data. Assets at Risk This section lists the jurisdiction’s assets at risk, including critical facilities and infrastructure; historic, cultural, and natural resources; and economic assets. It discusses the impacts that occurred in past events and vulnerability to specific hazards. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure A critical facility may be defined as one that is essential in providing utility or direction either during the response to an emergency or during the recovery operation. FEMA’s HAZUS-MH loss estimation software uses the following three categories of critical assets. Essential facilities are those that if damaged would have devastating impacts on disaster response and recovery. High potential loss facilities are those that would have a high loss or impact on the community. Transportation and lifeline facilities are the third category; examples are provided below. Essential Facilities High Potential Loss Facilities Transportation and Lifeline ▪ Hospitals and other medical facilities ▪ Police stations ▪ Fire station ▪ Emergency Operations Centers ▪ Power plants ▪ Dams/levees ▪ Military installations ▪ Hazardous material sites ▪ Schools ▪ Shelters ▪ Day care centers ▪ Nursing homes ▪ Main government buildings ▪ Highways, bridges, and tunnels ▪ Railroads and facilities ▪ Bus facilities ▪ Airports ▪ Water treatment facilities ▪ Natural gas facilities and pipelines ▪ Oil facilities and pipelines ▪ Communications facilities Natural, Cultural, and Historical Assets Natural resource assets may include wetlands, threatened and endangered species, or other environmentally sensitive areas. Historical assets include state and federally listed historic sites. Economic Assets Economic assets at risk may include major employers or primary economic sectors, such as agriculture, whose losses or inoperability would have severe impacts on the community and its ability to recover from disaster. Use the table below to compile a detailed inventory of specific assets at risk including critical facilities and infrastructure; natural, cultural, and historical assets; and economic assets. These may include hospitals, fire stations, or historic buildings. Add additional rows as necessary. If the asset is located in a hazard area or susceptible to a specific hazards, describe this vulnerability. 5 Table x: Critical Facilities and other Community Assets Name of Asset Replacement Value Occupancy/ Capacity # Hazard Specific Info Estimating Potential Losses 201.6(c)(2)(ii) (B) The plans should describe vulnerability in terms of…An estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate; Estimations of potential losses should be developed using best available data. This may include GIS data and/or tax assessor’s data to estimate property values at risk. The table below shows the jurisdiction’s total exposure to hazards in terms of population and the number and values of structures. It also shows the number and value of parcels in the 100-year (Zone A) and 500-year (X-500) flood hazard areas as mapped by FEMA. Make sure to describe how your estimates were calculated. Table x: City of XX—Exposure to Hazards City of XX Population Buildings Value Total Exposure (Earthquake) Flood: Zone A Flood: X-500 Wildfire: Very High Threat ranking If possible, provide information on the following: • Number of flood insurance policies - total number of buildings in community that are insured against floods through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) • Number of repetitive loss properties - number of repetitive losses properties (usually on a parcel basis), for which NFIP/FEMA has paid more than $1,000 twice in the past 10 years • Number of unreinforced masonry buildings • Hospitals built before 1973 • Any hazard-related concerns or issues regarding the vulnerability of special needs populations, such as the elderly, disabled, low-income, or migrant farm workers. 6 Growth and Development Trends 201.6(c)(2)(ii) (C) The plans should describe vulnerability in terms of…Providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. Describe the types and location of new development in your jurisdiction. How much is manufactured housing? Do you have plans for new critical facilities and/or infrastructure? Are there any hazard-related concerns, such as new growth near flood or wildfire hazard areas, problems with soil hazards, etc.? 7 3.3 Capability Assessment Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. The capabilities assessment is divided into four sections: regulatory, administrative and technical, fiscal, and outreach and partnerships. Regulatory Table x lists planning and land management tools typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities. Indicate which are in place in your jurisdiction. Table x: City of XX—Regulatory and Planning Capabilities Regulatory Tool Yes/No Comments General plan (date adopted, etc) Zoning ordinance Subdivision ordinance Site plan review requirements Growth management ordinance Floodplain ordinance Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, water conservation, wildfire) Building code Fire department ISO rating Erosion or sediment control program Stormwater management program Capital improvements plan Economic development plan Local emergency operations plan List the name and date of the ordinances and plans from the table above and any others that the city has adopted and briefly summarize their purpose and relationship to mitigation. Examples: Conservation and Open Space Zoning District – This zoning district applies to pathways, storm drainage basins, and water recharge areas throughout the city and is intended to provide for permanent open spaces in areas of the city that exhibit significant vegetation, scenic qualities, wildlife or recreation potential, and that are designated as open space sites by the General Plan. Urban Water Management Plan, 2005 – This plan describes the vulnerability of the city’s water supply to seasonal or climatic shortage. It compares the projected normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year water supply to the projected water demand for each of these scenarios over the next 25 years, in 5-year increments. The plan designates water shortage stages of action, including up to a 50 percent reduction, and outlines specific water supply conditions at each stage. 8 Administrative/Technical The table below identifies the personnel resources responsible for activities related to mitigation and loss prevention in the jurisdiction. For smaller jurisdictions without local staff resources, if there are public resources at the next higher level government that can provide technical assistance, please indicate so in the comments column. Table x: City of XX—Personnel/Technical Capabilities Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/Engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Engineer/Professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Planner/Engineer/Scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Personnel skilled in GIS Full time building official Floodplain Manager Emergency Manager Grant writer Other personnel Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, outdoor warning signals) Other Briefly describe the community’s administrative and/or technical challenges or obstacles to improving mitigation capabilities. What are existing strengths or areas of opportunities? Fiscal The following table identifies financial tools or resources that the jurisdiction could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Identify whether your jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following financial resources for hazard mitigation Table x: City of XX—Fiscal Capabilities Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Community Development Block Grants Capital improvements project funding Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services Impact fees for new development Incur debt through general obligation bonds Incur debt through special tax bonds Incur debt through private activities 9 Financial Resources Accessible/Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Comments Withhold spending in hazard prone areas Other Outreach and Partnerships Does your jurisdiction have any past or ongoing public education or information programs, such as for responsible water use, earthquake or fire safety, household preparedness, or environmental education? Are there any partnerships or committees, such as an emergency management planning committee, in which your jurisdiction participates? Example: Outreach and Partnerships Corcoran participates in the “Are You Okay?” program administered by the Kings County Sheriff’s Office. The program is a free computerized telephone system used to check on senior citizens or disabled/homebound individuals. The Amigos de la Communidad was a successful outreach program of the Corcoran Police Department intended to form a partnership with the Spanish speaking community. The program is still in existence but not very active; it could potentially be used to communicate to the Latino community about hazards and emergencies. Other Mitigation Efforts Describe other ongoing and completed mitigation projects and programs. Include information such as: • Any hazard-related certifications, such as Storm Ready certification or Firewise Communities certification? • Past or ongoing projects or programs designed to reduce disaster losses, these may include projects to protect critical facilities. • Improvements to stormwater system to minimize local street flooding. 10 Section 4: Mitigation Strategy 201.6 (c)(3) The plan shall include…A mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. Once the Risk Assessment is complete, the Mitigation Strategy must be developed. This involves 1) indicating support for the goals and objectives of the countywide plan or adding your own and 2) identifying mitigation actions for your community or district. An implementation worksheet must be completed for each identified mitigation action. The mitigation strategy should be developed through a collaborative group process and consists of goals, objectives, and mitigation actions. The following definitions are based upon those found in FEMA publication 386-3, Developing a Mitigation Plan: • Goals are general guidelines that explain what you want to achieve. Goals are defined before considering how to accomplish them so that they are not dependent on the means of achievement. They are usually long-term, broad, policy-type statements. • Objectives define strategies or implementation steps to attain the identified goals and are specific and measurable. • Mitigation actions are specific actions that help achieve goals and objectives. 4.1 Goals and Objectives 201.6 (c)(3)(i) The mitigation strategy section shall include…A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. The HMPC for the countywide plan will develop goals and objectives to provide direction for reducing hazard-related losses in Fresno County. Review these goals and identify any new unique goals and objectives for your jurisdiction. 4.2 Mitigation Actions 201.6 (c)(3)(ii) The mitigation strategy section shall include…A section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. 201.6 (c)(3)(iv) For multi-jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. Through a collaborative group process, the HMPC for the countywide plan will also identify specific mitigation actions to achieve goals and objectives for reducing vulnerability to natural hazards. The HMPC will prioritize these mitigation actions using the STAPLEE criteria recommended by FEMA. STAPLEE stands for: social, technical, administrative, political, legal, economic, and environmental, which are the factors that should be considered when assessing mitigation measures. A description of the STAPLEE criteria, as well as examples of mitigation actions, can be found in your packet of jurisdictional annex information. Your jurisdiction should identify the countywide actions that it would like to specifically implement and also identify unique mitigation actions to the jurisdiction. The table on the following page can be used to summarize actions. 11 Table x: Summary of Mitigation Actions Mitigation Action Priority Links to Goals Hazards Addressed Schedule Example 1. Replace redwood water storage tanks with steel tanks to prevent losses from wildfire. High 1,2,3 Wildfire 7 years 12 4.3 Action Implementation Worksheets 201.6 (c)(3)(iii) The mitigation strategy section shall include…An action plan describing how the actions identified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. The jurisdiction should complete an implementation worksheet for each mitigation action identified in the previous section. The worksheet provides the details for how the jurisdiction will complete the action, such as identifying the responsible office, timeline, and funding, as well as the background information and costs/benefits of the project. An example of a completed worksheet is provided below. A blank worksheet is included on the following page. Example Mitigation Action #1: Replace redwood water storage tanks with steel tanks Priority (H, M, L): High Issue/Background: The CCWD owns 11 redwood water storage tanks that are approaching 40 years of age. These tanks are made of wood and are vulnerable to fire—the 602 tank in the Jenny Lind service area was destroyed by wildfire in 2004 and had to be replaced with a steel tank. Many of these tanks are also in high wildfire risk areas. There is a strong likelihood one or more redwood tanks will be destroyed by fire in the next few years, depriving a large group of customers their drinking water and depleting water storage available for fire protection. These tanks also release small amounts of organics into the drinking water, leaving behind a taste and odor, as well as creating substrate materials for carcinogen creation. The CCWD plans to replace all redwood tanks due to the vulnerability to fire and to the problems with water quality. Responsible Office: CCWD Engineering Partners: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Potential Funding: • District revenue from rates, fees, property taxes, interest on investments • FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program • U.S. EPA • State revolving fund grants and/or loans Cost Estimate: The replacement cost for a typically-sized redwood tank is $600,000. Total capital cost for replacing all redwood tanks is $6.6 million. Benefits (Losses Avoided): • Reliable water delivery for domestic consumption and fire flow • Reduce risk of property damage • Protect public health and safety Timeline: Replace all 11 tanks within next seven years 13 Mitigation Action #xx: Action Title: Jurisdiction: Priority: Issue/Background: Ideas for Implementation: Responsible Office: Partners: Potential Funding: Cost Estimate: Benefits: (Losses Avoided) Timeline: Completed by: Help Reduce Disaster Losses in Your Community or District by Participating in the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update The Fresno County Office of Emergency Services is taking the lead in updating its multi- jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan originally developed in 2008-2009. The purpose of this plan is to assess risk to natural and significant manmade hazards, implement actions to reduce future losses, and maintain eligibility for federal mitigation funds. Incorporated cities and special districts located in Fresno County are invited to participate in this cooperative update effort. What is a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan? Hazard mitigation means any action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from natural or manmade hazards. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires local governments to have a hazard mitigation plan approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to maintain eligibility for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding programs. In addition, Assembly Bill 2140, adopted by the California legislature in the fall of 2006, provides financial incentives for local jurisdictions adopting their Local Hazard Mitigation Plan as part of their General Plan. A multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan is a plan jointly prepared by more than one jurisdiction. The term “jurisdiction” in this guide means “local government.” A local government may include counties, municipalities, cities, towns, school districts, special districts, council of governments, Indian tribe or authorized tribal organizations, rural communities, or other public entities. What Are the Benefits of Participating in a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan? Local jurisdictions have the option of preparing a multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan under the Disaster Mitigation Act. Some of the benefits to jurisdictions of choosing to participate in a multi-jurisdictional planning process are the following: • Enables comprehensive approaches to mitigate hazards that affect multiple jurisdictions; • Allows for economies of scale by sharing costs and resources; • Improves coordination and communication among local governments and districts; • Avoids duplication of efforts; • Imposes an external framework and schedule on the process; and • Establishes eligibility for FEMA mitigation funding programs. When opting to participate in a multi-jurisdictional plan update, jurisdictions still must meet all planning requirements, including formal adoption of the plan. Failure of any of the participating jurisdictions to meet the requirements will not prevent the compliant jurisdictions from adopting the plan, getting it approved by FEMA, and consequently being eligible for project grants. (OVER) How to Participate in the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Update To participate in the multi-jurisdictional plan update, jurisdictions must complete the following steps: • Designate a representative to serve on the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee, which will meet four times during the nine-month planning process. • Send the representative to attend the Kickoff Meeting for the plan on Wednesday, July 12, 2017, at 9:30 am in Clovis, where additional information will be provided. • If you are a previously participating Jurisdiction: Provide requested input to the annex for your jurisdiction. Detailed guidelines for updating your annex will be provided through the county planning process. • If you are a new Jurisdiction: Develop an annex to the countywide plan for your jurisdiction. Detailed guidelines and support for creating your annex will be provided through the county planning process. • Inform the public, local officials, and other interested parties about the planning process and provide opportunity for them to comment on the plan and annex. • Formally adopt the mitigation plan and your community’s/district’s annex. Fresno County will provide participating jurisdictions with general background information on hazards, guidance on planning steps, and other resources. The outline for a jurisdictional annex is provided below. Outline of a Jurisdictional Annex Documentation of Local Jurisdiction Adoption I. Jurisdiction Profile II. Planning Process III. Risk Assessment Hazard Identification and Profiles Vulnerability Assessment Capability Assessment IV. Mitigation Strategy Mitigation Goals Mitigation Actions and Projects Implementation Process and Schedule for Identified Mitigation Actions V. Plan Maintenance Process Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms Continued Public Involvement For more information on this project, contact: Jeff Brislawn Ken Austin Angel Lopez Amec Foster Wheeler Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Office of Emergency Services Fresno County Department of Public Health Office of Emergency Services Fresno County Department of Public Health Phone: (303) 704-5506 Phone: (559) 600-4065 Phone: (559) 600-4499 Email: jeff.brislawn@amecfw.com Email: kenaustin@co.fresno.ca.us Email: angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Guide for Fresno County, California Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) Prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler July 2017 Fresno County 2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Overview The contents of this workbook have been designed to assist Fresno County and its jurisdictions (municipalities and special districts) in the 2017 update of the 2009 Multi-Jurisdictional, Multi- Hazard Mitigation Plan, in accordance with the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 update requirements. The mitigation planning regulation at 44 CFR §201.6(d)(3) states: A local jurisdiction must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within five (5) years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding. This guide includes a description of the necessary background information needed to support the hazard mitigation plan update process. This includes an update of the hazard identification and vulnerability assessment, revisiting the assessment of Fresno County’s current hazard mitigation capabilities, and a review of the progress on mitigation projects intended to prevent or reduce future losses. The plan’s key components will be revisited through a formal planning process, including re-adoption of the plan in order to securing the continued buy-in of participating jurisdictions. The essential information needed to support the update process includes current background information about Fresno County and its jurisdictions: plans, technical studies, and data related to hazards and risks; current governing codes, ordinances, regulations, and procedures whose intent is to minimize future losses; and an update of Fresno County’s technical and organizational capabilities to perform hazard mitigation/loss prevention functions. It is important that the plan shows what Fresno County is doing now to limit future disaster losses, and capture any mitigation success stories since 2009. The planning process is heavily dependent on existing data to be supplied by each of the participants represented on the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC). The DMA plan development process does not require the development of new data, but requires existing data only. The goal of this process is to produce an updated hazard mitigation plan that meets Fresno County’s needs, as well as the requirements of DMA 2000 and that contains a list of updated projects that may be eligible for streamlined federal mitigation funding pre or post disaster. What is Mitigation? Hazard mitigation is defined by FEMA as “any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to human life and property from a hazard event.” The results of a three-year, congressionally mandated independent study to assess future savings from mitigation activities provides evidence that mitigation activities are highly cost-effective. On average, each dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4 in avoided future losses in addition to saving lives and preventing injuries (National Institute of Building Science Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council 2005). Mitigation generally means reducing long-term risk from hazards to acceptable levels through predetermined measures accompanying physical development, for example: strengthening Fresno County 3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 structures to withstand high winds or snow loads; elevating, removing or limiting development in flood-prone areas; clearing defensible space around residences in Wildfire Urban Interface (WUI) areas; or designing development away from areas of geological instability. Mitigation can also protect existing development through seismic retrofitting, critical infrastructure protection, floodproofing etc. Mitigation is different from emergency preparedness or response. Preparedness concentrates on activities which make a person, place, or organization ready to respond to a disaster with emergency equipment, food, emergency shelter, and medicine. Response activities may reduce damages, such as sandbagging during a flood, but this is a short term solution and requires advance warning and resources to be in place during the event. Mitigation of flood hazards through wise floodplain management and hazard avoidance is an example of a long term solution. Participation The DMA planning regulations and guidance stress that each entity seeking the required FEMA re-approval of their mitigation plan must: • Participate in the process; • Detail areas within the planning area where the risk differs from that facing the entire area; • Identify specific projects to be eligible for funding; and • Have the governing board formally adopt the plan. For HMPC members, ‘participation’ means the planning committee representatives will: • Attend and participate in HMPC meetings; • Provide available data that is requested of the HMPC coordinator; • Provide revisions to specific sections of the 2006 plan relevant to the jurisdiction; • Provide a status report on mitigation actions of the 2006 plan relevant to the jurisdiction; • Review and provide/coordinate comments on the updated plan draft; • Advertise, coordinate and participate in the public input process; and • Coordinate the formal adoption of the plan by the governing board. Plan Update and Data Collection Guide This guide contains an explanation of the types of hazard mitigation/loss prevention data that is needed for the hazard mitigation planning process. This guide identifies specific requirements for the Risk Assessment Process, which includes the Hazard Identification, Vulnerability, and Capability Assessments as well as defines requirements for the update of the Mitigation Strategy. The worksheets have been developed to assist with the update. Each jurisdiction should utilize members of their planning subcommittee to review the existing draft and either complete the Fresno County 4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 worksheet forms or directly edit the respective sections of the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan. A step by step process is included in this guide. Each participating jurisdiction (county, town, city, or special district) that desires credit for participation in the 2017 update must go through this process. Data collection worksheets, or edits to respective sections of the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan are due on August 31st to Jeff Brislawn (contact information below). Project Contacts Jeff Brislawn Ken Austin Angel Lopez Amec Foster Wheeler Office of Emergency Services Fresno County Department of Public Health Office of Emergency Services Fresno County Department of Public Health Phone: (303) 704-5506 Phone: (559) 600-4065 Phone: (559) 600-4499 Email: jeff.brislawn@amecfw.com Email: kaustin@co.fresno.ca.us Email: angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us Fresno County 5 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Steps to update your jurisdiction’s annex of the Fresno HMP 1. Attend plan update meetings of the countywide HMPC. 2. Download a Word (editable) version of the 2009 plan from the project Google drive (link to be provided in email) Track all edits with Track Changes. A PDF copy of the plan can also be downloaded. 3. Reconvene a mitigation planning subcommittee for your jurisdiction a. Include departments such as planning, engineering, public works, GIS, police, fire, etc as applicable b. Document any meetings with sign in sheets (use blank template attached) 4. Review Chapter 4.1 Hazard Identification section in Base Plan and Annex a. Identify hazard impacts to your jurisdiction since 2007 (Use historic hazard event worksheet to provide details, or collect related reports, articles or memos with damage amounts, damage assessment reports etc.) b. Identify any new hazard studies or plans – send electronic versions (preferred if available), web link, or hardcopies to County HMP coordinator 5. Review Chapter 4.2 Vulnerability Assessment in Base Plan and Annex a. Review discussion on potential losses and note where you may have more specific information on past losses or potential for future losses specific to your jurisdiction. Note: Amec Foster Wheeler will be re-doing the flood, earthquake and wildfire analyses based on current countywide GIS datasets and recent Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps and current wildfire hazard data. 6. Review Capabilities Assessment in Annex a. Review the Jurisdiction-Specific Existing Capabilities, Development Trends b. Using the ‘Track Changes’ feature in Word, mark up the document with changes, OR use the attached worksheets to provide updated information. c. Note any changes in hazard significance or reduction in vulnerability through the implementation of mitigation projects such as defensible space, stormwater improvements, public education efforts etc. d. Note any changes in development trends. Provide an estimate of future trends (building types and counts). e. Upload either ‘Track Changed’ Word version of chapter or Worksheets to the Google Drive. Provide this and notify the County HMP coordinator by August 31st. Fresno County 6 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 7. Review Chapter 5.3 County Mitigation Action Plan summary table, specific to your jurisdiction, and the Mitigation Project Descriptions in your jurisdictional Annex. a. Provide updates to the details of the project, where applicable b. Note any changes in priority c. Provide a status update on each project. Indicate what projects are ongoing, completed, deleted or deferred. If completed was it successful? Did the project help prevent losses from an event, or has it not been tested yet? If it has not been completed indicate reason why (i.e. lack of funding, other priorities etc.). d. A worksheet and template will be provided to facilitate this, with due date TBD. e. Consider ideas for new projects for your jurisdiction. These can be projects that may be in the works already but not captured in the plan or that may have become a priority following recent disaster declarations. These will be discussed at a future HMPC meeting. A worksheet and template will be provided for new projects, and for those projects to be carried forward from the existing plan, with due date TBD. 8. Review Chapter 7.0 Plan Implementation and Maintenance a. Review this section for compliance; If this process was followed (i.e. annual reviews) please provide details. If not, provide specific details to actual implementation and maintenance process over past 5 years. b. Note any updates/efforts to incorporate this plan into existing planning mechanisms or opportunities to do so in the future (Important) c. Note any continued public involvement (Amec Foster Wheeler will document meetings specific to the plan update). 9. Help advertise and coordinate public meetings where applicable 10. Provide documentation of all meetings to County HMPC coordinator 11. Review and comment on the updated plan 12. When plan receives conditional approval from FEMA, re-adopt the plan 13. Continue to implement the plan! Fresno County 7 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Information Sources The following are possible sources of information to assist with updating the plan: • General Plans, specifically Safety Element • Emergency Operations Plans • Emergency Action Plans for dams • Incident logs/After Action reports • Damage Assessment reports • Drought Plans • Evacuation Plans • Recovery Plans • Emergency Exercise Scenarios • GIS databases • Hazard specific plans: o Community Wildfire Protection Plans o Flood Hazard Mitigation Plans o Fire Safe plans • Capital Improvement Plans • Capital Facilities Plans • Strategic plans • Land Use Plans/Codes • Local Building codes/regulations • Climate adaptation plans The Risk Assessment Process The risk assessment process includes three components: hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and capability assessment. Data needs and worksheets for each of the risk assessment components are included in this guide. Use these worksheets to evaluate your jurisdiction’s current vulnerability to the hazards in the plan. Refer to the existing plan (Chapter 4) first. The intent is to identify any changes in the significance or risks to these hazards as they pertain to your jurisdiction. Fresno County 8 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Fresno County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Worksheet #1: Hazard Identification Update Name of Department/Jurisdiction: Use this worksheet to identify possible hazards that may impact your jurisdiction. Hazards currently identified in the plan are listed. Please rank according to the guidelines that follow the table. Use copies of Worksheet #2: Historic Hazard Event to provide evidence to justify your conclusions. Hazard Frequency of Occurrence Hazard Extent Potential Magnitude Significance Hazard Map? (Paper/GIS/ Source) Dam & Levee Failure Drought Earthquakes Floods Insect Hazards Landslides Natural Health Hazards Severe Weather* Soil Hazards Volcanoes Wildfires *Severe Weather Includes Dust Storms, Extreme Temperatures, Fog, Hail, Heavy rains, lightning, tornadoes, windstorms, and winter storms Frequency of Occurrence: Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year. Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year or at least one chance in ten years. Occasional: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next 100 years. Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years. Potential Magnitude: Catastrophic: Multiple deaths, complete shutdown of facilities for 30 days or more, more than 50% of property is severely damaged Critical: Multiple severe injuries, complete shutdown of facilities for at least 2 weeks, more than 25% of property is severely damaged Limited: Some injuries, complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than one week, more than 10 percent of property is severely damaged Negligible: Minor injuries, minimal quality-of-life impact, shutdown of critical facilities and services for 24 hours or less, less than 10 percent of property is severely damaged. Significance (your subjective opinion): Low, Medium, High Hazard Extent: Limited: Less than 10% of planning area Significant: 10-50% of planning area Extensive: 50-100% of planning area Prepared by: Phone: Email: Fresno County 9 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Fresno County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Worksheet #2: Historic Hazard Event Name of Department/Jurisdiction: Please fill out one sheet for each significant hazard event with as much detail as possible. Attach supporting documentation, photocopies of newspaper articles, or other original sources. Type of event Nature and magnitude of event Location Date of event Injuries Deaths Property damage Infrastructure damage Crop damage Business/economic impacts Road/school/other closures Other damage Insured losses Federal/state disaster relief funding Opinion on likelihood of occurring again Source of information Comments Prepared by: Phone: Email: Fresno County 10 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Fresno County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Worksheet #3: Vulnerability Assessment Name of Department/Jurisdiction: The purpose of this worksheet is to assess the vulnerable buildings, populations, critical facilities, infrastructure, and other important assets in your community by using the best available data to complete the table and questions that follow. Use the table on the next page to compile a detailed inventory of specific assets at risk including critical facilities and infrastructure; natural, cultural, and historical assets; and economic assets as defined below. Alternately you can edit your jurisdiction’s information in Section 4.3 of the plan. Attach supporting documentation, such as photographs, reports, or plans if possible. In the hazard specific column of the asset inventory table, indicate if there is a specific hazard to which the asset is at risk. Critical Facilities Critical Facilities must remain operational during any major disaster and be designed, located, and constructed accordingly. FEMA’s HAZUS-MH loss estimation software uses the following three categories of critical assets. ‘Essential facilities’ are those that if damaged would have devastating impacts on disaster response and/or recovery. ‘High potential loss facilities’ are those that would have a high loss or impact on the community. Transportation and lifeline facilities are third category of critical assets; examples are provided below. Essential Facilities High Potential Loss Facilities Transportation and Lifeline ▪ Hospitals and other medical facilities ▪ Police stations ▪ Fire station ▪ Emergency Operations Centers ▪ Power plants ▪ Dams/levees ▪ Military installations ▪ Hazardous material sites ▪ Schools ▪ Shelters ▪ Day care centers ▪ Nursing homes ▪ Main government buildings ▪ Highways, bridges, and tunnels ▪ Railroads and facilities ▪ Bus facilities ▪ Airports ▪ Water treatment facilities ▪ Natural gas facilities and pipelines ▪ Oil facilities and pipelines ▪ Communications facilities Natural, Cultural, and Historical Assets Natural resource assets may include wetlands, threatened and endangered species, or other environmentally sensitive areas. Historical assets include state and federally listed historic sites. Economic Assets Economic assets at risk may include major employers or primary economic sectors, such as agriculture, whose losses or inoperability would have severe impacts on the community and its ability to recover from disaster. Fresno County 11 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Asset Inventory Name of Asset Type* Replacement value Hazard Specific issues *EI: Essential Infrastructure; VF: Vulnerable Facilities; HM: Hazardous Materials Facilities; NA: natural assets Fresno County 12 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Additional Vulnerability Questions Describe growth and development trends and future growth areas and how they relate to hazard areas and vulnerability concerns/issues. Review the mitigation actions in your jurisdictional annex. Indicate what projects have been completed or are ongoing and describe how vulnerability has changed (or not) as a result of implementing successful mitigation actions. Prepared by: Phone: Email: Fresno County 13 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Fresno County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Worksheet #4: Capability Assessment Name of Department/Jurisdiction: Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. Please complete this worksheet and provide supporting documentation if possible, or edit your jurisdiction’s table in Section 4.3 of the 2006 plan. Regulatory The following planning and land management tools are typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities. Please indicate which your jurisdiction has in place. If your jurisdiction does not have this capability or authority, please indicate if a higher level of government has the authority. Also use the comments column to indicate how we can obtain a copy of the plan or document (i.e. available on the web (include address), will put on ftp, will e- mail or mail, will fax). Regulatory Tool (ordinances, codes, plans) Yes/No Comments General or Comprehensive plan Zoning ordinance Subdivision ordinance Growth management ordinance Floodplain ordinance Other special purpose ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) Building code Fire department ISO rating Erosion or sediment control program Stormwater management program Site plan review requirements Capital improvements plan Economic development plan Local emergency operations plan Other special plans Flood insurance study or other engineering study for streams Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) Other Fresno County 14 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Administrative/Technical Identify the technical and personnel resources responsible for activities related to hazard mitigation/loss prevention within your jurisdiction. For smaller jurisdictions without local staff resources, if there are public resources at the next higher level government that can provide technical assistance, please indicate so in the comments column. Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position Comments Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Personnel skilled in GIS Full time building official Floodplain manager Emergency manager Grant writer Other personnel GIS Data Resources (Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) Other Fresno County 15 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Additional Capabilities Questions Does your community have any hazard- related certifications, such as Storm Ready certification or Firewise Communities certification? Describe any past or ongoing public education or information programs, such as for responsible water use, earthquake or fire safety, household preparedness, or environmental education. Describe any other past or ongoing projects or programs designed to reduce disaster losses. These may include projects to protect critical facilities. Prepared by: Phone: Email: SIGN-IN SHEET - FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE PROJECT Jurisdiction: Date: Time: Location: Meeting Purpose: Name Jurisdiction/Organization/Citizen Title Phone E-mail FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE KICKOFF MEETING Wednesday, July 12, 2017 10:00 am – 12:30 pm Clovis Fire Headquarters EOC/Training Room 1233 Fifth Street Clovis, CA 93612 1. Introductions 2. Mitigation, Mitigation Planning, and the Disaster Mitigation Act Requirements 3. Benefits of Participation and the Role of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee 4. Overview of the 2009 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 5. Implementation Success Stories 6. Objectives and Schedule for the Plan Update 7. Review of Identified Hazards 8. Coordinating with Other Agencies, Related Planning Efforts, and Recent Studies 9. Planning for Public Involvement 10. Updating Jurisdictional Annexes and Information Needs 11. Questions and Answers/Adjourn Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional, Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update Project Kick-Off Meeting Summary 9:30am-Noon July 12, 2017 Clovis Fire Headquarters EOC/Training Room 1233 Fifth Street Clovis, CA 93612 Introductions and Opening Remarks Ken Austin with Fresno County Office of Emergency Services began the meeting with welcoming remarks and introduced Jeff Brislawn, project manager with Amec Foster Wheeler, the consulting firm hired to facilitate the planning process and develop the updated County plan. Ken asked everyone around the room to introduce themselves. 42 persons representing a mix of county departments and stakeholders were present and documented on a sign-in sheet. County representatives included Roads, ISD, Assessor’s Office, Public Works and Planning and Public Health, Ag department, Sheriff’s Office and Office of Emergency Services. Municipality representation included Clovis, Fowler, Reedley, Kingsburg, Sanger, and City of Fresno. Stakeholders and other interested parties present included representatives from the Sierra Resource Conservation District, Cal Fire (Fresno Kings Unit), Fresno Metro Flood Control District, Fresno Irrigation District, Westlands Water District, Malaga County Water District and Oak-Timberline and Hwy 168 Fire Safe Councils. Federal and state agency stakeholders included the California Office of Emergency Services, CalTrans, CalFire, US Forest Service – Sierra NF, and the US Bureau of Reclamation. Also represented were staff from the local Amec Foster Wheeler office and Mintier Harnish, a firm that is working on the County General Plan update and providing support to the HMP update as part of the Amec Foster Wheeler team. Jeff asked how many had participated in the 2009 planning process; only a few raised their hands. Jeff discussed the agenda items as summarized below. Mitigation Planning and the Disaster Mitigation Act Requirements Jeff presented PowerPoint slides that outlined the planning process and the Disaster Mitigation Act Requirements. Jeff also mentioned the increase in the number of disaster incidents and the corresponding increase in recovery costs in California and nationwide in recent years. The upside of these disasters is that more funding is becoming available for mitigation projects. The planning process involves a 4 Phase approach with 9 steps per FEMA guidance updated in 2013. The update will also align with the Community Rating System (CRS) 10 step floodplain Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 2 management planning process so that credits can be achieved since Fresno County and the City of Fresno participate in CRS. An important aspect of the plan update is that it’s needed to be eligible for FEMA mitigation grant funding. Additionally, local governmental agencies that have incorporated the HMP by reference into their General Plans are eligible to receive a potentially higher state share of California Disaster Assistance Act funding post-disaster. The plan will be updated in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000. Jeff emphasized the importance and benefits of hazard mitigation planning and the types of mitigation projects that can be funded if eligibility requirements are met. In California, these projects have included wildfire mitigation/fuels treatment, flood reduction/drainage improvements, landslide stabilization, generators and warning systems. Recent changes in FEMA policy now make certain levee projects eligible, provided they don’t duplicate another federal program, and ‘climate resilient’ activities including groundwater recharge for drought mitigation and green infrastructure for stormwater mitigation. Objectives and Schedule for the HIRA Update The HMP update will be based on existing documents and studies, with the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan (2009) providing the baseline for identified hazards and the groundwork for policies and actions for hazard mitigation. Aspect of planning process include: • Reengage the local government participants that originally had annexes to the plan • Invite other local governments to participate in the plan update • Raise awareness and engage the public • Update hazards and baseline development data to reflect current conditions • Update the mitigation strategy • Maximize CRS planning credits where feasible Role of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) The County and participating jurisdictions (local governments including special districts) will comprise the HMPC to provide input into the plan update. Jeff emphasized that this is YOUR plan, local input, and participation from the county, municipalities and special districts is required for full approval from FEMA; participation includes: • Establishing a planning committee for each jurisdiction, • Attend planning meetings and provide requested data, • Assist with public outreach including assisting in coordinating press releases, and advertising public meetings Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 3 • Providing comments on draft plans • Coordinating formal adoption The county emphasized the intent to get all municipalities engaged in the update effort, at a minimum. Certain special districts, particularly those that might be applicants for FEMA mitigation funding, are also encouraged to participate if they did not do so before. The county will need to know soon of the jurisdictions new to the plan so that resources can be evaluated accordingly. Stakeholders include other local, state and federal agencies with a stake in hazard mitigation in the County. Examples include the USFS, CalTrans, CalFire and CalOES. Neighboring counties will be notified about the update and given an opportunity to provide input into the process. The HMP will be updated over the next six months, with two more meetings with the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee. Amec Foster Wheeler will be updating the Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) in the next couple of months, with input from the HMPC. Three drafts will be created: first for review by HMPC committee, a 2nd for public review, and a 3rd for state and FEMA review. The first draft for HMPC review is targeted for December 2017, and a public review draft in January. Review of Identified Hazards Based on hazards from the 2009 County HMP, the list of potential natural hazards was reviewed. The focus is on natural hazards, since manmade hazards are not required by DMA 2000 regulations and often are dealt with through separate planning mechanisms. Human caused hazards included in the 2009 HMP included hazardous materials incidents. Jeff showed a slide that listed the hazards in the 2009 hazards list. After discussion, the hazards recommended for profiling in the HMP update include: • Agricultural Hazards • Avalanche • Dam Failure • Drought • Earthquakes • Floods • Human Health Hazards o Epidemic/Pandemic o West Nile Virus • Landslides • Severe Weather o Extreme temperatures (heat and cold/Freeze) o Fog o Heavy rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 4 o Snow o Tornadoes • Soil Hazards o Erosion, Subsidence, Expansive soils • Volcanoes • Wildfire • Hazardous materials/transported and fixed facility In general, the group felt that the list was comprehensive. It was also explained that FEMA does not require human caused hazards, and every hazard profiled must have a mitigation action identified. Jeff Brislawn asked the group to review the list of hazards and comment on how they could be enhanced or updated with: • Historic incidents • Incident logs • Public perception • Scientific studies • Other plans and reports (e.g., flood and drainage studies, CWPPs, Internet databases) • Recent disasters Additional insight and details were learned during the conversation among participants. Highlights of the discussion include: • Flood: The County has experienced flooding in 2017 due to winter storms and high summer snowmelt runoff. • Subsidence: This has become more of an issue due to heavy groundwater withdrawal during the recent severe multi-year drought. It may be exacerbating flood hazards by lowering levee heights in some areas. • Levee failure: There have been some concerns with levees and non-leveed embankments, including canal banks that function as levees. • Wind: Jeff noted this seemed to be omitted in the 2009 plan. The HMPC noted Chinook /Foehn/Mono winds on the east slopes of the Sierra and Santa Ana type winds on the western side of the county. Blowing dust can be an issue with winds in the valley. • Tree Mortality: Significant tree deaths have occurred in the Sierras and foothills due to long term drought and insect infestations. This needs to be addressed in the plan update; Jeff recommended in drought and wildfire sections are where tree issues/hazards are typically noted. Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 5 • Public Health: Zika was noted as more of a concern currently than West Nile virus. Air quality issues due to wildfires in other parts of the state was also noted. Coordinating with Other Agencies\Related Planning Efforts\Recent Studies A discussion of other agencies that should be coordinated with took place. Those noted included: • Native American Tribes; County OES noted that they were invited. • Fresno Council of Governments • Utility providers in the County – PG&E and Southern California Edison have hydroelectric plants that are susceptible to disasters as well as other power infrastructure that could be affected by various hazards • Ensure Corp of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation are included as stakeholders • Cal DWR and Cal Tech – may have flood/levee risk and subsidence information • Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board is concerned about subsidence and water quality due to groundwater withdrawals. • Lower San Joaquin Levee District was unable to attend but is planning to participate in the update process. A discussion on recent studies of hazards in other documents and reports followed. Opportunities for coordinating and cross-referencing the HMP were discussed. Recent studies and related planning efforts included: • General Plan Background Report and Safety Element revised in 2016 • An Integrated Resource Management Plan for the Southern Sierra is being updated • CWPP updates: The Oak-Timberline and Hwy 168 Fire Safe Councils have updated CWPPs • General plan updates are addressing climate change and adaptation • High Speed Rail construction was noted; an EIS for this project has information on hazards • A Unit Wide Fire Plan has mitigation initiatives that might relate to the HMP Planning for Public Involvement How to involve the public was discussed. The public can be a source of information on hazards and mitigation ideas. Public meetings are scoped to be part of the effort but Jeff recommend ‘piggy backing’ on other public forums where possible to ensure an audience. Suggestions included: • Outreach through social media • County General Plan update has a window for public comment in the next two months as well as public meetings and board and commission meetings. Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 6 • Advertise in Mountain Press • Use city websites to link to information on plan • Discuss HMP at FireWise and Fire Safe meetings and note in newsletters Data Collection Needs and Next steps Jeff noted that he will be in touch to followup on some of the previously identified data sources and plans. A handout was provided for jurisdictions new to the plan, with a companion annex template/worksheet that will need to be completed with input from the jurisdiction. A separate handout was provided to jurisdictions that already have an annex with instructions on how to update some of the information and provide input to Amec Foster Wheeler. A Google Share Drive will be set up for the project to share large documents. A GIS needs list was provided to the County to assist with data collection. Jeff agreed to provide the meeting summary, presentation and sign in sheet by email so that other HMPC members that could not attend today’s meeting could get up to speed. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 12:00 pm. Summary prepared by Jeff Brislawn, Amec Foster Wheeler Jeff.brislawn@amecfw.com 303-820-4654 1942 Broadway, Suite 314 Boulder, CO 80302 FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Risk Assessment and Goals Update Meeting Friday, October 6, 2017 9:30 am – 12:00 pm Clovis Fire Headquarters EOC/Training Room 1233 Fifth Street Clovis, CA 93612 Introductions Review of the Planning Process Review of Identified Hazards Vulnerability Assessment Overview by Hazard Capabilities Assessment Update Updating Goals for the Mitigation Plan Mitigation Action Strategy update needs Update on Public Involvement Activities/public meeting planning Next Steps Questions and Answers/Adjourn Goals and Objectives from 2009 Plan for Review Goal 1: Provide Protection for People’s Lives from Hazards Objective 1.1: Provide timely notification and direction to the public of imminent and potential hazards Objective 1.2: Protect public health and safety by preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the effects of natural or technological disasters Objective 1.3: Improve community transportation corridors to allow for better evacuation routes for the public and better access for emergency responders Goal 2: Improve Communities’ Capabilities to Mitigate Hazards and Reduce Exposure to Hazard-Related Losses Objective 2.1: Reduce wildfires/protect life, property, and natural resources from damaging wildfires Objective 2.2: Reduce flood and storm-related losses Objective 2.3: Reduce hazards that adversely impact the agricultural industry Objective 2.4: Minimize the impact to the communities due to recurring drought conditions that impact both ground water supply and the agricultural industry Objective 2.5: Minimize the risk/loss to endangered species, native plants, land (erosion), and native wildlife Goal 3: Improve Community and Agency Awareness about Hazards and Associated Vulnerabilities that Threaten Fresno County Planning Area Communities Objective 3.1: Increase public awareness about the nature and extent of hazards they are exposed to, where they occur, what is vulnerable, and recommended responses to identified hazards (i.e., both preparedness and response) Goal 4: Provide Protection for Critical Facilities, Utilities, and Services from Hazard Impacts Goal 5: Maintain Coordination of Disaster Planning Objective 5.1: Coordinate with changing U.S. Department of Homeland Security/FEMA needs Objective 5.2: Coordinate with other community plans Objective 5.3: Maximize the use of shared resources between jurisdictions and special districts for mitigation/communication Objective 5.4: Standardize systems among agencies to provide for better interoperability Goal 6: Maintain/Provide for FEMA Eligibility and Work to Position Jurisdictions for Grant Funding Objective 6.1: Provide County departments and other jurisdictions with information regarding mitigation opportunities Objective 6.2: As part of plan implementation, review actions in this plan on an annual basis to be considered for annual FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant allocations or after a presidential disaster declaration in California for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding as well as for other local, state, and federal funding opportunities SIGN-IN SHEET FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE PROJECT HMPC #2 -Risk Assessment and Goals Meeting Friday Oct 6, 2017 9:30am-12:00pm Clovis Fire Headquarters 1233 Fifth St Clovis, CA Name J urisdiction/Ore:./Citizen Title Phone E-mail 5/e...u'A"' ��D -P/spqcr rt 6£, I #s-.r--s-et/o {!JJl/ tJ ,,,C ll_EEi?t.1E'-htzc C,1,£F Ma. c- ? �, .... j',L g C-p t::v°'"" ,ae eo(ost�+<. F/"1 ,:::r-0 Fresno County 1 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Summary of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Risk Assessment and Goals Meeting October 6, 2017 9:30– 12 PM Clovis Fire Headquarters EOC/Training Room 1233 Fifth Street Clovis, CA 93612 Introductions and Opening Remarks Jeff Brislawn of Amec Foster Wheeler, the consulting firm hired to facilitate the plan development process, began the meeting with welcoming remarks. Twenty eight persons were present and documented on a sign in sheet. Review of Mitigation, Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) Requirements, and the Planning Process Following introductions a PowerPoint presentation was presented by Jeff Brislawn. Jeff reviewed the planning process being followed and discussed the project status. Jeff emphasized that jurisdictions that have not submitted a review and edit of their jurisdictional annex to do so as soon as possible. New jurisdictions to the plan should also submit information requested in the data collection guide to indicate their intent to participate in the plan and provide a basis for the development of an annex. Risk Assessment Presentation and Discussion Jeff outlined the general risk assessment requirements before beginning a detailed discussion of each hazard. He presented highlights on each hazard included in the updated risk assessment chapter of the plan. Refer to the Fresno County HMP Risk Assessment PowerPoint presentation for specific details on each hazard and a handout summarizing hazard significance. Additional insight and details were learned during the risk assessment conversation among participants. Highlights of the discussion are noted by hazard in the table below. Fresno County 2 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Hazard or Topic Meeting Discussion Agricultural Hazards No comment Avalanche No comment Dam Failure The significance of this hazard could be changed from High to Medium based on low probability. However, HMPC members are concerned about the volume of water released from spillway overflows, which can happen more frequently and did this year. Drought It was suggested to look at vulnerability in both Tier I and Tier II tree mortality areas. Tree fall risk to campgrounds and recreating populations from May- Oct should be noted; National Parks also. Earthquake County is doing an assessment of conditions of county owned buildings, not specific to earthquake but could have potentially useful information. There has not been an inventory of unreinforced masonry buildings done. The year built could be a used as an indicator as older buildings built prior to modern building codes could be more vulnerable. Flood Levee failure has been added in the flood hazard profile The levee and Fresno Slough was close to overtopping during runoff this year; came close to evacuation of residents in the area. Subsidence has caused a 4’ drop on the Kings River Bypass levee Drought has also enabled the buildup of silt and sediment, which reduces the design flows. There is a need to remove sediment and vegetation in some areas. Potential for agricultural losses was noted The county relies heavily on major flood control facilities for mitigation; the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District mentioned they could provide an updated list of these. Human Health Hazards: Pandemic No comment. Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus It was noted that Zika is a potential concern, but no evidence of it yet in local mosquitos. Landslide Hwy 164 corridor had issues a couples years ago that were being addressed by CalTrans. West side of county has highest potential Removal of dead trees might make slopes more susceptible to landslides and erosion Huntington Lake Road was also noted as a problem area. Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures Fog Hailstorm Thunderstorm Lightning Tornado Windstorm Snow Several sub-hazards of Severe Weather were discussed. Wind is a greater concern lately with potential to knock down trees weakened by drought and disease. Soil Hazards: Erosion Runoff and erosion in the Rough Fire burn scar has caused siltation in some reservoirs. Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence See comments in flood section regarding levee impacts. This hazard should be raised from low to medium significance. Fresno County 3 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Hazard or Topic Meeting Discussion Soil Hazards: Expansive soils No comment Volcano If ash falls on snow it could lead to rapid snowmelt which could have a cascading impact on dams (water quality) and possibly affect water availability (drought). Wildfire Integration of priority landscapes from 2010 FRAP document discussed. Comment that the “rangeland” priority landscape should be included. Hazardous Materials An updated inventory of hazardous materials facilities is being researched. The specific details on these may not be presented in the updated plan since it is a public document. Capability Assessment Update Jeff touched on some of the highlights of the capability assessment. Highlights include the County and City of Fresno’s participation in the Community Rating System. The update of the County’s General Plan will include a policy with direct reference to the HMP, and will formally incorporate the HMP by reference. Plan Goals Update The HMPC reviewed the goals and objectives from the previous plan to see if they were still relevant or needed updating. In general the group thought was they were still valid. The HMPC also wanted to integrate more language related to resilience in Goal 2. Jeff will revise Goal 2 per the suggestion and the group will revisit the goals for finalization at the beginning of the next meeting. Mitigation Action Strategy update needs Jeff noted that the mitigation action strategy will be revisited moving forward and will be the focus of the next HMPC meeting. Jeff recommended that the existing mitigation actions be reviewed by the HMPC as a status report will need to be completed for each action. Jeff will send out a worksheet to help facilitate the status reporting prior to the next meeting. There will be an opportunity to develop new mitigation actions for the plan as well. These will be identified at the next meeting. Update on Public Involvement Activities/public meeting. An online public survey will be developed as part of the public process; when ready the link will be provided for distribution by email and posting on jurisdiction websites. A public meeting will occur in November during the week the same timeframe as the next HMPC meeting with details forthcoming. Fresno County 4 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Plan Timeline/Next steps The next and final HMPC planning meeting will be during the week of November 13th. The purpose of this meeting is to develop mitigation actions for the plan. Once a date has been identified, a calendar update will be sent out to save the date. The meeting materials will also be shared electronically, including the presentation and handouts. The meeting adjourned at noon. From: Brislawn, Jeff P Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 2:22 PM To: Wilma.Quan-Schecter@fresno.gov; daniel.vasquez@fresno.gov; lukes@cityofclovis.com; chadf@ci.clovis.ca.us; mtrejo@coalinga.com; dgabriel@coalinga.com; bgallegos@ci.firebaugh.ca.us; Salvador.Rayggoza@fcle.org; jdavis@ci.fowler.ca.us; Mlopez@ci.fowler.ca.us; jcastro001@yahoo.com; georgeturegano@fcle.org; jkunkel@cityofkerman.org; joseph.blohm@fcle.org; ahenderson@cityofkingsburg-ca.gov; captosborne@cityofkingsburg-ca.gov; vincedimaggio@cityofmendota.com; samescobar@cityoforangecove.com; rick.ehle@fcle.org; nicole.zieba@reedley.ca.gov; jerry.isaak@reedley.ca.gov; elizabethn@cityofsanjoaquin.org; tchapa@ci.sanger.ca.us; gregt@ci.sanger.ca.us; DavidE@CityofSelma.com; myrond@cityofselma.com; folivares@cityofselma.com; rpud@sbcglobal.net; Jim.McDougald@FIRE.ca.gov; Chris.Christopherson@fire.ca.gov; matt_furrer@emcorgroup.com; camahoo@yahoo.com; chief@pineridgefire.org; r.michaels@orangecovefire.com; michaelk@cityofselma.com; jhuneke@eaglabs.com; miz5150@netptc.net; howardh@csufresno.edu; bcservices218@gmail.com; office@biolabcd.org; carutherscsd@sbcglobal.net; drcsd@pacbell.net; emailccservices@gmail.com; latonwater@sbcglobal.net; SierraCedarsCSD@gmail.com; DMERRITT@KRCD.ORG; jcascia@panochewd.org; bryant_jeff@sbcglobal.net; ashbrook.don@gmail.com; ocfpd@hotmail.com; andrewr@fresnofloodcontrol.org; brenths@fresnofloodcontrol.org; ipf@altaid.org; ss@altaid.org; cwhite@ccidwater.org; mmacias@cidwater.com; pdesatoff@cidwater.com; ssingh@fresnoirrigation.com; lkimura@fresnoirrigation.com; sstadler@jamesid.org; scott@lagunaid.com; jsanders@orangecoveid.org; riverdaleid@sbcglobal.net; liz@trqid.com; lsjld@elite.net; smulligan@mosquitobuzz.net; Julia@fresnomosquito.org; ppud@att.net; jandlsiliznoff@outlook.com; carlson@griswoldlasalle.com; admin@sierrarcd.com; Craig.Jones@colostate.edu; gerstenb@jps.net; cannon@bfarm.com; sandrits@netptc.net; danny@trqid.com; hydrobuffalo@sbcglobal.net; bormonde@westlandswater.org; firebaughcanal@sbcglobal.net; donnahrc@aol.com; rcozzie@aol.com; kjohansen@ppeng.com; rhopkins@ppeng.com; stevesloan31@yahoo.com; donna_cfy@yahoo.com; gunlund@sbcglogal.net; associate@slwd.net; hsimmons@ppeng.com; jgutierrez@westlandswater.org; danpearce@waterworksdist18.com; pe-pcwd@sbcglobal.net; mogdeb@aol.com; lcortez@malagacwd.org; tsiphonsay@malagacwd.org; lfreeman@sjrecwa.net; Seyed.Sadredin@valleyair.org; roger.mccoy@valleyair.org; carl.carlucci@cdph.ca.gov; sharri_bender_ehlert@dot.ca.gov; shane.gunn@dot.ca.gov; irisy@water.ca.gov; promero@water.ca.gov; faulkenb@water.ca.gov; fmarquez@tmr.org; slittlebucknaylor@fs.fed.us; cballard@fs.fed.us; johngoss@fs.fed.us; thomas.jehrke@usace.army.mil; michael.r.erskine@usace.army.mil; mjackson@usbr.gov; dstroup@usbr.gov; greyes@usbr.gov; hough@usgs.gov; terri.mejorado@caloes.ca.gov; jrousseau@co.fresno.ca.us; dpomaville@co.fresno.ca.us; DSchmidt@co.fresno.ca.us; scrump@co.fresno.ca.us; gdelacerda@co.fresno.ca.us; AOrtiz@co.fresno.ca.us; wafox@co.fresno.ca.us; stwhite@co.fresno.ca.us; BJimenez@co.fresno.ca.us; jothompson@co.fresno.ca.us; WKettler@co.fresno.ca.us; CJonas@co.fresno.ca.us; RPalacios@co.fresno.ca.us; rishii@co.fresno.ca.us; armendoza@co.fresno.ca.us; jcoffman@co.fresno.ca.us; ADBuchanan@co.fresno.ca.us; DSiemer@co.fresno.ca.us; lasprec@co.fresno.ca.us; sartal@co.fresno.ca.us; knehring@co.fresno.ca.us; lwright@co.fresno.ca.us; rbash@co.fresno.ca.us; jbarr@co.fresno.ca.us; Yang, Ahla; margaret.mims@fresnosheriff.org; john.zanoni@fresnosheriff.org; kathy.curtice@fresnosheriff.org; Lopez, Angel; Austin, Kenneth Cc: larry@mintierharnish.com; bob@mintierharnish.com; roa1@comcast.net; Purvis, Leslie Subject: Public survey on Fresno County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update and public meeting press release Attachments: Fresno HMP Nov 16 Public meeting press release.docx A public survey has been developed as part of the public input process to the Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan update. Please distribute the link to the survey below broadly through local media or social media outlets. I also recommend posting it on each jurisdiction’s homepage. Please document how the survey is advertised or shared by sending me an email. A press release for a public meeting on November 16th is also attached. The survey and public meeting are meant for the public and not for the HMPC; HMPC attendance at the public meeting is welcome but not required. Here is some suggested text to advertise the public survey when sharing the link: Input on hazards and hazard planning solicited: Fresno County is updating its Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and is soliciting public input with a short survey. The purpose of this survey is to collect information from the public and stakeholders to better understand hazard vulnerabilities within the County as well as solicit input on needs to best mitigate, or reduce, the impacts of natural and human-caused hazards. Please complete this survey via the link below by November 30, 2017. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FresnoHMP In addition, a public meeting will be held Thursday, November 16 from 6:00 to 9:00 pm at the Clovis Veterans Memorial District, 808 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612. Attendees will learn more about the hazards and strategies to mitigate them at this meeting. Public input is also being sought on these same topics at this meeting. Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com As of 10-9-17 Amec Foster Wheeler’s corporate name is Wood due to acquisition by Wood Group. FRESNO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE MITIGATION STRATEGY MEETING Thursday, November 16th, 2017 9:30 to noon Clovis Veterans Memorial District, 808 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612 Introductions Review of the Planning Process and HIRA Recap Public survey interim results and public meeting Finalizing Updated Goals Review of possible mitigation activities and alternatives Discuss criteria for mitigation action selection and prioritization Review of progress on existing actions in the plan Brainstorming Session: Development of new mitigation actions (group process) Prioritize mitigation actions (group process) Discuss plan implementation and maintenance Discuss next steps/Questions and Answers/Adjourn Public Notice Ad Public Meeting on the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Location: Clovis Veterans Memorial District, 808 4th Street, Clovis, CA 93612 Thursday, November 16th, 2017 at 6:00-9:00 pm. In recent months California and the U.S. has experienced significant natural disasters. Would you like to learn more about hazards that could impact Fresno County including floods, dam failures, wildfires, drought, and other hazards? A public forum to discuss these hazards, and how the County is proposing to mitigate or lessen their impact, will be held November 16th. The Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan is being updated under the guidance of a multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) with assistance from a consultant and a FEMA grant. Attendees will learn more about the hazards and strategies to mitigate them at this meeting. Public input is also being sought on these same topics at this meeting. A short public survey related to the plan update can be accessed at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FresnoHMP Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Public survey November 2017 Online version can be found at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FresnoHMP 1 Background: Fresno County is updating its Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2017 per the five-year update cycle required by FEMA and the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The purpose of this survey is to collect information from the public and stakeholders to better understand the vulnerabilities within the County and solicit input on how to best mitigate, or reduce, the impacts of natural disasters. Please complete this survey by November 30, 2017. 1. The hazards addressed in the Hazard Mitigation Plan are listed below. Please indicate the level of significance in your community that you perceive for each hazard. Please rate these hazards 1 through 3 as follows: 1=low, 2=moderate, 3=high. ___ Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures ___ Severe Weather: Fog ___ Severe Weather: Heavy Rain / Thunderstorm / Hail / Lightning ___ Severe Weather: Snow ___ Severe Weather: Tornado ___ Agricultural Hazards ___ Avalanche ___ Dam Failure ___ Drought ___ Tree Mortality ___ Earthquake ___ Flood ___ Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic ___ Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus ___ Landslide ___ Soil Hazards: Erosion ___ Soil Hazards: Expansive or Swelling Soils ___ Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence ___ Volcano ___ Wildfire ___ Windstorm 2. Do you have information on specific hazard issues/problem areas that you would like the planning committee to consider? Note the jurisdiction to which it applies: 3. The following types of mitigation actions may be considered in the plan. Please place a check next to the types of mitigation actions that you think should have the highest priority in the plan. Wildfire fuels treatment projects Assistance with defensible space Continued participation in the National Flood Insurance Program Critical facilities protection Generators for critical facilities Planning/Zoning Public education/awareness Hazardous tree removal Stormwater drainage improvements Forest health/watershed protection Flood mitigation Education and discounts on flood insurance Floodprone property buyout Warning and notification systems Landslide/mudslide mitigation Evacuation route development Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Public survey November 2017 Online version can be found at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FresnoHMP 2 4. Please comment on any other pre-disaster strategies that the planning committee should consider for reducing future losses caused by natural disasters. 5. How would you describe the region where you reside? San Joaquin Valley Sierra Nevada Mountains / Foothills Western Coastal Range Other: _________________________________ 6. Indicate the community where you live: Unincorporated County City of Coalinga City of Fowler City of Huron City of Kingsburg City of Orange Cove City of Reedley City of Sanger Other: ________________________________ City of Clovis City of Firebaugh City of Fresno City of Kerman City of Mendota City of Parlier City of San Joaquin City of Selma 7. Please indicate the type of environment you reside in: Grassland/plains Urban River/riparian Forest Suburban Other: _________________________________ 8. Optional: Provide your name and email address if you would like to be added to a distribution list for upcoming activities related to the planning process. Name: ______________________________________ Email: _______________________________________ Please return survey responses by November 30, 2017 to Leslie Purvis, LEP Amec Foster Wheeler/Wood plc 1281 East Alluvial Avenue, Suite 101 Fresno, CA 93720 Leslie.Purvis@woodplc.com 559-892-2921 Q1 The hazards addressed in the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan update are listed below. Please indicate the level ofsignificance in the County that you perceive for each hazard. Answered: 183 Skipped: 1 Severe Weather:... Severe Weather: Fog Severe Weather: hea... Severe Weather: Snow Severe Weather:... Agricultural Hazards 1 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey Avalanche Dam Failure Drought Tree Mortality Earthquake Flood Human Health Hazards:... 2 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey Human Health Hazards: Wes... Landslide Soil Hazards: Erosion Soil Hazards Expansive or... Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence Volcano Wildfire 3 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 11.73% 21 27.37% 49 60.89% 109 179 13.97% 25 33.52% 60 52.51% 94 179 37.02% 67 45.86% 83 17.13% 31 181 78.89% 142 15.00% 27 6.11% 11 180 90.50% 162 6.70% 12 2.79% 5 179 20.56% 37 44.44% 80 35.00% 63 180 88.76% 158 8.43% 15 2.81% 5 178 35.75% 64 35.75% 64 28.49% 51 179 6.67% 12 16.67% 30 76.67% 138 180 12.29% 22 23.46% 42 64.25% 115 179 29.28% 53 45.30% 82 25.41% 46 181 33.71% 60 49.44% 88 16.85% 30 178 21.67% 39 46.11% 83 32.22% 58 180 25.41% 46 50.28% 91 24.31% 44 181 70.39% 126 25.14% 45 4.47% 8 179 50.84% 91 32.40% 58 16.76% 30 179 65.73% 117 28.09% 50 6.18% 11 178 Low Moderate High Windstorm 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% LOW MODERATE HIGH TOTAL Severe Weather: Extreme Temperatures Severe Weather: Fog Severe Weather: heavy Rain/Thunderstorm/Hail/Lightning Severe Weather: Snow Severe Weather: Tornado Agricultural Hazards Avalanche Dam Failure Drought Tree Mortality Earthquake Flood Human Health Hazards: Epidemic/Pandemic Human Health Hazards: West Nile Virus Landslide Soil Hazards: Erosion Soil Hazards Expansive or Swelling Soils 4 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 53.11% 94 32.77% 58 14.12% 25 177 87.15% 156 9.50% 17 3.35% 6 179 10.00% 18 27.22% 49 62.78% 113 180 49.15% 87 39.55% 70 11.30% 20 177 Soil Hazards: Land Subsidence Volcano Wildfire Windstorm Q2 Do you have information on specific hazard issues/problem areas that you would like the planning committee to consider? Note the jurisdiction to which it applies: Answered: 60 Skipped: 124 #RESPONSES DATE 1 fires 1/11/2018 11:10 AM 2 NO 1/5/2018 10:35 AM 3 Civil disobedience 1/1/2018 10:53 PM 4 North Korea nuke attack 12/12/2017 2:45 PM 5 Yes. Along Dinkey Creek Road east of Hwy 168 11/27/2017 8:36 PM 6 Wildfires- Foothills 11/27/2017 10:11 AM 7 no 11/26/2017 10:07 PM 8 Wildfire mitigation (foothills)11/24/2017 11:52 AM 9 Fire Protection, Fresno County Fire Protection District 11/19/2017 8:36 AM 10 none 11/17/2017 9:43 AM 11 OES - If the Long Valley Caldera etc. should have an event during a heavy snow year, I've heard that the ash fall could result in a catastrophic melt/flood scenario. 11/17/2017 5:14 AM 12 Trucking/railway on highways 11/16/2017 8:42 PM 13 handling "mass" > than say 12 casulties cause by the same problem 11/16/2017 5:18 PM 14 Drought. Lawns should be outlawed, period. Trees and drought-tolerant landscapes only.11/16/2017 12:17 PM 15 United States Coast Guard Auxiliary (Fire/Water/Disasters,etc(11/16/2017 11:37 AM 16 Climate change and its ability to increase current hazards 11/15/2017 12:41 PM 17 No 11/15/2017 8:57 AM 18 terroist activities, Sheriff 11/14/2017 9:55 PM 19 Emergency Safe drinking supply - Northeast Fresno County, Orange Cove 11/14/2017 5:46 PM 20 no 11/14/2017 11:28 AM 21 Fresno City-Gang/riots/social unrest 11/14/2017 11:01 AM 22 No 11/10/2017 10:24 PM 23 Fresno County 11/10/2017 10:12 PM 24 No 11/10/2017 12:34 PM 5 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 25 Worse 24-7 biting mosquitoes after July 2017Release of altered mosquitoes, which drifted, re- colonized throughout SE Fresno causing UNNECESSARY pain to an area that had never had a Mosquito problem to begin with. We've had to seek doctor's mosquito bite infection advice on the very young and our adult selves! We have had very wet rainy seasons in the past without mosquito problems, that we had to endure this summer into autumn, unnecessarily. When you release a "questionable" live flying mating entity into a "nearby" population that unites with additional neighborhoods, your going to get overwhelming "drift, relocation, re-colonization." We were never asked our permission to be "experimented on" before the "Release!" Please protect our neighborhood families from further experimentation with latent issues maybe down the road. 11/10/2017 11:37 AM 26 Keep the rivers clean of debre so the water can flow 11/10/2017 10:14 AM 27 No.11/10/2017 8:46 AM 28 wild fires, Fresno county and hill sides surrounded.11/10/2017 7:51 AM 29 Highway 180 corridor, eastern Fresno County 11/9/2017 4:02 PM 30 Fires, road erosion, flooding mountain areas like Squaw Valley; dam/levee problems including outer areas of Mendota etc. 11/7/2017 8:55 PM 31 Wildfires, drought 11/7/2017 8:27 PM 32 Not at this time.11/7/2017 10:34 AM 33 Dam Failure 11/6/2017 3:29 PM 34 No 11/6/2017 2:30 PM 35 Dust/visual imparment/respiratory imparment created from ag field plowing/discing 11/5/2017 10:32 PM 36 Canal breech in the valley 11/4/2017 6:53 AM 37 Power outage 11/4/2017 5:41 AM 38 N/A 11/3/2017 3:46 PM 39 Rising use and abuse of opioids 11/3/2017 3:19 PM 40 agressive homeless people 11/3/2017 10:28 AM 41 None at this time, thank you 11/3/2017 8:15 AM 42 No 11/3/2017 7:22 AM 43 Widespread and extended time of power outage.11/3/2017 1:41 AM 44 No 11/2/2017 11:12 PM 45 Brown water coming from the older drinking fountains at Fresno High School 11/2/2017 9:28 PM 46 Dry Creek is under ground in my neighborhood, which doesn't seem safe for a waterway that can flood 11/2/2017 9:26 PM 47 He flooding during intense rain. Our current drainage system can’t keep up with it.11/2/2017 4:52 PM 48 None 11/2/2017 4:11 PM 49 Foot hills 11/2/2017 3:01 PM 50 No 11/2/2017 2:12 PM 51 N/A 11/2/2017 2:09 PM 52 Pesticides and production chemicals 11/2/2017 1:58 PM 53 Fire like they had in Santa Rosa 11/2/2017 1:48 PM 54 Flooding on the freeways during an intense storm, specifically highway 168 between shields and highway 180 11/2/2017 12:54 PM 55 Dams 11/2/2017 12:45 PM 56 Power lines falling & outage; fire; high winds 11/2/2017 12:42 PM 57 No 11/2/2017 12:33 PM 58 Drought Selma 11/1/2017 3:56 PM 6 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 59 no 10/31/2017 4:41 PM 60 Wildfires in the foothills/shaver area, Drought conditions along most of the western half of the county located further off the San Joaquin river, ground water well depth(ever increasing, we will need to address soon) 10/31/2017 1:44 PM Q3 The following types of mitigation actions may be considered in Fresno County. Please indicate the types of mitigation actions that you think should have the highest priority in the updated Fresno County Multi- Hazard Mitigation Plan. Answered: 157 Skipped: 27 7 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 60.51%95 Wildfire Fuels Treatment... Assistance with Defensi... Continued Participatio... Critical Facilities... Generators for critical... Planning/Zoning Public Education/Aw... Stormwater Drainage... Forest Health/Water... Flood Mitigation Education and Discounts on... Floodprone Property Buyout Public Education /... Warning and Notification... Floodprone Property Buyout Landslide/mudsl ide mitigation Evacuation route... Hazardous Tree Removal 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Wildfire Fuels Treatment projects 8 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 26.75%42 33.76%53 45.22%71 55.41%87 28.66%45 54.14%85 39.49%62 43.95%69 29.30%46 18.47%29 6.37%10 51.59%81 59.24%93 3.82%6 7.64%12 56.69%89 61.15%96 Total Respondents: 157 Assistance with Defensible Space Continued Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program Critical Facilities Protection Generators for critical facilities Planning/Zoning Public Education/Awareness Stormwater Drainage Improvements Forest Health/Watershed Protection Flood Mitigation Education and Discounts on Flood Insurance Floodprone Property Buyout Public Education / Awareness of hazards Warning and Notification Systems (Indoor and Outdoor) Floodprone Property Buyout Landslide/mudslide mitigation Evacuation route development Hazardous Tree Removal Q4 Please comment on any other pre-disaster strategies that the planning committee should consider for reducing future losses caused by natural disasters: Answered: 44 Skipped: 140 #RESPONSES DATE 1 power grid outage - aging of systems and less $ because of emphasis on solar 1/12/2018 7:27 AM 2 fire 1/11/2018 11:11 AM 3 Abandoned dwelling abatement 1/1/2018 10:58 PM 4 Removing dead trees along roads. Reverse 911. Evacuation plans/notifications 11/27/2017 8:39 PM 5 Education, Evacuation Plans 11/27/2017 10:12 AM 6 public health, infection control 11/26/2017 10:07 PM 7 collaboration with Federal agencies (i.e. Forest, Park)11/24/2017 11:53 AM 8 Volcano education. Mammoth mountain 11/21/2017 10:10 AM 9 Public awareness needs to be increased to the risks from natural hazards, everyone thinks "It can not happen here" as we watch increases in natural disasters around the world. 11/18/2017 8:55 AM 10 Due to wildfires- remove dry/old trees 11/17/2017 9:48 AM 9 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 11 Globally, heat kills far more people than cold. Heat "storms" affect the elderly & low income disproportionately more than other groups. A volunteer cadre should be at the ready to assist with notifications/transportation to cooling centers. 11/17/2017 5:17 AM 12 Education on fighting floods. Every film crew shows people sandbagging incorrectly 11/16/2017 8:47 PM 13 continue to clear dead trees 11/16/2017 5:20 PM 14 I think drought and extreme high temperatures are our biggest threats. We must faithfully practice water conservation even when not technically in drought. Farmers should not be allowed to flood their fields as an irrigation practice. 11/16/2017 12:22 PM 15 Involvement from local hospital representatives, etc.11/16/2017 11:42 AM 16 Strict zoning to prevent development in historic fire- & flood-prone areas 11/15/2017 2:38 PM 17 Local agency communication and plans. Local agencies need to have staff trained on their duties when a disaster happens. The worst things that could happen is having a great plan in place that no one knows how to adequately execute. 11/15/2017 12:43 PM 18 Expand on your emergency disaster preparedness awareness campaign to the public. Make it ongoing on radio, social media, TV, etc. 11/14/2017 5:48 PM 19 Gov't experiments unknown to public, cloud seeding, etc. weather weponry testing.11/14/2017 11:03 AM 20 Public education/workshops for emergency preparedness 11/14/2017 9:52 AM 21 ?11/10/2017 10:25 PM 22 Staying updated proactive on social media, particularly Twitter since it's short, quick, and in real time. 11/10/2017 10:18 PM 23 Proper forest management of under brush.11/10/2017 8:50 AM 24 Continue to be engaged with the Tribal Summit Emergency Management Planning efforts for 2018. 11/9/2017 4:05 PM 25 Public meetings in all communities, educational materials for public, more surveys such as this, sharing with the public the results of surveys 11/7/2017 9:03 PM 26 Wildfires 11/7/2017 8:29 PM 27 Work w/ CA National Gd to stop dumping of hazardous fuels that can start or intensify wildfires 11/7/2017 10:38 AM 28 none 11/6/2017 2:31 PM 29 N/A 11/3/2017 3:47 PM 30 containment of illegal immigrants 11/3/2017 10:30 AM 31 None at this time 11/3/2017 8:16 AM 32 A routing map on how to get out of city by sections of town 11/2/2017 11:13 PM 33 Pandemics 11/2/2017 9:31 PM 34 None 11/2/2017 4:12 PM 35 Communication 11/2/2017 3:02 PM 36 During the last mud/rockslide that closed the Grapevine, CHP closed The 5 and routed all traffic headed to Los Angeles over Tehachapi. However, as early as 4 pm on the day of the closure, motorists who took this route were posting warnings of being caught in mud/rockslides and telling others to NOT take this route or they would become trapped. Unfortunately the CHP continued to direct traffic over Tehachapi - a move that would prove to cause injuries and fatalities. They did not close that route until 9 pm that night. When I called them to ask why, the answer was "When we close one road to L.A. We need to leave another one open to avoid traffic jams." This just spells disaster to me - especially in the case of a potential widespread disaster where EVERYONE is trying to escape something. Better communication between agencies and the public - and reasonable protocols - are needed. 11/2/2017 2:22 PM 37 N/A 11/2/2017 2:11 PM 38 Forest health and management 11/2/2017 2:00 PM 39 Fires 11/2/2017 1:49 PM 10 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 40 Ag losses due to climate change. Water conservation.11/2/2017 1:03 PM 41 Wildfires are a huge problem during the summer, we need to better prevent them from happening. 11/2/2017 12:58 PM 42 Please consider limiting people to how much concrete they put in yards. We have major flooding problems because the water can’t penitrate the ground. This includes fake grass installments. 11/2/2017 12:57 PM 43 Shelters 11/2/2017 12:43 PM 44 Allocate funds set aside on yearly basis to essentially make a safety account for expected events in the future. 10/31/2017 1:47 PM 91.67%143 5.77%9 0.00%0 2.56%4 Q5 How would you describe the region where you reside? Answered: 156 Skipped: 28 TOTAL 156 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 residential 1/12/2018 8:29 AM 2 City of Fresno 11/16/2017 5:21 PM 3 Fresno/Clovis, California 11/16/2017 11:43 AM 4 In Clovis, near the foothills 11/2/2017 1:00 PM San Joaquin Valley Sierra Nevada Mountains/Fo... Western Coastal Range Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES San Joaquin Valley Sierra Nevada Mountains/Foothills Western Coastal Range Other (please specify) Q6 Indicate the community where you live Answered: 157 Skipped: 27 11 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 11.46%18 31.85%50 0.00%0 Unincorporated County City of Clovis City of Coalinga City of Firebaugh City of Fowler City of Fresno City of Huron City of Kerman City of Kingsburg City of Mendota City of Orange Cove City of Parlier City of Reedley City of San Joaquin City of Sanger City of Selma Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Unincorporated County City of Clovis City of Coalinga 12 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 0.00%0 1.27%2 46.50%73 0.00%0 0.64%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.64%1 0.00%0 1.91%3 0.00%0 0.64%1 0.64%1 4.46%7 TOTAL 157 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 auberry 1/11/2018 11:12 AM 2 County island in fresno 1/1/2018 10:59 PM 3 Patrol Lake Millerton/Pine Flat Lakes 11/16/2017 11:45 AM 4 city of Los Banos 11/15/2017 7:56 AM 5 Dunlap 11/9/2017 4:06 PM 6 Hanford 11/6/2017 2:32 PM 7 highway city 11/3/2017 10:31 AM City of Firebaugh City of Fowler City of Fresno City of Huron City of Kerman City of Kingsburg City of Mendota City of Orange Cove City of Parlier City of Reedley City of San Joaquin City of Sanger City of Selma Other (please specify) Q7 Please indicate the type of environment you reside in. Answered: 155 Skipped: 29 13 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey 2.58%4 3.23%5 34.19%53 56.77%88 0.00%0 4.52%7 Total Respondents: 155 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Farmland 11/15/2017 11:43 PM 2 Rural 11/14/2017 5:49 PM 3 Lower foothills 11/10/2017 10:19 PM 4 Foothills 11/9/2017 4:06 PM 5 Rural 11/7/2017 9:05 PM 6 Metro 11/4/2017 5:02 AM 7 Agriculturally developed plains/basin 10/31/2017 1:48 PM Grassland/plain s Forest Urban Suburban River/Riparian Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Grassland/plains Forest Urban Suburban River/Riparian Other (please specify) Q8 Optional: Provide your name and email address if you would like to be added to a distribution list for upcoming activities related to the planning process: Answered: 49 Skipped: 135 14 / 16 Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Public Input Survey Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Available for Public Review and Comment Would you like to learn more about what Fresno County is doing to minimize the impacts of floods, dam failures, wildfires, drought, and other hazards? A draft of the updated Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan is being made available for public review and comment. The plan assesses risks posed by natural and man-made hazards, identifies ways to reduce those risks, and allows the County and participating jurisdictions to be eligible for mitigation grant funding from FEMA. A multi-jurisdictional planning team, including representatives from 13 municipalities, developed the plan over the past 9 months with assistance from a consultant. The County is now soliciting public comment on the plan before it is finalized and submitted for FEMA review and approval. The comment period will be April 16-31, 2018. The plan and comment form are available at www.fcdph.org/oes. For more information, contact the Fresno County Office of Emergency Services at (559) 600-4065. From: Olivia Pimentel <OPimentel@cityofkerman.org> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 11:09 AM To: 'Brislawn, Jeff P' Cc: Joseph Blohm (FCLE); 'abigail.moore@woodplc.com' Subject: RE: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review Attachments: Annex E Kerman update.3.14.2018.docx See updated report From: Brislawn, Jeff P [mailto:jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 3:17 PM To: Olivia Pimentel <OPimentel@cityofkerman.org> Cc: Joseph Blohm (FCLE) <Joseph.Blohm@fcle.org>; 'abigail.moore@woodplc.com' <abigail.moore@woodplc.com> Subject: RE: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review See pages E19-20 in attachment. Also please review other yellow highlights in document. Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler’s parent company is now owned by Wood plc Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com From: Olivia Pimentel [mailto:OPimentel@cityofkerman.org] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 4:08 PM To: 'abigail.moore@woodplc.com' <abigail.moore@woodplc.com>; 'jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com' <jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com> Cc: Joseph Blohm (FCLE) <Joseph.Blohm@fcle.org> Subject: RE: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review I need the 2009 action plan you are referring to in order to determine whether the actions identified in 2009 were addressed or not. I did not prepare that report so I would appreciate your assistance. From: Blohm, Joseph (Kerman PD) [mailto:Joseph.Blohm@fcle.org] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 2:18 PM To: Olivia Pimentel <OPimentel@cityofkerman.org> Subject: FW: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review Importance: High Hi Olivia, I just got this and I’m forwarding it to you. From: Brislawn, Jeff P [mailto:jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 1:54 PM To: Blohm, Joseph (Kerman PD) <Joseph.Blohm@fcle.org> Cc: Moore, Abigail <abigail.moore@woodplc.com>; Austin, Kenneth (cof) <kaustin@co.fresno.ca.us>; Lopez, Angel (cof) <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; jkunkel@cityofkerman.org Subject: FW: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review Importance: High Joseph, We are still lacking some information in the mitigation action strategy section of your annex. We need the details on the actions that were identified in 2009, and an updated schedule for any actions being carried forward from 2009. You can also add new actions to your annex if you so desire (or if the 2009 actions are completed). Please send to me by Thursday March 15 so we can get the information in the draft that will be going out for public review. Thanks Jeff Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler’s parent company is now owned by Wood plc Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com From: Brislawn, Jeff P Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 5:52 AM To: 'joseph.blohm@fcle.org' <joseph.blohm@fcle.org> Cc: Moore, Abigail <abigail.moore@amecfw.com>; 'Austin, Kenneth' <KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us>; 'Lopez, Angel' <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; 'jkunkel@cityofkerman.org' <jkunkel@cityofkerman.org> Subject: Kerman Jurisdictional Annex to Fresno County LHMP for Review Importance: High Attached is your jurisdiction’s updated draft annex to the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017-18. Please circulate within your jurisdiction for review and let me and Abby Moore (cc’d) if you have comments or changes no later than March 5. Please use TRACK CHANGES in Word. Outstanding items or items where we would welcome more input or verification are highlighted in yellow. Anything in green is text that Amec Foster Wheeler will revise in the final draft. Review the mitigation actions and detailed action write ups. There are some that need clarification and more details which are highlighted. It is not too late to add additional mitigation projects if desired. If you reviewed and see little change please let us know that also. Thanks Jeff Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler’s parent company is now owned by Wood plc Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler’s parent company is now owned by Wood plc Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com This message is the property of John Wood Group PLC and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates and is intended only for the named recipient(s). Its contents (including any attachments) may be confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure by law. Unauthorised use, copying, distribution or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited. We assume no responsibility to persons other than the intended named recipient(s) and do not accept liability for any errors or omissions which are a result of email transmission. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by reply email to the sender and confirm that the original message and any attachments and copies have been destroyed and deleted from your system. If you do not wish to receive future unsolicited commercial electronic messages from us, please forward this email to: unsubscribe@woodplc.com and include “Unsubscribe” in the subject line. If applicable, you will continue to receive invoices, project communications and similar factual, non-commercial electronic communications. Please click http://www.woodplc.com/email-disclaimer for notices and company information in relation to emails originating in the UK, Italy or France. From: Michael Osborn <mosborn@ppeng.com> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2018 3:11 PM To: Austin, Kenneth; 'Romero, Paul@DWR' Cc: Lopez, Angel; 'Brislawn, Jeff P'; Smith, Brian@DWR; Cristian Gonzalez; David McGlasson Subject: RE: Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan Update - HMPC Draft for Review Attachments: Fresno Chapter 5.0 Mitigation Strategy3.docx Ken and Paul, Thanks for reaching out. The City of Mendota definitely wants to participate. Please see attached document with minor comments/edits track in Chapter 5.0. Sincerely, Michael Osborn, P.E. LEED-AP Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Office: (559) 449-2700 From: Austin, Kenneth <KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 1:43 PM To: 'Romero, Paul@DWR' <Paul.Romero@water.ca.gov> Cc: Lopez, Angel <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; 'Brislawn, Jeff P' <jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com>; Michael Osborn <mosborn@ppeng.com>; Smith, Brian@DWR <Brian.Smith@water.ca.gov> Subject: RE: Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan Update - HMPC Draft for Review Thanks Paul. This information is very helpful and I appreciate you getting it to us. We’ll discuss it with our Consultant and let you know if we will need anything else. Ken Ken (Casey) Austin Emergency Manager Fresno County Office of Emergency Services 559 600-4065 From: Romero, Paul@DWR [mailto:Paul.Romero@water.ca.gov] Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 1:40 PM To: Austin, Kenneth <KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us> Cc: Lopez, Angel <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; 'Brislawn, Jeff P' <jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com>; mosborn@ppeng.com; Smith, Brian@DWR <Brian.Smith@water.ca.gov> Subject: RE: Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan Update - HMPC Draft for Review Hi Ken, I can give a bit more description, but if I understand correctly Chapter 5 is only looking for a minimal description. So, my understanding of the three projects is below from my contacts: #12 Panoche-Silver Creek Feasibility Study: Implementation not started but problem continues. I spoke to city engineer Michael Osborn and he seemed interested in the LHMP. I have cc’d him on this email. #13 Investigate and Construct Upper SJR Storage Options: Continuing ongoing implementation. Draft EIS completed and funding currently being sought for implementation. #14 Analyze Flood Conveyance facilities: Implementation not started. Likely discontinued. DWR’s Central Valley Flood Protection Plan looked at structures of the State Plan of Flood Control, but that is only a small part of Fresno County. No other study is being considered as I understand. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Paul 559 230-3328 From: Austin, Kenneth [mailto:KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 9:59 AM To: Romero, Paul@DWR <Paul.Romero@water.ca.gov> Cc: Lopez, Angel <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; 'Brislawn, Jeff P' <jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com> Subject: FW: Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan Update - HMPC Draft for Review Importance: High Hi Paul, Thanks for taking the time to speak with me this morning and for helping to get the status on several of these LHMP projects. I’m sending you the email that our consultant, Jeff Brislawn, sent out to our planning group. You don’t need to review all of the sections (unless you’re interested). As we discussed I need your assistance with the status of three projects contained in Chapter 5 (Mitigation Strategy). The projects are numbers 12, 13 and 14. These 3 projects were identified in 2009 and we need to know the current status. Have they been completed, are they ongoing, discontinued or no longer feasible? Any information that you can provide would be appreciated. Please give me a call if you have questions. You can also call our consultant if you need to speak to him. Thanks. Ken Ken (Casey) Austin Emergency Manager Fresno County Office of Emergency Services 559 600-4065 From: Brislawn, Jeff P [mailto:jeff.brislawn@woodplc.com] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 3:07 PM To: myrond@cityofselma.com; riverdaleid@sbcglobal.net; SierraCedarsCSD@gmail.com; Coffman, John <jcoffman@co.fresno.ca.us>; firebaughcanal@sbcglobal.net; samescobar@cityoforangecove.com; jcascia@panochewd.org; shane.gunn@dot.ca.gov; folivares@cityofselma.com; larry@mintierharnish.com; chief@pineridgefire.org; danpearce@waterworksdist18.com; roa1@comcast.net; bgallegos@ci.firebaugh.ca.us; bormonde@westlandswater.org; Adam Hoffman <AHoffman@sjrecwa.net>; howardh@csufresno.edu; jandlsiliznoff@outlook.com; Mlopez@ci.fowler.ca.us; Craig.Jones@colostate.edu; Israel Sanchez <isanchez@westlandswater.org>; sandrits@netptc.net; Buchanan, A. D'Andra <ADBuchanan@co.fresno.ca.us>; Wright, Les <lwright@co.fresno.ca.us>; scott@lagunaid.com; Palacios, Robert <RPalacios@co.fresno.ca.us>; De La Cerda, Gabriel <gdelacerda@co.fresno.ca.us>; hsimmons@ppeng.com; greyes@usbr.gov ; bryant_jeff@sbcglobal.net; Barr, Jill <jbarr@co.fresno.ca.us>; captosborne@cityofkingsburg-ca.gov; rpud@sbcglobal.net; admin@sierrarcd.com; Chris.Christopherson@fire.ca.gov; ahenderson@cityofkingsburg-ca.gov ; Zanoni, John J. <john.zanoni@fresnosheriff.org>; tchapa@ci.sanger.ca.us; Salvador.Rayggoza@fcle.org; lfreeman@sjrecwa.net; rick.ehle@fcle.org; pdesatoff@cidwater.com; Curtice, Kathy <kathy.curtice@fresnosheriff.org>; thomas.jehrke@usace.army.mil ; jcastro001@yahoo.com; mtrejo@coalinga.com; Jim Anderson <ja@malagacwd.org>; ashbrook.don@gmail.com; r.michaels@orangecovefire.com; Siemer, Dale <DSiemer@co.fresno.ca.us>; Ben Fenters <bfenters@slwd.net>; Ortiz, Adan <AOrtiz@co.fresno.ca.us>; Jim.McDougald@FIRE.ca.gov; jgutierrez@westlandswater.org; ajmasovero@fs.fed.us; Crump, Stephen <scrump@co.fresno.ca.us>; mogdeb@aol.com; Purvis, Leslie <leslie.purvis@woodplc.com>; Fox, Wayne <wafox@co.fresno.ca.us>; Wilma.Quan-Schecter@fresno.gov; sharri_bender_ehlert@dot.ca.gov; Robertson, John <John.Robertson@reedley.ca.gov>; irisy@water.ca.gov ; Asprec, Lemuel <lasprec@co.fresno.ca.us>; brenths@fresnofloodcontrol.org; fmarquez@tmr.org; jerry.isaak@reedley.ca.gov; lcortez@malagacwd.org; office@biolabcd.org; sstadler@jamesid.org; rcozzie@aol.com; Seyed.Sadredin@valleyair.org; carl.carlucci@cdph.ca.gov; jdavis@ci.fowler.ca.us; Steve Haze <stevehaze007@gmail.com>; mmacias@cidwater.com; donnahrc@aol.com; georgeturegano@fcle.org; gerstenb@jps.net; Rousseau, Jean <jrousseau@co.fresno.ca.us>; carutherscsd@sbcglobal.net; Ishii, Randy <rishii@co.fresno.ca.us>; jkunkel@cityofkerman.org; ocfpd@hotmail.com; Rick Hoelzel <rhoelzel@krcd.org>; Thompson, John R. <jothompson@co.fresno.ca.us>; liz@trqid.com; jhuneke@eaglabs.com; michael.r.erskine@usace.army.mil ; Jonas, Chuck <CJonas@co.fresno.ca.us>; terri.mejorado@caloes.ca.gov; DMERRITT@KRCD.ORG; associate@slwd.net; Pomaville, David <dpomaville@co.fresno.ca.us>; Bash, Robert <rbash@co.fresno.ca.us>; Yang, Ahla <ahlayang@co.fresno.ca.us>; Mendoza, Armando <armendoza@co.fresno.ca.us>; dstroup@usbr.gov; latonwater@sbcglobal.net; Mather, Daniel N. <dmather@co.fresno.ca.us>; bcservices218@gmail.com; hydrobuffalo@sbcglobal.net; Austin, Kenneth <KAustin@co.fresno.ca.us>; Lopez, Angel <angellopez@co.fresno.ca.us>; Scott, Jordan J. <jjscott@co.fresno.ca.us>; miz5150@netptc.net; Mims, Margaret <margaret.mims@fresnosheriff.org>; Jimenez, Bernard <BJimenez@co.fresno.ca.us>; ipf@altaid.org; kjohansen@ppeng.com; hough@usgs.gov; DavidE@CityofSelma.com; dgabriel@coalinga.com; cannon@bfarm.com; lkimura@fresnoirrigation.com; stevesloan31@yahoo.com; Nehring, Kevin <knehring@co.fresno.ca.us>; cwhite@ccidwater.org; Bill Stretch <BStretch@fresnoirrigation.com>; joseph.blohm@fcle.org; slittlebucknaylor@fs.fed.us; faulkenb@water.ca.gov; ssingh@fresnoirrigation.com; gregt@ci.sanger.ca.us; andrewr@fresnofloodcontrol.org; rhopkins@ppeng.com; gunlund@sbcglogal.net; emailccservices@gmail.com; Julia@fresnomosquito.org; roger.mccoy@valleyair.org; lsjld@elite.net; Artal, Sebastian <sartal@co.fresno.ca.us>; Peter Preciado <Ppreciado@coalinga.com>; Raygoza, Salvador (Firebaugh PD) <Salvador.Raygoza@fcle.org>; ssaetern@fresnoirrigation.com; sanchez@westlandswater.org Cc: bob@mintierharnish.com; roa1@comcast.net; Colmenares, Nicholas <nicholas.colmenares@woodplc.com>; Moore, Abigail <abigail.moore@woodplc.com> Subject: Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan Update - HMPC Draft for Review Importance: High County of Fresno Internal Services Department (ISD) - IT Services Service Desk 600-5900 (Help Desk) CAUTION!!! This email has been flagged as containing one or more attachments from an outside source. Please check the senders email address carefully. If you were not expecting to receive an email with attachments, please DO NOT open the file. Forward the email to SPAM "SPAM@co.fresno.ca.us" and delete it. Fresno County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (County staff and participating jurisdictions in particular): The DRAFT of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017-18 update is available for your review. Due to the file size of the document it is being shared in in separate sections in 3 emails. Emails 2 and 3 will follow tomorrow. Email 1: All chapters in Word, minus Chapter 4 Risk Assessment in PDF due to maps Email 2: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Chapter 4 as a PDF Email 3: Draft updated jurisdictional annexes will be sent to the points of contact for participating jurisdictions We are requesting your review and any comments back by March 5th. Our goal is to complete a revised draft in a merged PDF for public review in mid-March. So we are nearing the finish line on the updated plan but it’s important to review, and for some, provide the outstanding items by this deadline. Outstanding items or items where we would welcome more input or verification are highlighted in yellow. Anything in green is text that Amec Foster Wheeler will revise in the final draft. To focus your review I suggest the following priority areas: Chapters 1 and 2: Yellow highlights note that there is still some uncertainty as to if some jurisdictions are participating fully in this update or not. If your jurisdiction is in yellow please contact me with questions about outstanding needs or respond to earlier requests. Chapter 5: Review the mitigation action summary table and detailed action write ups (for County staff, jurisdictional action write ups will be in their respective annexes). There are some that need clarification and more details which are highlighted. It is not too late to add additional mitigation projects if desired. Chapter 3: Review the planning process section and provide any additional details on public outreach and how the plan has been coordinated with or integrated into other planning efforts. Chapter 7: Review how the plan will be implemented and maintained. The largest section of the plan is Chapter 4 HIRA, this will be sent in a separate email due to its size. For those that want to review or comment in a Word version I will have placed it on the Google Drive here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xHOqB3ae67qZdlKgOkfUMfuhM2-J_osf?usp=sharing Amec Foster Wheeler will also conduct an internal review against the FEMA DMA requirements and may reach out to some of you for additional specifics. Some of the appendices including an appendix with a compendium of planning process documentation (sign in sheets, meeting items etc.) is being compiled for the next draft. The preferred method to obtain feedback is editing the document in Word with track changes turned on. Or you can note items in an email. Please provide comments or direct edits back to me. Let me know if there are any questions. Thanks Jeff Jeff Brislawn Hazard Mitigation Lead/Sr Associate Amec Foster Wheeler’s parent company is now owned by Wood plc Environment & Infrastructure/Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Management Program 1942 Broadw ay, Suite 314, Boulder CO, 80302 Direct 303-209-3781, mobile/cell 303-704-5506 jeff.brislaw n@w oodplc.com w w w .amecfw .com w w w .w oodplc.com This message is the property of John Wood Group PLC and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates and is intended only for the named recipient(s). Its contents (including any attachments) may be confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure by law. Unauthorised use, copying, distribution or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited. We assume no responsibility to persons other than the intended named recipient(s) and do not accept liability for any errors or omissions which are a result of email transmission. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by reply email to the sender and confirm that the original message and any attachments and copies have been destroyed and deleted from your system. If you do not wish to receive future unsolicited commercial electronic messages from us, please forward this email to: unsubscribe@woodplc.com and include “Unsubscribe” in the subject line. If applicable, you will continue to receive invoices, project communications and similar factual, non-commercial electronic communications. Please click http://www.woodplc.com/email-disclaimer for notices and company information in relation to emails originating in the UK, Italy or France. Master City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File Number: ID19-1638 File ID: Type: Status: ID19-1638 Resolution Agenda Ready CONSENT1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 04/30/2019File Created: Final Action: Subject: Title: RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 Internal Notes: CAO - EC A19-0493 04/25/19 Sponsors: Fire Department Enactment Date: Exhibit A. LHMP FEMA approval eligibility letter 2-8-19.pdf, Exhibit B Fresno County HMP_Final_Reduced.pdf, EMC Resolution.pdf Attachments: ORD/RES Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 05/16/2019City Council The above item was removed from the agenda by staff. Notes: Page 1City of Fresno Printed on 12/9/2019 Master Continued (ID19-1638) Text of Legislative File ID19-1638 Page 2City of Fresno Printed on 12/9/2019 City of Fresno Legislation Text 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:KERRI L. DONIS, Fire Chief Fire Department SUBJECT: RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopts the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the hazard mitigation plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards.Fresno County and other participating jurisdictions developed this multi- hazard mitigation plan to make the County and its residents less vulnerable to future hazard events. This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000,so Fresno County would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA)Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants,including Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant programs,as well as,lower flood insurance premiums (in jurisdictions that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System). The plan was originally developed in 2007-2008 and FEMA approved it in 2009.The plan was comprehensively updated in 2017-2018.The County followed a planning process in alignment with FEMA guidance during its original development and update,which began with the formation of a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC)comprised of key County,city,and district representatives and other stakeholders.The HMPC conducted a risk assessment that identified and profiled hazards that pose a risk to Fresno County,assessed the County’s vulnerability to these hazards,and examined the capabilities in place to mitigate them.The County is vulnerable to several hazards that are identified,profiled,and analyzed in this plan.Floods,wildfires,severe weather, drought,and agricultural hazards are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the County. Based on the risk assessment,the HMPC identified goals and objectives for reducing the County’s vulnerability to hazards.To meet identified goals and objectives,the plan recommends a number of mitigation actions that include actions specific to each participating jurisdiction.This plan has been formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years at a minimum. BACKGROUND The current Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was created in 2000 as a requirement of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and updated in 2007.The plan underwent another update known as the 2017-2018 update.The City of Fresno has participated in the initial draft,the update,and provided information to the County of Fresno to include in the plan. While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts,the regulations established the requirements that local hazard mitigation plans must meet in order for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T.Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Public Law 93-288).Because the Fresno County planning area is subject to many kinds of hazards,access to these programs is vital. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future.Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to communities and their residents by protecting critical community facilities,reducing liability exposure,and minimizing overall community impacts and disruptions.The Fresno County planning area has been affected by hazards in the past and is thus committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and becoming eligible for mitigation-related federal funding. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not applied since this is an adoption of a plan that the City of Fresno has previously been involved with. FISCAL IMPACT This item has no fiscal impact.The City of Fresno currently provides these services in case of an emergency. Attachments: Exhibit A: FEMA Approval Letter dated February 8, 2019 Exhibit B: Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 EMC Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Legislation Text 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:KERRI L. DONIS, Fire Chief Fire Department SUBJECT: RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopts the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the hazard mitigation plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards.Fresno County and other participating jurisdictions developed this multi- hazard mitigation plan to make the County and its residents less vulnerable to future hazard events. This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000,so Fresno County would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA)Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants,including Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant programs,as well as,lower flood insurance premiums (in jurisdictions that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System). The plan was originally developed in 2007-2008 and FEMA approved it in 2009.The plan was comprehensively updated in 2017-2018.The County followed a planning process in alignment with FEMA guidance during its original development and update,which began with the formation of a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC)comprised of key County,city,and district representatives and other stakeholders.The HMPC conducted a risk assessment that identified and profiled hazards that pose a risk to Fresno County,assessed the County’s vulnerability to these hazards,and examined the capabilities in place to mitigate them.The County is vulnerable to several hazards that are identified,profiled,and analyzed in this plan.Floods,wildfires,severe weather, drought,and agricultural hazards are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the County. Based on the risk assessment,the HMPC identified goals and objectives for reducing the County’s vulnerability to hazards.To meet identified goals and objectives,the plan recommends a number of mitigation actions that include actions specific to each participating jurisdiction.This plan has been formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years at a minimum. BACKGROUND The current Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was created in 2000 as a requirement of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and updated in 2007.The plan underwent another update known as the 2017-2018 update.The City of Fresno has participated in the initial draft,the update,and provided information to the County of Fresno to include in the plan. While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts,the regulations established the requirements that local hazard mitigation plans must meet in order for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T.Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Public Law 93-288).Because the Fresno County planning area is subject to many kinds of hazards,access to these programs is vital. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future.Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to communities and their residents by protecting critical community facilities,reducing liability exposure,and minimizing overall community impacts and disruptions.The Fresno County planning area has been affected by hazards in the past and is thus committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and becoming eligible for mitigation-related federal funding. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not applied since this is an adoption of a plan that the City of Fresno has previously been involved with. FISCAL IMPACT This item has no fiscal impact.The City of Fresno currently provides these services in case of an emergency. Attachments: Exhibit A: FEMA Approval Letter dated February 8, 2019 Exhibit B: Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 EMC Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Legislation Text 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:KERRI L. DONIS, Fire Chief Fire Department SUBJECT: RESOLUTION - Adopting the County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopts the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the hazard mitigation plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards.Fresno County and other participating jurisdictions developed this multi- hazard mitigation plan to make the County and its residents less vulnerable to future hazard events. This plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000,so Fresno County would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA)Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants,including Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant programs,as well as,lower flood insurance premiums (in jurisdictions that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System). The plan was originally developed in 2007-2008 and FEMA approved it in 2009.The plan was comprehensively updated in 2017-2018.The County followed a planning process in alignment with FEMA guidance during its original development and update,which began with the formation of a Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC)comprised of key County,city,and district representatives and other stakeholders.The HMPC conducted a risk assessment that identified and profiled hazards that pose a risk to Fresno County,assessed the County’s vulnerability to these hazards,and examined the capabilities in place to mitigate them.The County is vulnerable to several hazards that are identified,profiled,and analyzed in this plan.Floods,wildfires,severe weather, drought,and agricultural hazards are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the County. Based on the risk assessment,the HMPC identified goals and objectives for reducing the County’s vulnerability to hazards.To meet identified goals and objectives,the plan recommends a number of mitigation actions that include actions specific to each participating jurisdiction.This plan has been formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1638,Version:1 formally adopted by the County and the participating jurisdictions and will be updated every five years at a minimum. BACKGROUND The current Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was created in 2000 as a requirement of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and updated in 2007.The plan underwent another update known as the 2017-2018 update.The City of Fresno has participated in the initial draft,the update,and provided information to the County of Fresno to include in the plan. While the act emphasized the need for mitigation plans and more coordinated mitigation planning and implementation efforts,the regulations established the requirements that local hazard mitigation plans must meet in order for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding under the Robert T.Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (Public Law 93-288).Because the Fresno County planning area is subject to many kinds of hazards,access to these programs is vital. Information in this plan will be used to help guide and coordinate mitigation activities and decisions for local land use policy in the future.Proactive mitigation planning will help reduce the cost of disaster response and recovery to communities and their residents by protecting critical community facilities,reducing liability exposure,and minimizing overall community impacts and disruptions.The Fresno County planning area has been affected by hazards in the past and is thus committed to reducing future impacts from hazard events and becoming eligible for mitigation-related federal funding. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not applied since this is an adoption of a plan that the City of Fresno has previously been involved with. FISCAL IMPACT This item has no fiscal impact.The City of Fresno currently provides these services in case of an emergency. Attachments: Exhibit A: FEMA Approval Letter dated February 8, 2019 Exhibit B: Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan May 2018 EMC Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 5/10/2019Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1640 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-G REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL MAY 16, 2019 FROM:TJ MILLER, Interim Director Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services Department BY:KRISTINA CHAMBERLIN, Assistant Director Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services Department SUBJECT Actions pertaining to authorizing not accept the submission of grant applications through Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program (Proposition 68). 1.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for new park development at Church/Orangewood (Council District 5) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 2.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for Quigley Park reconstruction (Council District 1) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 3.***RESOLUTION - To approve the filing of an application for Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program grant funds for Radio Park improvements (Council District 7) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) 4.Authorize execution of all application- related documents by the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Interim Director or designee RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council: (1) adopt RESOLUTIONS to authorize application of grant funds through the Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program a new park development at Church/Orangewood (District 5), Quigley Park Reconstruction Project (District 1), and Radio Park Improvement Project (District 7) and; (2) authorize execution of all application related documents by the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Interim Director or designee. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff met with each of the Council offices to identify and prioritize significant park improvement projects for the purpose of applying for grants currently available through the Statewide Park City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1640 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-G Development and Community Revitalization Program, aka Prop 68 grant opportunity. Three projects are slated for the current round of funding including: 1.New Park Construction at Church/Orangewood (District 5) 2.Reconstruction project for Quigley Park (District 1) 3.Miscellaneous improvements and renovation of Radio Park (District 7) BACKGROUND In June 2018, California voters approved Proposition 68, a general obligation bond, au thorizing $4.1 billion for creation and rehabilitation of state and local parks, natural resources protection projects, climate adaptation projects, water quality and supply projects, and flood protection projects. The release of funds occurs in cycles and with specific project specifications and criteria. The current Statewide Park Program has a total of $254 million allocated for grant funding. This competitive program focuses on the creation of new parks and new recreation opportunities in underserved communities across California. The project scope allows for a minimum of $200K per project with a maximum of $8.5M per project with no match requirement and no limit on the number of grants submitted. In January 2018, the City Council adopted the Parks Master Plan Update. The adoption celebrates the culmination of nearly 18 months of community outreach, stakeholder engagement, staff analysis, and a comprehensive evaluation of parks and amenities. The Plan serves as the visionary guide for improving Fresno’s parks, open space and recreational services. The Plan also provides recommendations and strategies and highlights the community’s priorities for improvements. The overwhelming common goal identifies a focus on making substantial improvements to the city’s existing park system and to seek out alternative funding for new park development. The current Statewide Park Program provides the opportunity to address both. Staff engaged each council member with identifying park priorities using the two main grant factors as our guide - assuring that proposed projects were located in disadvantaged communities and had deficiencies in park acreage (those with less than 3 acres per 1,000 residents). Staff compiled the results of those priorities and from the list, selected those that most met the overall grant guidelines as well as those that met the construction performance criteria - being fully constructed by March 2022. Staff also held additional meetings with council to review the process that was utilized to select the three top projects in which to submit a project application for the current Statewide Park Program cycle. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed each resolution and approved as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS A resolution for applying for grant funding is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1640 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-G Local preference is not implicated because the resolutions do not include a bid or award of a construction or service contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact at this time as the above action is authorizing the submission of three grant applications. Grant applications are due August 2019 and anticipated notification of award will occur early 2020. Should the grant(s) be awarded, funds will be identified through appropriate fiscal year capital budgets. Attachments: Resolution - Church / Orangewood Resolution - Quigley Park Resolution - Radio Park City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1672 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-H REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:DEJAN PAVIC, PE, Public Utilities Manager 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 construction of 850 linear feet of Water Main Installation for the Mono Street and H Street Downtown Water Main Enhancements project (Council District 3): 1.Adopt findings of Section 15282 (Other Statutory Exemptions)of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC, Inc., in the amount of $322,718 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15282 (Other Statutory Exemptions)of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines; award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC,Inc.,in the amount of $322,718 for Water Main Installation for the Mono Street and H Street Downtown Water Main Enhancements project (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 installation contract.The scope of work for the Project includes construction of 450 feet of a new 16-inch diameter pipeline in H Street between Mono Street and Inyo Street,construction of 400 feet of new 12-inch diameter pipeline in Mono Street between Broadway Street/H Street alley and Fulton Street/Broadway Street alley,and construction of an intertie between the 24-inch diameter pipeline and 30-inch diameter pipeline within the intersection of Mono Street and H Street.Staff recommends that City Council award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC,Inc.,as the lowest responsive and City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1672 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-H that City Council award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC,Inc.,as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in the amount of $322,718. BACKGROUND The Department of Public Utilities,Water Division,has identified that a portion of the existing water system in H Street and Mono Street lack adequate water mains to provide sufficient capacity to meet the water demand for this area of downtown.Staff has determined that the proposed transmission grid water main gap closure will meet and exceed the expected water demands of the surrounding downtown area.The scope of work for the Project includes construction of 450 feet of a new 16-inch diameter pipeline in H Street between Mono Street and Inyo Street,construction of 400 feet of new 12-inch diameter pipeline in Mono Street between Broadway Street/H Street alley and Fulton Street/Broadway Street alley,and construction of an intertie between the 24-inch diameter pipeline and 30-inch diameter pipeline within the intersection of Mono Street and H Street. Plans and Specifications were prepared for this Project.A Notice Inviting Bids was published on February 26,2019,and posted on the City’s Planet Bids website.The Specifications were distributed to ten prospective bidders and posted at thirteen Building Exchanges.Five sealed bid proposals were received and publicly opened on March 26,2019.The bid proposals ranged from $322,718 to $391,194. The bids will expire 45 days after bid opening, which will be on May 29, 2019. Bill Nelson GEC,Inc.,was found to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder,with the bid amount of $322,718.The staff determination was posted on the City’s Planet Bids website on April 17,2019.Staff recommends that City Council award a construction contract to Bill Nelson GEC,Inc., in the amount of $322,718 as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.Their bid price is 6% below the Engineer’s Estimate of $345,000. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this Project and has determined that it is exempt under Section 15282 (Other Statutory Exemptions)of the CEQA Guidelines,set forth in Section 21080.21 of the Public Resources Code,as long as the project does not exceed one mile in length.The combined length of the proposed Project will not exceed one mile in length. Furthermore,none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15282 apply to this Project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local Preference was not implemented because the low bidder qualifies as a local business pursuant to the Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-108(d). FISCAL IMPACT Funding for this Project is available within the Water Capacity Fee Fund 40202 in the Fiscal Year 2019 budget. Attachments: City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1672 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-H Attachment 1 - Bid Evaluation and Fiscal Impact Statement Attachment 2 - Sample Contract Attachment 3 - Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 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, MMC CRM 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] KEARNEYCALIFORNIAWHITES BRIDGENIELSENBELMONTCHURCHM O N O S T R E E TH STREETCALIFORNIABUTLERVENTURADIVISADEROBELMONTCHURCHWEST BLACKSTONE FRESNO FIRST MILLBROOK FRUIT PALM VAN NESS WEST CHERRY WALNUT FRUIT M.L.K. ELM EAST ORANGE PROJECTLOCATIONVICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALE City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1651 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-I REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:BRIAN SPINDOR, PE(WA), Assistant Director - Wastewater Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division DEJAN PAVIC, PE, Public Utilities Manager Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering BY:ANITA LUERA, Senior Engineering Technician Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Preparation of Workplans for Evaluation of the Existing Groundwater Monitoring Well Network and Arsenic and Manganese Assessment at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Council District 3 and Citywide): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 6,Section 15306 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Approve a consultant services agreement with Carollo Engineers,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $250,000 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign all documents on behalf of the City of Fresno RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 6, Section 15306 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines;approve a consultant services agreement with Carollo Engineers,Inc.(Carollo),in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for the Preparation of Workplans for Evaluation of the Existing Groundwater Monitoring Well Network and Arsenic and Manganese Assessment at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF)(Project);and authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign all documents on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1651 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-I The Department of Public Utilities (DPU),Wastewater Management Division operates under Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR)Order R5-2018-0080 adopted by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Board)on December 13,2018.To comply with the requirements of the WDR,staff conducted a competitive process for selecting a consultant for the Project.Failure to submit the workplans or to meet the deadlines established by the Board will result in a non- compliance status of the RWRF. BACKGROUND DPU,Wastewater Management Division operates the RWRF which is regulated by WDR Order R5- 2018-0080 adopted by the Board on December 13,2018.The WDR is the regulatory document that establishes numeric or narrative limits on the final effluent of the RWRF,as well as on the receiving groundwater,and also contains time-sensitive provisions that are required to be completed in order for the City to remain in compliance with the WDR. Provision J of the WDR addresses Groundwater Limitations and provides a compliance schedule to submit a Groundwater Monitoring Well Network Evaluation and Well Installation Workplan that will evaluate and include proposed improvements to the existing groundwater monitoring well network’s adequacy in providing representative data of groundwater impacts by the RWRF.Provision J of the WDR also requires submittal of an Arsenic and Manganese Compliance Assessment Workplan to evaluate impacts of those constituents to the groundwater as they relate to the RWRF.The evaluation will include potential impacts of elevated concentrations on beneficial uses of groundwater downgradient of the RWRF and shall propose modifications to the current groundwater monitoring well network,if needed.Both of the workplans are required to be submitted to the Board by December 10, 2019. In accordance with Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 4,Article 1,and Administrative Order 6-19,DPU conducted a competitive process for selecting a consultant to provide the requested professional services for this Project.On February 5,2019,the City published a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for consulting services through the City’s Planet Bids website and sent direct email notifications with details of the posting to 129 potential candidates.The RFQ was then published in the Business Journal on February 8,2019.Two Statement of Qualifications (SOQs)were submitted by the deadline on March 14,2019.A selection committee,consisting of five representatives from DPU, Utilities Planning and Engineering and Wastewater Management Division,evaluated the SOQs and ranked the consultants.Upon completion of the evaluation,scope of work,and fee negotiation process,Carollo was selected based on their extensive experience on groundwater impacts by wastewater treatment facilities and their knowledge of the existing conditions of the RWRF as a result of a previous study determining the RWRF Best Practical Treatment and Control Report (2007)that addressed pollutants of concerns including arsenic and manganese.Failure to submit the workplan or to meet the deadlines established by the Board will result in a non-compliance status of the RWRF. A standard consultant services agreement has been used in accordance with Administrative Order 4 -4,and Carollo Certificates of Insurance have been approved by the City’s Risk Management Division.Upon approval by the City Council,the consultant services agreement will be executed by the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,who has been delegated this authority by the City Manager. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1651 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-I ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has determined that a Categorical Exemption is appropriate,based on Class 6,Section 15306 of the CEQA Guidelines.Class 6 exempts basic data collection,research,experimental management,and resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource.This Project involves compliance with requirements set forth by a regulatory agency for protection of both natural resources and the environment.The study of the existing groundwater monitoring network will involve data collection and result in the preparation of workplans.No construction is involved in this study.Furthermore,staff has determined that none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines,Section 15300.2 apply to this Project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference did not affect the evaluation process because the two consultants who submitted SOQs are both local firms. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.This Project is located in Council District 3 and provides Citywide benefits.Funding for this work is included in the Wastewater Management Division’s Operations and Maintenance budget within the Wastewater Enterprise Fund 40501.The total contracted price for this work is $250,000 of which $100,000 has been appropriated in the Fiscal Year 2019 budget,and $150,000 is scheduled to be appropriated in the Fiscal Year 2020 budget contingent upon adoption by the City Council. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Consultant Services Agreement Attachment 2 - Waste Discharge Requirements Order R5-2018-0080 City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY REGION ORDER R5-2018-0080 WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (Central Valley Water Board) finds that: 1. On 6 October 2015, the City of Fresno submitted a Report of Waste Discharge (RWD) to apply for revised waste discharge requirements (WDRs) for the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Facility), an existing publicly-owned wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) serving the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, the Pinedale Water District, the Pinedale Utilities District, and some unincorporated areas of Fresno County (i.e., not within Fresno and Clovis city limits). 2. The City of Clovis maintains the rights and capacity to discharge 9.3 million gallons per day (mgd) to the Facility. The City of Fresno is responsible for the day-to-day Facility operations, and is therefore specifically referred to herein as “Operator.” For the purposes of this Order, the cities of Clovis and Fresno will be collectively and jointly referred to as “Discharger” (in singular form). Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the Cities of Clovis and Fresno are each jointly responsible for compliance with the WDRs prescribed herein. 3. The Facility is at 5607 W. Jensen Avenue in Fresno (Section 22, Township 14 South, Range 19 East, Mount Diablo Base & Meridian). The Facility occupies the following Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) as shown on Attachment A (Site Map), which is incorporated herein. 327-021-04T 327-030-38T 327-040-11ST 327-050-03T 327-021-05T 327-030-41T 327-040-26T 327-050-19T 327-021-45T 327-030-44U 327-040-31T 327-200-28ST 327-030-22ST 327-040-07T 327-040-39T 327-200-34ST 327-030-23ST 327-040-09T 327-050-01T 327-200-38ST 327-030-24T 327-040-10T 327-050-02T 4. WDRs Order 5-01-254, adopted by the Central Valley Water Board on 19 October 2001, prescribes requirements for the Facility. Order 5-01-254 allows an annual monthly average daily discharge flow of 80 mgd of undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to onsite disposal ponds. Since 2001, the Operator has completed multiple projects to improve the Facility’s treatment capabilities and overall capacity. This included adding a third secondary treatment train in 2009, and adding a tertiary treatment system in 2017. The Operator also ceased discharging stillage from wineries at the Facility in 2003. Therefore, Order 5-01-254 is out of date and no longer reflects current Facility operations. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 2 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Order 5-01-254 will be rescinded and replaced with this Order upon the effective date of this Order. Existing Facility and Discharge 5. The Facility treats domestic, commercial, and industrial wastewater from the service area described above. The City of Fresno’s sewer collection system consists of approximately 24,151 manholes, 15 lift stations, 11.5 miles of force mains, and 1,601 miles of gravity sewers (excluding abandoned/out of service segments and private facilities). In addition, the City of Fresno’s sewer collection system receives domestic wastewater from the City of Clovis at, primarily, four connection points. 6. The Facility previously consisted of two separate wastewater treatment plants, referred to as Plant 1 and Plant 2. Plant 2, a 6 mgd trickling filter plant, was demolished in 2008. Plant 1, an activated sludge treatment plant, is still in service but was expanded in 2009. Prior to the 2009 expansion, the activated sludge treatment plant had two treatment trains and had a design treatment capacity of 88 mgd. 7. The Operator completed an organics upgrade project in 2009 to increase the Facility’s treatment capacity. The purpose of the upgrades was to provide additional treatment facilities to meet an increase in organic loadings at the Facility. The upgrades included the addition of a new primary effluent flow split structure, a secondary treatment train (Train C), and one new anaerobic digester. 8. The Operator, in an effort to increase the reuse of treated wastewater, completed the construction of Phase I of the tertiary treatment system at the Facility in 2017. The tertiary treatment system is planned in three phases. The current design flow for the tertiary treatment system is 5.0 mgd but can be expanded in two subsequent phases to 15 mgd (Phase II) and ultimately 30 mgd (Phase III). 9. The Facility now includes preliminary, primary, secondary, and tertiary units with disinfection. Preliminary and primary treatment consists of bar screens, grit removal tanks, and six primary clarifiers. Secondary treatment consists of three treatment trains (Trains A, B, and C) that operate as three separate activated sludge systems. Each treatment train contains aeration basins and secondary clarifiers. Train A includes three complete-mix square aeration basins and four secondary clarifiers. Train B includes four plug-flow rectangular aeration basins and eight secondary clarifiers. Train C includes two plug-flow aeration basins and four secondary clarifiers. The tertiary treatment system receives primary-treated effluent diverted immediately upstream of Train C’s aeration basins. The tertiary treatment system includes a fine screen, two pre-aeration basins, four membrane bioreactor tanks, and four in-vessel ultraviolet light disinfection system trains. The Facility also includes an Anaerobically Digestible Material receiving station and a station to receive material from the Discharger’s sewer cleaning vehicles. A facility layout is included in Attachment B, which is attached hereto and made a part of this Order by reference. 10. Included within the Facility property are 1,720 acres of disposal ponds (Discharge Point 001). The 1,720 acres of disposal ponds consist of 83 ponds that collectively provide a total storage capacity of 10,890 acre-feet. Order 5-01-254 limited the discharge WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 3 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY of undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to 80 mgd as an annual monthly average and 88 mgd as a maximum monthly average. 11. In addition to disposing undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to the onsite disposal ponds, the Discharger also conveys undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to farmers for restricted irrigation of nonfood crops on agricultural land on the Facility property and on surrounding properties (Discharge Point 002). The onsite recycling of undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater is conducted by local farmers under lease agreements on approximately 748 acres (hereinafter referred to as Onsite Use Areas). The discharge of undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater from the Facility to surrounding offsite croplands is authorized under separate water reclamation requirements (collectively, Offsite Use Areas). Based on data from 2009 to 2013, an average of 9,933 acre-feet per year of undisinfected secondary-treated effluent was used for direct agricultural irrigation. 12. On 19 July 2016, the Operator submitted a Title 22 Engineering Report and application for State Water Resources Control Board’s Water Reclamation Requirements for Recycled Water Use Order WQ 2016-0068-DDW (General Reclamation Order) for the reclamation of disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater to unrestricted recycled water Use Areas (Discharge Point 003). On 20 March 2017, the Operator was enrolled under the General Reclamation Order. 13. Due to the extensive use of disposal ponds over the past decades, a substantial groundwater mound persists at the Facility. The mound is approximately 10 to 20 feet high and extends beyond the perimeter of the Facility’s property. 14. The Fresno Irrigation District (FID) covers 245,000 acres in central Fresno County, which extends from Pine Flat Dam along the Kings River to the Kerman area, and includes the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area. 15. In 1974, the Operator established an agreement with FID that allows the Operator to discharge extracted groundwater into FID’s canal system. The Operator specifically discharges extracted groundwater into FID’s Dry Creek and Houghton Canals during the growing season for agricultural use on the western side of FID. Each canal can convey up to 200 cubic feet per second. The 1974 agreement includes the following stipulations: a. The Operator must discharge a minimum of 100,000 acre-feet of extracted groundwater to FID during any ten-year period; b. The Operator may discharge a maximum of 30,000 acre-feet of extracted groundwater to FID in any given year; c. Every acre-foot of extracted groundwater the Operator discharges to FID, the Operator is entitled to receive 0.46 acre-feet of surface water from FID; d. Any increase in the discharge of extracted groundwater to FID beyond that stipulated in the 1974 agreement is subject to FID approval; and e. The Operator cannot extract groundwater from beneath the Facility in volumes that will cause the groundwater level to drop below levels observed in the previous year. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 4 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 16. The Operator currently has 22 operational reclamation wells on the Facility the property. The wells extract water from depths ranging from 80 to 200 feet below ground surface (bgs). In 2016, the Operator discharged approximately 9,000 acre-feet of extracted groundwater to FID’s canals and approximately 22,600 acre-feet in 2015. The Operator’s RWD estimates that 19 to 43 percent of the Facility’s percolated effluent is extracted and delivered to FID. 17. WDRs Order 5-01-254 required the Discharger to evaluate the degree of treatment the underlying soil provided on percolating wastewater. In September 2015, the Operator submitted a report titled Demonstration of Filtration and Disinfection Compliance Through Soil-Aquifer Treatment (2015 Soil-Aquifer Treatment Study) prepared by the WateReuse Research Foundation in cooperation with the United States Bureau of Reclamation, the cities of Fresno and Dinuba, and Carollo Engineers. The evaluation included developing a more sensitive, high-volume, low-level method for virus enumeration to evaluate the treatment provided by percolating unfiltered secondary wastewater. As part of the 2015 Soil-Aquifer Treatment Study, total coliform, E. coli, particle size distribution, ultraviolet light transmittance, and turbidity were analyzed. The high-volume, low-level virus enumeration method demonstrated approximately 6-log removal of male-specific type 2 coliphage. The 2015 Soil-Aquifer Treatment Study concluded that the results demonstrated that soil treatment provided by the recharge and extraction operation at the Facility is equivalent to the tertiary recycled water disinfection requirements in Title 22 of California Code of Regulations (Title 22). 18. The Operator began disposing winery stillage to a 95-acre area of the Facility in 1974 and added another 50 acres for stillage disposal in 1998. The Discharger disposed stillage directly to land, bypassing the Facility’s treatment system. WDRs Order 5-01-254 regulated the discharge of stillage to the 145-acre site at the Facility. In 2003, the Operator ceased the direct land discharge of untreated stillage at the Facility. 19. The disposal of stillage directly to land over the decades has resulted in groundwater degradation, specifically due to the accumulation of nitrogen in the stillage disposal area soils. To mitigate the impacts on water quality, Order 5-01-254 prohibited the discharge of stillage by 31 December 2003 and required the Discharger to plant and harvest crops on the former stillage disposal area. Beginning in 2005, the Operator began farming the former stillage disposal area at the Facility. According to submitted monitoring reports, from 2005 to 2016, this farming has resulted in the removal of approximately 1,800 pounds of nitrogen per acre (total of 125 acres). This Order prohibits the discharge of untreated stillage to land at the Facility and continues to require the Operator to implement measures to provide nutrient uptake in the former stillage disposal area (i.e., systematic cropping and harvesting) and conduct lysimeter monitoring for the area. 20. The Operator, in its October 2015 RWD, submitted a treatment capacity analysis report (2015 Capacity Report) for the Facility. The 2015 Capacity Report evaluated the Facility’s secondary treatment system (all three treatment trains) and Phase I of the tertiary treatment system which, at the time, was still under construction. The 2015 Capacity Report concluded that the Facility’s secondary treatment system has an annual average treatment capacity of 87 mgd. Train A has 30 mgd treatment capacity and Trains B and C, combined, have a treatment capacity of 57 mgd. Phase I of Facility’s tertiary treatment WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 5 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY system has a treatment capacity of 5 mgd. Therefore, the 2015 Capacity Report concluded that the Facility’s total treatment capacity is 92 mgd (as an annual average). 21. The October 2015 RWD also included a water balance evaluating the Facility’s discharge capacity. As discussed in Findings 10 – 12, the Operator currently has three means to discharge treated wastewater from the Facility: (1) discharging undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to 1,720 acres of on-site disposal ponds (Discharge Point 001), (2) discharging undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to on-site and off-site farmland for restricted irrigation of crops (Discharge Point 002); and (3) discharging disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater to Use Areas under the Reclamation General Order (Discharge Point 003). The Facility’s water balance is summarized below. Facility Water Balance Discharge Location Approximate Volume (acre-feet/year) Annual Average Daily Flow (mgd) % of Total Flow On-Site Disposal Ponds 1 90,000 80 1 87.4% Restricted Agricultural Irrigation (Secondary-Treated Wastewater) 2,3 9,400 8.4 9.2% Unrestricted Tertiary Irrigation (Phase I) 4 3,500 3.1 3.4% Total 102,900 91.5 100% 1 The pond’s maximum annual average percolation capacity is 80 mgd. (See Finding 22.) 2 Based on the restricted irrigation discharge data and monthly crop patterns for 2013. 3 The RWD also included a nitrogen balance, using 2013 data. The nitrogen balance demonstrated that the estimated nitrogen loading to the croplands of 546,000 pounds (if 9,400 acre-feet/year of secondary treated wastewater was reclaimed on the croplands) does not exceed the maximum allowable total nitrogen loading of 897,366 pounds. Thus, the Discharger is restricted by the water needed for crop demand. 4 The RW D used the Clovis Sewage Treatment and Water Reuse Facility’s recycled water demand curve to estimate the unrestricted tertiary irrigation demand for the Facility. 22. The onsite disposal ponds have a maximum annual average capacity of 80 mgd. The controlling factor for the pond system capacity is the groundwater mound beneath the Facility. The RWD included a Groundwater Mounding Analysis prepared by Ken Schmidt and Associates which evaluated the groundwater elevation conditions under the existing discharge conditions (63 mgd) as well under increased discharge conditions (both 80 mgd and 92 mgd). The analysis demonstrated that if the Facility discharged 92 mgd to the on- site disposal ponds, “shallow groundwater levels could be at or close to the pond bottoms over a considerable area beneath the percolation ponds.” This could reduce infiltration and the degree of soil treatment. Consequently, the RWD acknowledges that the flow limit to the onsite disposal should remain at 80 mgd. 23. Influent flows to the Facility have remained fairly consistent, with a slight decrease in flows over the past few years. The annual average influent flows in 2015 and 2016 were 56.84 mgd and 55.86 mgd, respectively. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 6 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 24. The following tables summarize the Facility’s annual average influent and effluent concentrations. Influent Monitoring Data (2012 - 2016) Constituent Units Annual Average 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L 324 327 349 371 372 Total Suspended Solids mg/L 307 318 298 301 317 Settleable Solids mL/L 12 10 10 12 14 pH s.u. 6.6 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.6 Electrical Conductivity (EC) µmhos/cm 1,072 1,074 1,038 1,052 1,057 Effluent Monitoring Data (2012 - 2016) Constituent Units Annual Average 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L 17 17 13 15 14 Total Suspended Solids mg/L 4 5 4 4 5 ph s.u. 6.6 6.5 6.7 6.8 6.8 Electrical Conductivity (EC) µmhos/cm 930 903 850 828 837 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 470 493 503 495 514 Chloride mg/L 105 115 109 105 112 Sodium mg/L 93 97 94 99 95 Sulfate mg/L 38 38 40 40 38 Ammonia (as N) mg/L 21 13 6 6 5 Nitrate (as N) mg/L 4 6 12 13 15 Total Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 26 21 19 20 20 25. From 2012 to 2016, the electrical conductivity (EC) 12-month rolling average source water based effluent limit, calculated as the EC of source water plus 500 µmhos/cm, ranged from approximately 750 µmhos/cm to 800 µmhos/cm. The Facility’s effluent EC has consistently exceeded the 12-month rolling average source water limit since approximately 2004. The following graph compares the Facility’s effluent EC concentrations to the source water plus 500 µmhos/cm limit from 1995 to 2016. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 7 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Electrical Conductivity (EC) – Effluent vs. Source Water Planned Changes in the Facility and Discharge 26. In its 2010 Urban Water Master Plan, the Operator established a goal to reuse 25,000 acre-feet of recycled water per year by 2025 to offset potable water use. As part of this effort, the Operator identified possible opportunities where potable water demand could be supplemented and/or replaced with disinfected tertiary-treated recycled water from the Facility. In the near future, the Operator plans to implement recycled water delivery for urban irrigation, industrial and commercial reuse, and agricultural reuse. The Operator divided its city limits into four subareas (southwest, southeast, northwest, and northeast) for phasing the implementation of the recycled water use. The Operator will begin developing a recycled water distribution system in the southwest subarea due to its proximity to the Facility. Potential major users in the southwest subarea include city/county parks, cemeteries, schools, Highway 180, industrial users, and existing/future residential and commercial development. 27. The Facility’s tertiary treatment system is designed to provide a higher level of wastewater treatment than previously provided at the Facility. Phase I of the tertiary system is designed to treat up to 5 mgd of wastewater to Title 22 disinfected tertiary recycled water standards. The Operator plans to upgrade the Facility’s treatment system in two subsequent phases, to 15 mgd (Phase II) and ultimately 30 mgd (Phase II), when the recycled water demand warrants the upgrades. The October 2015 RWD states that the Facility’s tertiary treatment system is designed to meet the following level of treatment. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 8 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Proposed Effluent Concentrations for the Tertiary Treatment System Constituent Units Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) mg/L 10 15 20 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/L 10 15 20 Settleable Solids mL/L -- -- 0.1 Total Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 10 -- -- BOD and TSS % Removal % 90 Total Coliform Organisms MPN/100 mL 23 1 2.2 2 240 3 1 More than once in any 30-day period. 2 7-day median. 3 At any time. 28. The RWD states that the Operator is considering modifying its 1974 agreement with FID to increase the current annual maximum allowed discharge of extracted groundwater into FID’s canal system. Finding 15 above describes the stipulations included in the 1974 agreement. The Operator is currently restricted to a maximum of 30,000 acre-feet of extracted groundwater to FID’s canal system in any given year. Industrial Pretreatment Program 29. Industrial discharges to publicly owned wastewater treatment facilities can cause one or more of the following problems if not adequately controlled: a. Interference or Upset. Discharges of high volumes or concentrations of certain pollutants can inhibit or interfere with the proper operation of the wastewater treatment facility, causing it to do an inadequate job of treating wastes. As a result, the facility could be prevented from meeting its permit requirements. b. Sludge Management. Industrial pollutants, particularly metals and other toxic pollutants, can limit the sludge management alternatives available to the Discharger and increase the cost of sludge management and disposal. Additionally, biosolids contaminated with toxic pollutants could be rendered unsuitable for use as a soil amendment. c. Pass-through. Some industrial pollutants may not receive adequate treatment and pass through the treatment system in concentrations that can could unreasonably degrade groundwater quality and/or prevent recycling of domestic wastewater. Additionally, the discharge of explosive, reactive, or corrosive wastes can cause damage to the wastewater collection system or the treatment works and may also pose a threat to worker or public safety. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 9 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 30. The Operator has implemented an industrial pretreatment program to regulate the discharge of industrial wastes into the wastewater collection system or treatment works to prevent damage to the sewer system or treatment works, inhibit or disrupt the treatment process, or cause violation of the effluent or groundwater limits of this Order. The Central Valley Water Board originally approved the Discharger’s industrial pretreatment program on 17 June 1984. The Discharger has revised the program since 1984, most recently in 2009. The last industrial pretreatment compliance inspection was conducted on 27/28 January 2016. 31. According to the Operator’s 2017 3rd Quarter Pretreatment Report, 41 significant industrial users discharge into the Facility’s collection system and include the following industry types: industrial launderers, metal finishers, slaughter house, dairy, winery, rendering facility, poultry processors, beverage processors, and food processors. This Order contains provisions that require the Discharger continue to implement the program, periodically review and update the program as appropriate, and report any proposed new industrial discharges. Site-Specific Conditions 32. Source water for the cities of Clovis and Fresno is obtained from both groundwater supply wells and surface water treatment facilities. The 2015 to 2016 flow-weighted average electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids concentration of source water was 275 µmhos/cm and 188 mg/L, respectively. The City of Fresno’s Northeast Surface Water Treatment Plant currently has a treatment capacity of 30 mgd. By 2020, the City of Fresno intends to double the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Plant treatment capacity to 60 mgd. In addition, by 2019, the City of Fresno plans to bring the Southeast Surface Water Treatment Plan online, which is designed to have a treatment capacity of 80 mgd. The City of Clovis also has a 22.5 mgd surface water treatment plant, which is expandable to 45 mgd. 33. The land surface in the vicinity of the Facility is generally flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The approximate elevation at the Facility is 250 feet above mean seal level (MSL). The nearest surface water body is FID’s Dry Creek Canal, which runs through the Facility. 34. Based on the 18 February 2009 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps (Map Numbers 06019C2100H and 06019C2085H) the Facility property, excluding the farmland and disposal ponds, is in Zone X, an area determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain (< 0.2% annual chance of flooding). The rest of the Facility property is also primarily in Zone X, with the exception of a few peripheral disposal ponds and a relatively small section of farmland where secondary effluent is used for irrigation. 35. Areal soils consist of unconsolidated alluvial deposits of interbedded layers of sand, gravel, silt, sandy clay, clay and localized cobble zones. Soils in the vicinity of the Facility include Hanford, Delhi, and Tujunga soils. According to the Web Soil Survey published by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, soils at the Facility property are primarily comprised of sandy loam, with Hesperia being the predominate soil series (approximately 60%). WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 10 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 36. The Fresno/Clovis area is characterized as semi-arid with hot dry summers and cool winters. Annual precipitation in the vicinity of the Facility averages approximately 11.5 inches, the 100-year total annual precipitation is approximately 21.6 inches, and the reference evapotranspiration is approximately 53 inches per year. 37. Surrounding land use is primarily agricultural. Irrigation water is either supplied by groundwater wells or by FID via a network of surface water canals. FID delivers surface water from Kings River and the San Joaquin River (via the Friant-Kern Canal) for agriculture irrigation, to groundwater recharge basins, and, currently, to two surface water treatment plants. In a technical report dated 6 June 2002, the Operator identified the types of crops irrigated with water from the Houghton and Dry Creek canals (canals which extracted groundwater is discharged to). The major types of crops identified included alfalfa, almond, bean, corn, cotton, grape, and oat/wheat. 38. In 2005, the Operator conducted a survey of the area around the Facility to determine the crops that were affected by groundwater impacted by the Facility’s discharge. The 2005 survey found that the following crops cover approximately 92 percent of the land area over the groundwater that is influenced by the Facility’s discharge to its disposal ponds. Crops Grown in Area Influenced by Facility’s Discharge to Disposal Ponds Crop Percent of Land Area Grapes (table, wine, and raisin) 42 % Almonds 16 % Alfalfa 20 % Corn (fodder) 14 % Cotton 4 % Groundwater Conditions 39. The Operator’s 2002 Technical Report on Groundwater Conditions at and near the Cities of Fresno and Clovis WWTF describes the subsurface geologic and hydrogeologic conditions at and the near vicinity of the Facility. The uppermost 100 feet of soils underneath the disposal ponds are predominately compromised of fine-grained deposits. In some areas, sand is more predominant, specifically the former unlined sludge drying bed area. The geologic cross-sections included in the 2002 report also indicate a local shallow confining bed below some of the disposal ponds. The top of this clay layer averages about 45 feet deep, with an average thickness of 50 feet. A major confining bed exists below portions of the Facility’s disposal ponds in the interval between approximately 300 to 360 feet in depth. 40. As mentioned in Finding 13 above, a groundwater mound exists underneath the Facility’s disposal ponds due to the extensive historic use of the disposal ponds. Based on October 2016 groundwater data, depth to groundwater at the Facility ranges from approximately 80 to 90 feet bgs. Groundwater generally flows southwest. 41. In 1975, the Operator installed 21 reclamation wells within the Facility property. Since then, the Operator has added one additional reclamation well and replaced several of the wells with “flowpath” wells, which are designed to extract water at shallower depths than WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 11 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY the original extraction wells. Currently, the Operator has 22 operational wells within the Facility’s property. The reclamation wells extract water from depths ranging from 80 to 270 feet bgs. The Operator, as required by previous Order 5-01-254, conducts monitoring of the extracted groundwater. The extracted groundwater monitoring data suggests that the extracted groundwater is primarily percolated effluent and not regional groundwater. 42. To evaluate the impact the proposed reuse of disinfected tertiary-treated recycled water within its city limits, the Operator submitted a report titled Impact of Use of Recycled Water for Irrigation in the City of Fresno dated February 2015. In the report, the City of Fresno was divided into quadrants and the subsurface geologic and hydrogeologic conditions were evaluated for each quadrant. The following table summarizes the conditions in each quadrant. City of Fresno Subsurface Geologic and Hydrogeologic Conditions Quadrant Geologic Conditions Hydrogeologic Conditions Southwest • Top layer consisting of alluvial deposits (average depth between 250 to 400 feet) • Confining bed present at depths ranging from about 150 to 250 feet • Depth to groundwater between 84 to 128 feet (June 2014) • General groundwater flow to the north-northeast (April 2006) Southeast • Top layer consisting of alluvial deposits, specifically coarse-grain deposits (average depth between 300 to 500 feet) • Confining bed at average depth between 200 to 300 feet • Depth to groundwater between 84 to 114 feet (June 2014) • General groundwater flow to the northwest (April 2006) Northwest • Top layer consisting of alluvial deposits (average depth between 250 to 300 feet) • Confining bed at average depth between 250 to 300 feet • Depth to groundwater between 92 to 147 feet (June 2014) • General groundwater flow to the southwest (April 2006) Northeast • Top layer consisting of alluvial deposits (average depth between 225 to 275 feet) • Fine-grained deposits predominate beneath alluvial deposits • Depth to groundwater between 133 to 178 feet (June 2014) • General groundwater flow to the south-southeast (April 2006) 43. The Operator’s groundwater monitoring well network currently consists of approximately 24 monitoring well locations, comprised of both cluster and individual wells , and a total of 49 individual monitoring wells. The network monitors groundwater in the top unconfined aquifer at two different zones, Zone A (shallow) and Zone B (intermediate). The perforation depth for Zone A (shallow) wells ranges from 20 to 130 feet bgs and 150 to 250 feet bgs for Zone B (intermediate) wells. The Operator also has monitoring wells in the underlying confined aquifer (400+ feet bgs). 44. From 2001 to 2016, groundwater elevations have decreased by approximately 40 feet. For the 4th quarter of 2016, the Operator was only able to collect groundwater samples for 20 of the 49 monitoring wells. Due to the decreasing groundwater table and the presence of WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 12 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY dairies and other land uses that impact groundwater quality around the Facility, the Operator’s groundwater monitoring well network needs to be evaluated to determine if the network is effectively characterizing the impact the Facility’s discharge has on underlying groundwater. 45. The current groundwater monitoring well network consists of four upgradient monitoring wells, at two different locations. Groundwater monitoring wells MW -10A and MW -16A monitor shallow groundwater, MW-10B monitors intermediate groundwater, and MW -16B monitors deep groundwater. Due to the decreasing groundwater table, the Operator, as of 2016, has not been able to collect a groundwater sample at monitoring well MW -10A since July 2015 and at MW-16A since July 2013. Attachment A includes a map of the groundwater monitoring well network. The following table summarizes the recent groundwater quality at these upgradient monitoring wells. Upgradient Groundwater Quality Constituent Units MW-10A (July 2015) MW-16A (July 2013) MW-10B (October 2016) MW-16B (July 2016) Total Coliform MPN/100mL <1.0 2 <1.0 <1.0 pH s.u. 7.2 7 7.4 7.3 Electrical Conductivity (EC) µmhos/cm 1,025 2,060 532 683 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 709 1,390 364 463 Chloride mg/L 66 89 27 35 Boron mg/L 0.046 0.064 0.026 0.02 Sodium mg/L 33 88 21 26.5 Sulfate mg/L 97 231 43 38 Arsenic µg/L 2.5 2.5 1.8 2.9 Iron µg/L <50 <50 5 4 Manganese µg/L <2.5 <2.5 0.3 0.3 Ammonia as Nitrogen mg/L <0.5 <0.5 <0.4 <0.5 Nitrate as Nitrogen mg/L 26 58 10 11 Total Nitrogen mg/L 26 58 10 11 46. The following table summarizes the downgradient shallow and intermediate groundwater conditions. Downgradient Groundwater Quality (2011 through 2016) Constituent Units Shallow1 (2011–2016 Avg.) Upper-Intermediate2 (2011–2016 Avg.) Lower-Intermediate3 (2011–2016 Avg.) Total Coliform MPN/100mL 3.5 10 29 pH s.u. 6.8 7 7.2 Electrical Conductivity (EC) µmhos/cm 1,200 940 890 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 760 590 590 Chloride mg/L 100 87 78 Boron µg/L 240 180 79 Sodium mg/L 88 75 53 Sulfate mg/L 83 44 43 Arsenic µg/L 7.5 7.6 3.5 Iron µg/L 26 25 25 Manganese µg/L 1,300 250 3.7 Ammonia as Nitrogen mg/L 3.1 0.67 <0.50 Nitrate as Nitrogen mg/L 15 4.7 7 WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 13 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Constituent Units Shallow1 (2011–2016 Avg.) Upper-Intermediate2 (2011–2016 Avg.) Lower-Intermediate3 (2011–2016 Avg.) Total Nitrogen mg/L 18 5.3 7 1 Approximate groundwater elevation range = 20 to 130 feet bgs. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize shallow downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -1A, 2A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 9A, 12A, 13A, 14A, 15A, 17A, 1002-1, and 1003-1. Due to the decreasing groundwater monitoring table, the majority of these monitoring wells went dry by the end of the 2016 calendar year. 2 Approximate groundwater elevation range = 162 to 225 feet bgs. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize upper-intermediate downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -1B, 2B, 5B, 6B, 11B, 13B, 14B, 15B, 17B, 18B, 22B, 23B, 1002-2, and 1003-2. 3 Approximate groundwater elevation range = 221 to 250 feet bgs. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize lower-intermediate downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -12B, 19B, 20B, and 21B. 47. Arsenic and manganese concentrations in select groundwater monitoring wells underlying and downgradient of the Facility exceed the applicable primary MCL (10 µg/L) and secondary MCL (50 µg/L) for arsenic and manganese, respectively. The arsenic and manganese concentrations in groundwater above the applicable MCL are likely due to excessive organic loading and reducing conditions beneath the Facility’s disposal ponds. 48. On 14 December 2009, the Operator submitted a report titled Best Practicable Treatment and Control Comprehensive Evaluation (2009 BPTC Report) which, in part, evaluated the arsenic and manganese concentrations observed in the underlying groundwater. The 2009 BPTC Report concluded that the source of the high arsenic and manganese groundwater concentrations is alluvium beneath the Facility’s disposal ponds. A core sampling study verified the presence of arsenic and manganese in crystallized form in the alluvium. The 2009 BPTC Report evaluated various above-ground best management practices (e.g., conducting a pond cycling study to investigate if wet/dry cycling could reduce concentrations), but concluded that “[a]bove ground management practices such as enhanced effluent treatment and pond cycling will not substantially decrease concentrations of arsenic and manganese in the groundwater.” The Operator’s plan to increase the reclamation of the Facility’s treated wastewater will diminish the hydraulic burden on the ponds, the size and extent of the mound, and diminish the organic carbon loading to underlying groundwater. This Order requires the Discharger to evaluate the extent of the elevated concentrations for arsenic and manganese and the potential impact these concentrations are having on downgradient water supply wells. Basin Plan, Beneficial Uses, and Regulatory Considerations 49. The Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin, Third Edition (revised May 2018) (Basin Plan) designates beneficial uses, establishes water quality objectives (WQOs), contains implementation plans and policies for protecting waters of the basin, and incorporates, by reference, plans and policies adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). In accordance with Water Code section 13263, subdivision (a), these WDRs implement the Basin Plan. 50. The Facility is in Detailed Analysis Unit (DAU) No. 233, within the Kings Basin. The Basin Plan designated the beneficial uses of water in DAU No. 233 as municipal and domestic supply (MUN), agricultural supply (AGR), industrial service supply (IND), industrial process supply (PRO), contact water recreation (REC-1), and non-contact water recreation (REC-2). WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 14 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 51. The Basin Plan establishes narrative WQOs for chemical constituents, tastes and odors, and toxicity in groundwater. It also sets forth a numeric WQO for total coliform organisms. 52. The Basin Plan’s numeric WQO for bacteria requires the most probable number (MPN) of coliform organisms over any seven-day period shall be less than 2.2 per 100 mL in MUN- designated groundwater. 53. The Basin Plan identifies the greatest long-term problem facing the entire Tulare Lake Basin is the increase in salinity in groundwater, which has accelerated due to the intensive use of soil and water resources by irrigated agriculture. The Basin Plan establishes several salt management requirements, including: a. The incremental increase in salts from use and treatment must be controlled to the extent possible. The maximum electrical conductivity (EC) in the discharge shall not exceed the EC of the source water plus 500 µmhos/cm. When the source water is from more than one source, the EC shall be a weighted average of all sources. b. Discharges to areas that may recharge good quality groundwater shall not exceed an EC of 1,000 µmhos/cm, a chloride content of 175 mg/L, or a boron content of 1.0 mg/L. 54. The Basin Plan’s narrative WQOs for chemical constituents, at a minimum, require MUN- designated waters to meet the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) specified in Title 22. The Basin Plan recognizes that the Central Valley Water Board may apply limits more stringent than MCLs to ensure that waters do not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. 55. In 1979, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) designated the groundwater aquifer serving the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area a sole source of drinking water pursuant to section 1424 of the Safe Drinking Water Act. 56. The narrative toxicity objective requires that groundwater be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, animal, plant, or aquatic life associated with designated beneficial uses. 57. Quantifying a narrative WQO requires a site-specific evaluation of those constituents that have the potential to impact water quality and beneficial uses. The Basin Plan states that when compliance with a narrative objective is required to protect specific beneficial uses, the Central Valley Water Board will, on a case-by-case basis, adopt numerical limitations in order to implement the narrative objective. 58. In the absence of specific numerical water quality limits, Basin Plan methodology is to consider any relevant published criteria. General salt tolerance guidelines, such as Water Quality for Agriculture by Ayers and Westcot and similar references indicate that yield reductions in nearly all crops are not evident when irrigation water has an electrical conductivity (EC) less than 700 µmhos/cm. There is, however, an eight- to ten-fold range in salt tolerance for agricultural crops, and the appropriate salinity values to protect agriculture in the Central Valley are considered on a case-by-case basis. It is possible to achieve full yield potential with waters having EC up to 3,000 µmhos/cm if the proper leaching fraction is provided to maintain soil salinity within the tolerance of the crop. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 15 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 59. The list of crops in Findings 37 and 38 is not intended as an exclusive or exhaustive inventory of crops that are or could be grown in the area, but it is representative of current and historical agricultural practices in the area. 60. In 2005, as part of the Operator’s effort to develop the 2009 BPTC Report, a report titled Evaluation of Interim Groundwater Quality Limits (EC, TDS, B, Cl, and NA) For the Fresno Wastewater Treatment Plant to Protect Irrigated Agriculture” was developed by Dr. Grattan and Dr. Isidoro-Ramirez, from University of California, Davis (2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report). The 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report’s objective was to determine interim groundwater limits for salinity (EC and total dissolved solids) and potentially toxic ions (chloride and sodium) protective of irrigated agriculture, taking into account site-specific conditions near the Facility (e.g., soil type, irrigation management practices, crop evapotranspiration, and rainfall) while protecting the most sensitive dominant crops in the area. The 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report proposed irrigating with water containing EC of 1,400 µmhos/cm, as the sole source of irrigation, would be protective of the most sensitive crops in the area (almonds and grapes). Based on a 1,400 µmhos/cm limit, the 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report proposed a total dissolved solids limit of 766 mg/L and a sodium limit of 161 mg/L (assuming a salinizing ratio of 1:1 sodium to calcium, the 1,400 µmhos/cm EC limit translates to a sodium limit of 161 mg/L). For chloride, the 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report proposed an interim limit of 175 mg/L to be protective of the most sensitive crop, almonds. For boron, the 2005 Grattan and Isidoro- Ramirez Report recognizes that the model used for the study was “not appropriate to predict soil boron behavior nor could it be readily adapted to account for complex soil boron chemistry.” As a result, it recommended boron concentrations in irrigation water not to exceed 1.0 mg/L. At these thresholds, the 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report contends that yield potential for the salt-sensitive crops in the area would be maintained above 90 percent over 90 percent of the years. CV-SALTS Reopener 61. The Central Valley Water Board adopted Basin Plan amendments incorporating new programs for addressing ongoing salt and nitrate accumulation in the Central Valley at its 31 May 2018 Board Meeting. These programs, once effective, could change how the Central Valley Water Board permits discharges of salt and nitrate. For nitrate, dischargers that are unable to comply with stringent nitrate requirements will be required to take on alternate compliance approaches that involve providing replacement drinking water to persons whose drinking water is affected by nitrates. Dischargers could comply with the new nitrate program either individually or collectively with other dischargers. For salinity, dischargers that are unable to comply with stringent salinity requirements would instead need to meet performance-based requirements and participate in a basin-wide effort to develop a long-term salinity strategy for the Central Valley. This Order may be amended or modified to incorporate any newly-applicable requirements. 62. The stakeholder-led Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) initiative has been coordinating efforts to implement new salt and nitrate management strategies. The Board expects dischargers that may be affected by new salt and nitrate management policies to coordinate with the CV-SALTS initiative. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 16 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 63. The Operator submitted an application, dated 12 May 2015, for an electrical conductivity (EC) effluent limitation exception pursuant to Section 4.1.4.1., Exception to Discharge Requirements related to the Implementation of Water Quality Objectives for Salinity (Salinity Exception Policy). In the application, the Operator justifies the need for the salinity exception; describes implemented salinity control measures (e.g., surface water treatment, “Salt is Serious” campaign, and implementing a recycled water program); discusses how the drought and water conservation impacts have caused the electrical conductivity to increase (e.g., substantial decrease in potable water use after full implementation of residential water metering program); and summarizes the Operator’s previous and continued participation in CV-SALTS. 64. The Operator’s May 2015 Salinity Exception Policy application proposed an interim performance-based effluent limit for electrical conductivity (EC) of 1,104 µmhos/cm. The limit was calculated using a statistical best-fit regression line for the 12-month rolling average effluent EC from January 2005 to June 2014 to project the Facility’s effluent EC concentration ten years in the future. Since June 2014, the Facility’s effluent EC has decreased. Using the same statistical approach used in the application, but with an updated date set (January 2006 to December 2016), the projected EC is 960 µmhos/cm. Therefore, this Order includes a 1,000 µmhos/cm effluent limitation (12-month rolling average), but does not include the Basin Plan 500 µmhos/cm plus source water EC limitation. Antidegradation Analysis 65. The State Water Board’s Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality Waters in California, Resolution 68-16 (Antidegradation Policy), prohibits degradation of groundwater unless it is demonstrated that such degradation: a. Will not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial uses; b. Will not result in water quality less than that prescribed in state and regional policies, (including violation of one or more WQOs); c. Will be minimized by the discharger through best practicable treatment or control (BPTC) to minimize degradation; and d. Will be consistent with the maximum benefit to the people of the State. 66. Order 5-01-254 limited the Facility’s discharge to its disposal ponds to an annual average of 80 mgd, and a max monthly average of 88 mgd. In its RWD, the Operator requested that new waste discharge requirements include flow limits of 91.5 mgd (annual average) and 101 mgd (monthly average) for the Facility’s total discharge, but still maintain the 80 mgd annual average discharge flow limit to the disposal ponds. The Operator included an antidegradation analysis in its RWD for the requested flow limits and an antidegradation analysis for its tertiary recycled water program, dated June 2015. The discharge of tertiary recycled water to recycled water Use Areas is permitted under the Reclamation WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 17 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY General Order and the discharge of secondary recycled water to offsite cropland surrounding the Facility is covered under separate water reclamation requirements. 67. As mentioned in Finding 48, the Operator submitted a BPTC Report on 14 December 2009. The findings from the 2009 BPTC Report were included in the Discharger’s October 2015 RWD. The 2009 BPTC Report was the culmination of a six-year study to identify waste constituents that threaten to degrade the groundwater and provide recommendations on how these constituents should be treated and controlled in the discharge. The Operator initially evaluated over 100 constituents in the underlying groundwater. The BPTC Report eventually concluded that the primary constituents of concern at the Facility and in underlying groundwater are salinity, nitrogen, arsenic, and manganese. For each constituent, the BPTC Report evaluated alternative control measures that might reduce or eliminate the concentration in underlying groundwater at the Facility. 68. Based on the data presented in the BPTC Report and submitted monitoring data, the constituents of concern that have the potential to degrade groundwater at the Facility include salts (primarily EC, total dissolved solids [TDS], sodium, and chloride), arsenic, manganese, nutrients, and total coliform organisms, as discussed below. Constituent Average Concentration (2011 – 2016)1 Effluent2 Upgradient Groundwater Quality Downgradient Groundwater Quality Potential WQO Shallow3 Upper- Intermediate4 Lower- Intermediate5 Shallow3 Upper- Intermediate4 Lower- Intermediate5 EC (µmhos/cm) 870 1,600 350 590 1,200 940 890 9006 1,4008 TDS (mg/L) 490 1,000 270 390 760 590 590 5006 7668 Sodium (mg/L) 95 53 17 25 88 75 53 1618 Chloride (mg/L) 108 70 11 26 100 86 78 2506 1758 Arsenic (µg/L) 0.88 2.5 2.0 3.0 7.5 7.6 3.5 107 Manganese (µg/L) 40 3.5 2 3 1,300 253 3.7 509 Nitrate as N (mg/L) 9.5 50 6.1 5.6 14.7 4.7 7.0 107 1 Average concentration of data reported from 2011 through 2016. 2 Undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater. 3 Data from monitoring wells 10A and 16A were used to summarize shallow upgradient groundwater conditions. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize shallow downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -1A, 2A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 9A, 12A, 13A, 14A, 15A, 17A, 1002-1, and 1003-1. Due to the decreasing groundwater monitoring table, the majority of these monitoring wells were dry by the end of the 2016 calendar year. 4 Data from monitoring well 10B were used determine upper-intermediate upgradient groundwater conditions. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize upper-intermediate downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -1B, 2B, 5B, 6B, 11B, 13B, 14B, 15B, 17B, 18B, 22B, 23B, 1002-2, and 1003-2. 5 Data from monitoring well 16B were used determine lower-intermediate upgradient groundwater conditions. Data from the following monitoring wells were used to summarize lower-intermediate downgradient groundwater conditions: MW -12B, 19B, 20B, and 21B. 6 Recommended Secondary MCL 7 Primary MCL 8 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report (see Finding 60) 9 Secondary MCL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 18 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY a. Salinity (EC, TDS, Sodium, and Chloride). The average EC and TDS concentration in the shallow upgradient groundwater monitoring wells exceed the recommended secondary MCLs for electrical conductivity (900 µmhos/cm) and total dissolved solids (500 mg/L). The average chloride concentrations in upgradient wells do not exceed the recommended secondary MCL of 250 mg/L. For chloride and sodium, the average upgradient groundwater concentrations do not exceed the respective 2005 Grattan and Isidoro-Ramirez Report limits. For TDS and EC, the shallow upgradient groundwater concentrations are significantly higher than the Facility’s effluent concentrations, while shallow downgradient groundwater concentrations range between the upgradient groundwater and effluent concentrations. However, for EC, TDS, sodium, and chloride, some intermediate downgradient groundwater wells have concentrations exceeding intermediate upgradient concentrations, indicating that that the Facility’s discharge has contributed to groundwater degradation for salinity. The Operator has and continues to implement various measures to reduce the salinity loading on underlying groundwater at the Facility. These measures include increasing the Operator’s surface water treatment capacity, constructing a tertiary treatment system in conjunction with implementing a recycled water program, implementing a salinity outreach program, and implementing an industrial pretreatment program. As noted in Finding 32, the Operator plans to increase its surface water treatment supply from 30 mgd (current capacity) to 140 mgd. The Operator’s tertiary recycled water program will increase the treatment level for a portion of the Facility’s wastewater and reduce the loading to the onsite disposal ponds. The Operator began implementing an outreach program (“Salt is Serious” campaign) in 2007 to promote waste minimization. This campaign included television and radio commercials and distributing informational materials at home shows and in residential utility bills. As of 2009, the Operator states that it has spent over $100,000 on the “Salt is Serious” campaign. In 2008, the Operator received the National Association of Clean Water Agencies’ National Environmental Achievement Award for Public Information Education in recognition of the Operator’s salinity outreach program. The Operator also implements an industrial pretreatment program in the cities of Fresno and Clovis that includes salinity source control. As discussed in Finding 63, the City of Fresno requested an exception to the EC effluent limit in accordance with the Basin Plan’s Salinity Exception Policy. This Order grants a 10-year exception to the EC limit specified in the Basin Plan and establishes an interim performance-based EC effluent limit. Pursuant to the Salinity Exception Policy, the Discharger is required to continue to participate in the CV-SALTS. In addition, this Order requires the Operator to develop and implement a Salinity Reduction Study Workplan. The treatment and control measures described above, in combination with the requirements of this Order, represent BPTC. b. Arsenic and Manganese. The average arsenic and manganese concentrations in the upgradient groundwater monitoring wells are below the applicable MCLs for arsenic (primary MCL of 10 µg/L) and manganese (secondary MCL of 50 µg/L). The Facility’s effluent arsenic and manganese concentrations are generally below the respective MCL. However, excessive organic and hydraulic loading of the disposal ponds can deplete oxygen, resulting in anoxic conditions that can solubilize naturally occurring WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 19 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY metals in soil. The groundwater monitoring data indicate that the Facility’s discharge of secondary-treated wastewater to the disposal ponds has degraded groundwater quality with respect to manganese and arsenic in the immediate vicinity of the disposal ponds. The Operator’s 2009 BPTC Report evaluated the arsenic and manganese groundwater concentrations and potential treatment and controls. This included evaluating above- ground management practices and conducting a pond cycling study to investigate whether wet/dry cycling would significantly improve the arsenic and manganese groundwater concentrations. The results from the pond cycling study indicated a slight decrease in arsenic groundwater concentrations, but no apparent trend in manganese concentrations downgradient of the ponds used for the study. The 2009 BTPC Report concluded that as groundwater moves laterally away from the Facility, into oxygenated zones, arsenic and manganese in the groundwater naturally precipitate out and return to the solid phase. By implementing a recycled water master plan for the City of Fresno, the Operator will consequently reduce the effluent loading to the onsite disposal ponds. This could potentially result in reduced arsenic and manganese groundwater concentrations at the Facility. This Order includes a time schedule for the Discharger to further evaluate the arsenic and manganese concentrations in underlying groundwater and designate/establish groundwater monitoring wells to determine compliance with the arsenic and manganese groundwater limits included in this Order (Provision J.1.a). c. Nitrate. For nutrients such as nitrate, the potential for groundwater degradation depends on wastewater quality, crop uptake, and the ability of the vadose zone below the cropland and disposal ponds to support nitrification and denitrification to convert the nitrogen to nitrogen gas before it reaches the water table. The nitrate concentrations in the shallow upgradient groundwater monitoring wells significantly exceed the nitrate (as N) primary MCL of 10 mg/L. Recent nitrate concentrations in the intermediate upgradient groundwater monitoring wells were at or above the 10 mg/L primary MCL. The high upgradient nitrate concentrations are likely reflective of surrounding land uses (e.g., irrigated agriculture and dairies). For purposes of this analysis, the Basin Plan’s Controllable Factors Policy is applicable because the upgradient groundwater nitrate (as N) concentration generally exceeds 10 mg/L, the water quality objective for nitrate. The Controllable Factors Policy does not allow further degradation of water quality in instances where other factors have already resulted in water quality objectives being exceeded. The Facility’s secondary-treated effluent total nitrogen concentration averages approximately 20 mg/L. The Discharger’s RWD included a report titled Technical Memorandum on Nitrogen Removal for Percolation from Ponds prepared by Kenneth D. Schmidt and Associates, which concluded that secondary effluent discharged to the Facility’s disposal ponds receives approximately 70 percent reduction in total nitrogen during percolation. The new tertiary treatment system is designed to treat total nitrogen in wastewater to below 10 mg/L (as N). The Operator proposes to continue to discharge secondary-treated wastewater to the disposal ponds; however, by expanding the City of Fresno’s recycled water program, the Operator will reduce the nitrogen loading to the disposal ponds. To ensure compliance with the Controllable Factors Policy, this Order WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 20 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY prescribes a nitrate groundwater limit of 10 mg/L (as N) or in excess of natural upgradient quality, whichever is greater. d. Total Coliform Organisms. For coliform organisms, the potential for exceedance of the Basin Plan’s numeric WQO depends on the ability of vadose zone soils below the disposal ponds to provide adequate filtration. Historically, some groundwater water monitoring wells have had sporadic total coliform detections. In 2007 and in 2009, the Operator evaluated the physical condition of the monitoring wells. During both evaluations, the Operator identified possible sources of contamination that could contribute to positive coliform results (e.g., animal activity, runoff water entering the well, presence of nearby dairy lagoons). After corrective measures were implemented, the groundwater quality data for total coliform improved, generally to non-detect levels. In addition, from 2011 to 2016, no downgradient monitoring well had total coliform concentration detections greater than 30% of the time. This indicates that previous total coliform detections were likely a result of contaminated or compromised wells or poor sampling techniques. The approximate 75-foot unsaturated zone consisting of fine grained soils is expected to be sufficient to filter out coliform organisms and to prevent groundwater degradation. 69. This Order establishes effluent and groundwater limitations for the Facility that will not unreasonably threaten present and anticipated beneficial uses or result in groundwater quality that exceeds WQOs set forth in the Basin Plan. a. For nitrate, groundwater monitoring data indicates that groundwater has not been degraded beyond upgradient groundwater quality by the previous discharge and the discharge does not pose a threat of degradation in the future. The requirements of this Order do not allow any further degradation to occur. b. For salinity constituents (i.e., EC, TDS, sodium, and chloride), current groundwater monitoring data indicates that groundwater has been degraded by the Facility’s discharge. The Discharger has and continues to implement BPTC. In addition, this Order requires the Discharger to conduct a Salinity Reduction Study Workplan or a salinity-based watershed management plan and includes salinity effluent and groundwater limits to ensure the Facility’s discharge does not cause further degradation. c. For arsenic and manganese, current groundwater monitoring data indicates that the discharge has caused exceedance of applicable WQOs. The provisions of this Order require that the Discharger implement BPTC and comply with a time schedule to evaluate the arsenic and manganese area of influence due to the Facility’s discharge. 70. The Discharger provides BPTC of the discharge that incorporates: a. Completing upgrades to the Facility’s secondary treatment system, including constructing a third secondary treatment train; b. Recycling secondary-treated wastewater on surrounding croplands; c. Decommissioning the old 6-mgd trickling filter plant at the Facility; WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 21 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY d. Ceasing the direct land discharge of untreated stillage waste at the Facility; e. Farming the former stillage site to remove nitrogen from underlying soil; f. Constructing a tertiary treatment system at the Facility with future plans to upgrade the Facility’s tertiary treatment system to increase the system’s design flow; g. Developing a Title 22 Engineering Report and enrolling under the Reclamation General Order to recycle tertiary-treated wastewater from the Facility on Use Areas in the City of Fresno; h. Implementing a pretreatment program that includes effective salinity source control; i. Shifting more of the City of Fresno’s municipal supply water to surface water; j. Providing sludge treatment and removal on concrete-lined surfaces; k. Recycling treated wastewater at loading rates unlikely to cause unacceptable groundwater degradation; and l. Conducting groundwater monitoring to monitor the potential impact of the Facility’s discharge on underlying groundwater. 71. Generally, limited degradation of groundwater by some of the typical waste constituents of concern (e.g., EC and nitrate) discharged from a municipal wastewater utility, after effective source control and treatment, is consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State. The technology, energy, water recycling, and waste management advantages of municipal utility service far exceed any benefits derived from a community otherwise reliant on numerous concentrated individual wastewater systems, and the impacts on water quality will be substantially less. Economic prosperity of valley communities and associated industry is of maximum benefit to the people of the State, and, therefore, sufficient reason to accommodate growth and some groundwater degradation provided terms of the Basin Plan are met. Generally, the degradation will not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial uses of groundwater or result in water quality less than WQOs. 72. With respect to manganese and arsenic, groundwater degradation has occurred. Therefore, this Order does not authorize any continued degradation beyond that which exists today for those constituents. This Order includes groundwater limitations for arsenic and manganese and contains a time schedule to evaluate the extent of the arsenic and manganese area of influence to ensure that the highest water quality consistent with the maximum benefit to the people of the State. Following completion of the time schedule, this Order will be reopened if necessary to reconsider effluent limitations and other requirements to comply with the Antidegradation Policy. Based on the existing record, the discharge authorized by this Order is consistent with the Basin Plan. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 22 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Water Recycling Regulatory Considerations 73. Undisinfected domestic wastewater contains human pathogens that are typically measured using total or fecal coliform organism as indicator organisms. The State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water, which has primary statewide responsibility for protecting water quality and the public health, has established statewide criteria for the use of recycled water. (See Title 22, § 60301 et seq.) 74. On 3 February 2009, the State Water Board adopted Resolution 2009-0011, Adoption of a Policy for Water Quality Control for Recycled Water (Recycled Water Policy). The Recycled Water Policy promotes the use of recycled water to achieve sustainable local water supplies and reduce greenhouse gases. 75. On 23 April 2009, the Central Valley Water Board adopted Resolution R5-2009-0028, In Support of Regionalization, Reclamation, Recycling and Conservation for Wastewater Treatment Plants. Resolution R5-2009-0028 encourages water recycling, water conservation, and regionalization of wastewater treatment facilities. It requires the municipal wastewater treatment agencies to document: a. Efforts to promote new or expanded wastewater recycling opportunities and programs; b. Water conservation measures; and c. Regional wastewater management opportunities and solutions (e.g., regionalization). Recycling of the Facility’s effluent (both undisinfected secondary and disinfected tertiary recycled wastewater) by the Operator is consistent with the intent of State Water Board Resolution 2009-0011 and Central Valley Water Board Resolution R5-2009-0028. 76. The Discharger submitted an Engineering Report Update for the Fresno – Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility dated 2 June 2016 (2016 Title 22 Engineering Report) to the Central Valley Water Board and the Division of Drinking Water. This report provided an update to the Title 22 Engineering Report Reclamation System Overview dated January 2001. The 2016 Title 22 Engineering Report was submitted pursuant to Title 22 for recycling of undisinfected secondary recycled water as defined by Title 22, section 60301.900. The Division of Drinking Water reviewed the 2016 Title 22 Engineering Report in a letter dated 28 April 2017 and provided various comments. The Operator responded to these comments on 31 May 2017, and the 2016 Title 22 Engineering Report was subsequently approved by the Division of Drinking Water on 1 June 2017. 77. As discussed in Finding 12, the Operator was enrolled under the General Reclamation Order on 20 March 2017 for the reuse of disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater. To satisfy Title 22 disinfection requirements, an on-site spot check bioassay test was performed in August 2016 to verify performance of the Facility’s ultraviolet light disinfection system. Based on the results of the test, the Division of Drinking Water issued a letter dated 12 September 2016 recommending, in part, that the Facility’s ultraviolet light disinfection system be operated to ensure that each ultraviolet light reactor deliver a minimum ultraviolet light dosage of 98 millijoules per square centimeter (mJ/cm2) at all times. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 23 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Other Regulatory Considerations 78. Pursuant to Water Code section 106.3, subdivision (a), it is “the established policy of the state that every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” Although this Order is not necessarily subject to Water Code section 106.3 because it does not revise, adopt or establish a policy, regulation or grant criterion (see § 106.3, subd. (b)), it nevertheless promotes that policy by requiring discharges to meet MCLs designed to protect human health and ensure that water is safe for domestic use. 79. Based on the threat and complexity of the discharge, the Facility is determined to be classified as 1A as defined below: a. Category 1 threat to water quality, defined as: “Those discharges of waste that could cause the long-term loss of a designated beneficial use of the receiving water. Examples of long-term loss of a beneficial use include the loss of drinking water supply, the closure of an area used for water contact recreation, or the posting of an area used for spawning or growth of aquatic resources, including shellfish and migratory fish.” b. Category A complexity, defined as: “Any discharge of toxic wastes; any small volume discharge containing toxic waste; any facility having numerous discharge points and groundwater monitoring; or any Class 1 waste management unit.” 80. This Order, which prescribes WDRs for discharges of sewage and wastewater, is exempt from Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations, title 27 (Title 27) requirements for the treatment, storage, processing, and disposal of solid waste. (See Title 27, § 20090, subds. (a)-(b).) 81. The statistical data analysis methods specified in the USEPA’s 2009 Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities, Unified Guidance (Unified Guidance) are appropriate for determining whether the discharge complies with Groundwater Limitations of this Order. The USEPA published Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities, Unified Guidance (hereafter “Unified Guidance”) in 2009. As stated in the Unified Guidance, the document: …is tailored to the context of the RCRA groundwater monitoring regulations … [however, t]here are enough commonalities with other regulatory groundwater monitoring programs … to allow for more general use of the tests and methods in the Unified Guidance… Groundwater detection monitoring involves either a comparison between different monitoring stations … or a contrast between past and present data within a given station… The Unified Guidance also details methods to compare background data against measurements from regulatory compliance points … [as well as] techniques for comparing datasets against fixed numerical standards … [such as those] encountered in many regulatory programs. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 24 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY The statistical data analysis methods in the Unified Guidance are appropriate for determining whether the discharge complies with Groundwater Limitations of this Order. 82. The State Water Board adopted Order 2014-0057-DWQ (NPDES General Permit CAS000001) specifying waste discharge requirements for discharges of storm water associated with industrial activities and requiring submittal of a Notice of Intent by all affected industrial dischargers. The Discharger indicates that the Facility has a design capacity of more than 1.0 mgd, and all stormwater is collected and disposed onsite. The Discharger is therefore not required to obtain coverage under NPDES General Permit CAS000001. 83. On 2 May 2006, the State Water Board adopted Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems General Order 2006-0003-DWQ (the General Order). The General Order requires all public agencies that own or operate sanitary sewer systems greater than one mile in length to comply with the General Order. The Discharger’s collection system exceeds one mile in length and the Discharger is enrolled under the General Order. 84. Water Code section 13267(b)(1) states: In conducting an investigation specified in subdivision (a), the regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region … shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical or monitoring program reports which the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports. The technical reports required by this Order and the attached Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) R5-2018-0080 are necessary to ensure compliance with these waste discharge requirements. The Discharger owns and operates the wastewater treatment facility that discharges the waste subject to this Order. 85. The California Department of Water Resources sets standards for the construction and destruction of groundwater wells (hereafter DWR Well Standards), as described in California Well Standards Bulletin 74-90 (June 1991) and Water Well Standards: State of California Bulletin 74-81 (December 1981). These standards, and any more stringent standards adopted by the state or county pursuant to Water Code section 13801, apply to all monitoring wells used to monitor the impacts of wastewater storage or disposal governed by this Order. 86. The City of Fresno certified a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in April 2013 for the implementation of the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.). The April 2013 EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the City of Fresno’s Recycled Water Master Plan. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 25 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY The Recycled Water Master Plan lists several opportunities for recycling disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater from the Facility, including: (1) offsetting existing and future use of potable supplies for landscape irrigation, and industrial heating and cooling; (2) expanding agricultural reuse; and (3) groundwater recharge to supplement groundwater supplies. The Master Plan includes a plan for installing and operating a treatment, storage, and distribution infrastructure to serve the proposed project areas with recycled water. Due to Fresno’s geographic size (105 square miles), the Master Plan divided Fresno into four quadrants for evaluating reuse options and implementing the plan. The implementation of a recycled water treatment and distribution system would facilitate the City of Fresno’s goal, established in the 2008 Urban Water Management Plan, to provide 25,000 acre-feet per year of recycled water to offset potable water use by year 2025. 87. The City of Fresno certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in June 2014 for the construction of the Facility’s new tertiary treatment system in accordance with CEQA. The June 2014 MND evaluated the construction and operation of a tertiary treatment and disinfection system at the Facility. The new treatment system, as described in the June 2014 MND, includes a 5-mgd membrane bioreactor system, ultraviolet disinfection system, recycled water storage basin, and new recycled water pipelines. The MND specifically states that the document only evaluates the proposed phase 1 capacity of 5 mgd. 88. The April 2013 EIR evaluated the potential impacts to groundwater quality and found that compliance with WDRs, including implementing Best Practicable Treatment or Control (BPTC) in accordance with Antidegradation Policy, will ensure that impacts to water quality due to the implementation of the Recycled Water Master Plan would be minimized. 89. The USEPA-promulgated biosolids reuse regulations, codified as 40 C.F.R. part 503 (Standard for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge), establishes management criteria for protection of ground and surface waters, sets application rates for heavy metals, and establishes stabilization and disinfection criteria. These regulations are used as guidelines in this Order, as the Central Valley W ater Board is not the implementing agency under 40 C.F.R. part 503. The Discharger may have separate and/or additional compliance, reporting, and permitting responsibilities to the USEPA. 90. Pursuant to Water Code section 13263(g), discharge is a privilege, not a right, and adoption of this Order does not create a vested right to continue the discharge. Public Notice 91. The Discharger and interested agencies and persons have been notified of the Central Valley Water Board’s intent to prescribe waste discharge requirements for this discharge, and they have been provided an opportunity to submit written comments and an opportunity for a public hearing. 92. All comments pertaining to the discharge were heard and considered in a public hearing. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 26 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 93. All the above and the supplemental information and details in the attached Information Sheet, which is incorporated by reference herein, were considered in establishing the following conditions of discharge. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that WDRs Order 5-01-254 is rescinded and that, pursuant to Water Code sections 13263 and 13267, the cities of Fresno and Clovis (collectively, Discharger), their agents, successors, and assigns, in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the Water Code and regulations promulgated thereunder, shall comply with the following: A. Discharge Prohibitions 1. Discharge of wastes to surface waters or surface water drainage courses is prohibited. 2. Discharge of waste classified as “hazardous,” as defined in Title 22, section 66261.1 et seq., is prohibited. 3. Treatment system bypass of untreated or partially treated waste is prohibited, except as allowed by Standard Provision E.2 of the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements for Waste Discharge Requirements, dated 1 March 1991 (SPRRs), the entirety of which is incorporated herein. 4. Discharge of waste at a location or in a manner different from that described in the Findings is prohibited. 5. The Discharger shall not allow toxic substances to be discharged into the wastewater treatment system such that biological treatment mechanisms are disrupted. 6. Discharge of stillage at the Facility is prohibited. 7. Grazing of animals producing milk for human consumption within areas irrigated with undisinfected secondary-treated effluent is prohibited. B. Flow Limitations 1. Discharge Point 001. The discharge of treated effluent (undisinfected secondary- treated wastewater and/or disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater) to the onsite disposal ponds shall not exceed the following: Flow Measurement Flow Limit Total Annual Flow 1 80 mgd Maximum Monthly Flow 2 87.1 mgd 1 As determined by the total flow for the calendar year divided by the number of days in the year. 2 As determined by the total flow during the calendar month divided by the number of days in that month. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 27 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 2. Discharge Points 001, 002, and 003. The total discharge of treated effluent (undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater and disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater) from the Facility shall not exceed the following: Flow Measurement Flow Limit Total Annual Flow 1 91.5 mgd Maximum Monthly Flow 2 101 mgd 1 As determined by the total flow for the calendar year divided by the number of days in the year. 2 As determined by the total flow during the calendar month divided by the number of days in that month. C. Effluent Limitations 1. Discharge Points 001 and 002. Treated effluent discharged from the Facility’s undisinfected secondary-treated system to the onsite disposal ponds and restricted irrigation Use Areas shall not exceed the following limits: a. The effluent limitations specified below: Constituent Units Monthly Average Daily Maximum BOD5 1 mg/L 40 80 TSS 2 mg/L 40 80 1 5-day biochemical oxygen demand at 20˚C. 2 Total Suspended Solids b. The arithmetic mean of BOD5 and TSS in effluent samples collected over a monthly period shall not exceed 20 percent of the arithmetic mean of BOD5 and TSS in influent samples collected at approximately the same time during the same period (80 percent removal). c. The following electrical conductivity effluent limitations: i) Effective immediately and until 7 December 2028, the 12-month rolling average electrical conductivity of the discharge shall not exceed 1,000 µmhos/cm. Compliance with this effluent limitation shall be determined monthly. ii) On 7 December 2028, the electrical conductivity limit specified in the current revision of the Basin Plan1. 1 Current revision of the Basin Plan means the version of the Basin Plan that is in effect after 10 years from the adoption of the tentative WDRs and any other future revisions to the Basin Plan. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 28 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 2. Discharge Point 003. Treated effluent discharged from the Facility’s disinfection tertiary-treated system to the unrestricted recycled water Use Areas shall not exceed the following limits: a. The effluent limitations specified below: Constituent Units Monthly Average Daily Maximum BOD5 1 mg/L 10 20 TSS 2 mg/L 10 20 Nitrate (as N) mg/L 10 -- 1 5-day biochemical oxygen demand at 20˚C. 2 Total Suspended Solids b. The arithmetic mean of BOD5 and TSS in effluent samples collected over a monthly period shall not exceed 10 percent of the arithmetic mean of BOD5 and TSS in influent samples collected at approximately the same time during the same period (90 percent removal). c. The following electrical conductivity effluent limitations: i) Effective immediately and until 7 December 2028, the 12-month rolling average electrical conductivity of the discharge shall not exceed 1,000 µmhos/cm. Compliance with this effluent limitation shall be determined monthly. ii) On 7 December 2028, the electrical conductivity limit specified in the current revision of the Basin Plan1. d. The median concentration of total coliform bacteria in the disinfected tertiary recycled water shall not exceed any of the following: i) 2.2 most probably number (MPN) per 100 mL as a 7-day median; ii) 23 MPN/100 mL more than once in any calendar month; and iii) 240 MPN/100 mL at any time. D. Discharge Specifications 1. No waste constituent shall be released, discharged, or placed where it will cause a violation of the Groundwater Limitations of this Order. 2. Wastewater treatment, storage, and disposal shall not cause a condition of pollution or nuisance as defined by Water Code section 13050. 3. The discharge shall remain within the permitted waste treatment/containment structures and recycled water Use Areas at all times. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 29 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 4. The Operator shall operate all systems and equipment to optimize the quality of the discharge. 5. All conveyance, treatment, storage, and disposal systems shall be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to prevent inundation or washout due to floods with a 100-year return frequency. 6. Public contact with wastewater at the Facility shall be prevented through such means as fences, signs, or acceptable alternatives. 7. Objectionable odors as a result of operation of the Facility shall not be perceivable beyond the limits of the Facility property at an intensity that creates or threatens to create nuisance conditions. 8. As a means of discerning compliance with Discharge Specification D.7, the dissolved oxygen (DO) content in the upper one foot of any wastewater treatment or storage pond shall not be less than 1.0 mg/L for three consecutive sampling events. If the DO in any single pond is below 1.0 mg/L for three consecutive sampling events, the Operator shall report the findings to the Central Valley Water Board in writing within 10 days and shall include a specific plan to resolve the low DO results within 30 days. 9. The Operator shall operate and maintain all ponds sufficiently to protect the integrity of containment dams and berms and prevent overtopping and/or structural failure. Unless a California-registered civil engineer certifies (based on design, construction, and conditions of operation and maintenance) that less freeboard is adequate, the operating freeboard in any pond shall never be less than two feet (measured vertically from the lowest possible point of overflow). As a means of management and to discern compliance with this requirement, the Operator shall install and maintain in each pond a permanent staff gauge with calibration marks that clearly show the water level at design capacity and enable determination of available operational freeboard. 10. Wastewater treatment, storage, and disposal ponds or structures shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate allowable wastewater flow, design seasonal precipitation, and ancillary inflow and infiltration during the winter while ensuring compliance with all requirements of this Order. Design seasonal precipitation shall be based on total annual precipitation using a return period of 100 years, distributed monthly in accordance with historical rainfall patterns. 11. On or about 1 October of each year, available capacity shall at least equal the volume necessary to comply with Discharge Specifications D.9 and D.10. 12. All ponds and open containment structures shall be managed to prevent breeding of mosquitoes. Specifically: a. An erosion control program shall be implemented to ensure that small coves and irregularities are not created around the perimeter of the water surface. b. Weeds shall be minimized through control of water depth, harvesting, or herbicides. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 30 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY c. Dead algae, vegetation, and debris shall not accumulate on the water surface. d. The Operator shall consult and coordinate with the local Mosquito Abatement District to minimize the potential for mosquito breeding as needed to supplement the above measures. 13. Newly constructed or rehabilitated berms or levees (excluding internal berms that separate ponds or control the flow of water within a pond) shall be designed and constructed under the supervision of a California Registered Civil Engineer. 14. Wastewater contained in any unlined pond shall not have a pH less than 6.0 or greater than 9.0. 15. The Operator shall monitor sludge accumulation in the onsite disposal ponds at least once every five years, beginning in 2019, and shall periodically remove sludge as necessary to maintain adequate storage capacity. Specifically, if the estimated volume of sludge in an onsite disposal pond exceeds five percent of the permitted disposal ponds’ capacity, the Operator shall complete sludge cleanout within 12 months after the date of the estimate. 16. The Operator shall continue to regularly plant and harvest crops in the former stillage area to reduce the nitrogen content in the stillage disposal area soils and conduct lysimeter monitoring for the area. The Operator may cease this practice after providing sufficient demonstration to the Central Valley Water Board, for Executive Officer approval, that the nitrogen content, and any other constituents of concern, in the former stillage disposal area has been reduced to a level that will no longer threaten to degrade underlying groundwater quality. E. Ultraviolet Disinfection System Operating Specifications The following specifications are based on the disinfection system cited in Division of Drinking Water’s spot-check bioassay test report (dated 12 September 2016). No equivalents or substitutions will be accepted without DDW and the Central Valley Water Board Executive Officer approval of equivalent disinfection performance. The Operator shall comply with the following ultraviolet light (UV) disinfection system specifications at the Facility when recycling disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater unless otherwise approved by Division of Drinking Water and the Central Valley Water Board Executive Officer: 1. Filtered effluent turbidity shall not exceed any of the following: i. 0.2 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs), more than 5 percent of the time within a 24-hour period; ii. 0.5 NTUs, at any time. 2. The minimum UV dose per reactor shall be 98 millijoules per square centimeter (mJ/cm2) at all times. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 31 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 3. The minimum UV transmittance (at 254 nanometers) in the wastewater shall not fall below 64 percent. 4. The UV sensor intensities shall operate in a range from 0.49 to 1.8 milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm2). 5. The following two equations shall be used for each UV reactor as part of the automatic UV disinfection control system for calculating UV dose: So = ([1.05509 x 10-7 x 100] - 4.9730 x 10-6) x UVT2.7691 REDcalc = CR x 102.7060 x UVA[-1.9050 x UVA + 9.3234 x UVA^2] x [S/So]0.8234 x Q-0.8415 Where: UVT = UV transmittance at 254 nanometers, expressed as a whole number S = Measured UV sensor value (mW/cm2) So = Calculated intensity from new lamp at full power (at the same UVT) with clean sleeves, typically expressed as a function of UV transmittance (mW/cm 2) REDcalc = UV dose calculated independently for each reactor operated in parallel that is online, using the 2012 NWRI1 analysis UV dose-monitoring equation (mJ/cm 2) CR = Confidence factor of 0.909 UVA = UV absorbance at 254 nanometers (cm-1) Q = Flow rate (million gallons per day) 6. The UV dose equations assume that the intensity sensors will measure the decline as the lamps age. Since there is one UV intensity sensor for 72 lamps, the lamp with the highest number of hours should be closest to the UV sensor. 7. On-line monitoring of UV intensity, flow, and UV transmittance must be provided at all times. 8. Flow meters, UV intensity sensors, and UV transmittance monitors must be properly calibrated to ensure proper disinfection. 9. At least monthly, all duty UV intensity sensors must be checked for calibration against a reference UV intensity sensor. 10. For all UV intensity sensors in use, the ratio of the duty UV sensor intensity to the reference UV sensor intensity must be less than or equal to 1.2. If the calibration ratio is great than 1.2, the failed duty UV sensor must be replaced by a properly calibrated sensor and recalibrated by a qualified facility. The reference UV intensity sensors shall be recalibrated at least annually by a qualified facility using a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable standard. 1 National Water Research Institute (NWRI)/American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) (August 2012). Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidelines for Drinking Water and Water Reuse, (Third Edition). WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 32 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 11. UV transmittance meters must be inspected and checked against a reference bench-top unit weekly to document accuracy. 12. If the on-line analyzer UV transmittance reading varies from the bench-top spectrophotometer UV transmittance reading by 2 percent or more, the on-line UV transmittance analyzer must be recalibrated by a procedure recommended by the manufacturer. 13. Each UV reactor must be designed with built-in automatic reliability features that must be triggered by critical alarm set points. Conditions triggering an alarm and the startup of the redundant reactor must include the following: a. UV dosage dropping below 103 mJ/cm2; b. Ballast failure, and c. Multiple lamp failures. 14. Under any of following conditions, the Operator shall divert effluent from the UV disinfection system either to the influent of the Facility’s treatment system, the onsite disposal ponds (Discharge Point 001), or restricted irrigation Use Areas (Discharge Point 002): a. UV dose dropping below the minimum required UV dosage of 98 mJ/cm2; b. UV transmittance dropping below 64 percent; c. UV intensity dropping below 0.49 mW/cm2; d. Complete UV reactor failure; and/or e. Flow above the maximum flow commissioned of 3.005 mgd per reactor. 15. The Facility’s UV system should be operated in accordance with an approved operations plan, which specifies clearly the operational limits and responses required for critical alarms. A copy of the approved operations plan should be maintained at the Facility and be readily available to operations personnel and regulatory agencies. A quick reference operations data sheet should be posted at the Facility and include the following information: a. The alarm set points for flow, UV dose, UV intensity, and UV transmittance; b. The values of flow, UV dose, UV intensity, and UV transmittance when effluent must be diverted to waste; c. The required frequency of verification and calibration for all meters/analyzers measuring flow, UV intensity, and UV transmittance; d. The required frequency of mechanical cleaning and equipment inspection; e. The UV lamp hour tracking procedures and replacement intervals. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 33 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY F. Groundwater Limitations Release of waste constituents from any portion of the Facility, including but not limited to any treatment, reclamation, or storage component associated with the discharge of treated wastewater from the Facility, shall not cause or contribute to groundwater: 1. Containing constituent concentrations in excess of the concentrations specified below or in excess of natural background quality, whichever is greater: a. Nitrate (as nitrogen) of 10 mg/L. b. Arsenic of 10 µg/L. c. Manganese of 50 µg/L. d. Total coliform organisms level of 2.2 MPN/100 mL for any 7-day period. e. For constituents identified in Title 22, the MCLs quantified therein. 2. Containing taste or odor-producing constituents, toxic substances, or any other constituents in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. G. Recycled Water Specifications (Discharge Point 002) The following recycled water specifications apply to the reclamation of undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater on Use Areas within the Facility’s boundary (Discharge Point 002). Offsite reclamation of undisinfected secondary recycled water and disinfected tertiary recycled water from the Facility are covered by separate reclamation requirements. 1. For the purpose of this Order, “Use Area" means an area with defined boundaries where recycled water is used or discharged within the Facility’s boundaries. 2. Notwithstanding the following requirements, the production, distribution, and use of recycled water shall conform to an Engineering Report prepared pursuant to Title 22, section 60323 and approved by the Division of Drinking Water. 3. Recycled water shall be at least undisinfected secondary water as defined in Title 22, section 60301. 4. Recycled water shall be used in compliance with Title 22, section 60304. Specifically, uses of recycled water shall be limited to those set forth in Title 22, 60304(d). However, undisinfected secondary recycled water shall not be discharged to orchard or vineyard crops; 5. Tailwater runoff and spray of recycled water shall not be discharged outside of the Use Areas. 6. Application rates of recycled water to the Use Areas shall be at reasonable agronomic rates and shall consider soil, climate, and plant demand. In addition, application of recycled water and use of fertilizers shall be at a rate that takes into consideration WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 34 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY nutrient levels in recycled water and nutrient demand by plants. As a means of discerning compliance with this requirement: a. Crops shall be grown on the Use Areas, and cropping activities shall be sufficient to take up the nitrogen applied, including any fertilizers and manure. b. Hydraulic loading of recycled water and supplemental irrigation water (if any) shall be managed to: i. Provide water only when water is needed and in amounts consistent with that need; ii. Maximize crop nutrient uptake; iii. Maximize breakdown of organic waste constituents in the root zone; and iv. Minimize the percolation of waste constituents below the root zone. The Central Valley Water Board recognizes that some leaching of salts is necessary to manage salt in the root zone of crops for production. Leaching shall be managed to minimize degradation of groundwater, maintain compliance with the groundwater limitations of this Order, and prevent pollution. 7. Irrigation of the Use Areas shall occur only when appropriately trained personnel are on duty. 8. The Operator shall conduct periodic inspections of the recycled water Use Areas to determine compliance with the requirements of this Order. If an inspection reveals noncompliance or threat of noncompliance with this Order, the Operator shall temporarily stop recycled water use immediately and implement corrective actions to ensure compliance with this Order. 9. Discharge of recycled water to the Use Areas shall not be performed during rainfall or when the ground is saturated. 10. Discharge of storm water runoff from the Use Areas to off-site land or surface water drainage courses is prohibited. All storm water runoff from the Use Areas shall be captured and recycled for irrigation or allowed to percolate within the Use Areas. 11. The irrigation with recycled water shall be managed to minimize erosion within the Use Areas. 12. The Use Areas shall be managed to prevent breeding of mosquitoes or other vectors. 13. Use Areas and recycled water impoundments shall be designed, maintained, and operated to comply with the following setback requirements: Setback Definition Minimum Irrigation Setback (feet) Edge of use area to domestic water supply well 150 WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 35 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Setback Definition Minimum Irrigation Setback (feet) Toe of recycled water impoundment berm to domestic water supply well 150 Edge of Use Area to residence 100 Edge of Use Area using spray irrigation to public park, playground, school yard, or similar place of potential public exposure 100 14. Spray irrigation with recycled water is prohibited when wind speed (including gusts) exceeds 30 mph. 15. Spray, mist, or runoff shall not enter dwellings, designated outdoor eating areas, or food handling facilities. 16. Public contact with recycled water shall be controlled using fences, signs, and other appropriate means. 17. Use areas that are accessible to the public shall be posted with signs that are visible to the public and no less than four inches high by eight inches wide. Signs shall be placed at all areas of public access and around the perimeter of all use areas and at above-ground portions of recycled water conveyances to alert the public of the use of recycled water. All signs shall display an international symbol similar to that shown in Attachment C, which is attached and forms part of this Order, and shall include the following wording: “RECYCLED WATER – DO NOT DRINK” “AGUA DE DESPERDICIO RECLAMADA – NO TOME” Alternative language will be considered by the Executive Officer if approved by the Division of Drinking Water. 18. All recycling equipment, pumps, piping, valves, and outlets shall be marked to differentiate them from potable water facilities. Quick couplers, if used, shall be different than those used in potable water systems. 19. Recycled water controllers, valves, and similar appurtenances shall be equipped with removable handles or locking mechanisms to prevent public access or tampering. 20. Hose bibs and unlocked valves, if used, shall not be accessible to the public. 21. No physical connection shall exist between recycled water piping and any potable water supply system (including domestic wells), or between recycled water piping and any irrigation well that does not have an approved air gap or reduced pressure principle device. 22. Horizontal and vertical separation between pipelines transporting recycled water and those transporting potable water shall comply with Title 22, section 64572, except to the extent that the Division of Drinking Water has specifically approved a variance. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 36 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 23. No physical connection shall be made or allowed to exist between any recycled water system and any separate system conveying potable water or auxiliary water source system. 24. A public water supply shall not be used as backup or supplemental source of water for a recycled water system unless the connection between the two systems is protected by an air gap separation which complies with the requirements of California Code of Regulations, title 17 (Title 17), sections 7602(a) and 7603(a). 25. All recycled water piping and appurtenances in new installations and appurtenances in retrofit installations shall be colored purple or distinctively wrapped with purple tape in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 116815. 26. Any backflow prevention device installed to protect a public water system shall be inspected and maintained in accordance with Title 17, section 7605. H. Solids Disposal Specifications For the purposes of this Order, “sludge” means the solid, semisolid, and liquid residues removed during primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment processes; “solid waste” refers to grit and screenings generated during preliminary treatment; “residual sludge” means sludge that will not be subject to further treatment at the Facility; and “biosolids” refers to sludge that has been treated and tested and shown to be capable of being beneficially used as a soil amendment for agriculture, silviculture, horticulture, and land reclamation activities pursuant to federal and state regulations. 1. Sludge and solid waste shall be removed from screens, sumps, ponds, and clarifiers as needed to ensure optimal plant operation. 2. Any handling and storage of residual sludge, solid waste, and biosolids at the Facility shall be temporary (i.e., no longer than six months) and controlled and contained in a manner that minimizes leachate formation and precludes infiltration of waste constituents into soils in a mass or concentration that will violate the groundwater limitations of this Order. 3. Residual sludge, biosolids, and solid waste shall be disposed of in a manner approved by the Executive Officer and consistent with Title 27. Removal for further treatment, disposal, or reuse at disposal sites (i.e., landfills, wastewater treatment facilities, composting sites, soil amendment sites) operated in accordance with valid waste discharge requirements issued by a regional water board will satisfy this specification. 4. Use of biosolids as a soil amendment shall comply with valid WDRs issued by a Regional Water Quality Control Board or the State Water Board except in cases where a local (e.g., county) program has been authorized by a regional water board. In most cases, this will mean the General Biosolids Order (State Water Board Water Quality Order 2004-0012-DWQ, General Waste Discharge Requirements for the Discharge of Biosolids to Land for Use as a Soil Amendment in Agricultural, Silvicultural, Horticultural, and Land Reclamation Activities). For a biosolids use project to be covered by Order 2004-0012-DWQ, the Operator must file a complete Notice of Intent and receive a Notice of Applicability for each project. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 37 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 5. Use and disposal of biosolids shall comply with the self-implementing federal regulations of 40 C.F.R. part 503 (subject to USEPA enforcement), not the Central Valley Water Board. If during the life of this Order, the State accepts primacy for implementation of part 503, the Central Valley Water Board may also initiate enforcement where appropriate. 6. Any proposed change in sludge use or disposal practice shall be reported in writing to the Executive Officer at least 90 days in advance of the change. I. Pretreatment Provisions 1. The Discharger shall implement the necessary legal authorities, programs, and controls to ensure that the following wastes are not introduced to the treatment system: a. Wastes which create a fire or explosion hazard in the wastewater collection system or treatment works; b. Wastes which will cause corrosive structural damage to treatment works; c. Solid or viscous wastes in amounts which cause obstruction to flow in sewers, or which cause other interference with proper operation or treatment works; d. Any waste, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.), released in such volume or strength as to cause inhibition or disruption in the treatment works, and subsequent treatment process upset and/or loss of treatment efficiency; e. Heat in amounts that inhibit or disrupt biological activity in the treatment works unless the treatment works is designed to accommodate such heat; f. Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will cause interference or pass through; and g. Any trucked or hauled wastewater or septage, except at points predesignated by the Discharger and subject to above conditions. 2. The Discharger shall implement the legal authorities, programs, and control necessary to ensure that industrial discharges do not introduce pollutants into the sewerage system that, either alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources: a. Flow through the system to the receiving water in quantities or concentrations that cause a violation of this Order, or b. Inhibit or disrupt treatment process or treatment system operations and either cause a violation of this Order or prevent water recycling, biosolids reuse, or sludge disposal. 3. The Discharger shall provide the requisite funding and personnel to implement the pretreatment program, conduct inspections and sampling and analysis of industrial discharges as needed, and use any available legal means to ensure compliance with the pretreatment program. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 38 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 4. The Discharger shall periodically review the pretreatment program and make any changes that are needed to ensure compliance with this Order. Any update to the Discharger’s pretreatment program shall be submitted for approval by the Executive Officer. Until any revised pretreatment program is approved, the Discharger shall implement the existing pretreatment program. 5. The Discharger’s approved pretreatment program (as described in Findings 30 and 31) and its components, such as city ordinances, local limits, and control mechanisms, among others, are hereby made enforceable condition of this Order until such time as they are revised. J. Provisions 1. The following reports shall be submitted pursuant to Water Code section 13267 and shall be prepared as described in Provisions J.3 and J.4.: a. The Operator shall comply with Groundwater Limitations F.1 and F.2 in accordance with the following compliance schedule below. Task Description Due Date i. Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Assessment Workplan Submit a workplan to conduct an Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Assessment. The workplan shall include an implementation schedule for: 1) Evaluating the horizontal and vertical extent of the elevated arsenic and manganese concentrations in groundwater beneath and downgradient of the Facility; 2) Evaluating the potential impacts the elevated concentrations may have on downgradient beneficial uses. This shall include conducting a survey of domestic wells within an appropriate radius of the Facility. The results of the well survey shall be included in the Workplan along with a proposed strategy and schedule for sampling wells that could be impacted by the discharge; 3) Proposing monitoring locations (new or existing wells) to determine compliance with the arsenic and manganese groundwater limitations in this Order. The assessment must demonstrate that the distances of the proposed compliance monitoring well locations from the Facility are as small as practicable. 10 December 2019 ii. Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Assessment Report Footnote 1 WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 39 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Task Description Due Date Submit the final Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Assessment Report in accordance with the approved Workplan submitted pursuant to Task i of Provision J.1.a. If it is determined through the assessment that elevated arsenic and manganese concentrations have or threaten to impact downgradient domestic wells, the Report shall propose corrective actions (e.g., supplying drinking water to the user(s) of the impacted wells). iii. Annually, submit a technical report that includes: 1) An update on the preparation/implementation of the Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Assessment Report, 2) An analysis of the groundwater quality for arsenic and manganese, and an evaluation whether the arsenic and manganese concentrations at the approved compliance wells are below the applicable arsenic and manganese groundwater limits. 1 February of each year (beginning February 2021) 1. In accordance with the approved Task i time schedule but no later than 7 June 2021. b. By 10 December 2019, the Operator shall submit a Groundwater Monitoring Well Network Evaluation and Well lnstallation Workplan that evaluates the current monitoring network and proposes new monitoring wells to replace existing wells that have gone dry and to ensure adequate monitoring upgradient and downgradient of all disposal ponds and all surrounding restricted irrigation Use Areas. The workplan shall evaluate the adequacy of the current groundwater network and its ability to characterize upgradient groundwater quality and to assess potential groundwater impacts attributable to the Facility’s operations and discharge. The workplan shall be prepared in accordance with, and include the items listed in, the first section of Attachment D (Requirements for Monitoring Well lnstallation Workplans and Monitoring Well lnstallation Reports) which is incorporated herein. Finding 44 notes that approximately 29 groundwater monitoring wells were dry in December 2016. The Operator is not required, as part of this Workplan, to replace each monitoring well that has gone dry, provided that is can demonstrate to the Executive Officer that the proposed additional monitoring wells will ensure the Facility’s monitoring well network is adequate for evaluating the Facility’s impacts on underlying groundwater. c. Within 12 months of receiving Executive Officer approval of the Groundwater Monitoring Network Evaluation and Well Installation Workplan, the Operator shall submit a Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation Report for the new groundwater monitoring wells constructed to comply with Provision J.1.b. The report shall be prepared in accordance with, and include the items listed in, the second section of Attachment D. The report shall describe the installation and development of all new monitoring wells and explain any deviation from the approved workplan. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 40 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY d. By 10 December 2019, the Operator shall submit a Salinity Reduction Study Workplan. The Operator shall prepare and implement a Salinity Reduction Study Workplan to identify and address sources of salinity to and from the Facility. The Salinity Reduction Study Workplan shall at a minimum include the following: i. Data on current influent and effluent salinity concentrations; ii. Identification of known salinity sources; iii. Description of current plans to reduce/eliminate known salinity sources; iv. Preliminary identification of other potential sources; v. A proposed schedule for evaluating sources; and vi. A proposed schedule for identifying and evaluating potential reduction, elimination, and prevention methods. Implementation progress of the Salinity Reduction Study Workplan shall be reported each year in the Annual Monitoring Report required pursuant to Monitoring and Reporting Program R5-2018-0080 (MRP). 2. By 7 June 2019, the Operator shall develop and implement standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the Facility’s Anaerobically Digestible Material receiving station. The SOPs shall address material handling (including unloading, screening, and other processing) prior to anaerobic digestion, transportation, spill prevention, and spill response. In addition, the SOPs shall address avoidance of the introduction of materials that could cause interference, pass-through, or upset of the treatment processes; avoidance of prohibited material; vector control; odor control; operation and maintenance; and the disposition of any solid waste segregated from the material prior to its introduction to the digester. The Operator shall provide training to its staff on the SOPs and shall maintain records for three years of each load received, describing the hauler, waste type, and quantity received. 3. In accordance with Business and Professions Code sections 6735, 7835, and 7835.1, engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments shall be performed by or under the direction of registered professionals competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required activities. All technical reports specified herein that contain workplans for investigations and studies, that describe the conduct of investigations and studies, or that contain technical conclusions and recommendations concerning engineering and geology shall be prepared by or under the direction of appropriately qualified professional(s), even if not explicitly stated. Each technical report submitted by the Discharger shall bear the professional’s signature and stamp. 4. The Discharger shall submit the technical reports and workplans required by this Order for consideration by the Executive Officer, and incorporate comments the Executive Officer may have in a timely manner, as appropriate. Unless expressly stated otherwise in this Order, the Discharger shall proceed with all work required by the foregoing provisions by the due dates specified. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 41 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 5. The Discharger shall comply with Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) R5-2018-0080, which is part of this Order, and any revisions thereto as ordered by the Executive Officer. The submittal dates of self-monitoring reports shall be no later than the submittal dates specified in the MRP. 6. The Discharger shall comply with the attached SPRRs, which are incorporated herein. 7. The Discharger shall comply with all conditions of this Order, including timely submittal of technical and monitoring reports. On or before each report due date, the Discharger shall submit the specified document to the Central Valley Water Board or, if appropriate, a written report detailing compliance or noncompliance with the specific schedule date and task. If noncompliance is being reported, then the Discharger shall state the reasons for such noncompliance and provide an estimate of the date when the Discharger will be in compliance. The Discharger shall notify the Central Valley Water Board in writing when it returns to compliance with the time schedule. Violations may result in enforcement action, including Central Valley Water Board or court orders requiring corrective action or imposing civil monetary liability, or in revision or rescission of this Order. 8. The Discharger shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) that are installed or used by the Discharger to achieve compliance with the conditions of this Order. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems that are installed by the Discharger when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of this Order. 9. The Discharger shall use the best practicable cost-effective control technique(s), including proper operation and maintenance, to comply with this Order. 10. The Discharger shall provide certified wastewater treatment plant operators in accordance with Title 23, division 3, chapter 26. 11. As described in the Standard Provisions, the Discharger shall report promptly to the Central Valley Water Board any material change or proposed change in the character, location, or volume of the discharge. 12. In the event that the Discharger reports toxic chemical release data to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) pursuant to section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (42 U.S.C. § 11023), the Discharger shall also report the same information to the Central Valley Water Board within 15 days of the report to the SERC. 13. The Discharger shall comply with the requirements of the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (General WDRs) for Sanitary Sewer Systems (Water Quality Order 2006-0003), the Revised General WDRs Monitoring and Reporting Program (Water Quality Order 2013-0058-EXEC), and any subsequent revisions thereto. Water Quality Order 2006-0003 and Order 2013-0058-EXEC require the Discharger to notify the Central Valley Water Board and take remedial action upon the reduction, loss, or failure of the sanitary sewer system resulting in a sanitary sewer overflow. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 42 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 14. The Discharger shall not allow pollutant-free wastewater to be discharged into the wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal systems in amounts that significantly diminish the system's capability to comply with this Order. Pollutant-free wastewater means rainfall, groundwater, cooling waters, and condensates that are essentially free of pollutants. 15. At least 90 days prior to termination or expiration of any lease, contract, or agreement involving disposal or recycling areas or off-site reuse of effluent, used to justify the capacity authorized herein and assure compliance with this Order, the Discharger shall notify the Central Valley Water Board in writing of the situation and of what measures have been taken or are being taken to assure full compliance with this Order. 16. In the event of any change in control or ownership of the Facility, the Discharger must notify the succeeding owner or operator of the existence of this Order by letter, a copy of which shall be immediately forwarded to the Central Valley Water Board. 17. To assume operation as a Discharger under this Order, the succeeding owner or operator must apply in writing to the Executive Officer requesting transfer of the Order. The request must contain the requesting entity's full legal name, the state of incorporation if a corporation, the name and address and telephone number of the persons responsible for contact with the Central Valley Water Board, and a statement. The statement shall comply with the signatory paragraph of Standard Provision B.3 of the SPRRs and state that the new owner or operator assumes full responsibility for compliance with this Order. Failure to submit the request shall be considered a discharge without requirements, a violation of the W ater Code. If approved by the Executive Officer, the transfer request will be submitted to the Central Valley Water Board for its consideration of transferring the ownership of this Order at one of its regularly scheduled meetings. 18. Copies of this Order (including all attachments, Information Sheet and SPRRS) and the operative MRP shall be kept at the Facility for reference by operating personnel. Key operating personnel shall be familiar with the contents of this Order. 19. If the Central Valley Water Board determines that waste constituents in the discharge have reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an exceedance of an objective for groundwater, this Order may be reopened for consideration of addition or revision of appropriate numerical effluent or groundwater limitations for potential constituents. 20. The Central Valley Water Board will review this Order periodically and will revise requirements when necessary. If, in the opinion of the Executive Officer, the Discharger fails to comply with the provisions of this Order, the Executive Officer may refer this matter to the Attorney General for judicial enforcement, may issue a complaint for administrative civil liability, or may take other enforcement actions. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the assessment of Administrative Civil Liability of up to $10,000 per violation, per day, depending on the violation, pursuant to the Water Code, including sections 13268, 13350 and 13385. The Central Valley Water Board reserves its right to take any enforcement actions authorized by law. WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 43 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Any person aggrieved by this Central Valley Water Board action may petition the State Water Board for review in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and Title 23, section 2050 et seq. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5pm on the 30th day after the date of this Order; if the 30th day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5 pm on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions are available on the Internet (at the address below), and will be provided upon request. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/public_notices/petitions/water_quality I, PATRICK PULUPA, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 7 December 2018. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PATRICK PULUPA, Executive Officer Order Attachments: • Attachment A – Site Map • Attachment B – Facility Layout • Attachment C – Recycled Water Signage • Attachment D – Requirements for Monitoring Well Installation Workplans and Monitoring Well Installation Reports • Monitoring and Reporting Program R5-2018-0080 • Information Sheet • SPRRs (1 March 1991) WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Attachment A – Site Map WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Attachment B – Facility Layout WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Attachment C – Recycled Water Signage Source: Title 22, California Code of Regulations, Figure 60310-A WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY ATTACHMENT D REQUIREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION WORKPLANS AND MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION REPORTS Prior to installation of groundwater monitoring wells, the Discharger shall submit a workplan containing, at a minimum, the information listed in Section 1, below. Wells may be installed after staff approves the workplan. Upon installation of the monitoring wells, the Discharger shall submit a well installation report which includes the information contained in Section 2 below. All workplans and reports must be prepared under the direction of, and signed by, a registered geologist or civil engineer licensed by the State of California. SECTION 1 - Monitoring Well Installation Workplan and Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Plan The monitoring well installation workplan shall contain the following minimum information: A. General Information: - Purpose of the well installation project - Brief description of local geologic and hydrogeologic conditions - Proposed monitoring well locations and rationale for well locations - Topographic map showing facility location, roads, and surface water bodies - Large scaled site map showing all existing on-site wells, proposed wells, surface drainage courses, surface water bodies, buildings, waste handling facilities, utilities, and major physical and man-made features B. Drilling Details: - Description of the on-site supervision of drilling and well installation activities - Description of drilling equipment and techniques - Equipment decontamination procedures - Soil sampling intervals (if appropriate) and logging methods C. Monitoring Well Design (in narrative and/or graphic form): - Diagram of proposed well construction details: • Borehole diameter • Casing and screen material, diameter, and centralizer spacing (if needed) • Type of well caps (bottom cap either screw on or secured with stainless steel screws) • Anticipated depth of well, length of well casing, and length and position of perforated interval • Thickness, position and composition of surface seal, sanitary seal, and sand pack • Anticipated screen slot size and filter pack WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 Attachment D CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS Page 2 REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY D. Well Development (not to be performed until at least 48 hours after sanitary seal placement): - Method of development to be used (i.e., surge, bail, pump, etc.) - Parameters to be monitored during development and record keeping technique - Method of determining when development is complete - Disposal of development water E. Well Survey (precision of vertical survey data shall be at least 0.01 foot): - Identify the Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer that will perform the survey - Datum for survey measurements - List well features to be surveyed (i.e. top of casing, horizontal and vertical coordinates, etc.) F. Schedule for Completion of Work G. Appendix: Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) The Groundwater SAP shall be included as an appendix to the workplan, and shall be utilized as a guidance document that is referred to by individuals responsible for conducting groundwater monitoring and sampling activities. Provide a detailed written description of standard operating procedures for the following: - Equipment to be used during sampling - Equipment decontamination procedures - Water level measurement procedures - Well purging (include a discussion of procedures to follow if three casing volumes cannot be purged) - Monitoring and record keeping during water level measurement and well purging (include copies of record keeping logs to be used) - Purge water disposal - Analytical methods and required reporting limits - Sample containers and preservatives - Sampling o General sampling techniques o Record keeping during sampling (include copies of record keeping logs to be used) o QA/QC samples - Chain of Custody - Sample handling and transport SECTION 2 - Monitoring Well Installation Report The monitoring well installation report must provide the information listed below. In addition, the report must also clearly identify, describe, and justify any deviations from the approved workplan. A. General Information: - Purpose of the well installation project WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER R5-2018-0080 Attachment D CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS Page 3 REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY - Brief description of local geologic and hydrogeologic conditions encountered during installation of the wells - Number of monitoring wells installed and copies of County Well Construction Permits - Topographic map showing facility location, roads, surface water bodies - Scaled site map showing all previously existing wells, newly installed wells, surface water bodies, buildings, waste handling facilities, utilities, and other major physical and man-made features. B. Drilling Details (in narrative and/or graphic form): - On-site supervision of drilling and well installation activities - Drilling contractor and driller’s name - Description of drilling equipment and techniques - Equipment decontamination procedures - Soil sampling intervals and logging methods - Well boring log (including the following): o Well boring number and date drilled o Borehole diameter and total depth o Total depth of open hole (same as total depth drilled if no caving or back-grouting occurs) o Depth to first encountered groundwater and stabilized groundwater depth o Detailed description of soils encountered, using the Unified Soil Classification System C. Well Construction Details (in narrative and/or graphic form). - Well construction diagram, including: o Monitoring well number and date constructed o Casing and screen material, diameter, and centralizer spacing (if needed) o Length of well casing, and length and position of perforated interval o Thickness, position and composition of surface seal, sanitary seal, and sand pack o Type of well caps (bottom cap either screw on or secured with stainless steel screws) D. Well Development: - Date(s) and method of development - How well development completion was determined - Volume of water purged from well and method of development water disposal - Field notes from well development should be included in report E. Well Survey (survey the top rim of the well casing with the cap removed): - Identify the coordinate system and datum for survey measurements - Describe the measuring points (i.e. ground surface, top of casing, etc.) - Present the well survey report data in a table - Include the Registered Engineer or Licensed Surveyor’s report and field notes in appendix. CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY REGION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 FOR CITY OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY This Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) is issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board) pursuant to Water Code section 13267, subd. (b)(1), which provides in pertinent part as follows: [T]he regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region … shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical or monitoring program reports which the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports. The cities of Fresno and Clovis (collectively, Discharger) are each responsible for compliance with this MRP, and shall not implement any changes without written approval from the Central Valley Water Board or its Executive Officer in the form of a revised MRP. The reports required under this MRP are necessary to verify the Discharger’s compliance with the operative waste discharge requirements (WDRs). Pursuant to Water Code section 13268, subdivisions (a)(1) and (b)(1), failure to furnish the reports required under this MRP (and also under the operative WDRs), or falsifying information submitted in such reports, constitutes a misdemeanor and may result in the imposition of up to $10,000 in administrative civil liability for each day of noncompliance. A glossary of terms used in this MRP is included on the last page. I. GENERAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS A. FLOW MONITORING Hydraulic flow rates shall be measured at the monitoring points specified in this MRP. Central Valley Water Board Executive Officer shall approve any proposed changes to flow monitoring locations prior to implementation of the change. All flow monitoring systems shall be appropriate for the conveyance system (i.e., open channel flow or pressure pipeline) and liquid type. Unless otherwise specified, each flow meter shall be equipped with a flow totalizer to allow reporting of cumulative volume as well as instantaneous flow rate. Flow meters shall be calibrated at the frequency recommended by the manufacturer; typically at least once per year and records of calibration shall be maintained for review upon request. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 2 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY B. MONITORING AND SAMPLING LOCATIONS Samples shall be obtained at the monitoring points specified in this MRP. Central Valley Water Board staff shall approve any proposed changes to sampling locations prior to implementation of the change. The Discharger shall monitor the following locations to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this Order: Discharge Point Monitoring Location Monitoring Location Description -- INF-001 Location where a representative sample of the influent into the Facility can be collected prior to any plant return flows or treatment processes (besides the addition of ferric chloride) 001 & 002 EFF-001 Undisinfected secondary-treated effluent, prior to discharge to the disposal ponds and/or Use Areas, where most representative of the effluent 003 EFF-002 Tertiary-treated effluent, prior to or after the ultraviolet light disinfection system treatment system, where most representative of the effluent -- UVS-001 Ultraviolet light disinfection system 001 PND-001 through PND- XXX Onsite disposal ponds 002 LAA-001 through LAA-0XX Agricultural land that receives undisinfected secondary-treated effluent (Onsite and Offsite Use Areas) -- STL-001 through STL-0XX Lysimeters at the former stillage disposal area -- MW -01A through MW -21B, and all future wells added to the approved network Groundwater monitoring well locations -- RW -01 through RW -22, and all future wells added to the extraction system Reclamation wells used to extract groundwater to discharge into Fresno Irrigation District’s canal system -- BIO-001 Sludge monitoring -- SPL-001 Source water supply monitoring C. SAMPLING AND SAMPLE ANALYSIS All samples shall be representative of the volume and nature of the discharge or matrix of material sampled. Except as specified otherwise in this MRP, grab samples will be considered representative of water, wastewater, soil, solids/sludges and groundwater. The time, date, and location of each sample shall be recorded on the sample chain of custody form. All analyses shall be performed in accordance with the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements for WDRs, dated 1 March 1991 (SPRRs). Field test instruments (such as those used to measure pH, temperature, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen, wind speed, and precipitation) may be used provided: MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 3 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 1. The operator is trained in proper use and maintenance of the instruments; 2. The instruments are field calibrated at the frequency recommended by the manufacturer; and 3. The instruments are serviced and/or calibrated by the manufacturer or by the Discharger’s authorized and qualified staff at the recommended frequency. Laboratory analytical procedures shall comply with the methods and holding times specified in the following (as applicable to the medium to be analyzed): • Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater (USEPA); • Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (USEPA); • Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (USEPA); • Methods for Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples (USEPA); • Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA/AWWA/WEF); and • Soil, Plant and Water Reference Methods for the Western Region (WREP 125). Approved editions shall be those that are approved for use by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), Division of Drinking Water’s Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP). The Discharger may propose alternative methods for approval by the Executive Officer. Where technically feasible, laboratory reporting limits shall be lower than the applicable water quality objectives for the constituents to be analyzed. If monitoring consistently shows no significant variation in a constituent concentration or parameter after at least 24 months of monitoring, the Discharger may request this MRP be revised to reduce monitoring frequency. The proposal must include adequate technical justification for reduction in monitoring frequency. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 4 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY II. SPECIFIC MONITORING REQUIREMENTS A. INFLUENT MONITORING The Discharger shall monitor the influent to the Facility at Monitoring Location INF-001. At a minimum, influent shall be monitored as specified below: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Flow mgd Meter Continuous pH pH Units Meter Continuous Electrical Conductivity (EC) @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm 24-hour composite 3/Week BOD5 mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week Total Suspended Solids mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week B. UNDISINFECTED SECONDARY-TREATED EFFLUENT MONITORING The Discharger shall monitor undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater at Monitoring Location EFF-001. At a minimum, effluent shall be monitored as specified below: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Flow mgd Calculated Daily pH pH Units Meter Continuous Electrical Conductivity (EC) @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm 24-hour composite 3/Week BOD5 mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week Total Suspended Solids mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Nitrate Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Nitrite Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Nitrogen mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Sodium mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Chloride mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Boron µg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Standard Minerals1 Various 24-hour composite 1Month Priority Pollutants2 Various 24-hour composite/Grab 1/Year 1 Standard minerals shall include, at a minimum, the following elements/compounds: aluminum, calcium, chloride, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, sulfate, total alkalinity (including MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 5 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY alkalinity series), hardness, and include verification that the analysis is complete (i.e., cation/anion balance). 2 See Table 1 at the end of this MRP for the list of priority pollutants and sampling instructions. C. DISINFECTED TERTIARY-TREATED EFFLUENT MONITORING The Discharger shall monitor disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater discharged to the recycled water use sites at Monitoring Location EFF-002. At a minimum, effluent shall be monitored as specified below: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Flow mgd Meter Continuous pH pH Units Meter Continuous Electrical Conductivity (EC) @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm 24-hour composite 3/Week BOD5 mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week Total Suspended Solids mg/L 24-hour composite 2/Week Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Nitrate Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Nitrite Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (as N) mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Nitrogen mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Week Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Sodium mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Chloride mg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Boron µg/L 24-hour composite 1/Month Standard Minerals1 Various 24-hour composite 1/Month Priority Pollutants2 Various 24-hour composite/Grab 1/Year 1 Standard minerals shall include, at a minimum, the following elements/compounds: aluminum, calcium, chloride, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, sulfate, total alkalinity (including alkalinity series), hardness, and include verification that the analysis is complete (i.e., cation/anion balance). 2 See Table 1 at the end of this MRP for the list of priority pollutants and sampling instructions. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 6 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY D. ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT (UV) DISINFECTION SYSTEM MONITORING The UV disinfection system shall be monitored at Monitoring Location UVS-001 as specified below: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Flow mgd Meter Reading Continuous 1 Turbidity NTU Meter 2 Continuous 1,3 UV trains in operation Number Observation Continuous 1 UV Transmittance Percent (%) Meter Reading Continuous 1 UV Power Setting Percent (%) Meter Reading Continuous 1 UV Dose 4 mJ/cm2 Calculated Continuous 1 Total Coliform Organisms MPN/100 mL Grab 5 1/Day 1 For continuous analyzers, the Discharger shall report documented routine meter maintenance activities , including date, time of day, and duration of periods in which the analyzer(s) is(are) not in operation. 2 The turbidity meter shall be stationed immediately after the filters, prior to the UV disinfection process. 3 Report daily average turbidity and maximum turbidity. If the turbidity exceeds 0.5 NTU, collect a sample for total coliform organisms immediately after the UV disinfection system and report the duration of the turbidity exceedance. The additional total coliform organisms sample shall be in addition to the normally required daily total coliform organisms sample specified in this table. If the Discharger diverts the wastewater to the onsite disposal ponds prior to the turbidity reaching 0.5 NTU, the Discharger is not required to collect an additional total coliform organisms sample. 4 Report daily minimum hourly average UV dose and daily average UV dose. The daily minimum hourly average UV dose shall consist of the lowest hourly average dose provided in any train that had at least one bank of lamps operating during the hour interval. For trains that did not operate for the entire hour interval, the dose should be averaged based on the actual operation time. If effluent received less than the minimum UV dose, report the duration and dose calculation variables associated with each incident. 5 The sample shall be collected immediately after the UV disinfection system. E. POND MONITORING The onsite disposal ponds shall be monitored at Monitoring Locations PND-001 through PND-XXX as specified below: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Dissolved Oxygen 1 mg/L Grab1 As required2 Temperature 1 °F Grab As required2 pH 1 Standard Grab As required2 Freeboard 3 Nearest ¼ Foot Measurement 4 Odors -- Observation 1/Day Berm condition -- Observation 1/Day 1 The samples shall be collected opposite of the pond inlet at a depth of one foot. 2 The Discharger shall conduct the monitoring in each pond from which offensive odors are detected. The Discharger shall monitor the affected pond(s) daily for temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen until the dissolved oxygen is greater than 1.0 mg/L. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 7 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 3 Freeboard shall be measured vertically from the surface of the pond water to the lowest elevation of the surrounding berm and shall be measured to the nearest 0.25 feet. 4 The Discharger shall measure the freeboard of the perimeter ponds (i.e., ponds located at the edge of the Facility property) daily and the internal ponds weekly. In addition, the Discharger shall inspect the condition of the ponds once per week and document visual observations. Notations shall include observations of: a. Presence of weeds in the water or along the berm; b. Accumulations of dead algae, vegetation, scum, or debris on the pond surface; c. Animal burrows in the berms; and d. Evidence of seepage from the berms or downslope of the ponds. F. LAND APPLICATION AREA MONITORING 1. Onsite Use Area Observations The Discharger shall inspect each discrete Onsite Use Area (LAA-001 through LAA-0XX) at least once a month prior to and following irrigation events to identify any equipment malfunction or other circumstance that might allow recycled water to runoff the Use Area and/or create ponding conditions that violate the WDRs. Evidence of erosion, field saturation, irrigation runoff, or the presence of nuisance conditions (if any) shall be noted. Specifically, the following items shall be documented for each inspection: a. Evidence of erosion; b. Containment berm condition; c. Condition of above-ground pipes, flow control valves, sprinklers, and/or drip emitters (as applicable); d. Soil saturation; e. Ponding; f. Irrigation supply and tailwater ditch condition and potential for runoff to off-site areas; g. Potential and actual discharge of waste to surface water; h. Odors that have the potential to be objectionable at or beyond the property boundary; i. Insects (e.g., flies, mosquitoes); and j. Any corrective actions needed or taken based on observations made. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 8 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY A log of these inspections shall be kept at the Facility and a copy of entries made in the log during each month shall be submitted as part of the Quarterly Monitoring Report. If no irrigation with wastewater takes place during a given quarter, then the monitoring report shall state so. 2. Onsite and Offsite Use Area Monitoring The Discharger shall perform the following routine monitoring and loading calculations for each discrete undisinfected secondary-treated Onsite and Offsite Use Area (LAA-001 through LAA-0XX) each day water is applied to the area(s). Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Precipitation inches Rain Gauge Reading 1 1/Month Acreage Irrigated acres Calculated 1/Month Water Application Rate a. Wastewater b. Supplemental Irrigation Water c. Total gallons & Inches Meter Reading & Calculation 1/Month Nitrogen Loading Rate lbs/ac/month Calculated 2 1/Month 1 Data obtained from the nearest National Weather Service rain gauge is acceptable. 2 Nitrogen loading rates shall be calculated using the method specified in the Reporting Section of this MRP. G. GROUNDWATER MONITORING The Discharger shall maintain the groundwater monitoring well network. If a groundwater monitoring well is dry for more than four consecutive sampling events or is damaged, the Discharger shall submit a workplan and proposed time schedule to replace the well. The well shall be replaced following approval of the workplan by the Central Valley Water Board Executive Officer. Once installed, all new wells shall be added to the existing groundwater monitoring network (which currently consists of Monitoring Wells MW -01A through MW -21B). Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Prior to purging or sampling, the groundwater depth shall be measured in each well to the nearest 0.01 feet. Groundwater elevations shall then be calculated to determine groundwater gradient and flow direction. Low or no-purge sampling methods are acceptable, if described in an approved Sampling and Analysis Plan. Otherwise, each monitoring well shall be purged of at least 3 to 5 casing volumes until pH, electrical conductivity, and turbidity have stabilized prior to sampling. Groundwater monitoring at Monitoring Locations MW -01A through MW- 21B, and any new groundwater wells, shall include, at a minimum, the following: MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 9 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Depth to Groundwater 0.01 feet Measurement 1/Quarter Groundwater Elevation 1 0.01 feet Calculation 1/Quarter Gradient feet/foot Calculation 1/Quarter Gradient Direction degrees Calculation 1/Quarter pH standard units Grab 1/Quarter Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Nitrate Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Organic Carbon mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Electrical Conductivity (EC) @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm Grab 1/Quarter Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Chloride mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Standard Minerals 2 various Grab 1/Quarter Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Coliform Organisms MPN/100 mL Grab 1/Quarter Metals 3, 4 various Grab 1/Quarter 1 Groundwater elevations shall be determined based on depth-to-water measurements using a surveyed elevation reference point on the well casing. 2 Standard Minerals shall include, at a minimum, the following: boron, calcium, chloride, magnesium potassium, sodium, sulfate, total alkalinity (including alkalinity series), hardness, and include verification that the analysis is complete (i.e., cation/anion balance). 3 Samples for metals shall be filtered prior to preservation and digestion using a 0.45-micron filter. 4 Metals analysis shall include, at a minimum: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc. H. RECLAMATION WELL MONITORING Groundwater monitoring at Monitoring Locations RW -01A through RW-22, and any new reclamation wells, shall include, at a minimum, the following: Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Flow million gallons meter 1/Month pH standard units Grab 1/Quarter Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Nitrate Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 10 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency Total Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Phosphorus mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Organic Carbon mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Electrical Conductivity (EC) @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm Grab 1/Quarter Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Chloride mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Standard Minerals 2 various Grab 1/Quarter Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Grab 1/Quarter Total Coliform Organisms MPN/100 mL Grab 1/Quarter Metals 3, 4 various Grab 1/Quarter 1 Groundwater elevations shall be determined based on depth-to-water measurements using a surveyed elevation reference point on the well casing. 2 Standard Minerals shall include, at a minimum, the following: boron, calcium, chloride, magnesium, potassium, sodium, sulfate, total alkalinity (including alkalinity series), hardness, and include verification that the analysis is complete (i.e., cation/anion balance). 3 Samples for metals shall be filtered prior to preservation and digestion using a 0.45-micron filter. 4 Metals analysis shall include, at a minimum: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc. I. SLUDGE/BIOSOLIDS MONITORING A composite sample of dewatered sludge/biosolids shall be collected at Monitoring Location BIO-001 when sludge/biosolids is removed from the Facility for disposal in accordance with USEPA’s POTW Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance Document, August 1989, and tested for the metals listed in Title 22. Sampling records shall be retained for a minimum of 5 years. A log shall be kept of sludge quantities generated and of handling, application, and disposal activities. The frequency of entries is discretionary; however, the log should be complete enough to serve as a basis for part of the Annual Monitoring Report. J. WATER SUPPLY MONITORING The Discharger shall monitor the public water supply at Monitoring Location SPL-001. In addition, the Discharger shall submit a copy of the most current Division of Drinking Water Consumer Confidence Report as part of the Annual Monitoring Report. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 11 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Constituent/Parameter Units Monitoring Frequency Total Dissolved Solids 1 mg/L 1/Quarter Electrical Conductivity 1 µmhos/cm 1/Quarter Standard Minerals 2 various 1/Three Years 1 Reported results shall be based on a flow-weighted average of all operating water supply wells and surface water treatment systems. 2 Standard Minerals shall include, at a minimum, the following: calcium, chloride, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, sulfate, total alkalinity (including alkalinity series), and hardness. K. FORMER STILLAGE DISPOSAL AREA LYSIMETER MONITORING The Discharger shall collect vadose zone samples at Monitoring Locations STL-001 through STL-0XX. At a minimum, the vadose zone shall be monitored as specified below. Upon successful demonstration, pursuant to Discharge Specification 16 of the Order, that the nitrogen content (and any other constituents of concern) in the former stillage disposal area has been reduce to a level that will no longer threaten to degrade underlying groundwater quality, the Discharger may cease monitoring the lysimeters in the former stillage disposal area. Constituent/Parameter Units Sample Type Monitoring Frequency pH standard units Grab 1/Year Total Alkalinity mg/L Grab 1/Year Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Year Nitrate Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Year Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Year Total Nitrogen (as N) mg/L Grab 1/Year Potassium mg/L Grab 1/Year Sulfate mg/L Grab 1/Year Chloride mg/L Grab 1/Year Sodium mg/L Grab 1/Year Total Organic Carbon mg/L Grab 1/Year Electrical Conductivity @ 25 ˚C µmhos/cm Grab 1/Year Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Grab 1/Year Iron µg/L Grab 1/Year Manganese µg/L Grab 1/Year III. Reporting All monitoring reports should be converted to a searchable Portable Document Format (PDF) and submitted electronically. Documents that are less than 50MB should be emailed to: centralvalleyfresno@waterboards.ca.gov. Documents that are 50 MB or larger should be transferred to a CD, DVD, or flash drive and mailed to the following address: MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 12 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 1685 “E” Street Fresno, California 93706 To ensure that your submittal is routed to the appropriate staff person, the following information should be included in any email used to transmit documents to this office: Program: Non-15; WDID: 5D100105001; Facility: Cities of Fresno and Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility; Order: R5-2018-0080 A transmittal letter shall accompany each monitoring report. The letter shall include a discussion of all violations of the WDRs, including this MRP, during the reporting period and actions taken or planned for correcting each violation. If the Discharger has previously submitted a report describing corrective actions taken and/or a time schedule for implementing the corrective actions, reference to the previous correspondence will be satisfactory. Pursuant to Section B.3 of the SPRRs, the transmittal letter shall contain a statement by the Discharger, or the Discharger’s duly authorized representative, certifying under penalty of perjury that the report is true, accurate, and complete to the best of the signer’s knowledge. In reporting monitoring data, the Discharger shall arrange the data in tabular form so that the date, sample type (e.g., effluent, pond, etc.), and reported analytical result for each sample are readily discernible. The data shall be summarized in such a manner to clearly illustrate compliance with WDRs and spatial or temporal trends, as applicable. The results of any monitoring done more frequently than required at the locations specified in the Monitoring and Reporting Program shall be reported in the next scheduled monitoring report. Laboratory analysis reports do not need to be included in the monitoring reports; however, all laboratory reports must be retained for a minimum of three years, in accordance with Standard Provision C.3 of the SPRRs. For a Discharger conducting any of its own analyses, reports must also be signed and certified by the chief of the laboratory. In addition to the requirements of Standard Provision C.3 of the SPRRs, monitoring information shall include the method detection limit (MDL) and the Reporting limit (RL) or practical quantitation limit (PQL). If the regulatory limit for a given constituent is less than the RL (or PQL), then any analytical results for that constituent that are below the RL (or PQL) but above the MDL shall be reported and flagged as estimated. All monitoring reports that involve planning, investigation, evaluation or design, or other work requiring interpretation and proper application of engineering or geologic sciences, shall be prepared by or under the direction of persons registered to practice in California pursuant to Business and Professions Code sections 6735, 7835, and 7835.1. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 13 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY A. Quarterly Monitoring Reports Quarterly Monitoring Reports shall be submitted to the Central Valley Water Board by the 1st day of the second month after the quarter (i.e., the January-March quarterly report is due by May 1st). Each Quarterly Monitoring Report shall include the following: 1. Results of the Influent Monitoring (Section II.A. of the MRP). 2. Results of the Effluent Monitoring (Sections II.B and C of the MRP). 3. Results of the UV Disinfection System Monitoring (Section II.D. of the MRP) 4. Results of the Pond Monitoring (Section II.E. of the MRP), including: i. A map of the Facility’s ponds with each pond labeled using the naming convention PND-XXX. The map (or a separate list) shall indicate which ponds were in use during the quarter. ii. A summary of the weekly visual observations of the ponds 5. Results of the Land Application Area Monitoring (Section II.F. of the MRP), including: i. A summary of the monthly inspection activities conducted by the Discharger for each Onsite Use Area. ii. A map of the Onsite and Offsite Use Areas showing which Use Areas received undisinfected secondary-treated effluent each month. iii. The mass of total nitrogen applied to each discrete undisinfected secondary-treated Onsite and Offsite Use Area on a 12-month rolling average basis shall be calculated using the following formula and compared to published crop demand for the crops actually grown: = +=12 1 ))(345.8( i xii A MVCM Where: M = mass of nitrogen applied to the Use Area in lbs/ac/yr Ci = monthly average concentration of total nitrogen for month i in mg/L Vi = volume of wastewater applied to the Use Area during calendar month i in million gallons A = area of the Use Area irrigated in acres i = the number of the month (e.g., January = 1, February = 2, etc.) Mx = nitrogen mass from other sources (e.g., fertilizer and compost) in pounds 8.345 = unit conversion factor MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 14 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 6. Results of the Groundwater Monitoring (Section II.G of the MRP), including: i. A narrative description of all preparatory, monitoring, sampling, and sample handling for groundwater monitoring. ii. A field log for each well documenting depth to groundwater; sample preparation (e.g., filtering); and sample preservation. For each sampling event, the Operator may provide a table summarizing this information for all groundwater monitoring wells sampled in lieu of providing a field log for each well. The field logs should be made available on request of the Regional Board. iii. Calculation of the groundwater elevation at each monitoring well, and determination of groundwater flow direction and gradient on the date of measurement. iv. Summary data tables of analytical results collected during the quarter and the current water table elevations. 7. Results of the Reclamation Well Monitoring (Section II.H of the MRP), including: i. The total volume of extracted groundwater discharged each month to Dry Creek Canal and to the Houghton Canal each month (a separate total for each canal). 8. Results of the Sludge/Biosolids Monitoring (Section II.I of the MRP) completed during the quarter, and (if applicable) verification of classification of biosolids as nonhazardous per Title 22, Article 11, Criteria for Identification of Hazardous and Extremely Hazardous Waste (California Assessment Manual procedures). 9. Results of the Water Supply Monitoring (Section II.J of the MRP), including: i. For each month of this quarter, calculation of the flow-weighted 12-month rolling average electrical conductivity of the source water using flow data and source water electrical conductivity values for the most recent four quarters. 10. Data presented in a tabular format. 11. A comparison of monitoring data to the flow limitations, effluent limitations and discharge specifications and an explanation of any violation of those requirements. 12. If requested by Central Valley Water Board staff, copies of the laboratory analytical reports(s). 13. A copy of calibration log page(s) verifying calibration of all hand-held monitoring instruments performed during the quarter. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 15 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY B. Annual Monitoring Reports An Annual Monitoring Report shall be submitted by 1 February of each year and shall include the following: 1. The average monthly wastewater flows (influent and effluent) for each month of the year. 2. Concentration vs. time graphs for each monitored groundwater constituent, using all historic groundwater monitoring data. Each graph shall show the background groundwater concentration range and the applicable groundwater limitation as horizontal lines. 3. Summary data tables of historical and current water table elevations and analytical results. 4. An evaluation of the groundwater quality beneath the site and determination of whether any groundwater limitations were exceeded in any compliance well at any time during the calendar year. 5. A scaled map showing relevant structures and features of the facility, the locations of monitoring wells, surface waters, and groundwater elevation contours referenced to an appropriate datum (e.g., NGVD). 6. An annual update to the Arsenic and Manganese Groundwater Compliance Report (as required by Task iii. of Provision J.1.a. of the WDRs). 7. A summary of all biosolids/sludge analytical data and verification of compliance with the biosolids/sludge monitoring requirements. 8. The Facility’s annual sludge production in dry tons and percent solids. 9. A summary of information on the disposal of sludge and/or solid waste during the calendar year. 10. Analytical results for any water supply monitoring conducted and the Discharger’s Consumer Confidence Report. 11. Analytical results of the lysimeter monitoring at the former stillage disposal area (Section II.K. of the MRP) 12. An evaluation of the performance of the Facility, including discussion of capacity issues, infiltration and inflow rates, nuisance conditions, and a forecast of the flows anticipated in the next year, as described in Standard Provision E.4 of the SPRRs. 13. A discussion of compliance with the WDRs and MRP and the corrective actions taken, as well as any planned or proposed actions needed to bring the discharge into full compliance with the WDRs. MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 16 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY 14. A copy of the certification for each certified wastewater treatment plant operator working at the Facility and a statement about whether the Discharger is in compliance with Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 26. 15. Monitoring equipment maintenance and calibration records, as described in Standard Provision C.4 of the SPRRs. 16. A statement of when the wastewater treatment system Operation and Maintenance Manual was last reviewed for adequacy and a description of any changes made during the year. 17. A discussion of any data gaps and potential deficiencies or redundancies in the monitoring system or reporting program. C. Pretreatment Reporting The Discharger shall submit quarterly and annual pretreatment reports as required by Standard Provision E.7 of the SPRRs. A letter transmitting the self-monitoring reports shall accompany each report. The letter shall include a discussion of requirement violations found during the reporting period, and actions taken or planned for correcting noted violations, such as operation or facility modifications. If the Discharger has previously submitted a report describing corrective actions and/or a time schedule for implementing the corrective actions, reference to the previous correspondence will be satisfactory. The transmittal letter shall contain a statement by the Discharger, or the Discharger's authorized agent, under penalty of perjury, that to the best of the signer’s knowledge the report is true, accurate and complete, as described in the Section B.3 of the SPRRs. The Discharger shall implement the above monitoring program on the first day of the month following adoption of this Order. I, PATRICK PULUPA, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the forgoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Monitoring and Reporting Program issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 7 December 2018. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PATRICK PULUPA, Executive Officer MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 17 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Table 1 Priority Pollutants Inorganics 1 Organics 2 3-Methyl-4-Chlorophenol Hexachlorobenzene Antimony Acrolein Pentachlorophenol Hexachlorobutadiene Arsenic Acrylonitrile Phenol Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Beryllium Benzene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol Hexachloroethane Cadmium Bromoform Acenaphthene Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene Chromium (III) Carbon tetrachloride Acenaphthylene Isophorone Chromium (VI) Chlorobenzene Anthracene Naphthalene Copper Chlorodibromomethane Benzidine Nitrobenzene Lead Chloroethane Benzo(a)Anthracene N-Nitrosodimethylamine Mercury 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether Benzo(a)pyrene N-Nitrosodi-n-Propylamine Nickel Chloroform Benzo(b)fluoranthene N-Nitrosodiphenylamine Selenium Dichlorobromomethane Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Phenanthrene Silver 1,1-Dichloroethane Benzo(k)fluoranthene Pyrene Thallium 1,2-Dichloroethane Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Zinc 1,1-Dichloroethylene Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether Cyanide 1,2-Dichloropropane Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether Asbestos 1,3-Dichloropropylene Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Pesticides Ethylbenzene 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether Aldrin Methyl Bromide Butylbenzyl Phthalate alpha-BHC Dioxin Congeners Methyl Chloride 2-Chloronaphthalene beta-BHC 2,3,7,8-TCDD Methylene Chloride 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether gamma-BHC (Lindane) 1,2,3,7,8-PentaCDD 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Chrysene delta-BHC 1,2,3,4,7,8-HexaCDD Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene Chlordane 1,2,3,6,7,8-HexaCDD Toluene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 4,4'-DDT 1,2,3,7,8,9-HexaCDD 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 4,4'-DDE 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HeptaCDD 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 4,4'-DDD OctaCDD 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine Dieldrin 1,2,3,7,8-PentaCDF Trichloroethylene (TCE) Diethyl phthalate alpha-Endosulfan 2,3,4,7,8-PentaCDF Vinyl chloride Dimethyl phthalate beta-Endosulfan 1,2,3,4,7,8-HexaCDF 2-Chlorophenol Di-n-Butyl Phthalate Endosulfan Sulfate 1,2,3,6,7,8-HexaCDF 2,4-Dichlorophenol 2,4-Dinitrotoluene Endrin 1,2,3,7,8,9-HexaCDF 2,4-Dimethylphenol 2,6-Dinitrotoluene Endrin Aldehyde 2,3,4,6,7,8-HexaCDF 2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol Di-n-Octyl Phthalate Heptachlor 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HeptaCDF 2,4-Dinitrophenol 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine Heptachlor epoxide 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HeptaCDF 2-Nitrophenol Fluoranthene Polychlorinated biphenyls OctaCDF 4-Nitrophenol Fluorene Toxaphene 1 With the exception of wastewater samples, samples for metals analysis must first be filtered. If filtering in the field is not feasible, samples shall be collected in unpreserved containers and submitted to the laboratory within 24 hours with a request (on the chain of custody form) to immediately filter then preserve the sample. 2 Samples to be analyzed for volatile compounds and phthalate esters shall be grab sample (s); the remainder shall be 24-hour composite sample(s). MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM R5-2018-0080 18 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY GLOSSARY BOD5 Five-day biochemical oxygen demand NTU Nephelometric turbidity unit Continuous The specified parameter shall be measured by a meter continuously. 24-hr Composite Samples shall be a flow-proportioned composite consisting of at least eight aliquots over a 24-hour period. 1/Day Samples shall be collected every calendar day. 3/Week Samples shall be collected at least three times per week on non-consecutive days. 1/Week Samples shall be collected at least once per week on non-consecutive days 2/Month Samples shall be collected at least twice per month during non-consecutive weeks. 1/Month Samples shall be collected at least once per month. 1/Quarter Samples shall be collected at least once per calendar quarter. Unless otherwise specified or approved, samples shall be collected in January, April, July, and October. 1/Year Samples shall be collected at least once per year. Unless otherwise specified or approved, samples shall be collected in October. 1/Three Years Samples shall be collected at least once per three calendar years. mg/L Milligrams per liter µg/L Micrograms per liter μmhos/cm Micromhos per centimeter gpd Gallons per day mgd Million gallons per day MPN/100 mL Most probable number [of organisms] per 100 milliliters INFORMATION SHEET ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Background The cities of Fresno and Clovis (hereinafter collectively referred to as Discharger) own the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility (Facility). Specifically, the City of Clovis owns the rights and capacity to discharge 9.3 million gallons per day (mgd) to the Facility. The City of Fresno is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Facility, and is therefore specifically referred to herein as “Operator.” The Facility is located at 5607 W. Jensen Avenue in Fresno, approximately 7 miles west of State Route 99. The Facility serves the cities of Fresno and Clovis; Pinedale Water District and Pinedale Utilities; and some areas within the Fresno County not within the city limits of Fresno or Clovis. The Facility was permitted under Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order 5-01-254, which was adopted on 19 October 2001. At the time Order 5-01-254 was adopted, the Facility consisted of two separate wastewater treatment plants: (1) “Plaint 1,” an activated treatment plant consisting of treatment trains (Train A and Train B), with a treatment capacity of 88 mgd; and (2) “Plant 2,” a 6-mgd-capacity trickling filter treatment plant that included primary and secondary clarifiers. Plant 2 was demolished in 2008. In October 2015, the City of Fresno (Operator) submitted a Report of Waste Discharge (RWD) requesting revised WDRs for the Facility reflecting the recent upgrades and new discharge points. Order 5-01-254 permitted the Facility to discharge undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to the onsite disposal ponds or reuse the effluent for irrigation of crops at and around the Facility. Wastewater Treatment The Facility originated in 1891 as a 40-acre ‘sewage farm’ for raw sewage disposal. Since that time it has gone through various upgrades and expansions. The most recent upgrades to the Facility occurred in 2009 and 2017. In 2009, the Facility completed an ‘organics upgrade,’ which included a new secondary treatment train (Train C) and a new anaerobic digester. In 2017, the Facility completed the construction of Phase I of the tertiary treatment system at the Facility. The tertiary treatment system is planned in three phases. The design flow for Phase I of the Facility is 5.0 mgd, Phase II is 15 mgd, and Phase III is 30 mgd. The Facility now includes preliminary, primary, secondary, and tertiary units with disinfection. The secondary treatment units consist of three treatment trains (Train A, B, and C) that operate as three separate activated sludge systems. The tertiary treatment system receives primary- treated effluent. The tertiary treatment system includes fine screens, four membrane bioreactor tanks, and four in-vessel ultraviolet light disinfection system trains. With these most recent upgrades, the Facility’s current total treatment capacity is 92 mgd (87 mgd for the secondary treatment system and 5 mgd for the tertiary treatment system). INFORMATION SHEET -2- ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY Wastewater Disposal The Facility’s primary means of disposing secondary-treated wastewater is having it percolate on 1,720 acres of disposal ponds on property owned by the City of Fresno (Discharge Point 001). The 1,720 acres of disposal ponds consist of 83 ponds that collectively provide a total storage capacity of 10,890 acre-feet. In addition to the onsite disposal ponds, the Operator conveys undisinfected secondary-treated wastewater to surrounding farms (onsite and offsite) for irrigation of nonfood crops (Discharge Point 002). The onsite use of recycled water for irrigation of crops by local farmers under lease agreements is authorized under this Order (Onsite Reclamation). The use of undisinfected secondary recycled water for surrounding offsite croplands is authorized under separate water reclamation requirements (Offsite Reclamation Areas). The following water reclamation requirement orders currently have been issued to users authorizing the direct reuse of the Facility’s secondary-treated wastewater for irrigation of crops Water Reclamation Requirements (WRR) Order User 94-367 Daniel Souza 94-369 Golden State Vintners 94-370 Al Coelho, Jr. 94-371 Quist Dairy (Alivin J. Quist) 94-372 Daniel Souza R5-2002-0135 Big De Farms The following table summarizes the direct onsite and offsite irrigation practices for 2016. Farmer Onsite/Offsite Acreage Volume (acre-ft) Crops Quist Dairy Onsite 430 1736 Corn, Alfalfa, Wheat Daniel Souza Onsite 120 572 Alfalfa Bakersfield Properties, Inc. Onsite 158 815 Alfalfa Quist Farms Offsite (WRR 94-371) 152 349 Alfalfa Big De Farms Offsite (WRR R5-2002-0135) 340 1,485 Alfalfa, Winter Forage, Corn Big De Farms Offsite (WRR 94-372) 295 1,887 Alfalfa, Winter Forage, Corn Coelho Offsite (WRR 94-370) 194 899 Alfalfa, Winter Forage, Corn In addition to the reclamation of undisinfected secondary recycled water, the Operator intends to reclaim tertiary-treated recycled water to various offsite use areas. Under Phase 1, the tertiary treatment facility will have a capacity of 5 mgd. The initial phase of the planned distribution system for the tertiary treatment facility is to the southwest quadrant of the city of Fresno. The major users in this quadrant are parks, cemeteries, schools, Highway 180, industrial, and residential and commercial development. On 20 March 2017, the Operator was enrolled under INFORMATION SHEET -3- ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY the State Water Resources Control Board’s Water Reclamation Requirements for Recycled Water Use Order WQ 2016-0068-DDW (General Reclamation Order) for the reclamation of disinfected tertiary-treated wastewater on various recycled water use areas (referred to in this Order as Discharge Point 003). In 2016, 8,200 acre-feet of the Facility’s secondary-treated effluent was recycled for direct irrigation of crops. The Operator’s 2015 RWD estimated 3,489 acre-feet of disinfected tertiary- treated effluent would be reclaimed under Phase I per year. Based on this data, the Operator will directly reclaim approximately 20 percent of its combined effluent (secondary and tertiary) under current flow conditions (56 mgd) and 13 percent of its combined effluent under the maximum permitted flow conditions (91.5 mgd). STILLAGE The Discharger has historically been permitted to operate a stillage site at the Facility. In 2000, the Facility’s stillage site received about 79 million gallons of stillage. Stillage has very high organic nitrogen concentrations which is primarily retained in the upper two to three feet of the soil profile. The organic nitrogen is transformed by soil bacteria into inorganic nitrogen (i.e., ammonia, nitrites, and nitrates). Nitrate and nitrite are highly soluble and leach through the vadose zone and into groundwater. The Discharger ceased receiving stillage at the site in 2003. The disposal of stillage over the decades has resulted in groundwater degradation. Consequently, beginning in 2005, the Operator began farming the former stillage disposal area. This Order prohibits the discharge of untreated stillage to land at the Facility and continues to require the Operator to implement measures to provide nutrient uptake in the former stillage disposal area. ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS Based on groundwater monitoring data reported by the Discharger, the depth to groundwater at the Facility varies between 50 to 90 feet below ground surface. The general groundwater flow in the area is a southwesterly direction. However, due to the extensive use of disposal ponds over the past decades, a substantial groundwater mound persists at the Facility. The mound is approximately 10 to 20 feet high and extends beyond the perimeter of the Facility’s property. Beginning in 1924, the Operator began extracting groundwater from deep on-site irrigation wells to draw down the shallow groundwater table caused by the groundwater mounding under the Facility’s disposal ponds. From 2001 to 2016, groundwater elevations decreased by approximately 40 feet, and the Operator was only able to collect 20 of the 49 during the 4th quarter of 2016. Arsenic and manganese concentrations in select groundwater monitoring wells underlying and downgradient of the Facility exceed the applicable primary and secondary MCL for arsenic and manganese, respectively. This Order requires the Discharger to evaluate the extent of the elevated arsenic and manganese concentrations and the potential impact the concentrations are having on downgradient water supply wells. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Water Code section 13267 authorizes the Central Valley Water Board to require monitoring and technical reports as necessary to investigate the impact of a waste discharge on waters of the INFORMATION SHEET -4- ORDER R5-2018-0080 CITIES OF FRESNO AND CLOVIS REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FRESNO COUNTY State. Water Code section 13268 authorizes the assessment of administrative civil liability for failure to submit required monitoring and technical reports. The Order includes influent, effluent, ultraviolet light, pond, lysimeter, groundwater, and reclamation well monitoring requirements, and requires loading calculations for wastewater, irrigation water, organics, nutrients, and salts to the land application area. This monitoring is necessary to characterize the discharge and evaluate compliance with the effluent limitations and discharge specifications prescribed in the Order. LEGAL EFFECT OF RESCISSION OF PRIOR WDRS OR ORDERS ON EXISTING VIOLATIONS The Central Valley Water Board’s rescission of prior waste discharge requirements and/or monitoring and reporting orders does not extinguish any violations that may have occurred during the time those waste discharge requirements or orders were in effect. The Central Valley Water Board reserves the right to take enforcement actions to address violations of prior prohibitions, limitations, specifications, requirements, or provisions of rescinded waste discharge requirements or orders as allowed by law. CV-SALTS REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS The Central Valley Water Board adopted Basin Plan amendments incorporating new programs for addressing ongoing salt and nitrate accumulation in the Central Valley at its 31 May 2018 Board Meeting. These programs once effective, could change how the Central Valley Water Board permits discharges of salt and nitrate. The Salinity Control Program currently being developed would subject dischargers that do not meet stringent salinity numeric values (700 µmhos/cm EC as a monthly average to protect the AGR beneficial use and 900 µmhos/cm as an annual average to protect the MUN beneficial use) to performance-based salinity requirements and would require these dischargers to participate in a Basin-wide Prioritization and Optimization Study to develop a long-term strategy for addressing salinity accumulation in the Central Valley. The level of participation required of dischargers whose discharges do not meet stringent salinity requirements will vary based on factors such as the amount of salinity in the discharge, local conditions, and type of discharge. The Central Valley Water Board anticipates that the CV-SALTS initiative will result in regulatory changes that will be implemented through conditional prohibitions and modifications to many WDRs region-wide, including the WDRs that regulate discharges from the Facility. More information regarding this regulatory planning process can be found at the following link: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/salinity/ REOPENER The conditions of discharge in the proposed Order were developed based on currently available technical information and applicable water quality laws, regulations, policies, and plans, and are intended to assure conformance with them. It may be appropriate to reopen the Order if new technical information is provided or if applicable laws and regulations change. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1692 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:KEVIN R. MEIKLE, Director of Aviation Airports Department SUBJECT Approve the Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Airport Permit and Agreement between City of Fresno and Lyft Inc.,for ground transportation services by computer application- based networks at Fresno Yosemite International Airport.(Council District 4) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council authorize the Director of Aviation to execute the Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company (TNC)Airport Permit and Agreement (Agreement)with Lyft,Inc. (Lyft),a Delaware Corporation,to continue providing ground transportation services at Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The new Lyft Agreement establishes a fee for the use of Airport infrastructure,effective on July 1, 2019 as specified in the City's Master Fee Schedule (MFS).The term of the Agreement is for three years.Executing this Agreement will enable Lyft to continue providing TNC service at FAT, uninterrupted,for the traveling public and is timely with the peak spring and summer travel seasons. BACKGROUND Lyft began operating at FAT under a no fee TNC agreement in 2016.Their business model is to provide ground transportation services on demand by the traveler with the use of a mobile application. California law prohibits TNC's from operating at Airports without a permit. The Lyft Agreement is part of FAT's Ground Transportation (GT)program,which will be fully implemented by July 1,2019 and will,(i)help plan for and provide facilities and services needed to ensure safe and orderly services;(ii)ensure that ground transportation providers pay a fair, reasonable and proportionate share of funding to maintain existing infrastructure;and (iii)help City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1692 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: define and partially fund future expansion. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved Non-Exclusive TNC Airport Permit and Agreement as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This amendment is not a "project"as defined by the California environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference in not applicable to this project pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code 4-109(b)(3). FISCAL IMPACT The annual estimated revenue generated by the Agreement will be $180,900.00.The total estimated revenue for the full three year term of the Agreement will be $542,700.00.All revenues generated from the Agreement will be deposited into the Airport Enterprise Fund and contribute to the operation and maintenance of FAT. There is no impact to the General Fund from this action. Attachment: -Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Airport Permit and Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ FRESNO YOSEMITE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT NON-EXCLUSIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY AIRPORT PERMIT AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF FRESNO AND LYFT, INC. A Delaware Corporation Table of Contents RECITALS ................................................................................................................................. 4 AGREEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 4 ARTICLE I -DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................ 5 ARTICLE II -PERMITTEE'S RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND OBLIGATIONS ............................... 7 Section 2.01: Representations and Covenants by the Permittee ............................................. 7 Section 2.02: Permittee's Rights, Privileges and Obligations .................................................. 7 Section 2.03: TNC Vehicle Requirements ............................................................................... 9 Section 2.04: Space ............................................................................................................... 10 Section 2.05: City's Covenant Regarding More Favorable Terms .......................................... 10 ARTICLE Ill -TERM ................................................................................................................. 10 Section 3.01: Term ................................................................................................................ 1 O ARTICLE IV -AIRPORT GEO-FENCE, TRACKING AND MANAGEMENT OF TNC ACTIVITIES AND TRANSACTIONS ............................................................................................................. 10 Section 4.01: Airport Geo-Fence and Tracking ...................................................................... 10 Section 4.02: Data Collection and Storage ............................................................................. 10 Section 4.03: TNC Fees Collection and Payment .................................................................. 11 ARTICLE V -FEES AND OTHER CHARGES .......................................................................... 11 Section 5.01: Transportation Network Company (TNC) Fee and Monthly Report. .................. 11 Section 5.02: Late/Unpaid Fees ............................................................................................. 11 Section 5.04: Security Deposit ............................................................................................... 12 Section 5.05: Place and Manner of Payments ....................................................................... 12 Section 5.06: Retention of Records ........................................................................................ 12 Section 5.07: Certified Statement Monthly Drop Offs and Pick Ups Due within Ninety (90) Days of Close of each Agreement Year ................................................................................. 13 Section 5.08 Independent Certified Public Accountants ........................................................ 13 ARTICLE VI -INDEMNIFICATION, EXCEPTION OF CITY, AND INSURANCE ....................... 14 Section 6.01: Indemnification ................................................................................................. 14 Section 6.02: Exemption of City ............................................................................................. 15 Section 6.03: Insurance ......................................................................................................... 15 Section 6.04: Delivery to Director of Evidence of Insurance ................................................... 17 Section 6.05: Expiration of Insurance Policy .......................................................................... 17 Section 6.06: Adjustment of Claims ....................................................................................... 17 ARTICLE VII -ASSIGNMENT ................................................................................................... 17 Section 7.01: Assignment ...................................................................................................... 17 Section 7.02: Modification ...................................................................................................... 17 ARTICLE VIII -DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES ........................................................................... 18 Section 8.01: Default by City .................................................................................................. 18 Section 8.02: Default by Permittee ......................................................................................... 18 Section 8.03: Additional Terms .............................................................................................. 19 ARTICLE IX -NON-DISCRIMINATION ..................................................................................... 20 Section 9.01: Non-Discrimination ........................................................................................... 20 Section 9.03: Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act.. .................................................. 21 ARTICLE X -MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ....................................................................... 21 Section 10.01: No Personal Liability ...................................................................................... 21 Section 10.02: Agreements with the United States ............................................................... 21 Section 10.03: Modifications for Granting FAA Funds ........................................................... 22 Section 10.04: Notices .......................................................................................................... 22 Section 10.05: Amendments ................................................................................................ 22 Section 10.06: Headings; Construction of Agreement; Gender ............................................. 22 Page 2 Section 10.08: Exclusiveness of Permittee's Rights .............................................................. 23 Section 10.09: Withholding Required Approvals ................................................................... 23 Section 10.1 O: Inspection of City Records ............................................................................. 23 Section 10.11: Successors and Assigns ............................................................................... 23 Section 10.12: Accord and Satisfaction ................................................................................. 23 Section 10.13: Observation of Governmental Regulations .................................................... 23 Section 10.14: Governing Law and Venue ............................................................................ 24 Section 10.16: Modification ................................................................................................... 24 Section 10.17: Severability of Provisions .............................................................................. 25 Section 10.18: Conflicts of lnterest. ....................................................................................... 25 Section 10.19: Entire Agreement .......................................................................................... 25 Section 10.20: Confidentiality ................................................................................................ 25 Section 10.21: Limitation on Damages ................................................................................. 26 ARTICLE XI: SIGNATURE ........................................................................................................ 27 Page 3 This NON-EXCLUSIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY AIRPORT PERMIT AND AGREEMENT (Agreement or Permit) is dated as of July 1, 2019, by and between the City of Fresno, Department of Airports (City), a municipal corporation of the State of California, and Lyft, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware (Permittee or Designated TNC). RECITALS WHEREAS, City owns, controls, operates and maintains through the Department of Airports a municipal airport known as Fresno Yosemite International Airport, in the City and County of Fresno, California (Airport), with the power to grant rights and privileges with respect thereto; and WHEREAS, Airport is an enterprise of City which is operated to be financially self-sufficient, and contracts with concessionaires, tenants and other parties which are granted rights to operate commercially and provide critical revenues to the Airport which contribute to the City's payment of operating and maintenance expenses and debt service on capital improvements, which are incurred to provide the infrastructure, facilities and air service which make up the terminal area market; and WHEREAS, The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has promulgated rules and regulations regarding licensing and operation of Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), of which Permittee is one; and WHEREAS, the CPUC has prohibited TNCs from operating at airports unless the airport has authorized such TNC to do so by permit and agreement; and WHEREAS, TNCs operate through a computer application-based business model which enables TNCs to communicate and conduct business remotely with potential customers while they are still in the terminal; and WHEREAS, the TNC business model enables it to provide a broad range of current and future branded services beyond those pertaining to commercial ground transportation, which may conflict with existing concession agreements and unfairly compete with those concessions which have made significant capital investments on the airport premises, requiring the City to control the services and products offered within the terminal market in order to protect its contractual obligations to concessionaires, as well as its own revenue generation ability; and WHEREAS, An Airport Access Fee is required to be paid by the Permittee to operate at the Airport; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into an Agreement for the operation by Permittee of a non-exclusive Transportation Network Company at the Airport. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the privileges, premises, mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, City and Permittee agree, for themselves, their successors and assigns, as follows: Page 4 ARTICLE I -DEFINITIONS The following terms and phrases shall have the following meanings for purposes of this Agreement: A. Agreement. Means this Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Permit and Concession Agreement between Permittee and City. B. Agreement Year. Means the Agreement Year or any subsequent 12 month renewal term of this Agreement. C. Airport. Means the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, as it currently exists or as it may exist in the future throughout the Term of this Agreement. D. Airport Access Fee(s). Means fees for operating on the Airport for the term of the Agreement Year, paid in monthly installments at the end of the each month of the Agreement Year. E. CPUC. Means California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates and licenses transportation providers in California, including TNCs. F. City. Means the City of Fresno, California, owner of Airport. G. DBE. Means Disadvantaged Business Enterprise as defined by the FAA. H. Department. Means City's Airports Department. I. Director. Means the Director of Aviation for the City of Fresno or designated representative. J. Drop Off. Means the prearranged drop off of a passenger at the terminal. K. Effective Date. Means the date on which both 1) this Agreement is duly signed by both parties; and 2) any City Council action/resolution approving this Agreement is effective. L. FAA. Means the Federal Aviation Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. M. Fiscal Year. Means the City's fiscal year beginning July 1 and ending June 30 each year. 0. Geo-Fence. Means a polygon whose points are geographic coordinates on Airport Property designated by the City (as may be amended by the City from time-to-time) which delineates the area within which Permittee must operate under this Agreement. P. Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations {Rules & Regs). Means the policy and procedures as set forth in the manual provided by Director of Aviation, which describes the rules and regulations for operating on the Airport and as described therein, which may be updated from time to time. Attached hereto as Exhibit A. Page 5 Q. Initial Agreement Year. Means a period during the Term beginning on the Effective Date and ending 12 months thereafter. R. Mobile App./Mobile Application. Means the computer application for mobile devices used by Permittee to conduct its business model as a CPUC-licensed TNC. S. Party. Means each of the City and Permittee. T. Past Due Interest. Means interest accruing at the lesser of (a) the maximum rate allowable by law, or (b) eighteen percent (18%) per annum based on a three hundred sixty-five (365) day year, commencing on the tenth (10th) business day after the date such amount is due and owing and continuing until such amount is paid to the City. U. Permittee. Means the TNC which is Party to this Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Permit/Agreement. V. Pick Up. Means the prearranged pick up of a passenger from the Terminal Facilities. W. Security Deposit. Means the deposit as defined and described in Section 5.04 of this Agreement. X. Term. Means the term of this Agreement. Y. Terminal Building. Means the passenger terminal building at the Airport and any additional buildings that may be constructed, serving the airlines, together with the adjacent curbs, parking and staging areas and roadways, as now exist or as may hereafter be reconstructed, modified, changed or developed. Z. Termination Date. Means the date that this Agreerrent expires. AA. TNC Application Driver Identification. Means a form of identification assigned to each authorized TNC Driver using Permittee's computer based application. AA. TNC Driver. An individual who has been approved by the Designated TNC to transport passengers using the Designated TNC's online-enabled application where such driver is within the Airport Geo-Fence by reason of the driver's relationship with the Designated TNC, regardless of whether the driver is carrying a passenger. BB. TNC Vehicle. Means a vehicle operated by the TNC Driver when providing TNC Services. CC. TNC Vehicle Trade Dress/ Trade Dress. Means distinctive signage or display on the vehicle when providing TNC Services that is sufficiently large and color contrasted as to be readable during daylight hours at a distance of at least 50 feet. The trade dress shall be sufficient to allow a passenger, government official, or member of the public to associate a vehicle with the Designated TNC. Acceptable forms of trade dress include, but are not limited to, symbols or signs on vehicle doors, roofs, or grills. Magnetic or removable trade dress is acceptable. Page6 DD. TNC Services. Means the provision of ground transportation services by computer application-based networks of drivers to customers possessing the company's mobile application. EE. Transportation Network Company (TNC) Fee(s). Means fees for each drop off and pick up at the Airport, based upon the monthly certified report submitted through the Tracking and Management Service. Fees shall be paid in monthly installments at the end of the each month of the Agreement Year. FF. Tracking and Management Service. Means a third party that will establish the Airport Geo-Fence and provide services to manage, track and monitor application-based commercial ground transportation transacting business of TNCs to, on, or from the Airport, and to invoice and collect fees. GG. Tracking and Management Service Contract. Means City's agreement with Tracking and Management Service, as stated in subsection (EE), as may be updated from time to time. HH. Transportation Network Company or TNC. Means a company that uses computer application-based networks of drivers to provide ground transportation services for customers possessing the company's mobile application as its primary business model of providing commercial services. 11. Triggering Events. Has the meaning set forth in Section 4.02 hereof. JJ. TSA. Means the Transportation Security Administration of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. KK. Waybill. Means the prearranged reservation made between passenger and TNC Driver on the TNC Application. ARTICLE II -PERMITTEE'S RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND OBLIGATIONS Section 2.01: Representations and Covenants by the Permittee The Permittee hereby makes the following representations and covenants: The Permittee is a Corporation in good standing in the State of Delaware, is duly qualified in good standing to do business in/under the laws of the State of California, is not in violation of any provision of its governing documents (e.g., articles of incorporation, by-laws, partnership agreement, etc.), has full power to own its properties and conduct its business, has full legal right, power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to consummate all transactions contemplated hereby and by proper action has duly authorized the execution and delivery of this Agreement. Section 2.02: Permittee's Rights, Privileges and Obligations A. Rights and Privileges Granted. Lyf-l Fct; Fine! (_1!-(}')-20Hl) doc Page 7 Subject to such terms, covenants, conditions, reservations, limitations, and restrictions as are herein provided, City hereby grants to Permittee the non-exclusive right and privilege to access and use the Airport roadway system within the Airport's Geo-Fence for purposes of conducting commercial ground transportation operations for passengers and other users of the Airport using Permittee's Mobile App. B. Expansion of Rights and Privileges Considered. City may consider requests by Permittee to expand its rights and privileges to include other related activities involving Permittee Mobile App. City's consideration of such request will include the best interests of the City and its obligations under k other concession agreements, leases and contracts, as well as the appropriate business terms for agreeing to Permittee's request. Such business terms may include compensation by a fee structure or a concession MAG and Percent of Gross Revenue structure. Any expansion of rights and privileges the City grants shall be implemented only by written amendment to this Agreement and not verbally. C. Prohibited Uses/Activities/Conduct. 1. Unless expressly permitted by amendment to this Agreement, Permittee is expressly prohibited from providing any services or merchandise using its Mobile App or any other means, on the Airport or from inside of a TNC Vehicle, or in any other manner, except for the rights and privileges granted in Section 2.02 A. above. 2. The following activities are prohibited while operating under this Permit: a. Violating any term or obligation found in the Permit. b. Picking up or dropping off passengers or their baggage at any location other than those designated for such purpose. c. Leaving the TNC Vehicle unattended. d. Operating on Airport property without an activated TNC Application or TNC Vehicle Trade Dress. e. Waiting for a passenger match while on Airport property other than designated TNC staging areas, including but not limited to Airport parking lots, free waiting area, parking structures, gas station, or commercial hold lots. f. Solicitation of passengers on Airport Property without a prearranged Waybill. g. Failing to operate a vehicle in a safe manner as required by the California Vehicle Code. h. Any attempt to bypass the TNC Application. i. Soliciting cash payments. j. Operating a vehicle which is not in a safe mechanical condition or which lacks mandatory safety equipment as defined in the California Vehicle Code. k. Engaging in any conduct or activity intended to or apparently intended to ask, implore or persuade a passenger to alter his or her previously chosen mode of ground transportation or specific ground transportation operator, except as otherwise provided by contract or permit with the City of Fresno. D. Operating Requirements. Page 8 Lyft F•c1e Fintii (c\-05-20Hl) due 1. This Permit authorizes Permittee's provision of TNC Services to passengers at Airport. 2. Failure to comply with Permit terms or the Rules and Regulations as detailed in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor and may result in citation, fine, and/or termination of this Permit. 3. Passenger drop-offs, in conjunction with provision of TNC Services, shall be made at the locations identified in Exhibit B. 4. Passenger pick-ups, in conjunction with provision of TNC Services, shall be made at the locations identified in Exhibit B. 5. All TNC Driver activity on Airport property shall be documented by a Waybill prepared prior to proceeding to a passenger pick-up. The Waybill shall state the passenger's first name and last name first initial and pick up location. 6. TNC Applications shall be activated at all times while providing TNC Services on Airport property. 7. Upon request from Airport staff or law enforcement, all TNC Drivers will immediately comply with requests, including but not limited to, verifying proof of insurance, license and registration, prearranged Waybill or confirmation that TNC Application is activated. 8. TNC Drivers are prohibited from sharing a vehicle or TNC Application Driver Identification with unauthorized drivers. 9. Permittee's approved operation at Airport is limited solely to passenger pick-up and passenger drop-off on a non-exclusive basis. Permittee is not authorized to perform any other services on Airport Property. The method and arrangements for operating shall be subject to procedures established in Exhibit A, as may be updated from time- to-time. All of Permittee's operations shall be in accordance with the laws of the federal government and the State of California, the ordinances, rules, regulations and procedures of the City of Fresno, the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, Transportation Security Administration and the Department of Transportation, and the requirements of any other duly authorized governmental agency with jurisdiction over the Airport. Section 2.03: TNC Vehicle Requirements 1. TNC Vehicles must be in compliance with all current CPUC rules and regulations governing TN Cs as well as the Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations. 2. TNC Vehicle Trade Dress must be applied at all times while providing TNC Services on Airport property. Prior to commencement of operation under this Permit, Permittee shall provide City with a photograph of Permittee's TNC Vehicle Trade Dress along with a description of the designated TNC Vehicle Trade Dress location on the TNC Vehicles. Trade dress shall include but not be limited to symbols and/or signs on vehicle doors, windows, roofs, and/or grill. Magnetic removable TNC Page 9 l __ yft Fee F:n~'il (4-0S-)O·\~l) doc Vehicle Trade Dress is acceptable. TNC Vehicle Trade Dress and location must be approved by the Director. TNC Vehicle Trade Dress shall be visible within fifty (50) feet. Section 2.04: Space This Permit does not allow Permittee to possess any portion of Airport property or rent any space for Permittee's operation. Section 2.05: City's Covenant Regarding More Favorable Terms During the Term, or during any period of holding over by Permittee pursuant to the provisions hereof, City shall neither enter into any TNC Permit/Agreement with any other TNC, nor amend, change, supplement, or otherwise modify, in writing or otherwise, any such agreement in any manner whatsoever, so as to result in any such agreement's containing any terms, conditions, agreements, or provisions which shall be more favorable to such Permittee than those herein set forth. ARTICLE Ill -TERM Section 3.01: Term This Agreement shall have a three-year Term beginning on July 1, 2019 and terminating on June 30, 2022. City may grant no more than two extensions of one-year each, subject to City review of all fees. This Agreement shall be subject to earlier termination with or without cause by either Party giving sixty (60) days advance written notice to the other Party. ARTICLE IV -AIRPORT GEO-FENCE, TRACKING AND MANAGEMENT OF TNC ACTIVITIES AND TRANSACTIONS Section 4.01: Airport Geo-Fence and Tracking Permittee shall establish and maintain the Airport Geo-Fence in order to manage, track, and monitor the provision of TNC Services by Permittee to, on, or from the Airport. The exact data to be collected is described in Section 4.02. Upon execution of this Agreement, the Tracking and Management Service shall manage, track, and monitor the provision of TNC Services by Permittee to, on, or from the Airport, as shall be further detailed in the Tracking and Management Service Agreement. The exact data to be collected is described in Section 4.02. Section 4.02: Data Collection and Storage A. Data Collection and Storage. For each TNC Driver, the Tracking and Management Service or the Permittee, as applicable under this Article, shall obtain the "Required Data" upon each of the "Triggering Events" (each term as defined below). 1. Required Data: a. Transaction type (i.e., entry, exit, drop-off, pick-up); b. TNC identification; Page 10 Ft·;e Final(!, 0'.)--2(i'19) cJoc c. Date; d. Time; e. Geographical location; f. Unique driver identifier; g. Vehicle license plate number; and h. Number of active rides in the vehicle following the triggering event (based on a value of "O" (no active rides) or "1" (active ride)). 2. Triggering Events: a. Upon entry into the Geo-Fence; b. Upon completion of a passenger drop-off within the Geo-Fence; c. Upon pick-up of a passenger within the Geo-Fence; and d. Upon exit of the Geo-Fence Section 4.03: TNC Fees Collection and Payment Upon execution of this Agreement, the Permittee shall submit all Required Data to the Tracking and Management Service. Required Data shall be submitted to the Tracking and Management Service no later than the fifteenth (15th) calendar day following the end of the month for which the information is being reported. ARTICLE V -FEES AND OTHER CHARGES Section 5.01: Transportation Network Company (TNC) Fee and Monthly Report Permittee shall pay to the City a Transportation Network Company (TNC) Fee for each drop off and pick up at the Airport. The fees shall be based on the Permittee's monthly certified report, as provided to the Tracking and Management Service. The TNC Fees specified in this Section of this Article are published in the Master Fee Schedule of the City of Fresno. The TNC Fees shall be paid to Airport no later than the 15th day following every month of each Agreement Year. Section 5.02: Late/Unpaid Fees All fees and charges to City hereunder will bear a reasonable service charge per month equal to the Past Due Interest if not paid to and received by City within ten (10) business days following the due date. Permittee shall pay and discharge all reasonable costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred or expended by City in the collection of delinquent amounts due. Section 5.03: Additional Fees and Charges Permittee shall pay additional fees and charges only under the following conditions: A. If City has paid any sum or sums, or has incurred any obligation or expense, which Permittee has agreed to pay to, or to reimburse the City; or B. If City is required or elects to pay any sum or sums, or incur any obligation or expense, because of Permittee's failure, neglect, or refusal to perform or fulfill any condition of this Agreement. Page 11 !.yll Fee FinH! (0--0/)--2Jl1f)) doc C. Any payment of the above-described additional fees and charges shall include all interest, costs, damages and penalties incurred in connection with said fees and charges and may be added to any installment of future fees and charges due hereunder. Each and every part of such payment shall be recoverable by City in the same manner and with like remedies as if it were originally a part of the fees or other charge set forth herein. Section 5.04: Security Deposit A. In order to guarantee the timely payment of any fees and charges due pursuant to this Agreement, Permittee must remit to the City within ten (10) business days prior to the Effective Date, a Security Deposit in the amount of $10,000.00. The Security Deposit must be in the form of (i) a payment bond or an irrevocable letter of credit, renewable annually, from an insurer or bank reasonably acceptable to the City, (ii) cash or (iii) such other form of security as the City may deem reasonably acceptable. B. At any time that any of the fees or charges owed by Permittee, or any other amounts due hereunder, are more than thirty (30) days past due, the City, upon written notice to Permittee, will be entitled to apply all or any portion of the Security Deposit to the payment of such unpaid amounts, including any reasonable costs the City incurs in collecting the amounts it is owed. In any such event, Permittee must again meet the Security Deposit requirements set forth above within seven (7) business days from its receipt of such written notice. Section 5.05: Place and Manner of Payments Permittee shall make payment in legal tender of the United States of America to: City of Fresno -Airports Department Attn.: Revenue Accounting 4995 E. Clinton Way Fresno, CA 93727 Section 5.06: Retention of Records In the event Permittee requests and receives Amendment to this Agreement to expand the rights and privileges to include other activities, and upon commencement of the Term, Permittee agrees that it will retain, the books and records of accounts of Permittee for the last three twelve-month periods completed operations and the current Agreement Year, showing the information required under this Article IV or other similar Article(s) contained in any previous agreement(s), relating to business conducted at the Airport, the deductions there from, and other pertinent information required by the provisions of this Article or other similar Articles contained in such previous agreement. Permittee's obligation to retain such books and records is limited to the extent required under this Agreement, and/or previous agreement(s), until the Permittee retains sufficient books and records to meet the retention requirements stated above. Upon the City's prior written notice such books and records of accounts must be accessible to City or its duly authorized agents or auditors, during regular business hours only for the purpose of verifying compliance by Permittee with the terms of this Agreement, and/or previous Page 12 Lyn Fee Fin~11 (4-05-2019).<loc agreement. At the City's request, Permittee will pay for the copying and delivery of all records and books requested by the City. In the event the City determines that the auditors need to travel to the Permittee's location where the books and records are kept, Permittee will pay for the reasonable and customary travel and other incidental costs incurred by the City's auditors. Section 5.07: Certified Statement Monthly Drop Offs and Pick Ups Due within Ninety (90) Days of Close of each Agreement Year Within ninety (90) days following the close of each Agreement Year, Permittee shall furnish to City a sworn statement certified by a certified public accountant employed by the Permittee showing the total of all monthly drop-offs and pick-ups that occurred at the Airport for said Agreement Year and have been correctly reported in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Within ninety days following the termination of any other agreement or permit with the City, Permittee must provide, at its sole cost and expense, an audit by a certified public accountant, of all trips, drop off and pick up, as defined in any other agreement or permit with the City for the period beginning at the last audited month and ending at the commencement date of this Agreement. The City retains the right to request audits completed by an independent certified public accountant or firm of certified public accountants, upon written notice to the Permittee, when there is reasonable belief of an issue in accounting practices. Section 5.08 Independent Certified Public Accountants Wherever the statement of an Independent Certified Public Accountant is required, the parties agree that said CPA may be an employee or agent of Permittee. Section 5.09: City's Right to Audit Statements and Reports City shall have the right to audit the statements and reports reflecting Permittee's obligations under this Agreement no more than once (1) a calendar year. The cost of audit shall be borne by City; unless the audit reveals an underpayment of TNC Permit Fees by Permittee of five percent (5%) or greater, or if the audit reveals that the condition of the Permittee's records is such that the revenue due City cannot reasonably be properly determined. In the event of either condition described above, the reasonable cost of the audit, including any applicable travel costs, must be borne by the Permittee and must be paid within five business days of receipt of an invoice. Section 5.10: Taxes and Assessments In addition to the fees and charges set forth herein, Permittee shall pay, as and when due, but not later than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the delinquency date thereof any and all taxes and general and special assessments of any and all types or descriptions whatsoever which, at Page 13 any time and from time to time during the life hereof, may be levied upon or assessed against Permittee1 . Nothing within this Section shall be deemed to limit any of Permittee's rights to appeal any such levies and/or assessments in accordance with the rules, regulations, laws, statutes, or ordinances governing the appeal process of the taxing authority(ies) making such levies and/or assessments. Upon receipt of notice that any such taxes or general and special assessments are due, Airport shall provide timely notice to Permittee. Section 5.11: Late Payment Charges Any payment not received by the due date shall be deemed delinquent and shall accrue interest at the lesser of the rate of eighteen percent (18%) per year calculated on a daily basis at the rate of five-hundredths of a percent (0.05%) per day from the due date until paid in full, or the maximum rate allowed by law. Section 5.12: City Held Harmless Permittee agrees to protect and hold harmless City, from any and all such taxes and assessments provided in this Agreement, including any and all interest, penalties and other expenses which may be imposed thereby or result therefrom, and from any lien therefore or sale or other proceedings to enforce payment thereof. Section 5.13: Permittee's Right to Appeal Nothing within this section of this article shall be deemed to limit any of Permittee's rights to appeal any such levies and/or assessments in accordance with the rules, regulations, laws, statutes or ordinances governing the appeal process of the taxing authority(ies) making such levies and/or assessments. ARTICLE VI -INDEMNIFICATION, EXCEPTION OF CITY, AND INSURANCE Section 6.01: Indemnification Permittee agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, directors, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, actions, damages, liabilities, and judgments, and losses, costs, fines, penalties, and expenses paid or payable to a third party (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees, court costs and litigation expenses), with respect to any third party claim solely arising out of or related to: (a) Permittee's performance or exercise of this Agreement and rights granted under this Agreement; (b) an intentional act or a negligent act or omission of any of Permittee's officers, employees and independent contractors related to this Agreement; (c) the failure of Permittee to comply with any applicable laws, ordinances, rules or regulations related to this Agreement; or (d) any breach or default by Permittee of any of its 11 Any interest in real property which exists as a result of possession, exclusive use, or a right to possession or exclusive use of any real property (land and/or improvements located therein or thereon) which is owned by the City of Fresno (City) is a taxable possessory interest unless the possessor of interest in such properly is exempt from taxation. With regard to any possessory interest to be acquired by Permittee under this Permit, Permittee, bY. its signatures hereunto affixed, warrants, stipulates, confirms, acknowledges and agrees that, prior to executing this Permit, Perm1ttee either took a copy of this Permit to the office of the Fresno County Tax Assessors or by some other appropriate means independent of City or any employee, agent, or representative of City determined, to Permittee's full and complete satisfaction, how much Permitee will be taxed, if at all. Page 14 obligations under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Permittee shall have no obligation under this Section for claims arising out of or related to losses caused by an intentional act or a negligent act or omission of City or its officers, directors, agents, and employees. Any indemnification and hold harmless obligations of Permittee under this Agreement shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. The forgoing indemnification obligation is subject to City providing Permittee with (i) written notice of any claim subject to indemnification hereunder, (ii) sole control over the defense and settlement of each such claim (provided that Permittee will not settle or compromise any claim without written consent of City), (iii) reasonable cooperation, at Permittee's expense, in the defense and settlement of a claim, and (iv) City may, at its sole cost and expense, participate in the defense of a claim with counsel of its own choosing. Permittee shall conduct all defenses at no cost or expense to the City. City shall be reimbursed for all costs and attorney's fees incurred by City in enforcing this obligation. This indemnity 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 Permittee. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of Permittee and its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. The provisions of this section of this article shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. Section 6.02: Exemption of City Permittee hereby specifically warrants, covenants and agrees that City shall not be liable for injury to Permittee's business or any loss of income therefrom or for damage to the goods, wares, merchandise or other property located in, upon or about the Airport under authority hereof, whether belonging to Permittee, or any employee, agent, contractor, sub-contractor, tenant, sub-lessee of Permittee, or any other person whomsoever. The City shall not be liable for any injury to the person of Permittee or Permittee's employees, agents, contractors, sub- contractors, tenants, sub-lessees, customers, or invitees, whether or not said damage or injury is caused by or results from fire, steam, electricity, gas, water or rain, or from the leakage, breakage, obstruction or other defects of pipes, sprinklers, wires, appliances, plumbing, air conditioning or lighting fixtures, or from any other cause, whether or not the said damage or injury results from conditions arising in or on any part or all of the Airport or in or on any of the improvements/ facilities appurtenant thereto located therein or thereon, or from other sources or places, and regardless of whether or not the cause of such damage or injury or the means of repairing the same is inaccessible to Permittee. Permittee also covenants and agrees that City shall not be liable for any damages arising from any act or neglect on the part of any third parties. The above exemption shall not apply and shall in no way relieve the City from any liability, claims, judgments, fines, penalties, forfeitures, damages, demands, liabilities, suits, notices, costs and expenses, or any of these, caused solely by the gross negligence or by the willful misconduct of City or any of its officials, officers, or employees acting within the scope of their duties for City. Section 6.03: Insurance Permittee shall, at Permittee's expense, obtain and, throughout the Term, maintain in full force and effect all policies of insurance required hereunder, with an insurance company(ies) either (i) eligible to issue insurance policies in the State of California and rated not less than "A-/VII" in Page 15 l.yft Fee Final (11,-05<?019) doc Bests Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) authorized by City's Risk Manager or designee. The following polices of insurance are required and shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those amounts stated below. The following policies of insurance are required: A. Commercial General Liability insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CG 00 01 and shall include insurance for "bodily injury", "property damage" and "personal and advertising injury", including premises and operation, products and completed operations and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the Agreement) with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate for bodily injury and property damage, $1,000,000 per occurrence for personal and advertising injury and $2,000,000 aggregate for products and completed operations. B. Commercial Automobile Liability insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 10 13 and shall include coverage for "non-owned vehicles" with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily and property damage. C. Workers' Compensation insurance as required under the California Labor Code. D. Employers' Liability insurance with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 each accident, $1,000,000 disease each employee and $1,000,000 disease policy limit. Permittee shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policies required hereunder and Permittee shall also be responsible for payment of any self- insured retentions. The above-described policies of insurance shall provide an unrestricted thirty day written notice in favor of City, of policy cancellation, or reduction of coverage, except for the Workers' Compensation policy, which shall provide a ten (10) day written notice of such cancellation, or reduction of coverage. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, or reduction in coverage, Permittee shall file with City a certified copy of the certificates and endorsements for such policy, and applicable sections of the insurance policy to verify coverages required herein. The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall be written on an occurrence form and shall include the City of Fresno, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as an additional insured. Such policy(ies) of insurance shall be endorsed so Permittee's insurance shall be primary and no contribution shall be required of City. Any Workers' Compensation insurance policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation as to City, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Permittee shall furnish City with the certificate(s) and applicable endorsements for ALL required insurance prior to City's execution of this Agreement at the following address: Fee Final (t\-0(1--20i0) (Joe City of Fresno -Airports Department Attn.: Properties Division 4995 E. Clinton Way Fresno, CA 93727 Page 16 or to such other address as City may, from time to time, provide Permittee in writing during the Term. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for City to terminate this Agreement provided that the Permittee shall have five (5) business days to provide City with replacement coverage. Permittee shall have the right to provide the coverage specified in this Article by a program of self-insurance, which has been approved by the State of California. Permittee shall furnish City with a self-insured certificate of insurance and applicable endorsements. Said certificate and applicable endorsements shall document that Permittee's self-insurance program is apj3roved by the State of California; the retention level of such self-insurance program; and that the policy of insurance is primary and no contribution shall be required by City. Permittee shall also supply the name of Permittee's excess insurance carrier at the time the certificate of self-insurance is supplied to City. Section 6.04: Delivery to Director of Evidence of Insurance Permittee must deliver, without request or demand, to the Director, a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements or other evidence of insurance coverage required by this Article in form and content satisfactory to City's Risk Manager or designee. Permittee must update such evidence of insurance not less frequently than annually. Section 6.05: Expiration of Insurance Policy Promptly following the expiration of any insurance policy required by this Article, Permittee must submit to the Director a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed. If such coverage is cancelled, reduced or obtained through another insurer or insurers on at least as broad of terms, Permittee, within five business days following the date of written notice from the insurer of such cancellation or reduction in coverage, must file with the Director a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or provided through another insurer or insurers. Section 6.06: Adjustment of Claims In the event that Permittee agrees to self-insure in accordance with Section 6.03, Permittee must provide for the prompt and efficient handling of all claims for bodily injury, property damage arising out of the activities of Permittee under this Agreement. ARTICLE VII -ASSIGNMENT Section 7 .01: Assignment During the Term, neither Party shall assign this Agreement to any other person or entity, whatsoever. Section 7.02: Modification Unless stated otherwise in this Agreement, no prov1s1on of this Agreement may be waived, modified, or amended except by written amendment signed by City and Permittee. Page 17 No act, conversation, or communication with any officer, agent, or employee of City, either before or after the execution of this Agreement, will affect or modify any term or terminology of this Agreement and any such act, conversation, or communication will not be binding upon City or Permittee. ARTICLE VIII -DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES Section 8.01: Default by City City has no obligations to perform under this Agreement and therefore shall not be in default. Section 8.02: Default by Permittee A. Defaults: The occurrence of any of the following events shall constitute a material default and breach of this agreement by Permittee: 1. The failure by Permittee to use the Airport for lawful purposes only and/or failure by it to comply with or observe any statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, standard or requirement of any federal, state, or local government entity with respect to its occupancy(ies) and/or use(s) of any part or all of \he Airport, as such statutes, laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, standards or requirements exis\(ed) on the commencement date of the Term or as such may exist at any time and from time to time during the Term, where any such failure shall be evidenced by either a finding or judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction or where any such shall be admitted by Permittee in any proceeding brought against Permittee by any government entity. 2. The inability of and/or failure of Permittee to obtain, pay for, and maintain in full force and effect at all times during the life of this Agreement, without any lapse in coverage, such insurance as shall be required of Permi\\ee hereunder. 3. The occurrence of any of the following: (a) Permi\\ee's becoming insolvent or the making by it, of any general arrangement or an assignment for the benefit of creditors; (b) The filing by or against Permi\\ee of a petition to have it adjudged a bankrupt or a petition for reorganization or arrangement under any law relating to bankruptcy unless, in the case of a petition filed against Permi\\ee, the same is dismissed within sixty (60) calendar days; (c) The appointment of a receiver to take possession of substantially all of Permi\\ee's assets located in, on or about, the Airport, or of its interest in this Agreement, where possession is not restored to Permi\\ee within thirty (30) calendar days; or (d) The attachment, execution or other judicial seizure of substantially all of Permittee's assets located in, on or about the Airport, or of Permi\\ee's interest in this Agreement, where such seizure is not discharged within thirty (30) calendar days. Page 18 l.yft Fec.1 Finn! (f\,.05-2.0lfl) cloc 4. The discovery by City that any financial statement provided to the City by Permittee was materially false. 5. Any attempted/purported assignment, of this Agreement, in whole or in part. 6. The failure by Permittee to make any payment of TNC Fees or any other required payment, or to furnish any Security Deposit or instrument, as and when due hereunder, where such failure shall continue for a period of ten (10) days following service of notice thereof upon Permittee by City. "' 7 The failure of Permittee to keep, observe, undertake, fulfill, or perform any of the material terms, covenants, conditions, warranties, agreements, obligations, and/or provisions of this Agreement. B. City's Remedies. 1. Termination. Upon the occurrence of any material default and Permittee's failure to cure such default within a reasonable period of time, but in no event later than thirty (30) days after written notice is served upon Permittee by City specifying wherein Permittee has failed to perform any such obligations and breach of this Agreement by Permittee as set forth within this Article, above, City may then immediately, or at any time thereafter, terminate this Agreement by service of a minimum of ten (10) days advance written notice to such effect upon Permittee and this Agreement shall terminate at 11 :59:59 p.m., on the termination date specified within such notice. (a) Such notice shall, as a minimum, set forth the following the default and breach which resulted in such termination by City. (b} Such notice may contain any other notice which City may, at its option, desire or be required to give (e.g., "Demand For Payment" of any and all monies due and owing}. 3. Recovery. The amount of damages City may recover following such termination of this Agreement shall include: Unpaid fees which had been earned at the time of termination of this Agreement. Section 8.03: Additional Terms A. Other. In the event Permittee causes or threatens to cause a breach of any of the covenants, terms or conditions contained in this Agreement, City shall be entitled to obtain all sums held by Permittee, by any trustee or in any account provided for herein, to enjoin such breach or threatened breach and to invoke any remedy allowed at law, in equity, by statute or otherwise as though re-entry, summary proceedings and other remedies were not provided for in this Agreement. B. Cumulative Remedies. Each right and remedy of City provided for in this Article or now or hereafter existing at law, in equity, by statute or otherwise shall be cumulative and shall not preclude City from exercising any other rights or from pursuing any other remedies Page 19 Fe& Fina! (r\--OCl 2019) doc provided for in this Agreement or now or hereafter available to City under the laws or judicial decisions of the State of California. C. Indemnification. Nothing contained within this Section of this Article affects the right of City to indemnification by Permittee, as herein provided, for liability arising from personal injuries or property damage prior to the termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE IX· NON-DISCRIMINATION Section 9.01: Non-Discrimination A. To the extent required by controlling federal, state and local law, Permittee 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, 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, Permittee agrees as follows: 1. Permittee 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, gender identification, 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. 2. Permittee 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, gender identification, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Permittee 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, gender identification, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Such requirement shall apply to Permittee'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. Permittee agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this nondiscrimination clause. 3. Permittee will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of Permittee in pursuit hereof, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, religious creed, color, national Page 20 ongm, 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. 4. Permittee 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 Permittee's commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. Section 9.02: Airport Concession Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (ACDBE) Program City has developed and maintains and Permittee at all times hereunder, when applicable, shall comply with the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Concession Plan for the Airport in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation regulations 49 CFR Part 23, Subpart F, which plan establishes policies and procedures designed to promote City's interest in establishing Airport concession opportunities for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises and sets lawful, realistic and reasonable goals therefore, as enforceable in the Ninth Circuit. Any questions concerning Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) issues should be directed to DBE Program Coordinator, City of Fresno, Finance; 2600 Fresno St., Room 2156; Fresno, CA 93721; Telephone (559) 621-1163 or Fax (559) 488-1069. Section 9.03: Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act As a material part of any permit or concession on a City of Fresno property, every Permittee who has employees who will work on a City of Fresno property is required to comply with all of . the provisions of the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (P.L.1 99-603, 100 Stat. 3359), as applicable. This requirement includes compliance with all of the employee documentation provisions. Furthermore, Permittee will make any employee documentation required to comply with such Act immediately available to City, upon its request for each individual employee working on a City of Fresno property. ARTICLE X -MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 10.01: No Personal Liability No Councilperson, Director, officer, employee or other agent of either Party shall be personally liable under or in connection with this Agreement. Section 10.02: Agreements with the United States This Agreement is subject and subordinate to the provisions of any agreements heretofore made between City and the United States relative to the operation, security or maintenance of the Airport, the execution of which has been required as a condition precedent to the transfer of federal rights or property to City for airport purposes, or to the expenditure of federal funds for development of the Airport, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Aviation Act as it has been amended from time to time. This may include rules and regulations promulgated by the TSA and/or Airport security plan/requirements including pursuant to 49 CFR Part 1542, as Page 21 Lyf\ Fee Fin<:ii (4-05-2Cr\9) doc modified from time to time by legislative/regulatory action. These FM Grant Assurances attached hereto as Exhibit C are incorporated herein. Section 10.03: Modifications for Granting FAA Funds In the event that the FAA or TSA requires modifications or changes to this Agreement, Permittee agrees to consent to such amendments, modifications, revisions, supplements or deletions of any of the terms, conditions or requirements of this Agreement as reasonably may be required to enable City to obtain FAA funds. Section 10.04: Notices A. All notices required to be served by City or Permittee, one upon the other, under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing. B. All notices or demands of any kind which City shall have cause to serve upon Permittee under the terms of this Agreement shall be served upon Permittee by mailing a copy thereof by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to Permittee at the address shown below or to such other address as Permittee may, from time to time, specify to City in writing. All notices or demands of any kind which Permittee shall have cause to serve upon City under the terms of this Agreement shall be served upon City by mailing a copy thereof by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to City at the address shown below or to such other address as City may, from time to time, specify to Permittee in writing. City of Fresno Airports Department 4995 E. Clinton Way Fresno, CA 93727 In the event of any service of notice or demand by mail, as aforesaid, such notice or demand shall be deemed to have been sufficiently served as of 12:00:01 a.m., on the fourth (4th) calendar day following the date of deposit in the United States mail of such certified or registered mail properly addressed and postage prepaid. Section 10.05: Amendments This Agreement may be amended from time to time by written Amendment, duly authorized and executed by representatives the parties hereto. Section 10.06: Headings; Construction of Agreement; Gender The headings of each Section of this Agreement are for reference only. Unless the context of this Agreement clearly requires otherwise, all terms and words used herein, regardless of the number and gender in which used, shall be construed to include any other number, singular or plural, or any other gender, masculine, feminine or neuter, the same as if such words had been fully and properly written in that number or gender. Words of any gender in this Agreement will be held and construed to include any other gender. Section 10.07: Force Majeure Page 22 Lyft Feb Frn2i (l1-0S-2.0-Jfl) doc Neither City nor Permittee will be deemed in violation of this Agreement if either is prevented from performing any of the obligations hereunder by reason of strikes, boycotts, labor disputes, embargoes, shortages of materials, acts of God, acts of public enemy, acts of superior governmental authority, weather conditions, riots, rebellion, sabotage, or any other circumstances for which it is not responsible or which are not within its control. Section 10.08: Exclusiveness of Permittee's Rights Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to grant to Permittee any exclusive right or privilege within the meaning of Section 3.08 of the Federal Aviation Act for the conduct of any activity on the Airport Section 10.09: Withholding Required Approvals Whenever the approval of City or Director or Permittee is required herein, no such approval shall be unreasonably conditioned, delayed or withheld. Section 10.10: Inspection of City Records Permittee, at its expense and upon reasonable notice, shall have the right to inspect the books, records and other data of City relating to the provisions and requirements hereof, provided such inspection is made during regular business hours. Section 10.11: Successors and Assigns Subject to the \imitations on assignment contained herein, all of the terms, prov1s1ons, covenants, stipulations, conditions and considerations in this Agreement shall extend to and bind the legal representatives, successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto. Section 10.12: Accord and Satisfaction No payment by Permittee or receipt by City of a lesser amount than the rent, fees and/or charges due to be made by Permittee hereunder shall be deemed to be other than on account of the rent, fees and/or charges due. No endorsement or statement on any check or in any letter accompanying any check or payment as rent; fees and or charges shall be deemed an accord and satisfaction. City may accept such check or payment without prejudice to City's right to recover the balance of such rent, fees and/or charges or to pursue any other remedy provided in this Agreement Section 10.13: Observation of Governmental Regulations City's Airport Rules and Regulations: City reserves the right to adopt, amend, and enforce reasonable rules and regulations governing the Airport, including but not lmited to the public areas and any facilities used by Permittee in connection therewith. Such rules and regulations shall be consistent with the safety, security and overall public utility of Airport and with the rules, regulations and orders of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (or such successor agency[ies] as may, at any time and from time to time during the Term be designated by the Federal Government to perform either similar, new, additional, and/or supplemental functions, powers and/or duties with respect to air transportation, aircraft, Airports, etc.), and such rules Page 23 and regulations shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement or the procedures prescribed and approved, from time to time, by the FAA with respect to the operation of aircraft at the Airport. Permittee agrees to observe, obey and abide by all such rules and regulations heretofore or hereafter adopted or amended by City, including compliance with all FAA and Airport security rules, regulations and plans, including any and all measures mandated by the FAA from time to time to provide increased levels of security at Airport, and Permittee shall be fully liable to City for any and all claims, demands, damages, fines and/or penalties of any nature whatsoever which may be imposed upon City by the United States Government as a result of any unauthorized entry by Permittee, Permittee's employees, agents, representatives, servants, tenants, and/or sub-lessees, or vehicle operated by any of these or by a customer of Permittee, into any area of the Airport to which access by persons or vehicles is restricted/controlled pursuant to FAA/Airport Security Rules and Regulations. Other Governmental Regulations: Permittee shall, at all times during the Term, observe, obey and comply with any and all laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations, and/or orders of any governmental entity(ies) lawfully exercising any control(s) over either the Airport or over any part or all of Permittee's activities/ operations thereon and/or therefrom, including, without limitation, any and all local business license and/or permit requirements. Increased Levels of Security: In the event City must provide for an increased level of security in the areas occupied or used by any or all of the Permittees as mandated by the TSA, the Permittee agrees that the City shall have the following options: 1. Require Permittee to take whatever steps are necessary to meet the security requirements of the TSA mandate, at its own cost and expense; or 2. Close the Areas for Passenger Drop-offs or Passenger Pick-ups. In the event of closure of any part of such area for Passenger Drop-offs or Passenger Pick-ups (as designated in Exhibit B hereto) the City may at its option provide an alternate location for such area, but shall not be required to do so. Section 10.14: Governing Law and Venue This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties submit to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of California, Fresno County. Section 10.15: Waiver Waiver by City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or of any other term, covenant or condition. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by written consent of City, and forbearance or indulgence by City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of same to be performed by Permittee to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Permittee of the term, covenant or condition, City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. Section 10.16: Modification Page 24 l yft Fee F1n13I (1'! -05--2019).doc Unless stated otherwise in this Agreement, no provision of this Agreement may be waived, modified, or amended except in writing and signed by both Parties hereto. Section 10.17: Severability of Provisions Except, as specifically provided in this Agreement, all of the provisions of this Agreement shall be severable. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or unlawful, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall be valid unless the court finds that the valid provisions of this Agreement are so essentially and inseparably connected with and so dependent upon the invalid provision(s) that it cannot be presumed that the parties to this Agreement could have included the valid provisions without the invalid provision(s); or unless the court finds that the valid provisions, standing alone, are incapable of being performed in accordance with the intentions of the parties. Section 10.18: Conflicts of Interest Permittee certifies that no officer or employee of City has, or will have, a direct or indirect financial or personal interest in this Agreement, and that no officer or employee of City, or member of such officer's or employee's immediate family, either has negotiated, or has or will have an arrangement, concerning employment to perform services on behalf of Permittee in this Agreement. Section 10.19: Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with all documents referenced herein and exhibits attached hereto, constitutes the entire Agreement between the Parties. All other representations or statements heretofore made, verbal or written, are merged herein. Section 10.20: Confidentiality As used herein, "Confidential Information" means all confidential information disclosed by a party (Disclosing Party) to the other party (Receiving Party), whether orally or written, that is designated as confidential or that reasonably should be understood to be confidential given the nature of the information and the circumstances of disclosure. Confidential Information shall include, but not be limited to, business and marketing plans, technology and technical information, product plans and designs, and business processes disclosed by such party. However, Confidential Information shall not include any information that (i) is or becomes generally known to the public without breach of any obligation owed to the Disclosing Party, (ii) was known to the Receiving Party prior to its disclosure by the Disclosing Party without breach of any obligation owed to the Disclosing Party, (iii) is received from a third party without breach of any obligation owed to the Disclosing Party, (iv) was independently developed by the Receiving Party or (v) was disclosed with the prior written approval of the Disclosing Party. Except as otherwise permitted in writing by the Disclosing Party, (i) the Receiving Party shall protect the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information by using the same degree of care that it uses to protect the confidentiality of its own confidential information of like kind (but in no event less than reasonable care), and shall not disclose or use any Confidential Information of the Disclosing Party for any purpose outside the scope of these Terms, and (ii) the Receiving Party shall limit access to Confidential Information of the Disclosing Party to those of its employees, contractors and agents who need such access for purposes consistent with these Terms and who are bound by confidentiality agreements with the Receiving Party containing protections no less stringent than those herein. The Receiving Party may disclose Confidential Information of Page 25 the Disclosing Party if it is compelled by law to do so, provided the Receiving Party gives the Disclosing Party prior notice of such compelled disclosure (to the extent legally permitted) and reasonable assistance, at the Disclosing Party's cost, if the Disclosing Party wishes to contest the disclosure. Except as expressly set forth herein, no license or other rights to Confidential Information are granted or implied hereby by either party. Upon termination of this Agreement, each party shall, within fifteen (15) days promptly return or destroy the other party's Confidential Information except as may be required for backup, disaster recovery or business continuity and in such case the obligations hereunder shall survive until such Confidential Information is destroyed or returned. Any information that Permittee makes available to City pursuant to this Agreement is deem@d to be confidential and proprietary information (Permittee confidential information), regardless of whether the records are marked as such, and shall not be disclosed to anyone without Permittee's express written permission unless required to be disclosed by applicable law or a court order; including without limitation the public records laws, provided that City notifies Permittee of such requirement promptly prior to disclosure, and provided further that City makes diligent efforts to limit disclosure pursuant to any available bases set forth in the Public Records Act or other applicable law. If City is required to release Permittee's confidential information, it nevertheless shall use any available authorities to redact personal or business confidential information from such records to the extent consistent with applicable law and the final judgment. This provision shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Section 10.21: Limitation on Damages Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, in no event will either Party be liable to the other Party for any consequential, incidental or special damages, or lost revenues or lost profits. [Signatures follow on the next page.] Page 26 l.yfl rei:: Fina! (_4-0S-)Cr\ff) doe; ARTICLE XI: SIGNATURE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parti es hereto , for th emse lve s, their successors and ass ign s, have executed thi s Agreement, the day and year first above written . City of Fresno A Muni c ipal Corporation By: Kevin R. Meikle, Director of Aviation APPROVED AS TO FORM: g~~ l(y fundonM. ~Da i'!kh Senior Deputy C ity Attorn ey ATTEST: Yvonn e Spence, MMC CR M C ity C lerk By: __________ _ Deputy Add ress for Notice: C ity of Fres no Airports Department 4995 E. C linton W ay Fresno, CA 93727 Attach me nt s: LYFT, INC. A Delaware Co rporation / ?--L-< -;? e~'c..· .. Name: :Ba.~r·, K, 1'il')(.1( Titl e: ~~j0~~~~L f lJ 0 ~/,~ ~ Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres .) By: Name : __________ _ Title:----------- (if co rporation o r LL C, CFO , Treas ur er, Secret ary or Ass istant Secretary ) Address for Noti ce: Ex hibit A Ex hibit B Ex hibit C Exhibit D Fres no Yose mite International Ai rport Ground Transportation Rules a nd Reg ul ation s G ro und Tra nsport at ion Map FAA G rant Ass ur ances Di sc lo s ure of Co nfli ct of Interest Form Lyft Fee Fin al (4-05-20 19).doc Page 27 EXHIBIT "A" FRESNO YOSEMITE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Fresno Yosemite International Airport Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations ' Kevin R. Meikle, Director of Aviation Revision dated March 28, 2019 j I i I ' ! I ' I l I ! ' I l I I ff ' Fresno Yosemite International Airport Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 3 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................... 3 AUTHORITY ............................................................................................................... .4 VIOLATIONS AND INTERPRETATION ...................................................................... .4 SECTION 1 -DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................ 5 SECTION 2 -GROUND TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES ........................................ 10 SECTION 3-GROUND TRANSPORTATION DRIVERS .......................................... 12 SECTION 4 -USE OF AIRPORT PREMISES ........................................................... 15 SECTION 5-INDEMNIFICATION ............................................................................. 16 SECTION 6 -GENERAL INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ....................................... 17 SECTION 7 -TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES (TNCs), OR APPLICATION-BASED COMMERCIAL GROUND TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS (ABCT-PROVIDERS) ................................................................................................. 19 SECTION 8-TAXICAB SERVICES .......................................................................... 19 SECTION 9 -SPECIAL EVENT TRANSPORTATION .............................................. 20 SECTION 10-NO DIVERSION OF PASSENGERS .................................................. 20 SECTION 11 -DROP OFF AND PICK UP OF PASSENGERS ................................ 20 SECTION 12 -PUBLIC PARKING ............................................................................ 20 SECTION 13-REFUSAL OF FARES ....................................................................... 21 SECTION 14-TRANSPORTATION OF DISABLED PASSENGERS AND SERVICE ANIMALS ................................................................................................................... 21 SECTION 15-MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE ............................................................ 21 SECTION 16-TRANSPORTATION CHARTER PARTY SERVICES ....................... 21 SECTION 17 -PREARRANGED GROUND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ......... 22 SECTION 18-ENFORCEMENT. .............................................................................. 22 SECTION 19 -GROUND TRANSPORTATION PERMITS AND DECALS ............... 22 SECTION 20 -BADGING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................ 23 SECTION 23-GROUND TRANSPORTATION FEES .............................................. 26 SECTION 24 -MAP OF TERMINAL-GROUND TRANSPORTATION ..................... 28 J:\FYI\Tenant Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx OVERVIEW Fresno Yosemite International Airport Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations In 2018, over 1.7 million passengers and hundreds of tons of freight arrived and departed through Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT). Each one of those passengers arrived to, or departed from the airport on one of the various forms of ground transportation, including personal vehicles, rental cars, family/friend drop off/pick up, taxi cabs, hotel courtesy shuttles, public bus, limousine service, or ride-share. In addition to passengers and freight, hundreds of airline, concession, Airports Department, and federal employees arrive and depart their workplace at the airport around the clock, every day of the year, accounting for hundreds of thousands additional trips. The businesses operating at FAT receive supplies, materials, and merchandise from delivery vehicles daily. Facilitating this magnitude and variety of ground transportation in an orderly and safe manner requires long-range planning and capital investment in roadway systems, specialized circulation systems and facilities, and various types of parking that accommodate the differing needs of parking customers. As with all capital needs throughout the airport, revenue streams are necessary to provide funding for the improvements directly, or for the debt payments on bonds used to fund construction. Historically, these revenues have been derived from public parking fees, rental car leases, concession fees, and other airport general revenues. As the airport continues to grow, its' general revenues are required for other capital and operating needs. Consequently, this Ground Transportation Program is necessary for two fundamental reasons: 1) to help plan for, and provide the facilities and services needed to ensure safe and orderly services, and; 2) to ensure that all users of ground transportation program pay a fair and reasonable fee representing their proportionate share of the funding needed to provide and maintain the infrastructure. For these reasons, all vehicles and the owners, operators, and drivers thereof, transporting or offering to transport passengers or goods, shall operate at Fresno Yosemite International Airport (Airport) in compliance with all applicable Rules and Regulations contained herein. PURPOSE The purpose of these ground transportation Rules and Regulations is to establish a fair and reasonable fee structure, and to encourage safe, effective, and efficient use of the Airport roadway and transportation infrastructure to maintain a high level of Airport customer service. The following categories of ground transportation service (also referred to as "Provider") are impacted by these Rules and Regulations: J:\FYI\T enanl Files\Ground Transportalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx I i I I i I Category 1 Category 2 vans.and Category 3 services Category 4 Category 5 Category 8 Category 9 Taxicab services Transportation Charter Party (TCP) carriers including limousines, SUVs, buses Scheduled or on-call Van Services/Passenger Stage Corporation (PSC) Hotel Shuttles, Courtesy vehicles Nonprofit services including publicly owned transit Transportation Network Companies / Application-Based Commercial Ground Transportation Providers Pre-arranged Ground Transportation Services Except as noted in these Rules and Regulations, in order to operate on the Airport the above categories of ground transportation services are required to obtain all necessary, decals, permits, and pay the required fees. AUTHORITY The provisions set forth herein are promulgated under the authority of Chapter 5, Article 4 of the Fresno Municipal Code (Article 4). These Rules and Regulations are intended to supplement Article 4. Nothing in these Rules and Regulations is intended to replace or revise the Article 4. In any instance where there may be a conflict between these Rules and Regulations and Article 4, Article 4 shall govern. Words and phrases in these Rules and Regulations have the meanings and definitions as stated in Article 4 unless the context in these Rules and Regulations indicates that a different meaning is intended. The Director of Aviation (Director) may modify these Rules, Regulations and Fee Schedules as authorized by Article 4. Reference to all applicable federal, state and local laws or regulations also refers to any amendment to such laws or regulations. As necessary to comply with direction from the United States Department of Transportation or Transportation Security Administration, or as warranted by unforeseen exigent circumstances, the Director may temporarily suspend or modify any of the rights and privileges set forth herein. VIOLATIONS AND INTERPRETATION Violation Any person who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects, or refuses to comply with any of the provisions of these Rules and Regulations or any lawful order issued pursuant thereto may be denied use of the Airport premises for commercial purposes by the Director. Such denial of use is in addition to any fines or other penalties imposed pursuant to Article 4, or federal, state or local law. J:IFYI\Tenant Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx / I ij i ' I I ! ! ! I Interpretation In the event that an interpretation of any provisions of these Rules and Regulations is required, the Director shall render such an interpretation, and his or her determination shall be considered as final authority on the matter. All applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations and the laws and regulations of any other legal authority having jurisdiction, as now in effect or as may be promulgated in the future, as they may be from time to time amended, are hereby incorporated as part of these Rules and Regulations as though fully set forth herein. Any reference in these Rules and Regulations to a federal, state, or local law or regulation also refers to any amendment to such law or regulation. SECTION 1 -DEFINITIONS. There will be no exceptions to these definitions. A. Administrative Citation. Means an enforcement citation issued by an authorized City employee for violations of the terms of conditions of this Permit or the Rules and Regulation, among other violations. 1. First Offense. $100 dollar fine; 2. Second Offense. $200 dollar fine; 3. Third Offense. Revocation of Permit. B. Airport. Means the Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT), as it currently exists or as it may exist in the future throughout the Term of this Permit. C. Airport Customer. Means any user of the Airport who proposes to use a ground transportation provider's services, including, without limitation, for parcel delivery or pick-up. ' D. Airport Ground Transportation Rules and Regulations (Rules & Regs) or Rules and Regulations. Means the policy and procedures as set forth in the manual provided by Director of Aviation, which describes the rules and regulations for operating on the Airport and as described therein, which can be updated from time to time. E. Airport ID. Means an identification badge issued by the Airports Public Safety Office pursuant to background, training and testing requirements established by Airports. F. Business Day. Means any calendar day except Saturday, Sunday and any other day observed as a legal holiday by the City of Fresno. For purposes of this Permit, if the time in which any act is to be performed falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the time for performance shall be extended to the following business day. G. CPUC. Means California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates and licenses transportation providers in California, including TNCs. J:\FYI\T enant Fiies\Grmmd Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx I ' rr i I I I ! H. City. Means the City of Fresno, California, owner of Airport. I. Commencement Date/Effective Date. Means the first operating day of the Permit. J. Day. Means any calendar day, unless a Business Day is specified. K. Director. Means the City's Director of Aviation or such person as may be designated to carry out the duties of Director under this Permit. L. FAA. Means the Federal Aviation Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. M. Fee or Permit Fee. Means the annual cost to the Ground Transportation Provider to operate at the Airport. N. Fiscal Year. Means the City's fiscal year beginning July 1 and ending June 30 each year. 0. Fresno Municipal Code/Municipal Code. Means Chapter 5, Article 4 of the Fresno Municipal Code. P. Geo-Fence. Means a polygon whose points are geographic coordinates on Airport Property designated by the City (as may be amended by the City from time-to-time) which delineates the area within which Permittee must operate under this Permit. Q. Ground Transportation Provider. As defined the CUPC below: 1. Passenger Stage Corporations (PSC): for-hire passenger carrier authorities; a. "Classic" PSC. Carriers charging individual fares are presumed to be PSC's, except for round-trip sightseeing services. PSC's provide scheduled service, over fixed routes, between fixed termini (points), such as regularly scheduled bus service. However, regularly scheduled bus service operated by a publicly owned transit system is not "passenger stage" service, and is not under CPUC jurisdiction. b. Door-to-door Shuttle Service. Provides on-call service, for example, door-to-door airport shuttle service where all transportation begins or ends at a single terminus, such as an airport. Many vehicles used in the airport shuttle industry are not owned or operated by a PSC, but are charter-party carriers working as subcarriers (subcontractors) for a PSC. J:\FYI\Tenant Files\Ground Transporlalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs {Final) 03-28-19.docx 2. Charter-party carriers (TCP). Transportation is charted by a party (person or group). May also arrange the transportation on behalf of another person or group, such as an employee or client. TCP carriers must charge fares based on vehicle mileage, or time of use, or a combination of the two, and may not charge individual fares. All transportation performed by charter-party carriers must be arranged beforehand, and the driver must have a completed waybill in his or her possession at all times during the trip, showing, among other things, the name and address of the person requesting or arranging the transportation (the chartering party), the time and date when the charter was arranged, and whether it was arranged by telephone or written contract, the number of persons in the charter group, the name of at least one passenger, and the points of origin and destination. A charter-party carrier may not operate as a taxi, or advertise as to indicate that it provides taxicab service. 3. Taxicabs. Means a passenger vehicle for hire, used to transport passengers on public streets. The charge for use of a taxicab is determined by a taximeter. Taxis may provide transportation "at the curb", that is, a customer may "arrange" taxi transportation by simply hailing a cab from the sidewalk. Also, taxis have meters and top lights. Taxis are licensed and regulated by cities and counties, while charter-party carriers operate under authority from the CPUC, subject to the Public Utilities Code and CPUC regulations. 4. Regularly scheduled bus service. Bus service operated by a publicly owned transit system is not "passenger stage" service. 5. "Round-trip Sightseeing." The chartering party has control over the transportation that is, when and where the trip originates and ends, and the itinerary in between. R. Laws. Means any judicial decision, statute, constitution, ordinance, resolution, regulation, rule, administrative order, or other requirement of any municipal, county, state, federal, or other governmental agency or authority having jurisdiction over the parties in effect either at the time of execution of this Permit or at any time during the term of this Permit, including, without limitation, any regulation or order of a quasi-official entity or body. S. Manager. Means the Contractor contracted by the City to provide On Demand Ground Transportation Services Management or City employee assigned to Ground Transportation Services. T. Mobile App./Mobile Application/Application/App. Means the computer application for mobile devices used by Perrnittee to conduct its business model as a CPUC-licensed Ground Transportation Provider. J:\FYI\T enanl Files\Ground T ransporlation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (FinaQ 03-28-19.docx U. Municipal Code. Means the City of Fresno Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. V. Party. Means each of the City and Permittee. W. Past Due Interest. Means interest accruing at the lesser of (a) the maximum rate allowable by law, or (b) eighteen percent(18%) per annum based on a three hundred sixty-five (365) day year, commencing on the tenth (10th} business day after the date such amount is due and owing and continuing until such amount is paid to the City. X. Permit or Permit to Operate. Means this Ground Transportation Permit for Ground Transportation Providers coming onto Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT). Y. Permittee. Means the entity defined on page 1 of this Permit. Unless the context requires otherwise, any reference to Permittee shall be construed to include any of Permittee's drivers, employees, representatives, and other agents. Z. Pre-arranged. Means the providing for hire of commercial ground transportation to or from the Airport, where such transportation was contracted or arranged for by or on behalf of the passenger or parcel customer, in advance of the passenger's arrival or parcel's arrival at the Airport, or after the passenger's arrival at the Airport by communicating with a Ground Transportation Provider. Pre-arranged transportation includes transportation provided for business purposes, even though it is provided as a courtesy and the passenger is not directly charged for such transportation. AA. Provision. Means any term, agreement, covenant, condition, clause, qualification, restriction, reservation, or other stipulation in this Permit that defines or otherwise controls, establishes, or limits the performance required or permitted by either party. All Provisions, whether covenants or conditions, which are applicable to Permittee, shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. BB. Security Deposit. Means the deposit as defined and described in Section 4.08 of this Perm it. CC. Services. Means all ground transportation services as defined above by the Ground Transportation Provider. DD. Solicitation. Means the uninvited initiation of a conversation or other uninvited contact by a driver, other employee, representative or agent (whether formal or informal) of any Ground Transportation Provider with any person, for the purpose of enticing or persuading said person to use any service or facilities provided by J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx the Ground Transportation Provider or any affiliate of any Ground Transportation Provider. EE. Tax. Means and includes any assessment, license, charge, fee, imposition, or levy imposed by any governmental body. FF. Taxicab Services Provider. Means a Ground Transportation Provider who transports passengers in a Taxicab. GG. Term. Means the term of this Permit. HH. Terminal Building. Means the passenger terminal building at the Airport and any additional buildings that may be constructed, serving the airlines, together with the adjacent curbs, parking and staging areas and roadways, as now exist or as may hereafter be reconstructed, modified, changed or developed. II. Termination Date. Means the date that the ground transportation permit expires. JJ. Tracking and Management Service. Means a third party that will establish the Airport Geo-Fence and provide services to manage, track and monitor application-based commercial ground transportation transacting business of Ground Transportation Provider's to, on, or from the Airport, and to invoice and collect fees. KK. Tracking and Management Service Contract. Means City's Permit with Tracking and Management Service, which will be entered into by Airport on or around the date hereof, as may be updated from time to time. LL. Trade Dress. Means distinctive signage or display on the vehicle when providing Services that is sufficiently large and color contrasted as to be readable during daylight hours at a distance of at least 50 feet. The trade dress shall be sufficient to allow a passenger, government official, or member of the public to associate a vehicle with the associated Ground Transportation Provider. Acceptable forms of trade dress include, but are not limited to, symbols or signs on vehicle doors, roofs, or grills. Magnetic or removable trade dress is acceptable. ,)•, MM. TSA. Means the Transportation Security Administration of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. NN. Vehicle(s). Means any automobile, truck, van, bus, limousine, motorcycle, bicycle, and other wheeled conveyances (except aircraft), operated by a Ground Transportation Provider, in which any person or property can be transported upon land. 00. Vehicle Identification Decal. Means a vehicle identification decal issued or J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportal\on\Ru\es & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx authorized by the Director to be placed as directed, on or in each ground transportation vehicle registered and permitted to operate on Airport premises, for the purpose of identifying vehicles. PP. Vehicle Inspection . Means vehicle inspections under the CUPC that must be completed annual or as requested for all Vehicles in the ground transportation providers fleet, within ten (10) days of request. QQ . Vehicle Inspection Form. Means the inspection form that must be completed annually or as requested for all Vehicles in the Ground Transportation Providers fleet and submitted to the Airport within ten (10) days of request. Form can be found at http ://www.cpuc.ca .gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC Public Website/Content/Licensin g/Passenger Carriers/PL %20668 Vehicle%20lnspection%20Declarat ion 9.14. 16.pdf RR. Waybill. Means a document or electronic form containing the passenger's name(s), the number of persons in the party, the location of the pickup, and the airline and flight number on which the passenger arrived or will arrive. SECTION 2 -GROUND TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES 2.1 GENERAL OPERATION OF GROUND TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE. Every ground transportation Provider shall limit its vehicles and drivers in their activities to stopping at locations, using those designated roads, and using those portions of the Airport premises as specified in these Rules and Regulations, and as otherwise designated by the Director, for the loading and unloading of passengers and baggage, or picking up or delivering parcels. Every ground transportation Provider shall acquire and maintain such certificates, licenses and other authorizations required by federal, state and local authorities for each of its vehicles and its drivers in order to conduct ground transportation services on the Airport premises. Every ground transportation Provider shall ensure that its vehicles and drivers comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations while providing ground transportation services, including, but not limited to, those laws and regulations requiring accommodation for persons with disabilities . 2.2 GROUND TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE REQUIREMENTS. Each ground transportation vehicle operated on the Airport premises must be in compliance with all California Vehicle Codes, CPUC requirements, Fresno Municipal Codes and items listed below, but not limited to these specific items : J:\FYI\Te nant Files\Ground Transpor lalion\Rul es & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Fin al) 03-2 8-19 .docx II 11 I I i i I i A. Have the vehicle registration, where applicable, from the OMV within the vehicle pursuant to California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 4454; B. Display an unexpired license plate of the appropriate type; C. Display, where applicable, the appropriate California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), ICC, transponder and/or permit to operate, including the applicable certificate or authority number required. CPUC 1031, 5371; CVC 34507. D. Maintain valid insurance coverage as required in these Rules and Regulations. E. Display a vehicle fleet number where applicable in accordance with 4.03 General Order 157 CPUC; 4.03 General Order 158. 2.3 VEHICLE INSPECTIONS. A. All ground transportation vehicles shall be subject to inspection under the California Vehicle Code, the Department of Homeland Security, all other local, state and federal laws and any guidelines established by the Director. Any Airport law enforcement personnel, any federal, state or local law enforcement officer, any Airport official, and all agents appointed by the Director who display proper identification shall have the authority to inspect vehicles. Vehicles which fail inspections shall not be used to provide ground transportation services on the Airport until all noted deficiencies are corrected. B. All vehicle inspections shall be pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code (CPUC) and form PL 668 19-point Vehicle Inspection Declaration, or as modified by the CPUC. C. All vehicle inspections must be completed by a facility licensed by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair. 2.4 VEHICLE APPEARANCE. All signage of ground transportation vehicles is subject to the Director's approval. Each ground transportation vehicle, except limousines and TNCs, shall have the name of the ground transportation service and telephone number displayed on the exterior of the vehicle and in sharp contrast to the vehicle body color. A vehicle is considered easily identifiable if the company name, phone number, vehicle number or livery plate and CPUC, TCP and ICC numbers, if applicable, can be read from a distance of 50 feet from the vehicle. All ground transportation vehicles shall have professionally lettered identification signs on both sides of the vehicle and a uniform color scheme on all vehicle exteriors 2.5 VEHICLE STANDARDS. A. All vehicles must be maintained in good and safe mechanical condition and . otherwise in compliance with the California Vehicle Code and the California Public Utilities Code. B. All vehicle interiors, trunk space and exteriors shall be kept clean and free of J~FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transporlalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx any damage. All vehicles shall have hubcaps and door handles and all equipment required by the California Vehicle Code and the California Public Utilities Code. Trunks shall be kept adequately clean and empty to accommodate passenger baggage. C. All vehicles shall be in compliance with all local, state and federal safety and emission requirements. D. Ground transportation providers are required to maintain the exterior of their vehicles in good condition. Exterior body damage must be repaired in order to continue operating at the Airport. E. All ground transportation service Providers may be required to verify completion of any required repairs by re-inspection of a vehicle by the Airport. Operators shall have thirty (30) days to repair "minor" damage. Vehicles with "moderate" or "major" damage shall not be allowed to operate on the Airport until such damage is repaired. F. "Minor" damage shall mean slight damage such as small dents, cracked glass, and torn seats, etc. H. "Moderate" damage shall mean more than slight damage to one-fourth or less of the vehicle; for example an entire fender, grill, quarter panel, door, hood, rear deck, etc. I. "Major" damage shall mean damage to more than one-fourth of the vehicle; such as, entire side rear end, etc. J. Operators using clean air vehicles shall maintain their vehicles including the fueling system, engine and drive train in good working order at all times. Altering a clean air vehicle to allow it to be operated as a conventional diesel fuel or gasoline-powered vehicle, or substituting conventional diesel fuel or gasoline for an alternative fuel approved by the Director is prohibited. SECTION 3-GROUND TRANSPORTATION DRIVERS. 3.1 COMPLIANCE WITH LAW. Drivers of ground transportation vehicles shall strictly comply with these Rules and Regulations and those applicable Rules and Regulations and laws found in the CPUC and Vehicle Codes, Title 11.09, and any other applicable codes or laws. Airport Rules and Regulations, when legally permissible, shall augment any other applicable existing code, rule or regulation. 3.2 LAWFUL ORDERS. Drivers of ground transportation vehicles shall obey the lawful orders and directions of all Airport law enforcement personnel, any state or local law enforcement officer, all Airport officials, and all agents appointed by the Director who display proper identification. 3.3 DRIVER APPEARANCE. Drivers of ground transportation vehicles shall be clean and neat in appearance. 3.4 DRIVER REQUIREMENTS. Every driver of a ground transportation vehicle shall be: J:\FYI\T enanl Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (FinaQ 03-28-19.docx I i I I I I I i ' l I i I I I 3.5 A. In possession of a duly issued Airport ID, for all drivers that stage their vehicles on Airport property. Exempt are drivers who complete drop off and picks ups only. In possession of a valid state driver's license as required under the California Vehicle Code; B. Either a ground transportation Provider registered with and permitted by the City of Fresno, or a driver under the direct supervision of a ground transportation Provider and listed on a roster of drivers, where applicable, provided to the City; C. Responsible for knowing and understanding of the Airport Rules and Regulations; D. Knowledgeable of local geography and/or able to use maps, GPS or other similar resources necessary to efficiently transport passengers to desired locations within Fresno and other local communities served by the airport. E. Able to communicate with passengers. F. Courteous to the public at all times. A ground transportation driver shall not use profane language, insult or demean, make a threat of violence or physical harm, or act in a loud and boisterous or otherwise improper manner. Obscene gestures, or language, threats of physical harm, fighting, gambling, public intoxication, lewd or otherwise improper public behavior, or the use of illegal substances on Airport premises are expressly prohibited. G. Cooperative and communicative with Airport personnel. A driver shall not be verbally abusive toward any Airport representative or another ground transportation representative. H. No driver shall be under the influence of alcohol or illegal substances while operating ground transportation at Airports facilities. GROUND TRANSPORTATION OPERATOR CONDUCT. A. No driver, representative, employee, or agent of a Provider shall conduct any business on the Airport other than that expressly described in Article 4 of the Fresno Municipal Code, these Rules and Regulations, and in any applicable ground transportation permit or application unless approved by the Director in advance. B. No driver, employee, representative, or agent shall engage in the solicitation of passengers unless specifically permitted by the Director, in writing, to do so. C. No driver shall transport passengers in an unsafe manner. D. No driver, representative, employee, agent or Provider shall sell, promote or otherwise provide any items or services other than ground transportation to its passengers or any other persons upon the Airport premises. E. Ground transportation operator shall be courteous to the public and to other ground transportation operators and their employees. The ground transportation operator, or their agent, shall be clean, efficient and neat in appearance. Operators shall not allow employees on the airport to use improper language or act in a loud or boisterous or otherwise improper manner. Operators shall not engage in open, notorious and public disputes, J:\FYl\T enanl Files\Ground T rnnsportatio11\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx I I l I ' i. disagreements or conflicts intending to deteriorate the quality of the ground transportation services of commercial operators or their competitors or incompatible with the best interest of the public at the airport. Obscene communications, threats of violence or physical harm, fighting, gambling, public intoxication, and carrying weapons or illegal substances on airport premises are expressly prohibited. F. Ground transportation operators are prohibited from sleeping inside their vehicles at the ground transportation curb in front of the terminal. Violators will be immediately expelled and subject to suspension and permit revocation. 3.6 NO UNATTENDED VEHICLES. Drivers of ground transportation vehicles shall remain in (or with) their vehicles and shall not park or leave a vehicle unattended at any curb, unless the vehicle is a designated delivery vehicle and the driver is making a delivery, or otherwise authorized by the Director. Unattended vehicles may be cited and removed. If drivers must park or leave their vehicles unattended, they shall park in the public parking lot subject to the posted rates. 3.7 FALSE DOCUMENTS AND TRANSPONDERS. Ground transportation drivers, representatives, employees, agents or Providers shall not use, display, show, exhibit or transfer any transponder, permit, waybill, decal, receipt, or any other document which is false, invalid, altered, revoked, terminated or expired. 3.8 DECEPTION OF PUBLIC. A ground transportation driver, representative, employee, agent or Provider shall not deceive or attempt to deceive the public through false or misleading representations concerning its prices or services or those of other ground transportation service Providers. 3.9 PASSENGER RECEIPTS. All drivers of ground transportation vehicles with the exception of TNC's shall have passenger receipts in all their vehicles which are imprinted with the company's name, address, telephone number and CPUC or PSC number, if applicable. The receipt shall provide space for the driver's name, date and time of service and the fare charged. Electronic receipts are acceptable. Each customer shall be offered a receipt following payment by that customer. 3.10 RATE SCHEDULE AND TIMETABLE INFORMATION. All ground transportation services shall display timetable and tariff information in accordance with applicable local, state and federal law. Taxicabs shall have rate schedules posted externally, and all other ground transportation vehicles shall have tariff and timetable information (if applicable} available on or in the vehicle or online for TNC's for passenger review. 3.11 CPUC COMPLAINT ADDRESS. All ground transportation service vehicles subject to CPUC oversight (except TNCs) must post, in plain view by all passengers, the following information: CPUC Complaint Intake Unit-Transportation Enforcement Section Consumer J;\FYI\Tenant Files\Ground Transportalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx Protection and Safety Division 505 Van Ness Avenue, 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94102-3298 1-800-894-9444 The CPUC website for complaints follows: http :/www.cpuc.ca .gov/PUC/CEC/e complaint/d carrierscomplaint.htm . There is a complaint form that is used to file complaints. It can be found and downloaded from the above link or a complaint can call and ask to be mailed a form by calling 1-800-894 -9444 or by emailing ciu intake@cpuc.ca .gov. The Intake Unit will be happy to answer any questions complainants have about the complaint process. 3.12 CREDIT CARDS ACCEPTED. All ground transportation service Providers (except TNCs) shall post the types of credit cards accepted as payment for their services. 3.13 LUGGAGE ASSISTANCE. No ground transportation driver or driver's agent shall provide luggage assistance unless the passenger has, without solicitation from the ground transportation operator, requested such assistance; or unless the ground transportation operator is claiming and delivering delayed baggage under contract. 3.14 GRATUITIES. While taking passengers to and from the Airport, ground transportation drivers, repre sentatives , employees and agents shall not solicit gratuities or tips, directly or indirectly, from their passengers . SECTION 4 -USE OF AIRPORT PREMISES. The following Rules and Regulations are applicable to all ground transportation services: 4.1 PARKING AND STOPPING OF VEHICLES. All ground transportation vehicles operated on Airport premises must comply, at all times, with traffic signs, signals , pavement markings and other physical, electrical and mechanical traffic control devices placed and maintained by the Director unless directed oth erwise by authorized pe rsonnel. Designated loading and unloading areas are subject to change from time to time, as necessary in the judgment of the Director to advance the safety, security and/or convenience of Airport operations. All pick-ups and drop-offs must be made in a designated loading/unloading zone. Traffic control re strictions imposed by the Director may include, without limitation : A. Designating a parking time limit on any portion of the Airport; B. Designating any portion of the Airport for specific uses (e .g., for the general public, designated commercial passenger vehicles, a passenger loading/unloading zones, a freight loading zone, or for Airport vehicles only); C. Designating any portion of the Airport as a NO STOPPING, NO WAITING, or NO PARKING area; D . Designating where and how vehicl es shall be parked by means of parking J:\FY I\Te nant Files\Ground Tran sport alion\Rul es & Regs\FA T GT Rules Regs (Final) 03 -28-19 .doc x i i I i I i ! I ! I I I I I ll I ; ! I space markers; and E. Designating direction of travel. 4.2 USE OF AUTHORITY. The Director may use his or her full authority under federal, state, and Local law, as well as TSA security directives, to direct, remove, or cause to be removed at the owner's expense from any restricted or reserved area, any roadway or right-of-way or other area on the Airport premises, any vehicle which is: disabled, abandoned, illegally or improperly parked, or creating an Airport operational issue. Any such vehicle may be removed or caused to be removed to an official vehicle impound area designated by the Director. Neither the Airport nor the City shall be liable for damage to any vehicle or loss of personal property which might result from the act of removal. 4.3 DESIGNATED ROUTE. Drivers of ground transportation vehicles must, upon entering the Airport, proceed along the most direct route to the designated drop-off or pick-up location, hold lot, or other authorized destination unless otherwise instructed by the Director. 4.4 CRUISING. Cruising is prohibited. Ground transportation vehicles will be considered to be cruising unless the driver: A. Has a customer to be discharged at a terminal and is proceeding to this destination by the most direct route; B. Is in the process of leaving the Airport by the most direct route. 4.5 PROPER TRAFFIC FLOW. All ground transportation vehicles shall only be operated on roads and parking areas designated by the Director for use by that particular type of vehicle and ground transportation service. Vehicles are not to be positioned so as to block the flow of traffic or prevent other vehicles from gaining access to, or departing from, ground transportation areas or other areas at the Airport. Additional restrictions may be set forth by the Director through other means, including in a ground transportation permit. No ground transportation service shall use the roads, walkways, sidewalks, or other Airport facilities in such a manner as to hinder or obstruct their proper use, public access, the conduct of proper and approved business activities, or to interfere with the flow of traffic. SECTION 5-INDEMNIFICATION. 5.1 INDEMNIFICATION To the furthest extent allowed by law, Ground Transportation Provider shall hold City completely harmless and indemnify, protect and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers against any and all claims, judgments, fines, penalties, forfeitures, damages, demands, liabilities, suits, notices, costs and expenses [including all reasonable costs and expenses for investigation and defense thereof (including, but not limited to attorney fees, court costs and expert fees}], or any one, more or all of these, of any nature whatsoever, arising or allegedly arising, directly or indirectly, J:\FYI\Tenant Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-20-19.docx I I i ! I i out of, as a result of, or incident to, or in any way connected with: (1) Ground Transportation Provider's occupancy(ies) and/or use(s) of any part or all of the Airport; (2) Ground Transportation Provider's exercise of any one, more or all of the rights and privileges herein granted; (3) any breach or default in the performance of any obligation on Ground Transportation Provider's part to be performed under the terms of this Agreement; and/or (4} any act(s) or omission(s) on the part of Ground Transportation Provider and/or any officer(s), agent(s}, employee(s) or contractor(s),of Ground Transportation Provider during the Term, except for any claims, judgments, fines, penalties, forfeitures, damages, demands, liabilities, suits, notices, costs and expenses, or any of these, caused solely by the gross negligence or by the willful misconduct of City or any of its officials, officers, or employees acting within the scope of their duties for City. Ground Transportation Provider shall conduct all defenses at no cost or expense to the City. City shall be reimbursed for all costs and attorney's fees incurred by City in enforcing this obligation. This indemnity 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 Ground Transportation Provider. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of Ground Transportation Provider and its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. The provisions of this section of this article shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 6 -GENERAL INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. 6.1 EXEMPTION OF CITY Ground Transportation Provider hereby specifically warrants, covenants and agrees that City shall not be liable for injury to Ground Transportation Provider's business or any loss of income therefrom or for damage to the goods, wares, merchandise or other property located in, upon or about the Airport under authority hereof, whether belonging to Ground Transportation Provider, or any employee, agent, contractor, sub-contractor, tenant, sub-lessee of Ground Transportation Provider, or any other person whomsoever. The City shall not be liable for any injury to the person of Ground Transportation Provider or Ground Transportation Provider's employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, tenants, sub-lessees, customers, or invitees, whether or not said damage or injury is caused by or results from fire, steam, electricity, gas, water or rain, or from the leakage, breakage, obstruction or other defects of pipes, sprinklers, wires, appliances, plumbing, air conditioning or lighting fixtures, or from any other cause, whether or not the said damage or injury results from conditions arising in or on any part or all of the Airport or in or on any of the improvements/ facilities appurtenant thereto located therein or thereon, or from other sources or places, and regardles~ of whether or not the cause of such damage or injury or the means of repairing the same is inaccessible to Ground Transportation Provider. Ground Transportation Provider also covenants and agrees that City shall not be liable for any damages arising from any act or neglect on the part of any third parties. J:\FY\\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs {Final) 03-28-19.oocx I I ' I i I I i l i1 I 6.2 INSURANCE Ground Transportation Provider shall, at Ground Transportation Provider's expense, obtain and, throughout the Term, maintain in full force and effect all policies of insurance required hereunder, with an insurance company(ies) either (i} admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and rated not less than "A-NII" in Bests Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) authorized by City's Risk Manager or his/her designee. Insurance Requirements shall be specified in the Permit and/or Agreement. Ground Transportation Provider shall have the right to provide the coverage specified in the Permit and/or Agreement by a program of self-insurance, which has been approved by the St;:ite of California. Ground Transportation Provider shall furnish City with a self-insured certificate of insurance and applicable endorsements. Said certificate and applicable endorsements shall document that Ground Transportation Provider's self-insurance program is approved by the State of California; the retention level of such self-insurance program; the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers are named as additional insureds; and that the policy of insurance is primary and no contribution shall be required by City. Ground Transportation Provider shall also supply the name of Ground Transportation Provider's excess insurance carrier at the time the certificate of self-insurance is supplied to City. 6.3 DELIVERY TO DIRECTOR OF EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE Ground Transportation Provider must deliver, without request or demand, to the Director, a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements or other evidence of insurance coverage required by this Article in form and content satisfactory to City's Risk Manager or his/her designee. Ground Transportation Provider must update such evidence of insurance not less frequently than annually. 6.4 EXPIRATION OF INSURANCE POLICY Prior to the expiration of any insurance policy required by this Article, Ground Transportation Provider must submit to the Director a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced, Ground Transportation Provider, within five business days following the date of written notice from the insurer of such cancellation or reduction in coverage, must file with the Director a certificate of insurance and all applicable endorsements showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or provided through another insurer or insurers. 6.5 ADJUSTMENT OF CLAIMS Ground Transportation Provider must provide for the prompt and efficient handling of all claims for bodily injury, property damage or theft arising out of the activities of Ground Transportation Provider under the Permit and/or Agreement. J:IFYI\T enanl Files\Ground T ransporlalion\Rules & Regs IF AT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx I I ! Ii i I SECTION 7 -TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES (TNCs), OR APPLICATION-BASED COMMERCIAL GROUND TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS (ABCT-PROVIDERS). 7.1 This class of Ground Transportation Provider operates under an application-based business model which enables direct communication with customers. This feature enables the customer and TNC Driver to communicate with their respective mobile devices and enables the customer to arrange for personalized ground transportation. Likewise, it enables the TNC Driver to by-pass the airport rules and procedures under which non-application based Ground Transportation Providers are required to operate. This feature creates a privilege for the TNC Providers and the TNC Drivers which is not available to other Ground Transportation Providers and Drivers. Also, because TNCs are able to avoid the rules and procedures that other Providers are subject to, there are special rules and procedures that TNC Drivers must adhere to, as listed in 7.2 below. Finally, the business model of the TNCs enables it to have access to the Passenger while still in the terminal and before the Passenger can be accessed by other Ground Transportation Providers. This business model is more similar to a terminal concession in that it has virtual access to Passengers while still in the terminal that other classes of Ground Transportation Providers do not have. For these reasons, TNC Providers will be offered a Non-Exclusive Transportation Network Company Airport Permit and TNC Drivers will have unlimited access to the various parts of the Airport. The City will utilize a Geo-Fence tracking system as a means to monitor their ingress onto Airport property, their business transactions taking place on the mobile applications, and their egress off Airport property. While providing services at the Airport terminal, TNCs will be required to drop off Passengers at TNC assigned area at the outer curb. 7.2 While operating at the terminal, TN Cs will be subject to the same procedures that private vehicles are while dropping off and picking at the curb, as follows: A. No vehicles may be left unattended under any circumstance; B. Parking and waiting are prohibited; C. The practice of cruising, as defined herein, is prohibited; D. The Cell Phone Lot has limited parking capacity and is reserved for the public and may not be used by TNC Drivers; E. TNC Drivers who must park to wait for a Passenger, or enter the terminal for any purpose must use the Public Parking Lot at the posted parking rate. SECTION 8 -TAXICAB SERVICES. 8.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR TAXICAB SERVICE. Prior to providing any ground transportation service to or from the Airport, a taxicab service provider and driver is required to obtain a Permit and Vehicle Identification Decal. Taxicab providers and drivers must show proof of appropriate local, state and federal permits and licenses. Taxicab providers must provide FAT with their hours of operation at the Airport. J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx i I I I I I 1 I ! I I ' SECTION 9 -SPECIAL EVENT TRANSPORTATION. 9.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL EVENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES. Prior to providing any ground transportation service at the Airport, all special event service providers and drivers are required to obtain an Airport ground transportation Special Activity Notice (SAN). Special event Providers and drivers must evidence proof of appropriate local, state and federal permits and licenses and must obtain a transponder and a decal from the Airport. A. With the prior permission of the Director, drivers and operators of transportation charter party services involving large group movements and the use of multiple vehicles (e.g., tour groups) may use the curbside areas as designated for the Special Event. B. Use of these areas is available on a first come, first served basis and is subject to all local, state and federal security mandates. Ground transportation services seeking to use these areas must obtain the prior approval of the Director or his designee. Requests may be submitted via telephone. C. A "Notice of Special Event" form, distributed by the Director upon approval of the service, is to be placed on the dash of each special event vehicle. The notice allows the ground transportation Provider to board or unload passengers at the designated special event curbs. SECTION 10 • NO DIVERSION OF PASSENGERS. 10.1 NO DIVERSION OF PASSENGERS. Ground transportation operators shall not, through their officers, agents, representatives, or employees divert or cause to be diverted any prospective customer or item to a location off the airport, in order to pick up or drop off said customer or item off the airport and thereby avoid paying the fees and charges that would otherwise be owed to airport hereunder. SECTION 11 -DROP OFF AND PICK UP OF PASSENGERS. 11.1 TERMINAL CURB USAGE FOR DEPARTING PASSENGERS. Unless otherwise specified, provider vehicles shall use the outside lanes, as shown on the map in Section 24, for unloading of passengers and baggage. Use of these lanes shall be for active unloading only. Drivers shall not stop in the drive lane. The driver shall not leave the vehicle unattended. 11.2 TERMINAL CURB USAGE FOR ARRIVING PASSENGERS. Unless otherwise specified, provider vehicles shall use the outside lanes, as shown on the map in Section 24, for pick-up of arriving passengers and their baggage. The driver shall not leave the vehicle unattended. Drivers shall not stop in the drive lane. The driver shall not leave the vehicle unattended. SECTION 12 -PUBLIC PARKING. 12.1 USE OF PUBLIC PARKING LOTS. Public Parking lots shall be for the use of J;\FY\\Tenan\ Files\Grouncl Transporlalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final} 03-28-19.docx I I i 1 I I ! ! I I ' I i Airport passengers only. If any Ground Transportation Provider parks in the public parking lots they shall be responsible for all fees associated with using the lots. 12.2 CELL PHONE LOT. The Cell Phone Lot is for the purpose to accommodate customers that are at the Airport for the sole purpose of picking up a traveler and do not wish to park and leave their car. Ground Transportation Providers are not allowed to stage in the Cell Phone parking lot. SECTION 13 -REFUSAL OF FARES. 13.1 REFUSAL OF FARES. Ground transportation providers may only refuse a fare as follows: A. A voucher offered by the airlines. B. If the passenger(s) luggage exceeds the capacity of the vehicle. C. Any other right of refusal as stipulated in the Rules & Regulations set forth by the Public Utilities Commission. SECTION 14-TRANSPORTATION OF DISABLED PASSENGERS AND SERVICE ANIMALS. 14.1 TRANSPORTATION OF DISABLED PASSENGERS AND SERVICE ANIMALS. Ground Transportation Providers and their drivers shall comply with City, State, and Federal regulations concerning the transportation of disabled passengers, and shall agree to transport service animals accompanying airline passengers. SECTION 15-MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE. 15.1 PERMITS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRED. All miscellaneous ground transportation service Providers are required to obtain Vehicle Identification Decals prior to providing any ground transportation service at the Airport, with the Director's review and approval. Ground Transportation service drivers in this category shall exhibit evidence of all applicable local, state and federal permits or licenses, and any other items determined by Director. SECTION 16-TRANSPORTATION CHARTER PARTY SERVICES 16.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPORTATION CHARTER PARTY SERVICES. Prior to providing any ground transportation service at the Airport, all transportation charter party service providers and drivers are required to obtain a Vehicle Identification Decal. Transportation charter party service Providers and drivers must evidence proof of appropriate local, state and federal permits and licenses. 16.2 WAYBILL REQUIRED. Transportation charter party carrier drivers are required to have a waybill for each passenger for whom they are providing ground transportation services and shall present this waybill on demand to any APSO, J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transporlalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx traffic enforcement officer, Fresno Police Officer, State of California or federal law enforcement officer, or any person authorized by the Director to demand presentation of a way bill. An electronic waybill is acceptable. SECTION 17 -PREARRANGED GROUND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES. 17 .1 "Prearranged ground transportation service" means transportation for one or more passengers that is arranged in advance or operated on a regular route between specified points and is provided in a motor vehicle with a seating capacity that does not exceed 15 passengers (including the driver}. 17 .2 If any Provider has an agreement with a third party, such as an airline, for prearranged ground transportation services, that Provider must inform the Airport in writing with a current copy of the third party agreement. SECTION 18-ENFORCEMENT. 18.1 VIOLATIONS. Violations of these Rules and Regulations may lead to the temporary suspension or permanent revocation of the ground transportation service and the driver's permit to operate on the Airport, as well as fines and criminal prosecution pursuant to these Rules and Regulations and the Fresno Municipal Code. SECTION 19-GROUND TRANSPORTATION PERMITS AND DECALS. 19.1 GROUND TRANSPORTATION DECALS. Every ground transportation vehicle, other than TNC vehicles, on the Airport premises must display a current and valid ground transportation decal unless otherwise exempted pursuant to Chapter 5, Article 4 of the Fresno Municipal Code, or these Rules and Regulations. 19.2 APPLICATION FOR GROUND TRANSPORTATION PRIVILEGES AND DECAL. A. The Director has determined that it is warranted that each company shall enter into a Permit to operate at FAT and payment of all fees pursuant to Sections 22 and 23 of these rules and regulations. 1. Provider Fees will be collected by Airport staff upon the successful passin~ of the initial vehicle inspection, and then annually on each July 1•. 2. TNC Fees are to be submitted on a monthly basis with required reports as stated in the TNC Operating Permit. B. Airport Administration shall issue permits and decals. Permits shall have terms and conditions as the Director determines to be necessary for the protection of the safety, convenience, and welfare of the City and the general public. All providers must provide all information required by the Director, including, but not limited to, J:\FYIIT enant Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx the following information: 1. Provider's name, street and mailing address, telephone and fax numbers, e-mail address (if available), and a copy of the applicant's driver's license. 2. Business/operating name, if different than Provider's name . 3. Type of ground transportation business as described in Chapter 5, Article 4, of the Fresno Municipal Code . 4. For each vehicle to be permitted, a copy of the current vehicle OMV registration, the vehicle description , license number, year, make, body type, and number of passenger seats 5. Detailed and complete description of the ground transportation service(s) to be provided, including primary service area. 6. Copy of applicable approvals (e .g. TCP/PSC certificate or City taxicab permit) for each vehicle to be permitted . 7. If Provider is seeking permission for multiple drivers under his/her supervision to provide ground transportation service applicant must provide a current roster of Drivers under provider's direct supervision together with a copy of each driver's license . 8. No ground transportation driver other than those individually granted ground transportation badges may use a Vehicle Identification Decal at FAT. 9 . Insurance declaration sheet evidencing current and valid insurance in the amounts and types set forth in these Rules and Regulations. SECTION 20 -BADGING REQUIREMENTS. 20.1 BADGING PROCEDURES, RULES AND REQUIREMENTS. A. Badging Proce ss Drivers for ground transportation operators must possess an Airport ID Badge. Badge issuance with SIDA/Restricted access is limited to those individuals who have cleared the FBI-based Criminal History Records Check All Badge applicants must provide documentation that establishes identity and employment eligibility. Badging process requires two separate trips to the. badging office . 1. First Visit in the Badging Office: a . The applicant must pay $69 in fees and present ORIGINAL government issued documents that establish the applicant's identity and legal authority to work in the United States. (1-9 documentation. This is most commonly done by a driver's license and a social security card but various other documents are acceptable -see http ://www .uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis ). J:\FY I\Tenanl Files\Grouncl Transporl alion\Rul es & Regs\FAT GT Rul es Regs (Final) 03-28 -19 .docx I Foreign born individuals must also bring other documentation. Contact the Badging Office for specifics. b. Applicants will be live-scan finger printed and information will be received for submittal of their TSA security threat assessment. c. When FBI and TSA clearances are received (currently around two weeks}, applicants will be scheduled for a badging class. 2. Second Visit in the Badging Office: a. Applicants will attend the badging class where they will learn about local security and, if applicable, driving and escorting procedures. b. At the conclusion of the class, they will be issued their FAT Security I.D. (badge) with the authorized access levels. c. The second trip usually takes approximately 1 1/2hrs. at the badging office. Documents that establish identity: Valid State Driver's License Valid State ID Card US Passport Military ID Active Issued ID Resident Alien Card B. Authorizing Signature Form Documents that establish employment eligibility: Birth Certificate Social Security Card U.S. Passport Permanent Resident Alien Card U.S. Citizen ID Card Certification of Naturalization Native American Tribal Document Each company that requests Airport ID Badges must identify one or more responsible company employees as "Authorizing Signers". Only Badge Application Forms signed by an "Authorizing Signer" will be accepted for processing. Names of individuals authorized to sign Badge Application Forms for a particular company are on file in the Airport Badging Office. Each Badge Application submitted for processing will be checked to ensure that it is authorized by one of the authorized signers. The signature of an Authorized Signer on a Badge Application Form certifies that the applicant is an employee of the particular company, and that the Application has been reviewed for completeness. The Authorizing Signer is also responsible for indicating on the Badge Application that the employee will have a need to access the ground transportation queuing area. C. Security Training J:\FYIIT en ant Files\Ground T ransportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx I I I I i I 1 I I l ri I, li I I " ' fl Badge applicants must be able to comprehend the Airport's security rules, guidelines, regulations and procedures and possess the ability to perform the responsibilities associated with unescorted access privileges. To fu Ifill this requirement, all individuals applying for an Airport photo ID Badge with access to, the ground transportation queueing area must first undergo security training. Employees will undergo a class instructed security training program. Applicants will need to come in for processing/ fingerprinting before attending the training. D. Renewal It is the responsibility of each individual to renew his or her Badge. Airport ID Badges are issued with an expiration date that is no more than 2 years from the issue date. All individuals are required to undergo Ground Transportation Refresher Training upon renewal. Failure to renew the Airport ID Badge prior to the expiration date will result in loss of airport access privileges. E. Badge Replacement It is the responsibility of the individual to whom an Airport Badge is issued to secure and properly care for that card. Any expired, damaged or defaced badges will be confiscated and possibly suspended. Badges that have been lost or stolen must be reported immediately to the Badging Office. This notification will allow the "revocation" of lost or stolen Badges in the Security Card Access System, so if found, the Badge cannot be used to gain access. Individuals who require a replacement Badge must complete a "Badge Application Form" before a replacement may be issued. This Form must be signed by the Authorizing Signer for the company. Badge Application Forms are available in the Badging Office. Replacement cost is $25. Badges will only be issued a maximum of three (3) times before they are permanently revoked. After a badge is lost or revoked for the third time the individual must report to a Badge Appeal Board in order to get their badge reissued. This appeal process does not guarantee reissuance of an Airport Badge. F. Return of Airport ID Badges It is the responsibility of each company to maintain accountability of all Airport ID Badges issued to their employees. Badges must be retrieved and returned to the Airport when an individual is no longer providing ground transportation services at the airport, or is no longer employed by a ground transportation provider. Badges must be returned to Airport Public Safety within 3 days (72 hours) of the separation. If an individual voluntarily separates from a company under good terms, and the badge cannot be returned within 72 hours, the individual will have 30 days to return the badge to the airport. Notification must still be made to Airport Public Safety immediately so the badge can be deactivated. J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportalion\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19,docx i ! I I I ! I I l I I i I I I In cases where an employee is terminated, laid off or on strike, and the company does not have the ID Badge, notification must be made to Airport Public Safety immediately. Upon this notification, the Airport Public Safety will "revoke" the individual's access authority in the Security Card Access System, to prevent them from accessing the AOA, Restricted or Secured Areas. All Badges issued to your company must be accounted for. Failure to notify the Airport about any ID Badge that you can no longer account for is a violation of the Airport Security Plan and may result in administrative sanctions and/or civil penalties. H. ID Badge Audits The Transportation Security Administration requires that the Airport regularly audit ID Badge records to ensure accuracy and accountability. Paper Audits will include a listing of all Airport ID Badges issued to a particular company. Companies will be required to review the list, ensuring that all individuals are still employed by them, still require Airport access, and are in possession of their Airport ID Badge. Physical Audits, in addition to a review and certification of the employee listing by each company, may require each badge holder to report to a specific location for a physical inspection of their ID Badge. Failure to complete Audits as requested will result in the suspension of Airport ID Badge issuance privileges. J. Record Keeping Companies are required to maintain records pertaining to ID Badge Issuance for all employees. These records must be maintained for the duration of time that the employee is with the company, and up to 180 days from the date of termination/separation. It is recommended that companies keep this documentation in a separate file; remember, it is subject to audit by the Airport or TSA. Records must be made available to the Airport for inspection to determine compliance with all security requirements. The records shall include, but not be limited to the following: 1. A copy of the Badge Application 2. A copy of the Separation Form 3. Any other information as required by the Airport Each company must provide the Airport with the location the records will be stored and the name or title and phone number of the individual who maintains the records. SECTION 23-GROUND TRANSPORTATION FEES 23.1 . FEES. These fees are listed in the Master Fee Schedule for the City of Fresno and can be updated from time to time. J:\FYI\Tenanl Files\Ground Transportation\Rules & Regs\FAT GT Rules Regs (Final) 03-28-19.docx 23.2 PAYMENT OF TRIP FEES. Payment of Airport use fees shall be made in accordance with the following procedures: A. TNC Payments shall be made on a monthly basis consistent with the provisions of the operating agreement. B. Transportation Providers as defined in the CPUC and in this agreement shall be paid annually, in full, on the anniversary of their Permit. J:\FYI\T enanl Files\Ground Transportation\Rutes & Regs IF AT GT Rules Regs {Final) 03-28-19.docx X:JQP'6 ~·8 l·£0 (1eui:1) s6aH sa1nH rn l V:l\S6aH ~ sa1nH\llOJ1eµodsueJ1 pu110Jmsan:11ueual\lA:l\:r ,- ~ f;') ; ! ZS ~ ------g ::3 i I ~ m ,- ~ i f;') i ZS ; ,-. 0 ~ ~ I l'J i f;') ,-. ; I ~ i f;') i u I I ~ {} i f;') 5?: f;') NOi! '</ .U::IOdSN'</~! ONOO}:;f 8 -l'</NIIAl~3! ::10 d'</IAI -t,Z NOl!:J3S EXHIBIT "8" ~ I ' I I I I I TAXI/BUSA.IMO WAITING/STAG ING ,\ n SHORT TERM ·o U PARKING LONG TERM PARKING HOTEL SHUTTLE/TNC WAITIN G/STAG ING FUTURE LONG TERM PARKING ~ ~ J ====~~ 0 LONG TERM PARKING LONG TERM PARKING ADDITIONAL PASSENGER PARKING FUTURE EMPLOYEE PARKING EXHIBIT "C" A. General. ASSURANCES Airport Sponsors 1. These assurances shall be complied with in the performance of grant agi·eements for airport development, airport planning, and noise compatibility program grants for airport sponsors. 2. These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the project application by sponsors requesting funds under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. As used herein, the term "public agency sponsor" means a public agency with control of a public-use airport; the term "private sponsor" means a private owner of a public-use airpoit; and the term "sponsor" includes both public agency sponsors and private sponsors. 3. Upon acceptance of this grant offer by the sponsor, these assurances are incorporated in and become pait of this grant agreement. B. Duration and Applicability. I. Airport development or Noise Compatibility Program Projects Undertaken by a Public Agency Sponsor. The terms, conditions and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect throughout the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired for an airport development or noise compatibility program project, or throughout the useful life of the project items installed within a facility under a noise compatibility program project, but in any event not to exceed twenty (20) years from the date of acceptance of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project. However, there shall be no limit on the dmation of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport. There shall be no limit on the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances with respect to real propeity acquired with federal funds. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil Rights assurance shall be specified in the assurances. 2. Airport Development or Noise Compatibility Projects Undertaken by a Private Sponsor. The preceding paragraph ·1 also applies to a private sponsor except that the useful life of project items installed within a facility or the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired under an airpmt development or noise compatibility program project shall be no less than ten (10) years from the date of acceptance of Federal aid for the project. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 1 of20 3. Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor. Unless otherwise specified in this grant agreement, only Assurances l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 18, 25, 30, 32, 33, and 34 in Section C apply to planning projects. The terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect during the life of the project; there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Airport Revenue so long as the airpmt is used as an airport. C. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this grant that: 1. General Federal Requirements. It will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the application, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this project including but not limited to the following: Federal Legislation a. Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. b. Davis-Bacon Act -40 U.S.C. 276(a), et seq.1 c. Federal Fair Labor Standards Act -29 U.S.C. 201, et seq. d. Hatch Act-5 U.S.C. 1501, et seq.2 e. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 Title 42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.12 f. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 -Section 106 -16 U. S.C. 470(f).1 g. Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 -16 U.S.C. 469 through 469c.1 h. Native Americans Grave Repatriation Act -25 U.S.C. Section 3001, et seq. i. Clean Air Act, P.L. 90-148, as amended. J. Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 93-205, as amended. k. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 -Section 102(a) -42 U.S.C. 4012a.1 l. Title 49, U.S.C., Section 303, (formerly !mown as Section 4(f)) m. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 -29 U.S.C. 794. n. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252) (prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin); o. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability). p. AgeDiscriminationActof\975-42 U.S.C. 6101,etseq. q. American Indian Religious Freedom Act, P.L. 95-341, as amended. r. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 -42 U.S.C. 4151, et seq.1 s. Power plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 -Section 403-2 U.S.C. 8373.1 t. Contract Work Hours'and Safety Standards Act -40 U.S.C. 327, et seq.1 u. Copeland Anti-kickback Act-18 U.S.C. 874.l v. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 -42 U.S.C. 4321, et seg.1 w. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P .L. 90-542, as amended. x. SingleAuditActof1984-31 U.S.C. 7501,etseg.2 y. Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 -41 U.S.C. 702 through 706. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 2 of20 z. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, as amended (Pub. L. I 09-282, as amended by section 6202 of Pub. L. 110-252). Executive Orders a. Executive Order 11246 -Equal Employment Opportunity 1 b. Executive Order 11990 -Protection of Wetlands c. Executive Order 11998 -Flood Plain Management d. Executive Order 12372-Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs e. Executive Order 12699 -Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted New Building Construction 1 f. Executive Order 12898 -Environmental Justice Federal Regulations a. 2 CFR Part 180 -0MB Guidelines to Agencies on Govemrnentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement). b. 2 CFR Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. [0MB Circular A-87 Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments, and 0MB Circular A-133 -Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations].4• 5• 6 c. 2 CFR Part 1200 -Nonprocurement Suspension and Debarment d. 14 CFR Part 13 -Investigative and Enforcement Procedures14 CFR Pmi 16 - Rules of Practice For Federally Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings. e. 14 CFR Paii 150 -Airport noise compatibility planning. f. 28 CFR Part 35-Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services. g. 28 CFR § 50.3 -U.S. Department of Justice Guidelines for Enforcement of Title VJ of the Civil Rights Act of I 964. h. 29 CFR Part 1 -Procedures for predetermination of wage rates.1 i. 29 CFR Paii 3 -Contractors and subcontractors on public building or public work financed in whole or part by loans or grants from the United States.1 j. 29 CFR Pati 5 -Labor standards provisions applicable to contracts covering federally financed and assisted construction (also labor standards provisions applicable to non-construction contracts subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act).1 k. 41 CFR Part 60 -Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor (Federal and federally assisted contracting requirements). 1 l. 49 CFR Part 18 -Uniform administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements to state and local governments.3 m. 49 CFR Part 20 -New restrictions on lobbying. n. 49 CFR Part 2 I -· Nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation -effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. o. 49 CFR Part 23 -Participation by Disadvantage Business Enterprise in Airpoti Concessions. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 3 of20 p. 49 CFR Part 24 -Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs.1 2 q. 49 CFR Part 26 -Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Programs. r. 49 CFR Pait 27 -Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting from Federal Financial Assistance.1 s. 49 CFR Part 28 -Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities conducted by the Department of Transportation. t. 49 CFR Part 30 -Denial of public works contracts to suppliers of goods and services of countries that deny procurement market access to U.S. contractors. u. 49 CFR Part 32-Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance) v. 49 CFR Pait 37 -Transportation Services for Individuals with Disabilities (ADA). w. 49 CFR Part 41 -Seismic safety of Federal and federally assisted or regulated new building construction. Specific Assurances Specific assurances required to be included in grant agreements by any of the above laws, regulations or circulars are incorporated by reference in this grant agreement. Footnotes to Assurance C.1. 1 These laws do not apply to airport planning sponsors. 2 These laws do not apply to private sponsors. 3 49 CFR Part 18 and 2 CFR Part 200 contain requirements for State and Local Governments receiving Federal assistance. Any requirement levied upon State and Local Governments by this regulation and circular shall also be applicable to private sponsors receiving Federal assistance under Title 49, United States Code. 4 On December 26, 20 l 3 at 78 FR 78590, the Office of Management and Budget (0MB) issued the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR Pait 200. 2 CFR Part 200 replaces and combines the former Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants (0MB Circular A-102 and Circular A-110 or 2 CFR Part 2 l 5 or Circular) as well as the Cost Principles (Circulars A-21 or 2 CFR part 220; Circular A-87 or 2 CFR part 225; and A-122, 2 CFR part 230). Additionally it replaces Circular A-l 33 guidance on the Single Annual Audit. In accordance with 2 CFR section 200.110, the standards set forth in Part 200 which affect administration of Federal awards issued by Federal agencies become effective once implemented by Federal agencies or when any future amendment to this Part becomes final. Federal agencies, including the Depaitment of Transpmtation, must implement the policies and procedures applicable to Federal awards by promulgating a regulation to be effective by December 26, 2014 unless different provisions are required by statute or approved by 0MB. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 4 of20 5 Cost principles established in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E must be used as guidelines for determining the eligibility of specific types of expenses. 6 Audit requirements established in 2 CFR part 200 subpatt F are the guidelines for audits. 2. Responsibility and Authority of the Sponsor. a. Public Agency Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant, and to finance and carry out the proposed project; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide such additional information as may be required. b. Private Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant and to finance and carry out the proposed project and comply with all terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement. It shall designate an official representative and shall in writing direct and authorize that person to file this application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein; to act in connection with this application; and to provide such additional information as may be required. 3. Sponsor Fund Availability. It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which are not to be paid by the United States. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and maintenance of items funded under this grant agreement which it will own or control. 4. Good Title. a. It, a public agency or the Federal government, holds good title, satisfactory to the Secretary, to the landing area of the airport or site thereof, or will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that good title will be acquired. b. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds good title satisfactory to the Secretary to that portion of the property upon which Federal funds will be expended or will give assurance to the Secretary that good title will be obtained. 5. Preserving Rights and Powers. a. It will not take or permit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without the written approval of the Secretary, and will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such performance by the sponsor. This shall be done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 5 of20 b. It will not sell, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on Exhibit A to this application or, for a noise compatibility program project, that portion of the property upon which Federal funds have been expended, for the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without approval by the Secretary. If the transferee is found by the Secretary to be eligible under Title 49, United States Code, to assume the obligations of this grant agreement and to have the power, authority, and financial resources to carry out all such obligations, the sponsor shall insert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponsor's interest, and make binding upon the transferee all of the terms, conditions, and assurances contained in this grant agreement. c. For all noise compatibility program projects which are to be carried out by another unit of local government or are on property owned by a unit of local government other than the sponsor, it will enter into an agreement with that government. Except as otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall obligate that government to the same terms, conditions, and assurances that would be applicable to it if it applied directly to the FAA for a grant to undertake the noise compatibility program project. That agreement and changes thereto must be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the local government if there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. d. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on privately owned property, it will enter into an agreement with the owner of that prope1ty which includes provisions specified by the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the property owner whenever there is substantial non- compliance with the terms of the agreement. e. If the sponsor is a private sponsor, it will take steps satisfactory to the Secretary to ensure that the airport will continue to function as a public-use airpo1t in accordance with these assurances for the duration of these assurances. f. If an arrangement is made for management and operation of the airpmt by any agency or person other than the sponsor or an employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to insure that the airpmt will be operated and maintained in accordance Title 49, United States Code, the regulations and the terms, conditions and assurances in this grant agreement and shall insure that such arrangement also requires compliance therewith. g. Sponsors of commercial service airports will not pe1mit or enter into any arrnngement that results in permission for the owner or tenant of a prope1ty used as a residence, or zoned for residential use, to taxi an aircraft between that property and any location on airport. Sponsors of general aviation airports entering into any arrangement that results in pennission for the owner of residential real property adjacent to or near the airport must comply with the requirements of Sec. 136 of Public Law 112-95 and the sponsor assurances. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 6 of20 6. Consistency with Local Plans. The project is reasonably consistent with plans ( existing at the time of submission of this application) of public agencies that at·e authorized by the State in which the project is located to plan for the development of the area surrounding the airport. 7. Consideration of Local Interest. It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near where the project may be located. 8. Consultation with Users. ln making a decision to undertake any airport development project under Title 49, United States Code, it has undertaken reasonable consultations with affected parties using the aitport at which project is proposed. 9. Public Hearings. Jn projects involving the location of an airport, an airpmt runway, or a major runway extension, it has afforded the opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the economic, social, and environmental effects of the airport or runway location and its consistency with goals and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community and it shall, when requested by the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to the Secretary. Further, for such projects, it has on its management board either voting representation from the communities where the project is located or has advised the communities that they have the right to petition the Secretary concerning a proposed project. 10. Metropolitan Planning Organization. In projects involving the location of an airpmt, an ahport mnway, or a major runway extension at a medium or large hub airport, the sponsor has made available to and has provided upon request to the metropolitan planning organization in the area in which the airport is located, if any, a copy of the proposed amendment to the airport layout plan to depict the project and a copy of any airport master plan in which the project is described or depicted. 11. Pavement Preventive Maintenance. With respect to a project approved after Januaty I, 1995, for the replacement or reconstruction of pavement at the airpo1t, it assures or cettifies that it has implemented an effective airpmt pavement maintenance-management program and it assures that it will use such program for the useful life of any pavement constructed, reconstructed or repaired with Federal financial assistance at the airport. It will provide such reports on pavement condition and pavement management programs as the Secretary determines may be useful. 12. Terminal Development Prerequisites. For projects which include terminal development at a public use airport, as defined in Title 49, it has, on the date of submittal of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required for certification of such airport under section 44 706 of Title 49, United States Code, and all the security equipment required by rule or regulation, and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 7 of20 has provided for access to the passenger enplaning and deplaning area of such airport to passengers enplaning and deplaning from aircraft other than air carrier aircraft. 13. Accounting System, Audit, and Record Keeping Requirements. a. It shall keep all project accounts and records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds of this grant, the total cost of the project in connection with which this grant is given or used, and the amount or nature of that portion of the cost of the project supplied by other sources, and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The accounts and records shall be kept in accordance with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit ·in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984. b. It shall make available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, for the purpose of audit and examination, any books, documents, papers, and records of the recipient that are pertinent to this grant. The Secretary may require that an appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient. In any case in which an independent audit is made of the accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the project in connection with which this grant was given or used, it shall file a certified copy of such audit with the Comptroller General of the United States not later than six (6) months following the close of the fiscal year for which the audit was made. 14. Minimum Wage Rates. It shall include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, provisions establishing minimum rates of wages, to be predetermined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5), which contractors shall pay to skilled and unskilled labor, and such minimum rates shall be stated in the invitation for bids and shall be included in proposals or bids for the work. 15. Veteran's Preference. It shall include in all contracts for work on any project funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, such provisions as are necessary to insure that, in the employment of labor (except in executive, administrative, and supervisory positions), preference shall be given to Vietnam era veterans, Persian Gulf veterans, Afghanistan-Iraq war veterans, disabled veterans, and small business concerns owned and controlled by disabled veterans as defined in Section 47112 of Title 49, United States Code. However, this preference shall apply only where the individuals are available and qualified to perform the work to which the employment relates. 16. Conformity to Plans and Specifications. It will execute the project subject to plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary. Such plans, specifications, and schedules shall be submitted to the Secretary prior to commencement of site preparation, constrnction, or other pe1fonnance under this grant agreement, and, upon approval of the Secretary, shall be incorporated into this grant agreement. Any modification to the approved plans, Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 8 of20 specifications, and schedules shall also be subject to approval of the Secretary, and incorporated into this grant agreement. 17. Construction Inspection and Approval. It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at the construction site throughout the project to assure that the work conforms to the plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary for the project. It shall subject the construction work on any project contained in an approved project application to inspection and approval by the Secretary and such work shall be in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Such regulations and procedures shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsors of such project as the Secretary shall deem necessary. 18. Planning Projects. In carrying out planning projects: a. It will execute the project in accordance with the approved program narrative contained in the project application or with the modifications similarly approved. b. It will furnish the Secretary with such periodic reports as required pertaining to the planning project and planning work activities. c. It will include in all published material prepared in connection with the planning project a notice that the material was prepared under a grant provided by the United States. d. It will make such material available for examination by the public, and agrees that no material prepared with funds under this project shall be subject to copyright in the United States or any other country. c. It will give the Secretary unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use any of the material prepared in connection with this grant. f. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the sponsor's employment of specific consultants and their subcontractors to do all or any part of this project as well as the right to disapprove the proposed scope and cost of professional services. g. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the use of the sponsor's employees to do all or any pait of the project. h. It understands and agrees that the Secretaiy's approval of this project grant or the Secretary's approval of any planning material developed as part of this grant does not constitute or imply any assurance or commitment on the part of the Secretaty to approve any pending or future application for a Federal airport grant. 19. Operation and Maintenance. a. The airpo1t and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport, other than facilities owned or controlled by the United States, shall be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with the minimum standards as may be required or prescribed by applicable Federal, Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 9 of20 state and local agencies for maintenance and operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes. It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected therewith, with due regard to climatic and flood conditions. Any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non-aeronautical pmposes must first be approved by the Secretary. In fmtherance of this assurance, the sponsor will have in effect arrangements for- I) Operating the airport's aeronautical facilities whenever required; 2) Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport conditions, including temporary conditions; and 3) Promptly notifying airmen of any condition affecting aeronautical use of the airpott. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the airpo1t be operated for aeronautical use during temporary periods when snow, flood or other climatic conditions interfere with such operation and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the maintenance, repair, restoration, or replacement of any structure or facility which is substantially damaged or destroyed due to an act of God or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor. b. It will suitably operate and maintain noise compatibility program items that it owns or controls upon which Federal funds have been expended. 20. Hazard Removal and Mitigation. It will take appropriate action to assure that such terminal airspace as is required to protect instrument and visual operations to the airport (including established minimum flight altitudes) will be adequately cleared and protected by removing, lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of future airport hazards. 21. Compatible Land Use. It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airpott operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft. ln addition, if the project is for noise compatibility program implementation, it will not cause or permit any change in land use, within its jurisdiction, that will reduce its compatibility, with respect to the airport, of the noise compatibility program measures upon which Federal funds have been expended. 22. Economic Nondiscrimination. a. It will make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the airport. b. In any agreement, contract, lease, or other arrangement under which a right or privilege at the airport is granted to any person, firm, or corporation to conduct or Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 10 of20 to engage in any aeronautical activity for furnishing services to the public at the airport, the sponsor will insert and enforce provisions requiring the contractor to- !) furnish said services on a reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, basis to all users thereof, and 2) charge reasonable, and not unjustly discriminato1y, prices for each unit or service, provided that the contractor may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers. c. Each fixed-based operator at the airport shall be subject to the same rates, fees, rentals, and other charges as are uniformly applicable to all other fixed-based operators making the same or similar uses of such airport and utilizing the same or similar facilities. d. Each air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based operator that is authorized or permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport. e. Each air carrier using such airpmt (whether as a tenant, non-tenant, or subtenant of another air carrier tenant) shall be subject to such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rules, regulations, conditions, rates, fees, rentals, and other charges with respect to facilities directly and substantially related to providing air transpmtation as are applicable to all such air carriers which make similar use of such airport and utilize similar facilities, subject to reasonable classifications such as tenants or non-tenants and signatory carriers and non- signatory carriers. Classification or status as tenant or signatory shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations substantially similar to those already imposed on air carriers in such classification 01· status. f. It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or corporation operating aircraft on the airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own employees [including, but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling] that it may choose to perform. g. In the event the sponsor itself exercises any of the rights and privileges referred to in this assurance, the services involved will be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of such services by commercial aeronautical service providers authorized by the sponsor under these provisions. h. The sponsor may establish such reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, conditions to be met by all users of the airpmt as may be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the airport. L The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind or class of aeronautical use of the airpo1t if such action is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 11 of20 23. Exclusive Rights. It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any person providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public. For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the following apply: a. It would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services, and b. If allowing more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to an existing agreement between such single fixed-based operator and such airport. Jt further agrees that it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct any aeronautical activities, including, but not limited to charter flights, pilot training, aircraft rental and sightseeing, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying, air carrier operations, aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in co1,junction with other aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft, sale of aircraft parts, and any other activities which because of their direct relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity, and that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an aeronautical activity now existing at such an airport before the grant of any assistance under Title 49, United States Code. 24. Fee and Rental Structure. It will maintain a fee and rental structure for the facilities and services at the airport which will make the airport as self-sustaining as possible under the circumstances existing at the particular airpo1t, taking into account such factors as the volume of traffic and economy of collection. No part of the Federal share of an airport development, airport planning or noise compatibility project for which a grant is made under Title 49, United States Code, the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, the Federal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of l 970 shall be included in the rate basis in establishing fees, rates, and charges for users of that airp01t. 25. Airport Revenues. a. All revenues generated by the airport and any local taxes on aviation fuel established after December 30, 1987, will be expended by it for the capital or operating costs of the airport; the local airport system; or other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the airport and which are directly and substantially related to the actual air transportation of passengers or property; or for noise mitigation purposes on or off the airport. The following exceptions apply to this paragraph: l) If covenants or assurances in debt obligations issued before September 3, 1982, by the owner or operator of the airpmt, or provisions enacted before September 3, 1982, in governing statutes controlling the owner or operator's financing, provide for the use of the revenues from any of the airport owner or Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 12 of20 operator's facilities, including the airport, to suppmt not only the airpmt but also the airport owner or operator's general debt obligations or other facilities, then this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the airport (and, in the case of a public airport, local taxes on aviation fuel) shall not apply. 2) If the Secretary approves the sale of a privately owned airport to a public sponsor and provides funding for any pmtion of the public sponsor's acquisition of land, this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the sale shall not apply to ce1tain proceeds from the sale. This is conditioned on repayment to the Secretary by the private owner of an amount equal to the remaining unam01tized portion (amortized over a 20-year period) of any airport improvement grant made to the private owner for any purpose other than land acquisition on or after October 1, 1996, plus an amount equal to the federal share of the current fair market value of any land acquired with an airport improvement grant made to that airport on or after October 1, 1996. 3) Certain revenue derived from or generated by mineral extraction, production, lease, or other means at a general aviation airp01t (as defined at Section 47102 of title 49 United States Code), if the FAA determines the airpo1t sponsor meets the requirements set forth in Sec. 813 of Public Law 112-95. b. As part of the annual audit required under the Single Audit Act of 1984, the sponsor will direct that the audit will review, and the resulting audit report will provide an opinion concerning, the use of airpo1t revenue and taxes in paragraph (a), and indicating whether funds paid or transferred to the owner or operator are paid or transferred in a manner consistent with Title 49, United States Code and any other applicable provision of law, including any regulation promulgated by the Secretary or Administrator. c. Any civil penalties or other sanctions will be imposed for violation of this assurance in accordance with the provisions of Section 47107 of Title 49, United States Code. 26. Reports and Inspections. It will: a. submit to the Secretary such annual or special financial and operations reports as the Secretary may reasonably request and make such reports available to the public; make available to the public at reasonable times and places a report of the airport budget in a format prescribed by the Secretary; b. for airport development projects, make the airport and all airport records and documents affecting the airport, including deeds, leases, operntion and use agreements, regulations and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; c. for noise compatibility program projects, make records and documents relating to the project and continued compliance with the terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement including deeds, leases, agreements, regulations, and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 13 of20 d. in a format and time prescribed by the Secretary, provide to the Secretaty and make available to the public following each of its fiscal years, an annual report listing in detail: 1) all amounts paid by the airport to any other unit of government and the purposes for which each such payment was made; and 2) all services and property provided by the airport to other units of government and the amount of compensation received for provision of each such service and property. 27. Use by Government Aircraft. It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at all times without charge, except, if the use by Government aircraft is substantial, charge may be made for a reasonable share, proportional to such use, for the eost of operati'ng and maintaining the facilities used. Unless otherwise detennined by the Seei·etmy, or otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and the using agency, substantial use of an airpott by Government aircraft will be considered to exist when operations of such aircraft are in excess of those which, in the opinion of the Secretary, would unduly interfere with use of the landing areas by other authorized aircraft, or during any calendar month that - a. Five (5) or more Government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on land adjacent thereto; or b. The total number of movements ( counting each landing as a movement) of Government aircraft is 300 or more, or the gross accumulative weight of Government aircraft using the airport (the total movement of Government aircraft multiplied by gross weights of such aircraft) is in excess of five million pounds. 28. Land for Federal Facilities. It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in connection with any air traffic control or air navigation activities, or weather-reporting and communication activities related to air traffic control, any areas of land or water, or estate therein, or rights in buildings of the sponsor as the Secretary considers necessary or desirable for construction, operation, and maintenance at Federal expense of space or facilities for such purposes. Such areas or any pottion thereof will be made available as provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary. 29. Airport Layout Plan. a. It will keep up to date at all times an airpott layout plan of the airport showing 1) boundaries of the airport and all proposed additions thereto, together with the boundaries of all off site areas owned or controlled by the sponsor for airport purposes and proposed additions thereto; 2) the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport facilities and structures (such as runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal buildings, hangars and Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 14 of20 roads), including all proposed extensions and reductions of existing airport facilities; 3) the location of all existing and proposed nonaviation areas and of all existing improvements thereon; and 4) all proposed and existing access points used to taxi aircraft across the airport's property boundaiy. Such airpmt layout plans and each amendment, revision, or modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary on the face of the airpott layout plan. The sponsor will not make or permit any changes or alterations in the airport or any of its facilities which are not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary and which might, in the opinion of the Secretary, adversely affect the safety, utility or efficiency of the airport. b. If a change or alteration in the airpoit or the facilities is made which the Secretaiy determines adversely affects the safety, utility, or efficiency of any federally owned, leased, or funded property on or off the airpott and which is not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary, the owner or operator will, if requested, by the Secretaiy (1) eliminate such adverse effect in a manner approved by the Secretary; or (2) bear all costs of relocating such property (or replacement thereof) to a site acceptable to the Secretary and all costs of restoring such property ( or replacement thereof) to the level of safety, utility, efficiency, and cost of operation existing before the unapproved change in the airport or its facilities except in the case of a relocation or replacement of an existing airpott facility due to a change in the Secretary's design standards beyond the control of the airpoit sponsor. 30. Civil Rights. It will promptly take any measures necessary to ensure that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in any activity conducted with, or benefiting from, funds received from this grant. a. Using the definitions of activity, facility and program as found and defined in§§ 21.23 (b) and 21.23 ( e) of 49 CFR § 21, the sponsor will facilitate all programs, operate all facilities, or conduct all programs in compliance with all non- discrimination requirements imposed by, or pursuant to these assurances. b. Applicability 1) Programs and Activities. If the sponsor has received a grant ( or other federal assistance) for any of the sponsor's program or activities, these requirements extend to all of the sponsor's programs and activities. 2) Facilities. Where it receives a grant or other federal financial assistance to construct, expand, renovate, remodel, alter or acquire a facility, or part of a facility, the assurance extends to the entire facility and facilities operated in connection therewith. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 15 of20 3) Real Property. Where the sponsor receives a grant or other Federal financial assistance in the form of, or for the acquisition of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance will extend to rights to space on, over, or under such property. c. Duration. The sponsor agrees that it is obligated to this assurance for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to the program, except where the Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the form of, personal property, or real prope1ty, or interest therein, or structures or improvements thereon, in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor, or any transferee for the longer of the following periods: I) So long as the airport is used as an airpmt, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits; or 2) So long as the sponsor retains ownership or possession of the property. d. Required Solicitation Language. It will include the following notification in all solicitations for bids, Requests For Proposals for work, or material under this grant agreement and in all proposals for agreements, including airport concessions, regardless of funding source: "The (Name of Sponsor), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into pursuant to this adve1tisement, disadvantaged business enterprises and airpo1t concession disadvantaged business ente1prises 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." e. Required Contract Provisions. 1) It will insert the non-discrimination contract clauses requiring compliance with the acts and regulations relative to non-discrimination in Federally- assisted programs of the DOT, and incorporating the act~ and regulations into the contracts by reference in every contract or agreement subject to the non- discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the DOT acts and regulations. 2) It will include a list of the pertinent non-discrimination authorities in every contract that is subject to the non-discrimination acts and regulations. 3) It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses as a covenant running with the land, in any deed from the United States effecting or recording a transfer of real property, structures, use, or improvements thereon or interest therein to a sponsor. 4) It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, creed, sex, age, or handicap as a Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 16 of20 covenant running with the land, in any future deeds, leases, license, permits, or similar instruments entered into by the sponsor with other paities: a) For the subsequent transfer of real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program; and b) For the construction or use of, or access to, space on, over, or under real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program. f. It will provide for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the Secretary to give reasonable guarantee that it, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, transferees, successors in interest, and other participants of Federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to the acts, the regulations, and this assurance. g. It agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial enforcement with regard to any matter arising under the acts, the regulations, and this assurance. 31. Disposal of Land. a. For land purchased under a grant for airport noise compatibility purposes, including land serving as a noise buffer, it will dispose of the land, when the land is no longer needed for such purposes, at fair market value, at the earliest practicable time. That po1tion of the proceeds of such disposition which is propottionate to the United States' share of acquisition of such land will be, at the discretion of the Secretary, (I) reinvested in another project at the airport, or (2) transferred to another eligible airpott as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order, (1) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 47117(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 4 7115, or 4 7117 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airpmt, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. If land acquired under a grant for noise compatibility purposes is leased at fair market value and consistent with noise buffering purposes, the lease will not be considered a disposal of the land. Revenues derived from such a lease may be used for an approved airpo1t development project that would othe1wise be eligible for grant funding or any permitted use of airport revenue. b. For land purchased under a grant for airport development purposes ( other than noise compatibility), it will, when the land is no longer needed for airport purposes, dispose of such land at fair market value or make available to the Secretary an amount equal to the United States' propo1tionate share of the fair market value of the land. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of the cost of acquisition of such land will, (1) upon application to the Secretary, he reinvested or transferred to another Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 17 of20 eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order: (I) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 471 l 7(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 47115, or 47117 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. c. Land shall be considered to be needed for airport purposes under this assurance if (1) it may be needed for aeronautical purposes (including runway protection zones) or serve as noise buffer land, and (2) the revenue from interim uses of such land contributes to the financial self-sufficiency of the airport. Further, land purchased with a grant received by an airport operator or owner before December 31, 1987, will be considered to be needed for airpott purposes if the Secretary or Federal agency making such grant before December 31, 1987, was notified by the operator or owner of the uses of such land, did not object to such use, and the land continues to be used for that purpose, such use having commenced no later than December 15, 1989. d. Disposition of such land under (a) (b) or (c) will be subject to the retention or reservation of any interest or right therein necessary to ensure that such land will only be used for purposes which are compatible with noise levels associated with operation of the airport. 32. Engineering and Design Services. It will award each contract, or sub-contract for program management, construction management, planning studies, feasibility studies, architectural services, preliminary engineering, design, engineering, surveying, mapping or related services with respect to the project in the same manner as a contract for architectural and engineering services is negotiated under Title IX of the Federal Property and Administrntive Services Act of 1949 or an equivalent qualifications-based requirement prescribed for or by the sponsor of the airport. 33. Foreign Market Restrictions. It will not allow funds provided under this grant to be used to fund any project which uses any product or service of a foreign country during the period in which such foreign country is listed by the United States Trade Representative as denying fair and equitable market opportunities for products and suppliers of the United States in procurement and constmction. 34. Policies, Standards, and Specifications. It will carry out the project in accordance with policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary including but not limited to the advisory circulars listed in the Current FAA Advisory Circulars for AIP projects, dated (the latest approved version as of this grant offer) and included in this grant, and in accordance Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 18 of20 with applicable state policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary. 35. Relocation and Real Property Acquisition. a. It will be guided in acquiring real property, to the greatest extent practicable under State law, by the land acquisition policies in Subpart B of 49 CFR Part 24 and will pay or reimburse property owners for necessary expenses as specified in Subpart B. b. It will provide a relocation assistance program offering the services described in Subpart C and fair and reasonable relocation payments and assistance to displaced persons as required in Subpait D and E of 49 CFR Part 24. c. It will make available within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, comparable replacement dwellings to displaced persons in accordance with Subpart E of 49 CFR Patt 24. 36. Access By Intercity Bnses. The airport owner or operator will permit, to the maximum extent practicable, intercity buses or other modes of transportation to have access to the airport; however, it has no obligation to fund special facilities for intercity buses or for other modes of transportation. 37. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises. The sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract covered by 49 CFR Part 26, or in the award and performance of any concession activity contract covered by 49 CFR Part 23. In addition, the sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis ofraee, color, national origin or sex in the administration of its DBE and ACDBE programs or the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26. The sponsor shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts, and/or concession contracts. The sponsor's DBE and ACDBE programs, as required by 49 CFR Paiis 26 and 23, and as approved by DOT, are incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of these programs is a legal obligation and failure to cany out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the sponsor of its failure to cany out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Parts 26 and 23 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U .S.C. I 00 I and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1936 (31 U.S.C. 3801). 38. Hangar Construction. If the airport owner or operator and a person who owns an aircraft agree that a hangar is to be constructed at the airpmi for the aircraft at the aircraft owner's expense, the airport owner or operator will grant to the aircraft owner for the hangar a long term lease that is subject to such terms and conditions on the hangar as the airport owner or operator may impose. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 19 of20 39. Competitive Access. a. If the airpmt owner or operator of a medium or large hub airport (as defined in section 47102 of title 49, U.S.C.) has been unable to accommodate one or more requests by an air carrier for access to gates or other facilities at that airpmt in order to allow the air carrier to provide service to the airpmt or to expand service at the airport, the airport owner or operator shall transmit a report to the Secretary that- I) Describes the requests; 2) Provides an explanation as to why the requests could not be accommodated; and 3) Provides a time frame within which, if any, the airport will be able to accommodate the requests. b. Such report shall be due on either February I or August I of each year if the airpo1t has been unable to accommodate the request(s) in the six month period prior to the applicable due date. Airport Sponsor Assurances 3/2014 Page 20 of20 EXHIBIT "D" Exhibit "D" DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF IN TEREST I() c. between C ity of Fresno ("Fresno") l--vt+ (" l-Y Ir ") Y ES* NO 1 Are you currently in liti gati on with the C ity of Fresno or any of its D [2g agents? 2 Do you represent any firm , organization or person who is in D ~ litigation with the City of Fresno? 3 Do you currently represe nt or perform wo rk for any cl ients who do D gJ bus in ess with the City of Fresno? 4 Are you or any of your principals, managers or professionals, owners o r in vestors in a business which does business with the D ~ City of Fresno, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Fresno? 5 Are you or any of your principa ls, managers or professionals, related by blood or marriage to any City of Fresno employee who D gJ has any sig nificant ro le in the subject matter of this service? 6 Do you or any of your subco nt ractors have , o r expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect , in any other contract in con nection with D ~ this Project? * If the answer to any question is yes, p lease exp la in in full below. - Explanation: .. 1/C I A ll responses above app ly on ly to Lyft, Inc. as a corporation only . Date 8C,\1(0i.c\ Bcoc I c (name) Lyl + I ( (l(.. (company) 18 S--~.e (l{\J S+. ;/:i S-dOo I (address) D Additional page(s) attached . So./) n"v1 c, sc o , ('A Cflf'lb'f ( city state zip) 1 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1681 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-L REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:Councilmembers Chavez Councilmember Soria Vice President Arias SUBJECT Approve override of Mayor’s veto of “Resolution - Assigning Office and Parking Space,” Resolution 2019-086 adopted by the City Council on April 25, 2019 (Requires 5 affirmative votes). Attachment: City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1682 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-M NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENTS May 16, 2019 Approve the appointments of Naindeep Singh,Nancy Gray,Debbie Darden,Jan Minami,Robert Fuentes, America Hernandez and Ivanka Saunders to the District 3 Plan Implementation Committee City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OR COMMISSION DATE: May 8, 2019 TO: City Council FROM: Miguel Arias, Council Vice President, District 3 THROUGH: Yvonne Spence, City Clerk SUBJECT: Appointment by Councilmember Arias to Board or Commission ___ Reappointment _ X_ New Appointments Name of Appointees: See list below Appointed To: District Three Implementation Committee Term: At pleasure of Council Member City Council Agenda 5/16/2019 1. Naindeep Singh 2. Nancy Gray 3. Debbie Darden 4. Jan Minami 5. Robert Fuentes 6. America Hernandez 7. Ivanka Saunders City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1684 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-N NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENTS May 16, 2019 Approve the appointments of Geraldine Wong and Robin Katich to the District 6 Plan Implementation Committee City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1685 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-O NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT Approve the appointment of Don Gross to the Fire and Police Retirement Board City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1686 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-P NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENTS May 16, 2019 Approve the following appointments to the Immigration Affairs Committee: 1.Nancy Key and Hugo Morales - District 1 2.Manuel Cunha and Deepak Ahluwalia - District 2 3.Naindeep Singh and America Hernandez - District 3 4.Jessica Smith Bobadilla and Maggie Thao - District 4 5.Samuel Molina and Evelyn Gonzalez - District 5 6.Guillermo Moreno and Elizabeth Heng - District 6 7.Thomas Hernandez and Margarita Rocha - District 7 8.Pao Yang - Mayor’s Office City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1689 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:1-Q REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:Councilmember Esparza Councilmember Soria Vice President Arias Mayor Brand SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Declaring “The Origin of Certain Place Names” by Marisol Baca the Official Poem of Fresno Attachment:Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1673 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE FRESNO REVITALIZATION CORPORATION DATE:May 16, 2019 FROM:Garry Bredefeld, Councilmember BY:Marlene Murphey, Executive Director SUBJECT Actions pertaining to a Veterans Memorial at City Hall: 1.Approve Agreement with Bell Memorials & Granite Works, Inc., in the amount of $83,854.46 for design, fabrication and installation services; and 2.Approve Agreement with WW2 Research Inc., in the amount of $15,000 for research services. Sponsor: Councilmember Bredefeld and Fresno Revitalization Corporation (FRC) RECOMMENDATIONS To implement the Veterans Memorial project it is recommended that the Fresno Revitalization Corporation approve and authorize Councilmember Garry Bredefeld to execute the attached agreements with Bell Memorials &Granite Works,Inc.,in the amount of $83,854.46 for design, fabrication and installation services;and,with WW2 Research Inc.,in the amount of $15,000 for research services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Veteran Memorial Fund is well underway and in order to proceed with implementation it is appropriate to contract for services to fabricate and install the granite monument.To help insure that all Fresno veterans are honored,a contract for historical services is included to provide a verified list of service members who lost their lives along with their branch of service and related information. BACKGROUND In March of this year,the Council unanimously decided to erect a monument to honor the service men and women from Fresno who lost their lives in World War I,World War II,Korea,Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.The Fresno Revitalization Corporation,our nonprofit 501(C)3,is assisting with the receipt and deposit of donations.As of this writing,donations totaling $64,750.00 have been received and a deposit has been made for the timely preparation of the monument.Initial estimates for the project totaled about $130,000. A portion of the installation work is expected to be donated. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS N/A City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1673 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A FISCAL IMPACT N/A ATTACHMENTS: Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Contract WW2 Researcher Letter of Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 1 Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. 339 North Minnewawa Avenue Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 299-7055 O (559) 299-7045 F Contract and SOW 01 for Agreement to Create/Install Monument Services to The City of Fresno Date Services Performed By: Services Performed For: April 22, 2019 Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. 339 North Minnewawa Avenue Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 299-7055 O (559) 299-7045 F Fresno Revitalization Corporation 2344 Tulare Street Suite 200 Fresno, CA 93721 This Contract and Statement of Work (SOW) is made between The City of Fresno (“Client”) and Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. (“Monument Contractor”), effective April 22, 2019 (the “Agreement”). This SOW # 01 (hereinafter called the “SOW”), effective as of April 22, 2019, is entered into by and between Monument Contractor and Client, and is subject to the terms and conditions specified below. The Exhibit(s) to this SOW, if any, shall be deemed to be a part hereof. In the event of any inconsistencies between the terms of the body of this SOW and the terms of the Exhibit(s) hereto, the terms of the body of this Contract / SOW shall prevail. Contract The Fresno Revitalization Corporation hereby contracts with Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. for design, fabrication, and installation of: • One (1) Granite Monument; Consisting of Three (3) Upright Panels and Bases; City of Fresno Fallen War Heroes Memorial (The “Project”) to be completed as per the description and SOW referenced herein; said Project to be delivered on or before November 1, 2019 unless delayed by transportation, strike, fire, or other conditions beyond the control of the Monument Contractor. Period of Performance The Services shall commence on April 22, 2019, and shall continue through November 1, 2019. Contract and Statement of Work Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 2 Scope of Work Monument Contractor shall provide the Services and Deliverable(s) as follows: Deliverable Materials Item Description Material Size Bases/Dies Photo Medallions Special Instructions City of Fresno Fallen War Heroes Memorial 5 Upright Panels and 1 Base Academy Black Granite Georgia Gray Granite As Per Production Layout1-D Attached (Exhibit B) Academy Black Granite & Georgia Gray Granite As Per Design Layout 1-D Attached (Exhibit A) City of Fresno Seal (1@14”) One Insignia for Each Branch of War Time Military (5@10”) None Project to be delivered and erected at the Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Fifty percent (50%) deposit required at execution of this contract; balance due prior to delivery and installation. Monument Contractor is entitled to recover costs and reasonable attorney’s fee arising out of any dispute involving this Contract/SOW. It is agreed that the title and ownership of the Project shall not pass from the Monument Contractor to the Client until this Contract is fully paid. The Project, though placed upon any real property, shall not become part of the same until paid in full. If Client defaults on payment, Monument Contractor may without further notice immediately repossess said Project and Client shall forfeit any amounts paid on account. Client gives limited power of attorney to Monument Contractor to act on their behalf with the above noted installation site. Permission is granted to the Monument Contractor to use photographs of the completed Project for any purpose such as, but not limited to, advertising, marketing, publication, electronic distribution, the Internet, and Monument Contractor’s own website. It is understood that no engraving on back of monument is included and would incur additional expense. It is further understood that no future inscriptions are included in this Contract/SOW and would be provided by Monument Contractor at additional expense to Client. Total, including all materials, delivery, installation, and sales tax: $83,854.46 Deposit: 4/23/2019 $42,000 Balance due: $41,854.46 Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 3 Monument Contractor Responsibilities Manufacture and install One (1) Academy Black Granite/ Georgia Gray Granite City of Fresno Fallen War Heroes Memorial as per Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Layout 1-D. Final Invoice (Exhibit C) includes memorial materials, granite bases, labor, sandblasting, photo medallion installations, monument engineering, transportation of Project to Project Site, and installation of monument components ONLY. Concrete footing, site work, applicable site engineering, excavation and any other preparation work for the site itself is being handled by Others and is outside this Scope of Work. *No concrete pads or benches have been included in this invoice. *All work to be performed during regular working hours and non-prevailing wage. Monument Contractor is responsible for adhering to city and county codes and permits, as applicable. Monument Contractor herein notes that at time of this Contract, no City of Fresno Building Inspector has advised that a permit is required for this Project. If such a permit is required, it may change the balance due and payable after initial deposit. Monument Contractor assumes full responsibility for all aspects of fabrication and installation that are under its control, such as project management, coordination and communication between Monument Contractor, general contractor(s), sub-contractor(s), employees and other participating entities in order to meet target completion date of November 1, 2019. Monument Contractor hereby notifies Client that Monument Contractor can only commit to the November 1, 2019 installation date as long as all project materials are received undamaged and in Monument Contractor’s possession on or before July 8, 2019. Monument Contractor cannot be held responsible for installation by November 1, 2019 if delay(s) are created by circumstances outside of Monument Contractor’s control, such as, but not limited to: fire, earthquake, major weather disturbances and other Acts of Nature; overseas shipping delays; domestic shipping/transportation delays; union strikes; port strikes; and customs delays. Project has been estimated and priced according to regular, non-prevailing wages (no overtime). If circumstances outside Monument Contractor’s control occur which impact the November 1, 2019 date, resulting in possible delays, Client may elect to engage overtime charges to meet the November 1, 2019 date. These additional charges will be at Client’s direction, and will be contracted via the Project Change Control Procedure as outlined in that section. Client Responsibilities Client shall be responsible for providing all names and inscriptions for the Project. Client shall be further responsible for final proofreading of names and inscriptions to ensure correct spelling (especially as it relates to names), punctuation, grammar, imagery and insignias. While Monument Contractor strives to ensure all inscriptions are accurate, Monument Contractor must rely on Client’s knowledge of names and specific insignias, Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 4 etc to produce an error-free final product. By signature below, Client certifies that they have checked the inscriptions as attached Exhibit D and Exhibit E and find them to be correct. Client is responsible for securing all site preparation work, including but not limited to: engineering, excavation, cement foundation and/or pedestals, retaining walls, benches, landscaping and any other site work deemed necessary to prepare site for installation of The Project. Client is responsible for a 50% deposit of total Project cost; with balance due prior to installation.* Exhibits Please see attached Exhibits, which herein referenced become part of the Contract and Scope of Work (SOW): • Exhibit A: Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Design Layout 1-D • Exhibit B: Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Production Layout 1-D • Exhibit C: Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Final Invoice • Exhibit D: List of Names and Other Inscriptions for Project, as provided by Client • Exhibit E: Contractors Insurance Requirements • Exhibit F: Indemnification Fee Schedule This engagement will be conducted on a Time & Materials basis. The total value for the Services pursuant to this SOW shall not exceed $83,854.46 unless otherwise agreed to by both parties via the project change control procedure, as outlined within. A PCR will be issued specifying the amended value. Upon completion of this Performance Period, Monument Contractor and Client will have the option to renew this agreement for an additional then-stated number of hours at the then-current hourly rate for those resources identified. Bill To Address Client Project Manager Client Cost Center 2344 Tulare Street Suite 200 Fresno, CA 93721 Garry Bredefeld N/A Completion Criteria Monument Contractor shall have fulfilled its obligations when any one of the following first occurs: • Monument Contractor accomplishes the Monument Contractor activities described within this SOW, including delivery to Client of the materials listed in the Section entitled “Deliverable Materials,” and Client accepts such activities and materials without unreasonable objections. No response from Client within 2-business days of deliverables being delivered and/or installed by Monument Contractor is deemed acceptance. Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 5 Project Change Control Procedure The following process will be followed if a change to this SOW is required: • A Project Change Request (PCR) will be the vehicle for communicating change. The PCR must describe the change, the rationale for the change, and the effect the change will have on the project. • The designated Project Manager of the requesting party (Monument Contractor or Client) will review the proposed change and determine whether to submit the request to the other party. • Both Project Managers will review the proposed change and approve it for further investigation or reject it. Monument Contractor and Client will mutually agree upon any charges for such investigation, if any. If the investigation is authorized, the Client Project Managers will sign the PCR, which will constitute approval for the investigation charges. Monument Contractor will invoice Client for any such charges. The investigation will determine the effect that the implementation of the PCR will have on SOW price, schedule and other terms and conditions of the Agreement. • Upon completion of the investigation, both parties will review the impact of the proposed change and, if mutually agreed, a Change Authorization will be executed. • A written Change Authorization and/or PCR must be signed by both parties to authorize implementation of the investigated changes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract and SOW to be effective as of the day, month and year first written above. Fresno Revitalization Corporation Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. By: By: Name: Marlene Murphy Name: Dan L. Bell Title: Title: President Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 6 Exhibit A Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Design Layout 1-D Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 7 Exhibit B Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Production Layout 1-D Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 8 Exhibit C Bell Memorials & Granite Works Inc. Final Invoice Dated April 22, 2019 Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 9 Exhibit D List of Names and Other Inscriptions for Project, as provided by Client Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 1 Exhibit E Contractors Insurance Requirements INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS (a) Throughout the life of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all insurance as required herein 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 herein 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, CONTRACTOR or any of its subcontractors 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 CONTRACTOR 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 CONTRACTOR 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 CONTRACTOR shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, 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 CONTRACTOR. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of CONTRACTOR, vendors, suppliers, invitees, contractors, sub-contractors, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. 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. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE EXHIBIT A CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, and for 5 years thereafter, insurance with limits of liability 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: Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 1 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. Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California with statutory limits and EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY with limits of liability not less than: (i) $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury; (ii) $1,000,000 disease each employee; and, (iii) $1,000,000 disease policy limit. UMBRELLA OR EXCESS INSURANCE In the event CONTRACTOR 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 CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policy(ies) required herein and CONTRACTOR shall also be responsible for payment of any self-insured retentions. Any 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 self-insured retentions as respects CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers; or (ii) CONTRACTOR 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 (i) 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 has been given to CITY, except ten (10) days for nonpayment of premium. CONTRACTOR 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, CONTRACTOR 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, CONTRACTOR 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. (ii) The Commercial General and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall be written on an occurrence form. (iii) The Commercial General and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall be endorsed to name City, its Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 1 officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers as an additional insured. CONTRACTOR shall establish additional insured status for the City and for all ongoing and completed operations under the Commercial General Liability policy by use of ISO Forms or an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement providing additional insured status. The Commercial General endorsements must be as broad as that contained in ISO Forms: GC 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 & CG 20 37. (iv) The Commercial General and Automobile Liability insurance shall contain, or be endorsed to contain, that the CONTRACTORS’ insurance shall be primary to and require no contribution from the City. The Commercial General insurance policy is required to include primary and non contributory coverage in favor of the City for both the ongoing and completed operations coverage. These coverages shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. If CONTRACTOR maintains higher limits of liability than the minimums shown above, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits of liability maintained by CONTRACTOR. (v) Should any of these policies provide that the defense costs are paid within the Limits of Liability, thereby reducing the available limits by defense costs, then the requirement for the Limits of Liability of these polices will be twice the above stated limits. (vi) For any claims related to this Agreement, CONTRACTOR’S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers shall be excess of the CONTRACTOR’S insurance and shall not contribute with it. (vii) The Workers’ Compensation insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain, a waiver of subrogation as to CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers. (viii) The Commercial General and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall contain, or be endorsed to contain, a waiver of subrogation as to CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers. PROVIDING OF DOCUMENTS - CONTRACTOR shall furnish CITY with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required herein 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, CONTRACTOR 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. All subcontractors working under the direction of CONTRACTOR shall also be required to provide all documents noted herein. CLAIMS-MADE POLICIES - If any coverage required is written on a claims-made coverage form: (i) The retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by CONTRACTOR. (ii) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the work or termination of the Agreement, whichever first occurs. (iii) 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 work commencement date, CONTRACTOR must purchase “extended reporting” period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the work or termination of the Agreement, whichever first occurs. (iv) A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to CITY for review. (v) These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement. SUBCONTRACTORS - -If CONTRACTOR subcontracts any or all of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall require, at the discretion of the CITY Risk Manager or designee, 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 required, CONTRACTOR will be solely responsible for ensuring that it’s subcontractors maintain insurance coverage at levels no less than those required by applicable law and is customary in the relevant industry. Contract / Statement of Work for FRC April 22, 2019 1 Exhibit E Indemnification To the furthest extent allowed by law, Monument Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend Client 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 Client, Monument 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. Monument Contractor’s obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether Client 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 the willful misconduct, of Client or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. If Monument Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Monument Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend Client 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 P a g e | 1 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project LETTER OF AGREEMENT This letter includes the terms and conditions that will constitute the agreement between the Office of Fresno City Councilmember Garry Bredefeld (“Client”) and WW2 Research Inc (“Consultant”, or “WW2 Research”) under which WW2 Research has been hired to provide historical and military records research services to Client. 1. Term. The term of this Agreement will commence on April 15, 2019 and will continue through May 15, 2019, unless extended by mutual written agreement or terminated by either party in accordance with the terms specified under section 5 below. 2. Services. WW2 Research agrees to provide historical research services in connection with the City of Fresno’s “Fresno Veterans Memorial”. The services are described in Attachment A, Scope of Work, to this Agreement. 3. Compensation. For services and outlays on Client’s behalf, the basis of compensation to WW2 Research Inc shall be as follows: a. Financial Arrangement: i. WW2 Research shall assess a service fee of: 1. $15,000 a. Client agrees to pay a deposit of $2,500 via check or PayPal upon contract signing and before work begins. b. Client agrees to pay the remaining balance of $12,500 on or before May 15, 2019 via check or PayPal. Client will be invoiced prior to the due date; payment instructions will be provided in the invoice. 2. Additional services in excess of the planned budget may be performed upon receipt of written authorization by the Client. ii. A deposit of $2,500 is due upon contract signing and must be received by WW2 Research Inc before work begins. b. . 4. Billing. The following billing arrangements and due dates shall be in effect unless otherwise specified and agreed upon in writing by both parties: a. Client will be invoiced, and agrees to pay upon contract signing, the deposit against the project service fee. Work will begin once the funds are received by WW2 Research via check or PayPal. b. Each subsequent fee may be made by check or PayPal and will be initiated in time to be received at WW2 Research by the invoice due date. Page | 2 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project c. Client agrees to pay all undisputed invoices by the invoice due date. WW2 Research will assess a $250 late fee for invoices paid five days after the invoice due date. WW2 Research reserves the right to assess a 1.5% per month finance charge for invoices that remain unpaid after 30 days. Client agrees to reimburse WW2 Research for all expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in the collection of any overdue and unpaid invoices. In the event that invoices remain unpaid for more than 15 days, WW2 Research may, at its discretion, suspend work on Client’s account. In addition, in the event any invoices become overdue, all subsequent payments may, at WW2 Research’s option, first be applied to those invoices which are overdue for the longest period of time until all payments are up to date. d. WW2 Research reviews each invoice for accuracy before sending it to the Client. However, it is important that Client immediately review all invoices and approve them for payment. If Client cannot approve any portion of an invoice, Client agrees to contact WW2 Research immediately to discuss the discrepancy. Client agrees that invoices are deemed to be approved five days after receipt unless Client has notified WW2 Research in writing of a disputed invoice. 5. Termination. a. Either party may cause this Agreement to terminate by giving seven days’ written notice. Written notification should be delivered by email to the principal of WW2 Research Inc. WW2 Research’s receipt of the letter of termination shall cause a 15-day Notification Period to begin. During the Notification Period, the rights, duties and responsibilities of Client and WW2 Research as Client and Agency shall continue in full force and effect, and payment of all fees, hourly charges, expenses and other sums shall continue as provided in this Agreement. b. In the case of early termination, Client agrees to pay WW2 Research for all verifiable work performed up to the date of termination according to the Contractor’s published rates in effect during the contract period. . 6. Right of Ownership All articles, web sites, monuments, and other public works created or published under this agreement will remain the exclusive property of Client or other copyright holders, except where the Client transfers rights to the publishing entity. All services provided by WW2 Research under this Agreement shall be for the exclusive use of the Client. Upon full payment of all fees and expenses, reproduction rights for all work created by WW2 Research for this project shall be granted. All original source files, documents, spreadsheets and the like, created by WW2 Research or parts contained therein, whether preliminary concepts or final visual presentation remains the property of the WW2 Research and may not be used by the Client without the written permission of WW2 Research. WW2 Research retains the right to reference the completed project lists of names of war dead for educational purposes, marketing materials, on-line posting on Page | 3 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project WW2 Research website and physical portfolio. Where applicable the client will be given any necessary credit for usage of the project elements. 7. Possession of Property. Upon the termination of this contract and receipt of final payments, WW2 Research shall transfer, assign, and make available to Client or Client’s representative all property and materials in WW2 Research’s possession or control, which belong to Client, if requested. 8. Indemnification. a. Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless WW2 Research from and against all liabilities, losses, damages or expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, which WW2 Research may incur as the result of any claim, suit or proceeding brought or threatened arising out of the nature or use of Client’s work performed under this Agreement or research inquiries WW2 Research may make on Client’s behalf. b. Likewise, WW2 Research will indemnify, defend and hold harmless Client against all liabilities, losses, damages or expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, which Client may incur as the result of any claim, suit or proceeding brought or threatened against Client pertaining to libel, slander, defamation, copyright infringement, invasion of privacy and/or plagiarism, except to the extent that such claims arise from information or materials supplied by or through Client. c. In the event WW2 Research is called upon to respond to or assist Client in connection with litigation commenced or threatened against Client by third parties (for example, in complying with a document subpoena), WW2 Research will be entitled to staff time charges and reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses for services rendered to Client, or time spent by WW2 Research in connection with such matters. 9. Confidentiality. WW2 Research and Client agree to keep confidential and not to disclose or use for their own benefit or for the benefit of any third party (except as may be required for the performance of services under this agreement or as may be required by law), any information, documents or materials which are identified by a party, at the time that they are made available, to be proprietary or confidential. The confidentiality obligations in the preceding sentence, however, shall not extend to any information, documents, or materials that (a) become publicly available without breach of this provision, (b) are received from a third party without restriction, or (c) are independently developed without reference to information received hereunder from the other party, and provided further that such obligations shall expire upon the first anniversary of the effective date of termination of this contract. 10. Agreement Disclosure. WW2 Research may publicize our agreement to work with Client in the form of press releases and announcements and may include Client’s name in our client roster for the purpose of further business development efforts. Page | 4 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project 11. Dispute Resolution. This agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to California State law, with jurisdiction and venue in the California State courts in Los Angeles County. We hope and expect that our relationship will be mutually beneficial and cooperative. However, disputes arising out of or related to this agreement shall be resolved in accordance with this provision. In the first instance the parties will attempt to resolve such disputes through open communication and dialogue. To this end, if a party has a concern about an actual or possible dispute, and there is not otherwise a reason to immediately give a Notice of Dispute, the concerned party will informally notify the other party of the nature of the dispute and explore the possibility of reaching an agreeable resolution, prior to initiating a Notice of Dispute. If the parties cannot resolve the matter by informal dialogue or there is a reason to give notice immediately, either party may give Notice of Dispute to the other party. The Notice of Dispute shall state the nature of the dispute and the corrective action necessary to remedy the dispute. After Notice of Dispute, the parties shall first attempt to resolve any disputes by mediation. The parties shall agree on a single mediator who shall be Mediation shall be conducted in Los Angeles County, California. Each party shall pay its own attorneys’ fees and the costs of mediation shall be split equally between the parties. If the dispute has not been resolved by mediation within 30 days after Notice of Dispute, or the parties are unable to agree to a mediator, within 10 days after Notice of Dispute, then the dispute shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance with the binding arbitration laws of the State of California and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. The parties shall agree on an arbitrator who shall render a decision within ten days of the arbitration hearing. Arbitration shall be conducted in Los Angeles County, California. Anything else in this provision notwithstanding, if either party, at any time, believes that there is the need to maintain the status quo pending resolution by one or more of the methods set forth in this section, that party may seek a preliminary injunction or other equitable relief from any court of competent jurisdiction. 12. No Warranty. WW2 Research makes no guarantees as to the success of the Client’s Veterans War Memorial Project. Except for damages resulting from WW2 Research of Client’s material breach of any of their agreements contained herein, and except for any intentional, reckless, or grossly negligent actions by WW2 Research or Client or their agents, neither WW2 Research nor Client shall be liable to each other for any damages, including any lost profits, lost savings, or other incidental, consequential, or special damages arising out of or related to this agreement. Except as expressly set forth in this agreement, WW2 Research’s Page | 5 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project services delivered under this agreement are delivered without warranty of any kind, including without limitation, any warranty of non-infringement, merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose. 13. General Terms. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create any partnership or joint venture between the parties and WW2 Research shall not be deemed to be Client’s employee. WW2 Research will be acting as Client’s agent when purchasing materials or services on Client’s behalf, and Client agrees that all orders placed and contracts entered into by WW2 Research on Client’s behalf with our suppliers and other persons may so state. Client acknowledges that WW2 Research may from time to time use consultants and/or subcontractors in the performance of services hereunder. This agreement may not be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other, and any such purported assignment shall be void. This agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the law of the State of California, applicable to contracts made and to be performed entirely therein. This document is a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of this agreement and may not be changed orally but only in writing and signed by both parties. Page | 6 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project Agreed and Accepted: Agreed and Accepted: Fresno Veterans Memorial (Signature) (Signature) William Beigel, WW2 Researcher Garry Bredefeld (Print or type name) (Print or type name) WW2 Research Inc City of Fresno City Councilmember (Title) (Title) April 15, 2019 April 15, 2019 (Date) (Date) Bill.Beigel@ww2research.com Garry.Bredefeld@fresno.gov (e-mail Address) (e-mail Address) 804 El Redondo Avenue _______________________________________ (Mailing Address) (Signature) Douglas T. Stone Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Douglas T. Stone, City Attorney _______________________________________ (City, State/Province, Zip) (Print or type name) (310) 791-3949 ________________________________________ (Phone Number) (Date) Page | 7 WW2 Research Inc Research Services Agreement City of Fresno War Memorial Project Attachment A: SCOPE OF WORK WW2 Research will provide to Client a list, via Excel Spreadsheet, the following information: 1) List of servicemen from the City of Fresno who can be verified as having died in World War 2, in combat or in captivity as prisoners of war. Servicemen from the City of Fresno who did not die in combat (other than prisoners of war) shall not be included in this list. 2) List of servicemen from the City of Fresno who can be verified as having died in in the Korean War, in combat or in captivity as prisoners of war. Serviceman from the City of Fresno who did not die in combat (other than prisoners of war) shall not be included in this list 3) The list of names will also include complete rank (or grade) of servicemen, branch of the military with which they served, first name, middle initial, and surname, as recorded in World War 2 or Korean War military files. 4) WW2 research confirms that it has reviewed the lists of Vietnam and Gulf Conflict War dead provided by the Fresno Veterans Memorial and finds that the lists are accurate, barring extensive research or any evidence to the contrary. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1624 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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, Right-of-Way Section SUBJECT HEARING - To vacate a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Council District 2) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council conduct the required public hearing and at the close of the hearing, adopt the attached resolution ordering the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Susan Flores is requesting the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad as described in Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution. The purpose of this vacation is to eliminate excess public street right-of-way. BACKGROUND The proposed vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad was previously dedicated by map of the Town of Herndon in Book 1,of Miscellaneous Maps at Page 27,Fresno County Records.The purpose of this vacation is to eliminate excessive right-of-way of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. 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”of the attached Resolution,subject to Conditions of Approval as listed in Exhibit “B”of the attached City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1624 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: attached Resolution,subject to Conditions of Approval as listed in Exhibit “B”of the attached Resolution. This action is being taken pursuant to the provisions of the Public Streets,Highways,and Service Easements Vacation Law (California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8300-8363). On April 25,2019,the Council adopted Resolution of Intention No.1129-D,setting the time and place for the public hearing at 10:00 a.m.on May 16,2019,in the Council Chambers at Fresno City Hall. The public hearing has been duly noticed in accordance with the Public Streets,Highways,and Service Easements Vacation Law. The City Attorney's Office has approved the attached resolution 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 The City of Fresno adopted EA P18-02491 for the above-described project on April 25,2019 and determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15303/Class 3 which exempts new construction or conversion of small structures.Staff found that those conditions are met: 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,licensing,or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,facilities,mechanical equipment,or topgraphical features,involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination;including but not limited to,alteration of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities. Section 15303/Class 3 exempts projects consisting of the new construction or conversion 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 in the exterior of the structure.Examples of this include but are not limited to (a)one single family residence,or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone;in urbanized areas up to three single family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption, and (b)a duplex or similar multifamily residential structure totaling no more than four dwelling units; in urbanized areas this exemption applies to apartments duplexes and similar structures designed for not more than six dwelling units,and (e)accessory structures including garages,carports,patios, swimming pools and fences. Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332/Class 32 which exempts infill development.Staff found that those conditions are met with the vacation conditions set forth by Public Works.The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acresCity of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1624 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.The project site has no value as habitat for endangered,rare or threatened species.Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects related to traffic,noise,air quality or water quality.The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because the vacation of a public street easement does not involve bidding or contracting. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no City funds involved with this vacation.Susan Flores has paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachments: Devlan-Weber Vacation_Vicinity EA P18-02491 Devlan-Weber Resolution to Vacate City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 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 2 Assessor's Parcel Numbers 504-114-22 2 of 3 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 that the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad, as shown in Exhibit “A” is unnecessary for present and prospective public street purposes. 2. The public interest and convenience require, and it is hereby ordered, that as of May 16, 2019, the public street easement as shown in Exhibit “A” be vacated. 3. The proceedings for the vacation of such right-of-way are intended to be and shall be taken subject to the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit “B”, which is attached and incorporated herein. All work required by such conditions shall be completed in compliance with City Standard Specifications and approved by the Public Works Department. 4. 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. 5. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of the resolution for recordation in the Office once all work associated with this requirement has been accepted by the City Engineer or the Public Works Director. 6. 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 , 2019. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2019 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2019 Mayor Veto: , 2019 Council Override Vote: , 2019 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC, CRM City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY: John Hastrup Date Deputy City Attorney Attachment: Exhibits “A” and “B” PW File No. 12359 2090 NORTH WINERY AVENUE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93703(559) 292-4046 * FAX 251-9220 * EMAIL: STAFF@DALEMELL.COM EXHIBIT “B” VACATION CONDITIONS The following conditions must be met before the vacation resolution can be recorded: 1. The proposed street vacation area lies within the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District's Drainage Area "EH". This portion of Devlan Avenue is located in an area that has historically provided a passage for major storm flows from the areas to the north and east of the proposed vacation area. As a condition of the vacation a passageway for major storm flows must be provided and a drainage channel easement shall be granted to the District. The size and type of drainage channel easement will need to be reviewed and approved by the District prior to implementation. Approximately 131 acres of land contribute to this major storm water flow location. The District will need to review and approve any improvement plans associated with the vacation (i.e. grading plan and street plans), for conformance with the Master Plan drainage patterns prior to implementation. 2. The City of Fresno Street Maintenance Division requires a 6.00 foot wide public utility easement reserved for street light maintenance. If you have any questions or concerns about the requirements please contact Bill Shoemaker at (559) 621- 1312. PW File 12259 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1652 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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, Right-of-Way Section SUBJECT CONTINUED HEARING - To vacate a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Council District 2) 1.***RESOLUTION - Ordering the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council conduct the required public hearing and at the close of the hearing, adopt the attached resolution ordering the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Susan Flores is requesting the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad as described in Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution. The purpose of this vacation is to eliminate excess public street right-of-way. BACKGROUND The proposed vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad was previously dedicated by map of the Town of Herndon in Book 1,of Miscellaneous Maps at Page 27,Fresno County Records.The purpose of this vacation is to eliminate excessive right-of-way of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad. The Public Works Department,other City departments and utility agencies have reviewed the City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1652 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: 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”of the attached Resolution,subject to Conditions of Approval as listed in Exhibit “B”of the attached Resolution. This action is being taken pursuant to the provisions of the Public Streets,Highways,and Service Easements Vacation Law (California Streets and Highways Code Sections 8300-8363). On April 25,2019,the Council adopted Resolution of Intention No.1129-D,setting the time and place for the public hearing at 10:00 a.m.on May 16,2019,in the Council Chambers at Fresno City Hall. The public hearing has been duly noticed in accordance with the Public Streets,Highways,and Service Easements Vacation Law. The City Attorney's Office has approved the attached resolution 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 The City of Fresno adopted EA P18-02491 for the above-described project on April 25,2019 and determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15303/Class 3 which exempts new construction or conversion of small structures.Staff found that those conditions are met: 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,licensing,or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,facilities,mechanical equipment,or topgraphical features,involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination;including but not limited to,alteration of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities. Section 15303/Class 3 exempts projects consisting of the new construction or conversion 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 in the exterior of the structure.Examples of this include but are not limited to (a)one single family residence,or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone;in urbanized areas up to three single family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption, and (b)a duplex or similar multifamily residential structure totaling no more than four dwelling units; in urbanized areas this exemption applies to apartments duplexes and similar structures designed for not more than six dwelling units,and (e)accessory structures including garages,carports,patios, swimming pools and fences. Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332/Class 32 which exempts infill development.Staff found that those conditions are met with the vacation conditions setCity of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1652 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: exempts infill development.Staff found that those conditions are met with the vacation conditions set forth by Public Works.The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.The project site has no value as habitat for endangered,rare or threatened species.Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects related to traffic,noise,air quality or water quality.The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because the vacation of a public street easement does not involve bidding or contracting. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no City funds involved with this vacation.Susan Flores has paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachments: Devlan-Weber Vacation_Vicinity EA P18-02491 Devlan-Weber Resolution to Vacate City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 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 2 Assessor's Parcel Numbers 504-114-22 2 of 3 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 that the vacation of a portion of West Devlan Avenue and North Weber Avenue north of the Southern Pacific Railroad, as shown in Exhibit “A” is unnecessary for present and prospective public street purposes. 2. The public interest and convenience require, and it is hereby ordered, that as of May 16, 2019, the public street easement as shown in Exhibit “A” be vacated. 3. The proceedings for the vacation of such right-of-way are intended to be and shall be taken subject to the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit “B”, which is attached and incorporated herein. All work required by such conditions shall be completed in compliance with City Standard Specifications and approved by the Public Works Department. 4. 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. 5. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of the resolution for recordation in the Office once all work associated with this requirement has been accepted by the City Engineer or the Public Works Director. 6. 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 , 2019. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2019 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2019 Mayor Veto: , 2019 Council Override Vote: , 2019 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC, CRM City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY: John Hastrup Date Deputy City Attorney Attachment: Exhibits “A” and “B” PW File No. 12359 2090 NORTH WINERY AVENUE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93703(559) 292-4046 * FAX 251-9220 * EMAIL: STAFF@DALEMELL.COM EXHIBIT “B” VACATION CONDITIONS The following conditions must be met before the vacation resolution can be recorded: 1. The proposed street vacation area lies within the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District's Drainage Area "EH". This portion of Devlan Avenue is located in an area that has historically provided a passage for major storm flows from the areas to the north and east of the proposed vacation area. As a condition of the vacation a passageway for major storm flows must be provided and a drainage channel easement shall be granted to the District. The size and type of drainage channel easement will need to be reviewed and approved by the District prior to implementation. Approximately 131 acres of land contribute to this major storm water flow location. The District will need to review and approve any improvement plans associated with the vacation (i.e. grading plan and street plans), for conformance with the Master Plan drainage patterns prior to implementation. 2. The City of Fresno Street Maintenance Division requires a 6.00 foot wide public utility easement reserved for street light maintenance. If you have any questions or concerns about the requirements please contact Bill Shoemaker at (559) 621- 1312. PW File 12259 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1644 Agenda Date:6/13/2019 Agenda #: REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE COUNCIL May 16, 2019 Appearance by Gidai Maaza and Cesar CasaMayor to discuss the Measure Cannabis Business tax and the need to define the regulations. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE THE FRESNO CITY COUNCIL NOTE-ALL REQUESTS MUST BE TYPEWRITTEN On April 1, 1980 the Fresno City Council adopted a policy relating to procedures to be used for those persons wishing to appear before the Fresno City Council, as follows: SCHEDULED ORAL COMMUNICATIONS-APPEARANCES ON PRINTED AGENDA Submit this form, or a written letter to the City Clerk, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 requesting to be placed on the agenda for a scheduled time. The letter should state the subject matter, provide supporting material, if any, and state the action you wish the City Council to take. Your request will be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer and placed on the agenda no sooner than ten (10) days after a receipt of your written letter in order to provide an opportunity for City staff to prepare comments for Council consideration. The policy is to limit your presentation to three (3) minutes pursuant to Ordinance 96-67. The City Clerk shall provide copies of your written request to the Fresno City Council. UNSCHEDULED ORAL COMMUNICATIONS You may address the City Council at the conclusion of the Council meeting and the policy is to limit your presentation to three (3) minutes pursuant to Ordinance 96-67. Please be present at the conclusion of the Council meeting if you wish to be heard. REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE THE FRESNO CITY COUNCIL NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. DATE LETTER Gidai Maaza and Cesar CasaMayor District 1 and Distirct 3 4.29.2018 We would like to speak and make public comment re: Measure Cannabis Bussiness tax and the need to define w/in the regulations 1. A pathway intot he industry for people or color 2. Spefically map our the guidelines of the Community Benefit fund/advisory commitee and themes community would like addressed. Email Print City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1661 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 Appearance by Gonzalo Arambula to discuss the homeless City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1671 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:Councilmember Chavez, District 5 Request for City partnership in development and filing of a $4.9 million dollar Prop 68 Parks Grant Application, and a $400,000 Cal Fire Grant Application. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1 May 16, 2019 TO: Council Member Luis Chavez, District 5 Fresno City Council RE: Request of City's Partnership in the Development and Filing of a $4.9 million Proposition 68 Park Grant Application and a $400,000 Cal-Fire Grant Application. The Southeast Fresno Community Economic Development Association, Inc (SEFCEDA) along with more than 25 organizations that include community groups, soccer leagues and clubs, small businesses, medical professionals, educational institutions, and thousands of Fresno region residents, students and senior citizens would like to remind you that the shortage of parks, green space and recreational facilities in the Southern neighborhoods of our City continues to be an acute problem that adversely impacts quality of life, health, air quality conditions, respiratory illnesses, and higher mortality rates of Fresno region residents. 2 Proposition 68 provides a unique opportunity to address the shortage of parks and recreation facilities we have in South Fresno and the need to improve quality of life in our City and promote a cleaner and more healthy environment. In other California cities park programs combined with law enforcement activities have a positive impact in the reduction of crime. Business attraction programs can also be improved for cities that have a reputation of making the funding of parks a high priority. Soccer tournaments and events proposed by SEFCEDA can pay for the cost and maintenance of this new park project and have a positive impact on the local economy as this project will attract visitors from all parts of the State. As you know, the application process for the allocation of California Proposition 68 funds in the amount of $650 million statewide is now open for the first of two possible rounds. The maximum amount per project is $8.5 million. SEFCEDA would like to partner with the City of Fresno in the filing of a $4.9 million Proposition 68 application to fund improvements of phase I of the new regional park and soccer complex at 2155 S. Peach Avenue for the use of about 75% of this 49-acre City- owned park site. Additional funding for the planting of trees in the amount of $400,000 will also be requested from Cal-Fire. Project Scope. The proposed new Southeast Fresno Regional Park and Soccer Complex includes two main components: 3 Northern 18.5-acre Parcel. Phase I improvements of this project will include the completion of a new park on this entire parcel with the emphasis on outdoor recreation. Components of this park will include a veterans memorial garden, an open space playground area, picnic areas, children playground areas, a dog park, lots of new trees, a woodland component, all-purpose trails, outdoor courts for futsal, basketball, volleyball/Katar, a concession stand, restrooms, and parking. Only essential office space, storage and maintenance space will be provided during this phase. An existing community garden (4-5 acres) already in operation will continue. Funding for a community center and multipurpose hall, locker rooms and showers and a new softball field will be sought from additional future funding sources. Southern 30.5-Acre Parcel. Approximately one half of the western part of this parcel will be used for the construction of four regulation size soccer fields with synthetic grass floodlit convertible to several smaller size fields for youth soccer activities. A concession stand, along with parking and restroom facilities and landscaped areas will be included during this Phase I. About one half of the eastern part will remain vacant for future soccer sport facilities additions and development. An Indoor futsal facility with locker rooms and showers and a social area will be added at a future phase. 4 Construction Cost. We believe the $5.3 Million to be generated by these two state grant funding opportunities in combination with other resources will adequately fund the essential components of Phase I of this project. However, prior to the submittal of these grant applications to State agencies the project scope and design will be more refined by the Applicant and construction cost estimates will be more detailed for each component and the scope of the project will revised as required to meet funding resources available to fund all construction related expenses. Better information as to the funding resources available for the construction of Phase I will also be more refined based on the following factors: SEFCEDA as an IRS 501c3 nonprofit corporation, with the help of other community partners, will continue to help raise funds to help fund this and other construction costs of a new park. Other funding sources can come from various public and private grant sources, generate volunteer labor, pro-bono professional services and the donation of materials and supplies from local businesses. This model has been successfully implemented in other communities like Marysville and Lemoore, California. Additionally, other funding opportunities can be generated from City of Fresno sources proposed by SEFCEDA for your Council's consideration. In addition to joining SEFCEDA in the 5 filing of a Proposition 68 and Cal-Fire grant opportunities, your Council may also consider to allocate additionally funding for the construction of this project from the following sources: 1) Revenues received from park development fees that have been collected by the City from home builders in Southeast Fresno for many years, 2) Allocate a portion of $1.3 million received by the City from insurance proceeds when a building burned on this park site. (Those funds were not used to fund improvements on that site as required by an agreement with the National Park Service and should be returned to that project ), 3) Waive or reduce the cost of City plan check or inspection fees for this project, 4)Assume City responsibility for all off-site improvements in the upcoming widening of Peach Avenue, including the railroad pedestrian crossing, cost of landscaping on the City's right of way, and City water and drainage connections to this site. 5) Ask City staff to review these grant applications once completed by SEFCEDA, 6)Ask City staff to provide financial services in the implementation of this project as part of the park related to grant administration and project cash-flow requirements and seek reimbursement of all costs as permitted by the grant sources. Maintenance and Operations Cost. In order to generate the new funding necessary to pay for the maintenance and operations costs of this new regional park and soccer complex, SEFCEDA is proposing a strong soccer component on this 6 project with the inclusion of four outdoor Futsal soccer courts on the Northern parcel and four soccer regulation fields on the Southern parcel. (Flood light will be included) Even with the regional park and soccer components providing free access to the public at specified locations and times when they open, it has been preliminarily estimated that the soccer component with tournaments, leagues and other activities like a soccer academy can generate an annual revenue of $420,000 once it has been established and be fully operational. It is estimated that this new park revenue would be adequate to pay for the annual maintenance and operations costs also estimated to be $420,000. The availability of other funding mechanisms to pay for the cost of parks are also documented on the Fresno Parks Master Plan adopted by your Council on Dec. 14, 2017, (pages 278- 284). Other options include: Catering permits and services, community and parks foundation, corporate and personal lead giving, dedicated millage, developer contributions to parks and trails, donations, friends association, park impact fee, park open space and trail bond issue, recreation services fees, sales tax, and user fees and more. The proposed partnership for the development and maintenance of City parks by community nonprofit organizations is also included in your Parks Master Plan. 7 Since February, 2018 under the City of Fresno Adopt-A-Park Program, SEFCEDA in partnership with many community-based organizations, churches, soccer leagues and educational institutions has committed to clean up this site and plant 120 trees and 60,000 sq. ft. of turf. Clean up work has been completed by more than 500 volunteers and design work review of plans detailing the layout of this work is being finalized by City staff. A maintenance agreement with SEFCEDA to maintain this project's work for the next three years is also being finalized. This work is scheduled to be completed by June 30, 2019. We believe the revenue generated by the Soccer Component can ultimately help pay for all the ongoing maintenance and operations cost of this project, however, some City participation in the funding of these project's initial costs may be necessary initially until the soccer complex becomes fully operational . SEFCEDA'S REQUEST: In order to meet the Proposition 68 filing deadline of August 5, 2019, we ask the Fresno City Council direct City staff to add this project to the list of parks projects prepared by City staff to be included in the Proposition 68 application and Cal-Fire grant process and that City staff be directed to start working with 8 SEFCEDA in the preparation of this application and all the required documents for this process. Your Council may also direct staff to negotiate a Maintenance and Operations Agreement with SEFCEDA for a 10-year period with the option to expand to 20 years. Your Council may authorize your City Manager to sign the final applications and other required documents prior to their submittal to State agencies. California State University, Fresno professor Keith Woodcock is ready to assist in the start of the environmental reviews and public input. Proposition 68 regulations require that at least five public information meetings be held at various locations near the project site. These meetings will be coordinated with City staff. We welcome the opportunity to continue to work with the City of Fresno to improve quality of life in our City. Proposition 68 and Cal-Fire are two park funding opportunities we do not want to miss because they will help expand the availability of green space and recreational facilities to improve quality of life and environmental conditions in our City. 9 Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Jose Leon Barraza, CEO SEFCEDA, Inc. cc: Mayor Lee Brand Wilma Quan-Schecter, City Manager City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, AICP, HDFP, Director Development and Resource Management Department THROUGH:SOPHIA PAGOULATOS, Planning Manager Development and Resource Management Department BY:RODNEY L. HORTON, Planner III Development and Resource Management Department SUBJECT HEARING to consider initiation of the Specific Plan of the West Area,pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres in the West Development Area of the Fresno General Plan,filed by the Development and Resource Management Department Director 1.RESOLUTION -Initiating the Specific Plan of the West Area Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles and the corresponding amendment of the General Plan,and repeal or amendment of the West Area Community Plan and Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres located in the West Development Area to allow for future adoption of the Specific Plan of the West Area pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Sections 15-5803-C and 15-4902-B. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following action: 1.ADOPT RESOLUTION initiating the Specific Plan of the West Area Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles and the corresponding amendment of the General Plan,and repeal or amendment of the West Area Community Plan and Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan pertaining to approximately 7,077 acres located in the West Development Area to allow for future adoption of the Specific Plan of the West Area pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Sections 15-5803-c and 15-4902-B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: This report describes the background,process,outreach,land use concepts,and planning efforts related to the Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles.The Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles recommended by the Steering Committee are proposed for initiation of the Environmental Impact Report and full development of the Specific Plan of the West Area.The Specific Plan will also include an Infrastructure Financing Plan. BACKGROUND The idea for a Specific Plan of the West emerged from community members who wanted a feasible advanced planning tool to address a broad array of concerns.The last comprehensive planning effort that had been undertaken in the area besides the update of the General Plan in 2014 was the West Area Community Plan adopted in 2002 as “Appendix W”to the 2025 General Plan,and the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan adopted in 1998.FY2018 allocated money to begin the specific plan process which included the creation of an existing conditions report and community outreach. $400,000 was allocated in the FY2019 budget to finance the Environmental Impact Report and Infrastructure Financing Plan. Planning Process Overview The specific plan process includes the following steps and was expected to take less than 3 years from the beginning of the process in 2017.The process is now in Step 4.Future opportunities to comment on the plan will be scheduled throughout the remaining steps which involve the completion of the Environmental Impact Report and Infrastructure Financing Plan. 1.Project Kick-off and Existing Conditions Report 2.Initial Community Outreach 3.Selection of Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles by the Steering Committee 4.Plan Initiation through Planning Commission and City Council 5.Draft Specific Plan 6.Environmental Impact Report: Notice of Preparation and Scoping 7.Public Review of Draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report 8.Adoption See Exhibit B for a project schedule. Outreach The outreach and participation for the planning process to date has been multifaceted to receive input from the 38,503 residents of the Plan Area.It included numerous stakeholder interviews,2 community meetings billed as “Community Conversations”,a kick-off survey,and seven Steering Committee meetings.Also,focus group meeting occurred with religious leaders billed as “Coffee with the Clergy.” Stakeholder Interviews.City staff held stakeholder interviews between January 2018 and April 2018 with city and county residents,developers,Central Unified School District,Highway City Community Development Corporation, religious leaders, and other city agencies. Community Conversations.The initial phase of the planning process included two community conversations held on May 3,2018 and June 14,2018.They were attended by approximately 165City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: conversations held on May 3,2018 and June 14,2018.They were attended by approximately 165 and 75 persons,respectively.The purpose of the first Community Conversation was to educate the public about the plan process and to solicit input from community members.Concerns centered on transportation,limited parkland,limited commercial and recreational amenities,and lack of neighborhood identity. The task for the second Community Conversation was to identify key land use concepts that would guide future land use discussions of the Steering Committee.Community members were able to weigh in on the location of certain land uses (i.e.,parks,commercial facilities,and housing)through a dot voting exercise on a blank map. Kick-off Survey.A 10-question kick-off survey was produced and distributed to residents, business owners,and other interested parties.Approximately 373 individuals responded to the survey. The results of the survey were shared with the community and Steering Committee. Steering Committee.An 11-member Steering Committee was appointed by Councilmembers representing Council District No.1,Council District No.2,and Council District No.3.Represented on the committee are residents and residential and commercial developers.Central Unified School District is represented on the committee,as is State Center Community College District.The committee’s task has been to receive input from community members,and translate that input into the development of the Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles.At their first meeting,the committee elected a chairperson and vice chairperson,and adopted rules governing their decision- making process. Coffee with the Clergy.Approximately 15 pastors and church staff attended the event.The purpose of the event was to inform religious leaders about the specific plan process and to encourage their involvement. ANALYSIS The Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles are the outcome of the initial planning process that included over a year of work by community members and the steering committee.The Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles reflect the desires of community members and the committee to create a feasible and implementable plan that improves the quality of life for current and future residents. Phase 1:Land Use Framework.City staff provided three land use framework options for the committee to consider as the basis for refining the General Plan’s land use map.The first option was a concentric model which would divide the Plan Area into five different concentric circles expanding from a core commercial center that had intense land uses surrounded by four levels of lower density land uses.The second option was the selection of a transect land use framework that allowed for a flow from rural to urban land use intensities.The third option was a catalytic corridors/centers concept which focused on strategically locating land use densities along corridors in the Plan Area in order to cause a positive economical reaction on surrounding parcels. After discussion,the committee chose to incorporate the transect framework with the catalytic land use concept being strategically located on Ashlan Avenue,Shaw Avenue,Veterans Boulevard,and Shields Avenue.The committee also voted to incorporate agricultural components into open space City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: corridors, trails, and future parks. Phase 2:Conceptual Land Use Option.In addition to the land use framework alternatives described above,three conceptual land use options were presented to the committee for consideration.Option No.1 (more change)proposed preservation of agricultural/rural residential uses in the southwest corner of the Plan Area,reducing single family uses away from busy corridors,and reducing land use density within the interior of the quarter-sections.Option No.2 (moderate change)proposed to lower land use density throughout the Plan Area,and focuses higher residential density and commercial land uses on portions of key corridors.The key corridors include portions of Ashlan,Blythe,Shaw, Veterans,Shields,and Clinton.Option No.3 (less change)proposed lower density throughout the Plan Area,and preserved rural residential land uses throughout the Plan Area.The committee selected Option No. 2 (moderate change). Phase 3:Draft Land Use Map &Guiding Principles.Once the land use framework and concept were determined,they were applied to the draft land use map.The committee used all of the input received from the community conversations,kick-off survey results,existing conditions reports,and individual discussions with community members to make their decisions.The draft land use map attached as Exhibit D is the end result of the committee’s initial work. Land Use.The committee voted to reduce the density of residential land uses along the most western and southwestern edge of the Plan Area,while still encouraging a balanced range of housing types throughout the West Area.The concept of complete neighborhoods established in the General Plan was reaffirmed by the committee,but with higher density housing,office,commercial,and mixed -use land uses placed along corridors instead of in the middle of neighborhoods as depicted in the General Plan’s Planned Land Use Map.The committee maintained mixed-use land uses along the West Shaw Avenue corridor in anticipation of future transit service in the Plan Area.Also,the West Shaw Avenue corridor will serve as a town center for the Plan Area that will allow for pedestrian-and transit-oriented development. Parks.The Parks Master Plan adopted in 2018 identified that Development Area -1 North (DA-1 North),where the West Area is located,does not have any regional/open space/special use parks. The Parks Master Plan determined that approximately 71 acres of regional/open space/special use parks are needed to meet the 2017 population estimates,and 129 acres are needed to meet the 2035 population estimates.Community members and the committee expressed strong support for the location of a flagship regional park to be located in the West Area,and would like a regional park land use designation placed on the land use map.Planned parks,except parkland already owned by the City,are generally shown with a dual designation land use.Dual designation allows private development to occur in the instance that the City is not prepared to purchase and subsequently develop the parcel(s)into parkland.Community members and the committee have held vigorous debate over the location of a flagship regional park north and south of West Shaw Avenue.The committee voted to have three areas studied during the environmental review phase of the plan process. The three areas are attached as Exhibit G. Sphere of Influence.The committee recommended studying the expansion of the Plan Area’s Sphere of Influence through the environmental review process.The proposed area is bounded by West Shields Avenue to the north,Grantland Avenue to the east,West Clinton Avenue to the south, and North Garfield Avenue to the west.The proposed expansion of the Sphere of Influence is shown on the draft land use map which is attached as Exhibit D. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 4 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: Guiding Principles.After receiving public input,the committee voted to accept the draft guiding principles.The draft guiding principles reflect the West Area community’s vision to include an enhanced and improved multimodal transportation network,a variety of housing types,post- secondary educational opportunities, and components of agriculture within the Plan Area. Relationship to Other Plans The Specific Plan of the West Area relates to other planning efforts previously completed.They are listed below: §The Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan (1998) The Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan was adopted January 6,1998 and was prepared to address problems,issues,and opportunities of the Highway City neighborhood, especially for individuals who live,work or have a long-time involvement in the community. One of the guiding principles for the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan encouraged development of traditional neighborhoods characterized by a diverse but compatible arrangement of residential,commercial,industrial,and public uses that was to be reinforced by existing and established single-family residential areas.The Specific Plan of the West Area would repeal a portion of the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan to avoid overlap and confusion with the Specific Plan of the West Area,but would carry forward any relevant area- specific policies. §The West Area Community Plan (2002) The West Area Community Plan was adopted on February 1,2002 as “Appendix W”of the 2025 General Plan.The core goals of the Community Plan were to develop the West Area as a planned community with a complete range of services,facilities and public infrastructure development,and to minimize land use conflicts between agriculture and urban uses.This Plan would replace the Community Plan, but would carry forward any relevant policies. §The General Plan (2014) The General Plan was adopted on December 18,2014 and sets the stage for the initiation of this Plan.This Plan will refine the General Plan’s vision for the West Area.The General Plan created policies and implementation plans to achieve a long-term vision which emphasizes infill development, complete neighborhoods, and multi-modal transportation. §Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15: Citywide Development Code (2015) The main purpose of the Development Code,which was adopted in 2015,is to implement the General Plan and other adopted plans.The Development Code is the city’s zoning code,and it seeks to protect and promote the public health,safety,peace,comfort,convenience, prosperity,and general welfare of the residents of the City of Fresno.It allows for the orderly allocation of land for development by classifying the city into districts or zones that allow various land uses,including residential single-family,residential multi-family,mixed-use, commercial,public and semi-public,downtown and employment districts.This Plan will reference the Development Code and applicable regulations for the West Area. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 5 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: §The Active Transportation Plan (2017) The Active Transportation Plan (ATP)was adopted on March 2,2017 and serves as the city’s comprehensive guide outlining the vision for active transportation.The ATP envisions a complete,safe,and comfortable network of trails,sidewalks,and bikeways that serve as a means for people to safely get to their destinations while reducing roadway congestion and improving the air quality.This also results in replacing vehicle miles traveled with walking or biking.Both existing and planned Class II bike lanes are outlined for the West Area.Class I bicycle and pedestrian paths are planned for in the West Area with three eastward connection points over Highway 99 at Herndon Avenue,Veterans Boulevard,Gettysburg Avenue,and the Herndon Canal which abuts West Shaw Avenue. The ATP will be referenced in this Plan. §The Parks Master Plan (2017) The Parks Master Plan (PMP)was adopted on December 14,2017 and serves as a community-based vision and road map for planning a complete and functional park system in the city of Fresno.It examined the General Plan’s level of service goals for park land and determined the amount of acreage needed for the city’s existing and future population.The PMP articulates a vision for improving Fresno’s park and open space system formed by public input and based on thorough analysis.Priorities of Fresno community members,institutional leaders,and policy makers are reflected in the PMP.The goals and recommendations of the PMP for the Plan Area will be further developed later in the planning process. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Initiation of a Specific Plan is not a “project” for the purposes of CEQA Guidelines 15378. Planning Commission On May 1, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council initiate the Specific Plan of the West Area Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles as presented. The Planning Commission resolution is attached as Exhibit I. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this project does not include procurement. FISCAL IMPACT The FY2019 Budget appropriated $400,000 from the General Fund to complete the Environmental Impact Report and Infrastructure Financing Plan. Attachments: Exhibit A:Project Location Map Exhibit B:Project Schedule Exhibit C:Steering Committee Roster Exhibit D:Draft Land Use Map Exhibit E:General Plan Planned Land Use (West Area) Exhibit F:Draft Guiding Principles City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 6 of 7 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1656 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #: Exhibit G:Regional Park Options Exhibit H:Specific Plan of the West Area Initiation Document Exhibit I:Planning Commission Resolution Exhibit J:City Council Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 7 of 7 powered by Legistar™ ·|}þ ·|}þ BrawleyShields GrantlandHayesMarksCorneliaAshlan Sha w Bullard Herndon Dak ota Clinton Gettysburg Barstow Sierra BryanHughesPolkValentineBlytheClintonGarfield VALENTINE AVEDANTEAVEMARKS AVEGATES AVEEMERSONAVEVAN NESS BLVDMARKS AVEPOLK AVES IE R RA AV E D A K O TA AV E HUGHES AVESPRUCEAVE RIVER VISTA DR ALL UV IA L AV E POLK AVEAS HL AN AV E EMERSON AVE P A L O A LT O AV E FI G A RD E N D R H E R N D O N AV E VALENTINE AVECORNELIA AVEHAYES AVEHUGHES AVESIE R RA AV E BRAWLEY AVEMILBURN AVEB U L L A R D AV E SP RU C E AVE B A R S T O W AV E ES CA L O N AV E SHAW AV EBRAWLEY AVEBLYTHE AVEHAYES AVEGRANTLAND AVES H I E L D S AV E B U L L A R D A V E O L I V E AV E M C K I N L E Y AV ECECELIA AVEGOLDEN STATE BLVD MARTY AVESANTA FE AVE W E B E R AV E BRAWLEY AVES A N J O S E AV E RIV E R SID E D R JEANNE AVE BLYTHEAVE99 99 Date: 3/29/2019 LEGEND Sp ecific Pla n o f th e West Area City Limits Fresno Existing Sphere of Influen ce City of Fresno Project Location Map Spe cific Pla n of the We st Are a ®Development and Resource Management Department Development and Resource Management Department Jennifer K. Clark, AICP, HDFP Director WEST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT SCHEDULE Milestone Milestone End Date Project Kick-off and Existing Conditions Report Completed: 2/15/2018 Initial Community Outreach Completed: 6/14/2018 Selection of Draft Land Use Map and Guiding Principles by the Steering Committee Completed: 2/27/2019 Plan Initiation through Planning Commission and City Council Anticipated: 5/16/2019 Environmental Impact Report: Notice of Preparation and Scoping Anticipated: 6/30/2019 Public Review of Draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report Anticipated: 2/1/2020 Plan Adoption Anticipated: 6/25/2020 STEERING COMMITTEE ROSTER Appointed Members David Pena, Chairperson Deep Singh, Vice Chairperson Cathy Caples *Tina McCallister – Boothe Jeff Roberts Tiffany Mangum John Kashian Bill Nijjer Gurdeep Shergill Joseph Martinez Dennis Gaab Eric Payne City Staff Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager Rodney Horton, Planner *Alternate, Non-Voting ·|}þ ·|}þ BrawleyShields GrantlandHayesMarksWestCorneliaAshlan Shaw Bullard Herndon Dakota Clinton Gettysburg Barstow Sierra BryanHughesPolkValentineBlytheClintonGarfieldSteering CommitteeRecommendedSOI Expansion 99 G BP C EC G C C G C G G G G G G GG NMX G GG G GNMX G NMXNMX NMX NMX CH PB PB PB PB PB NPNP NP G NP POS CP NP NPNP NPNP NP NPNP NP NP OS CH EE E E E E/M/H H SS SS CMXNMX CH CH NMX G FS NMX NP NMXNMX CMX NP CHC C BP C NMX PB G G G G G C-R NMX CMX PB NMX CH CH FS G GGG G G G G PB R CH CH P G NMXG PB NP PB NP B U L L A R D AV E VALENTINEAVEE MERSONAVE D ANTEAV E D A K O TA AV EGATESAVEVANNESSB L V D MA R KSAVEPOLKA VEHUGHESAVES PRU C EAVE A S H L A N AV E 9 9 H WY C L I N T O N AV E S H A W AV E EMERSONAVE PA L O A LT O AVE S I E R R A AV EFIGARDENDRHAYES AVE B A R S T O W AV E BRAWLEY AVEMILBURNAVEWEST AVES P R U C E AV E E S C A L O N AV E BRAWLEYAVES H I E L D S AV E B U L L A R D A V E C ECELIAAVEGOLDENSTATEBLVD MAR TYAVE 99HWY SANTA FE AVE WEBERAVE S A N J O S E AV E RIV E R SID E DR 99H W Y H E R N D O N AV E 99 West Area Specific PlanSteering Committee Proposed Land Use Changes BOUNDARIES West Area Specific Plan Boundary Sphere Of Influence Steering Committee Recommended SOI Expansion®Date: 2/28/2019 Legend RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) COMMERCIAL Community Recreation General Regional EMPLOYMENT Office Business Park Light Industrial MIXED USE Neighborhood Mixed Use Corridor/Center Mixed Use Regional Mixed Use OPEN SPACE Community Park Pocket Park Neighborhood Park Open Space Park Ponding Basin PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Special School Elementary School Elementary & Middle School Elementary, Middle & High School High School Church Fire Station BP CP NP P PB SS E E&M H E/M/H CH FS R G C-R C NMX CMX RMX CP C C CC CC C C CC C G G G G G G G G CMX PB PB PB PB NP NP CP NP CP NP NP NPNP NP NPNP NP NP CH EE E E E E/M/H H SS SS BP RMX NP RMXRMX RUN RUN RUN RUN RUN C PB RUN G G G C-R RUN PB VALENTINE AVE EMERSONAVE DANTEAV E BULLARD AVE GATESAVECLINTON AVEVANNE S S BLV DMARKSAVE POLK AVESIERRA AVE DAKOTA AVE HUGHES AVESPRU C EAVE RIV ER VISTA D R ALLUVIAL AVE ASHLAN AVE SHAW AVE EMERSONAVE PAL O ALTO AVE FIGARDENDRHAY ESAVE BRAWLEY AVEMILBURNAVEVALENTINE AVESPRUCE AVE SIERRA AVE ESCALON AVE BRAWLEY AVESHIELDS AVE BULLARD AVE C ECELIAAVEGOLDENSTATEBLVD MARTYAVE MCKINLEY AVE HERNDON AVE BARSTOW AVE SA N T A F E A V E WEBERAVE SAN JOSE AVE RIV E R SID E D R JEA N N E A V E BLYT HEAVE99 99SANJOAQUINRIVER Source: City of Fresno RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) General Plan Land Use Map ´ Date: 4/2/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representationof the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we makeno warranties either expressed or implied for thecorrectness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles COMMERCIAL Community Recreation General OPEN SPACE Community Park Open Space - Ponding Basin Neighborhood Park Open Space Park CP NP P PB PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Special School Elementary School Elementary, Middle & High School High School Church Fire Station SS E E/M/H H CH FS BOUNDARIES City Limits West Area Specific Plan Boundary Sphere Of Influence EMPLOYMENT Office Business Park Light Industrial BP MIXED USE Corridor/Center Mixed Use Regional Mixed Use CMX NMX Steering Committee David Pena, Chairperson Deep Singh, Vice Chairperson Dennis Gaab Joseph Martinez Tiffany Mangum Cathy Caples Jeff Roberts John Kashian Bill Nijjer Eric Payne Gurdeep Shergill Tina McCallister – Boothe, Alternate DRAFT – The West Area’s Guiding Principles The guiding principles, as amended by the Steering Committee, are designed to form the direction of the Specific Plan, and how the Plan can best benefit the future of the West Area. The guiding principles incorporate input received from community members and formal recommendations of the Steering Committee. Transportation Accommodate and improve roadway access, connectivity and mobility among all modes of transportation, and prioritize roadway widening where bottlenecking exists. Accommodate planned transit services in the West Area by locating routes near or adjacent to the community centers, schools, parks, and retail centers. Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained sidewalk network from residential neighborhoods to commercial centers, schools, parks, and community centers. Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained roadway network that allows for efficient and smooth access from the West Area to other sections of the city and region. Parks & Trails Create parks that are within existing and planned neighborhoods that are easily accessed by community members using pedestrian and bicycle pathways, transit services, or motor vehicles, consistent with the City of Fresno’s Parks Master Plan. Provide for the location of a flagship Regional Park in the Plan Area that has components of the Plan Area’s agricultural history through the planting of drought- resistant vegetation or trees, and the creation of public art that exhibits the Plan Area’s contribution to the agricultural industry. Agriculture Incorporate elements of agriculture in future parks by planting a mixture of native drought-tolerant vegetation, shrubs, and trees that can serve to provide shade and enhance the streetscape. Encourage and provide land use opportunities for agri-tourism ventures to occur in the West Area. Encourage the development of harvest – producing community gardens. Retail Attract desired and needed local retail establishments to serve the needs of the West Area community. Such establishments include grocery stores, bakeries, restaurants other than fast food places, and boutiques. Discourage the expansion of undesirable retail establishments such as liquor stores, tobacco and vapor stores, short-term loan and pawn shops, and adult stores. Encourage the development of retail establishments along commercial corridors. Housing Encourage a variety of housing types and styles. Encourage the development of housing to accommodate an aging population including, multi-generational houses and other elder housing options. Reaffirm the City’s commitment and obligation to affirmatively furthering access to fair and affordable housing opportunities by strongly encouraging equitable and fair housing opportunities to be located in strategic proximity to employment, recreational facilities, schools, neighborhood commercial areas, and transportation routes. Catalytic Corridors Encourage the orderly and consistent development of civic, parkland, retail and commercial, mixed-use, and multi-family uses along West Shaw Avenue, West Ashlan Avenue, Veterans Boulevard, West Shields Avenue, West Clinton Avenue, and Blythe Avenue. Education Attract much needed educational opportunities for the residents of the West Area, especially for post-secondary education, and access to programs for life-long learners. Public Safety Provide for safe routes to schools for children, with the City and County working together with residents, to provide sidewalks in neighborhood that have sporadic access. Work to promote Neighborhood Watch in all neighborhoods, and further assess the need for the location of emergency response facilities west of Highway 99. Barstow AvenueShaw AvenueGrantland AvenueBREGIONAL PARK OPTIONS TO BE STUDIED DURING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWA. A Flagship Regional Park in the most northern portion of the Plan Area (40 acres)B. A Flagship Regional Park just north of Shaw Avenue with a trail connecting to Veterans Blvd (55 acres)A REGIONAL PARK OPTIONS TO BE STUDIED DURING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWCW. Clinton AvenueW. Shaw AvenueN. Bryan AvenueC. A Flagship Regional Park on Bryan Avenue, extending from Shields Avenue to W. Clinton Avenue (79 acres) WEST AREA i n i t i a t i o n r e p o r t | m a y 2 0 1 9 specific plan of the Alternate formats of this document will be provided by the City upon request. To request alternate formats contact: Shannon M. Mulhall, Certified Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator at (559) 621-8716. WEST AREA i n i t i a t i o n r e p o r t | m a y 2 0 1 9 specific plan of the Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 1 PLAN INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Plan Area History 1-2 1.3 The Plan Area 1-9 1.4 Farmland 1-9 1.5 Political Background 1-9 1.6 Other Planning Efforts 1-11 Impacting the West Area 1.7 West Area Profile 1-13 2 PLAN PROCESS & VISION 2-1 2.1 Draft Land Use Map & Guiding Principles 2-6 3 3 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 3-1 3.1 Stakeholder Input 3-1 3.2 Community Conversations 3-2 3.3 Community Surveys 3-6 1-1Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction PLAN INTRODUCTION1 1.1 Introduction The last time the West Area was comprehensively planned for was in 2002 when city leaders adopted the 2025 General Plan. That Plan included the West Area Community Plan which consisted of 13 pages of policies and goals. Before the Community Plan was adopted, a small portion of the Plan Area was included in the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan which was completed in 1998. However, that plan applies to only 5% of the West Area. The people of the West Area wanted a new long-range planning tool that updated the vision provided in these older plans that addressed current issues. The Specific Plan of the West Area (the Plan) will serve as the catalyst for development as well as a vital instrument for much needed infrastructure improvements. The West Area has long been considered “Forgotten Fresno” due to limited commercial amenities, a fragmented roadway system, and leapfrog development. The residents of the West Area continue to advocate for transportation improvements, development that respects agriculture, and commercial amenities. The Plan lays the foundation to make the West Area a complete neighborhood that moderates residential development and increases opportunities for commercial growth. The Plan reiterates, and in some instances, refines policies from the General Plan on a range of topics that include land use and development, transportation, the environment, parks, and public utilities. The Plan will be used by policymakers to guide decisions about the future of the Plan Area, to make land use determinations, and to acquire federal and state grant funding for public projects. The Plan will also be used by community organizations, developers, and residents as a basis for future partnerships and planning. image taken by City staff of West Area agriculture on Shields Ave and Grantland Ave Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-2 1.2 Plan Area History Fresno was established as a settlement in 1872 by the Central Pacific Railroad Company, and more specifically by the choice of Leland J. Stanford, a Director for the Railroad, who is credited with the site selection for what was at the time the new station. Twenty-two years after California had become a state and after the Gold Rush had come and gone, Stanford was impressed by the 2,000- acre wheat field belonging to A. Y. Easterby and announced, “Wonderful! Here we must build the town!” During its earliest years, Fresno experienced a population boom, contributed to by settlers arriving from eastern and southern states, as well as abroad. Chinese immigrants were the earliest foreign settlers in Fresno and rapidly grew in numbers, to the point that Fresno obtained the second largest Chinatown in California. Fresno was established as the county seat in 1874 and 1885 became incorporated as a city. The Central California Colony, established in 1875 south of Fresno, encompassed approximately 3,840 acres. During the 1880s, Fresno continued to see incoming settlers from abroad, at an increase and in greater diversity - specifically settlers from Armenia, Germany, and Japan, among other groups. During the early 20th century, there was a large influx in the Hispanic population. Today, Fresno celebrates a diverse citizenry of more than seventy different ethnic groups in the metropolitan area. As the geographic center of the State, Fresno County is located in the San Joaquin Valley – cradled by the coastal ranges to the west and the Sierras to the east. The two large rivers that flow through the county are the San Joaquin River and the Kings River – both heading from the Sierras. By 1903, there were forty-eight separate colonies in Fresno County. Tracts of land were subdivided ranging from 20-acre to 40-acre parcels, irrigated from a system of canals, and often landscaped with boulevards of palms, eucalyptus, figs, walnuts, oranges, and drought-resistant trees. The Muscatel Estate as well as portions of the Dewitt and Victoria colonies were within the boundaries of what is now Specific Plan of the West Area. By 1910, the colony system had begun to lose its popularity, and large holders were beginning to sell off portions of their land to farming families. Fresno was established as a railroad town but it thrived in agriculture. Central Union High School, 1922, Fresno County Public Library, Special Collections. 1-3Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction deemed utterly worthless. / Enterprise, combined with push and energy, have wrought miracles, and to-day Fresno county - the principal portion of which lies in the valley of the San Joaquin - is the scene of agricultural industries of all kinds. / Here there are wheat fields - through which one may drive all day without reaching the end. Fruits of every variety flourish here, and yield prolifically. In this valley are grown and dried the finest white figs produced in the State. Peaches, pears, apricots and nectarines have all been planted and have produced marvelous results. / The product, however, which will cause the name and fame of Fresno to be sounded far and wide is the grape. Without exception, the natural advantages afforded here for the cultivation of The following excerpted from an exposé on “Fresno Vineyards” from The Examiner, San Francisco on April 6, 1890 provides a narrative glimpse of Fresno’s origins in agricultural vibrancy: “It is not many years ago that the vast expanse of level plains that constitute the valley of the San Joaquin was by most people considered a barren desert of little or no value. If the winter season had been a sufficiently wet one there would be a little pasture for large flocks of sheep and herds of cattle that roamed about at will in the wild and unsettled region until the intense heat of a July sun, withering and scorching every bit of herbage, would compel them to resort to the foothills and mountains again. If, however, the season had been a dry one, these thousands of acres were at best Map showing Colony System of Settlement, Fresno Co. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-4 Highway 99 as it is known today is a relatively recent creation. Native populations found value in the north-south route prior to the existence of a California. Once the route’s modern era began, it gained momentum at a rapid pace – “horses, carts, and stages gave way to railroads, and railroads then yielded to today’s paved lanes” (Provost, Highway 99, XI). “In its passage through the long, level stretch of the San Joaquin Valley,” also known as California’s heartland and more precisely between the towns of Wheeler Ridge and Sacramento, “Highway 99 was heralded as, and continues to be known as, the Golden State Highway” (Buckley, “Highway 99,” 28). Much of the highway through the Valley was widened to at least twenty feet by the early 1930s, but a portion near Fresno was widened to thirty feet to accommodate the Valley’s heaviest agricultural traffic (Livingston, That Ribbon of Highway II, 60). By 1960, the multi-lane upgrading of Highway 99 through Fresno was completed to allow for faster transit. In contrast to the modern thoroughfare, motorists driving north from Fresno in 1916 would have encountered a sign that read the following: “Motorists attention! You are on your honor. Fresno County has no speed cops. Drive so they will not be needed. Speed limits 30 miles per hour” (Buckley, “Highway 99,” 32-33). vines, and especially for the curing of raisins, are unequaled in this State, if not in the whole world. Already Fresno wines and Fresno raisins are famous throughout the length and breadth of the county.”Specific reference is also made to the Muscatel grape: “The sweet Muscatel variety is the grape used for raisin-making. This was the first brought from Spain, where it is known as the Muscatel de Gordo Blanco. Muscatel is the Moorish for large white, and Gordo Blanco - the Spanish for fat white.” In the introduction to her 1942 Master’s thesis entitled “Pioneer Colonies of Fresno County,” Virginia Emily Thickens actually references these colonies very early in their history as “the principal competitor of Spain in viticulture.” Enterprise was key to the success of agriculture in Fresno County, through pioneer leaders such as M. Theodore Kearney, but so was advertising. The article referenced above is one example. Most famously, Kearney “embarked on a campaign which was painted so attractively as to lure the least gullible of speculators or homeseekers.” In 1912, James Clayton Forkner moved to Fresno. He helped establish Highway City, a neighborhood for the occupation of industrial and farm workers. The neighborhood name refers to its straddling of Highway 99, which is the eastern boundary for the Specific Plan of the West Area. Therefore, it is the southwestern portion of Highway City that falls within the boundaries of this Plan. The West Area is approximately bounded by Highway 99 to the northeast, West Clinton Avenue to the south, and North Garfield Avenue to the west. When it was established, Highway City was not incorporated, or within the city limits of Fresno. In fact, it was not until the 1970s when any portion of what is now referred to as the West Area began being annexed. Outside of this portion of Highway City, a significantly large portion of the West Area remained farmland until Highway 99 was established and began undergoing improvements for automobile access. Ultimately, these improvements encouraged further land development and population growth within this region northwest of the city’s urban core. The city annexed land west of Highway 99 as recent as the early 21st century, which includes undeveloped and underutilized lands adjacent to established commercial corridors. 1-5Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction The West Area currently has one designated historic resource. The Brewer Adobe, also referred to as the José Garcia Adobe, is located near the southwest corner of West Shaw Avenue and North Hayes Avenue - within the boundaries of Highway City and fairly central within the West Area. The Brewer Adobe was constructed between 1923 and 1937 as a residential property type and is the only extant example of a vernacular building in the Fresno area that employs three construction techniques: traditional adobe brick, board and batten over frame, and hardpan with brick masonry construction. José Garcia was the first known tenant and owner. The property was first evaluated as a historic resource in 1996 and referred to as the Brewer Farm, with Les Brewer as the property owner. The sign of course became obsolete over the years, as did the series of improvements to the roads that followed leading to the construction of the freeway. Several landmarks in Fresno were associated with old Highway 99 that ultimately became bypassed with the construction of the freeway including the Van Ness Entrance Gate welcoming motorists to Fresno; Belmont Circle that routed traffic from H Street via an underpass onto Motel Drive and alongside Roeding Park; one of the Richfield Beacons located approximately every fifty miles along Highway 99 that aided in guiding motorists as well as flyers; and more relevant to the West Area – the recently-demolished Astro Motel, located on the north end of what was known as Motel Drive between W Ashland and W Dakota avenues. The Astro was one of many motels along Motel Drive, an example of the numerous motel strips that “sprang up at entryways to cities along the highway… The bright neon beckoned nighttime travelers to stop for the night and grab some shut-eye” (Provost, Highway 99, 159). Fresno Vineyards, The Examiner San Francisco, 1890. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-6 And, it was found that the Brewer Adobe embodies the exchange of construction and design ideas that could develop in such a region. The Brewer Adobe is a fragile but extraordinary resource that is critical to the understanding of the area’s working class history and the story of adobe and hardpan construction in the San Joaquin Valley. Despite the fact that the region of Fresno now referred to as the West Area was not incorporated into the city until more recent years and that there is currently only one designated historic resource within its boundaries, it is a region that has a history dating back to the original settlement of Fresno which has yet to be fully explored. It remains the final frontier for the city and further research will undoubtedly reveal more hidden gems. Located in an area that was originally known as “Hardpan City”, the residents in this locale utilized those building materials which were available to them, including adobe brick and hardpan. This building exhibits a traditional Hispanic use of earthen materials in the construction of a house which closely resembles a bungalow. The fusion of these attributes became relatively common in the Central Valley by the 1920s, and interest in the use of adobe in particular increased by the economic Depression during the 1930s. The influences of Baldassare Forestiere’s Underground Gardens, another designated historic resource located seven-tenths of a mile east of the Brewer Adobe, undoubtedly influenced the use of hardpan as a building material. Property research from 1997 revealed that the area within the area where the Brewer Adobe is located, there has been an ethnic diversity among residents which included people of Mexican, Italian, and Swedish descent. 1-7Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction Fresno County Highways Aerial, 1942. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-8 UV41 UV99 UV41 UV99 UV145 UV180 UV168 UV168 UV180 Source: City of Fresno FIGURE 1-1 Regional Location Map Date: 4/2/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. Specific Plan of the West Area Fresno City Limits Fresno County 1-9Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction 1.3 The Plan Area The Plan Area is triangular in shape and located west of Highway 99. It is bounded on the south by the north side of West Clinton Avenue, and to the west by Grantland and Garfield Avenues. The Plan Area includes the southwest portion of Highway City adjacent to Highway 99. Figure 1.1 shows the Plan Area in relationship to the region. The West Area is vast in land area which presents opportunities for development. For purposes of comparison, the size of the West Area is larger than the Capitol cities of Maryland (Annapolis), New Jersey (Trenton), Pennsylvania (Harrisburg), and Vermont (Montpelier). The West Area encompasses 7,077 acres or a little more than 11 square miles. A significant amount of land in the Plan Area is farmland or rural residential lots with large, uneven, and underutilized parcels. Of the eleven square miles, 6.9 square miles are in the city limits and 4.1 square miles in the growth area. The growth area is land outside the city limits but within the city’s Sphere of Influence boundary, which is the adopted limit for future growth. The West Area has approximately 3,070.95 acres of land that is classified as Urban and Built-Up, according to the State Department of Conservation. Prime farmland is principally located outside of the Plan Area. The West Area has 285.65 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance which is located primarily in the western edge of the Plan Area. Unique Farmland has 509.39 acres within the Plan Area and is located within the southwest portion of the Plan Area. Farmland of Local Importance has approximately 1,562.82 acres located throughout the entire Plan Area. Vacant or Disturbed Land and Rural Residential Land account for approximately 1,650.17 acres within the growth area. 1.4 Farmland Fresno County is ranked as one of the top agricultural counties in California. In 2017, county produce had nearly $6.1 billion in crop value. A majority of the crops are grapes, almonds, cotton, and citrus. The Fresno region has rich history in agriculture that spans from A.Y. Easterby’s lush wheat field to Sicilian immigrant Baldassare Forestiere’s Underground Garden. Currently, residential and commercial development in the West Area abuts prime farmland. For many years the West Area was largely fig orchards. This Plan will incorporate policies that respect agriculture, and incorporate components of agriculture into the West Area’s future. 1.5 Politcal Background The Plan Area is situated in the 16th Congressional District, the 8th State Senatorial District, and the 23rd and 31st State Assembly Districts. The Plan Area is also situated in County Supervisorial District No. 1. In addition, the Plan Area is represented by three City Council Districts. Council District No. 1 represents a majority of the Plan Area’s population and covers a significant portion of the land in the middle of the Plan Area extending from the south side of West Shaw Avenue to the north side of West Shields Avenue. Council District No. 2 covers land in the northern portion of the Plan Area extending from the north side of West Shaw Avenue to the northern edge of the city’s boundary. Council District No. 3 includes land in the southeast portion of the Plan Area extending from the south side of West Shields Avenue to the north side of West Clinton Avenue. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-10 Image taken by City staff, Grantland Ave and Olive Ave. 1-11Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction 1.6 Other Planning Efforts Impacting the West Area This Plan serves as the first major specific planning effort, environmental evaluation, and infrastructure analysis for the West Area. However, other planning efforts have occurred or are in process as described below. • The Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan (1998) The Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan was adopted January 6, 1998 and was prepared to address problems, issues, and opportunities of the Highway City neighborhood, especially for individuals who live, work or have a long-time involvement in the community. One of the guiding principles for the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan encouraged development of traditional neighborhoods characterized by a diverse but compatible arrangement of residential, commercial, industrial, and public uses that was to be reinforced by existing and established single-family residential areas. The Specific Plan of the West Area would repeal a portion of the Highway City Neighborhood Specific Plan to avoid overlap and confusion with the Specific Plan of the West Area, but would carry forward any relevant area-specific policies. • The West Area Community Plan (2002) The West Area Community Plan was adopted on February 1, 2002 as “Appendix W” of the 2025 General Plan. The core goals of the Community Plan were to develop the West Area as a planned community with a complete range of services, facilities and public infrastructure development, and to minimize land use conflicts between agriculture and urban uses. This Plan would replace the Community Plan, but would carry forward any relevant policies. • The General Plan (2014) The General Plan was adopted on December 18, 2014 and sets the stage for the initiation of this Plan. This Plan refines the General Plan’s vision for the West Area. The General Plan created policies and implementation plans to achieve a long-term vision which emphasizes infill development, complete neighborhoods, and multi-modal transportation. The General Plan emphasizes supporting established neighborhoods in Fresno with safe, well maintained, and accessible streets, public utilities, education and job training, proximity to jobs, retail services, health care, affordable housing, youth development opportunities, open space and parks, transportation options, and opportunities for home grown businesses. Another key goal of the General Plan that will be reiterated in this Plan is to resolve existing public infrastructure and service deficiencies, make full use of existing infrastructure, and invest in improvements to increase competitiveness and promote economic growth. The Shaw Avenue Corridor from Highway 99 to Grantland Avenue is envisioned to be developed as a mixed-use corridor supported by enhanced transit service. This corridor includes high density and urban neighborhood residential components, along with retail, employment and civic uses. The General Plan proposes the location of a 40-acre park along the east side of the Veterans Boulevard between Shaw Avenue and Barstow Avenue, which will anchor a West Shaw Transit Village. The proposed park is bisected by a Class I bike trail along the Herndon Canal. This vision is supported by the West Area community and will continue in this Plan, albeit with lower density and possibly with integration of more open space. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-12 A regional mixed-use center is designated between Veterans Boulevard and Grantland Avenue. These land uses will be mixed both vertically and horizontally, and represent the transit – oriented cores of Complete Neighborhoods that connect with surrounding residential areas. It is important to note that the General Plan’s vision for the West Area is to provide opportunities for the development of Complete Neighborhoods. The concept of Complete Neighborhoods is to enable Fresnans to live in communities with convenient services, employment, and recreation within walking distance. It provides residents with amenities that make it mostly self-sufficient, walkable, and interconnected. The General Plan acknowledges that completeness is unlikely to be accomplished in each neighborhood; however it provides that the following characteristics can be combined to create an enhanced quality of life and increased property values: • A range of housing choices; • Neighborhood-serving retail; • Employment opportunities; • Public services, such as health clinics; • Entertainment and cultural assets; • Parks and public schools within or near the neighborhood; • Community services, such as a library, recreation center, senior center, and/or community garden; • Public plaza/civic space; and • Access to public transit. • Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15: Citywide Development Code (2015) The main purpose of the Development Code, which was adopted in 2015, is to implement the General Plan and other adopted plans. The Development Code is the city’s zoning code, and it seeks to protect and promote the public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the residents of the City of Fresno. It allows for the orderly allocation of land for development by classifying the city into districts or zones that allow various land uses, including residential single- family, residential multi-family, mixed- use, commercial, public and semi-public, downtown and employment districts. This Plan will reference the Development Code and applicable regulations for the West Area. • The Active Transportation Plan (2017) The Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was adopted on March 2, 2017 and serves as the city’s comprehensive guide outlining the vision for active transportation. The ATP envisions a complete, safe, and comfortable network of trails, sidewalks, and bikeways that serve as a means for people to safely get to their destinations while reducing roadway congestion and improving the air quality. This also results in replacing vehicle miles traveled with walking or biking. Both existing and planned Class II bike lanes are outlined for the West Area. Class I bicycle and pedestrian paths are planned for in the West Area with three eastward connection points over Highway 99 at Herndon Avenue, Veterans Boulevard, Gettysburg Avenue, and the Herndon Canal which abuts West Shaw Avenue. The ATP will be referenced in this Plan. 1-13Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction • The Parks Master Plan (2017) The Parks Master Plan (PMP) was adopted on December 14, 2017 and serves as a community-based vision and road map for planning a complete and functional park system in the city of Fresno. It examined the General Plan’s level of service goals for park land and determined the amount of acreage needed for the city’s existing and future population. The PMP articulates a vision for improving Fresno’s park and open space system formed by public input and based on thorough analysis. Priorities of Fresno community members, institutional leaders, and policy makers are reflected in the PMP. The goals and recommendations of the PMP for the Plan Area will be mentioned at a later period. 1.7 West Area Profile According to the United States Census Bureau, the Hispanic community is the largest ethnic group in Fresno, and the West Area. The Hispanic ethnic group includes Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and any other Hispanic or Latino groups. This trend is also representative throughout the entire state of California and is not limited to the city of Fresno and the West Area. In 2015, the Hispanic community edged out Caucasians as the largest ethnic group in the state of California. Gender dynamics in the state of California, city of Fresno, and the Plan Area show a nearly even divide between male and female portions of the population. 1.7 A. Race and Gender A M. IND. H ISPANIC W HITE B LACK A SIAN M IXED RACE 38.9%6.5%14.8%1.7%37.7%3.8% 48.9%7.5%12.7%0.5%28.1%2.3% 42.15%8.84%13.47%1.94%20%4.69% CALIFORNIA FRESNO WEST AREA Source: The United States Census Bureau FIGURE 1-2 RACE Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-14 ·|}þ ·|}þBrawleyShieldsGrantlandHayesMarksCorneliaAshlan Shaw Bullard Herndon Dakota Clinton Gettysburg Barstow Sierra BryanHughesPolkValentineBlytheClintonGarfield nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm 99 99VALENTINE AVEEMERSONAVE DANT E AVEB U L L A R D AV E GATES AVEVAN NESS BLVDM A R KSAVEPOLKAVED AK O TA AV E HUGHESAVERIVE R VIST A D R AL L UV I A L AV E AS H L A N AV E S H AW AV E EMERSONAVE F I GARD E NDRHAYESA VE BRAWLEYAVEMILBURN AVES P R U C E AV E S I E R R A AV EBRAWLEYAVE MC KI N L E Y AV E S H I E LD S AV E B U L L A R D A V E GOLD E N S TA T E BLV D MARTYAVE H E R N D O N AV E BA RS TO W AVE S A N TA F E A V E W EBER A V E S A N J O S E AV ERI V E R S I D E D R Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Source: City of FresnoFIGURE X-X Parcels Proposed for Change Proposed Land Use Change Map ´ Date: 4/12/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representatio n of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles School Districts Central Unified Fresno Unified BOUNDARIES Fresno City Limts Specific Plan of the West Area Sphere Of Influence School Facilities nm Head Start nm Elementary School nm Middle School nm High School nm Administration nm Alternative School nm Deran Koligian Stadium r *Proposed Elementary School FIGURE 1-3 1-15Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction • Polk Elementary School. Polk Elementary was named after former President James K. Polk, and is the first Fresno County schools to be themed on Californian history and the Westward Movement. • Preschool. Preschool services are provided for children who are 4 years of age. Public education is provided by 21 public schools within the Central Unified School District (CUSD) serving approximately 15,772 pupils. The following schools located in the Plan Area are: 1.7 B. Secondary Education • Central High School – East Campus. This school was built in 1996 to accommodate rapid growth and development within CUSD’s coverage area. • Central Learning Adult School Site (CLASS). CLASS is an alternative high school located on a campus it shares with the adult school. CLASS is a hybrid independent study program that incorporates direct instruction into traditional independent study model. • Glacier Point Middle School. Glacier Point Middle School enrolls approximately 893 students and provides a rigorous learning environment. • Harvest Elementary School. Harvest Elementary educates approximately 680 pupils in grades transitional kindergarten through sixth. • Herndon-Barstow Elementary School. Herndon-Barstow Elementary was originally a rural school without a natural population within its boundary to fill it to capacity. However, an increase in development has caused enrollment to spike. CUSD, as a whole, spans across and beyond the Plan Area amounting to a coverage area of approximately 88 square miles. CUSD primarily serves rural and suburban populations. Fuel by increased residential development since the early 2000’s, CUSD has experienced a hike in enrollment and as result has built new schools. The Board of Trustees serves as CUSD’s governing body, each elected from and representing an area, 3 trustee areas are located within the Plan Area. CUSD is preparing to build a new high school which is scheduled to open for the 2021- 22 school year. In addition, CUSD is also preparing to construct two new elementary schools totaling approximately $50 million. At the time of adoption of the General Plan, CUSD had 19 public schools; today CUSD has 2 additional schools. • Teague Elementary School. Teague Elementary School is located in close proximately to Inspiration Park and the proposed Highway City Community Resource Center. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-16 CUSD has large undeveloped tracts of land available for additional school buildings that are planned for within the Plan Area. The only school building currently located in Council District No. 3 is the Central Learning Adult School located near Shields and Brawley. The city of Fresno is home to several institutions of higher learning. California State University, Fresno, commonly referred to and known as Fresno State, is located in the northeastern section of the city, approximately X miles from the Plan Area. Fresno State is one of the largest and fastest growing campuses among the 23 CSU campuses. Another key postsecondary educational institution is the State Center Community College District, which operates Fresno City College. A new campus is proposed to be built south of the Plan Area is Southwest Fresno which will be situated approximately 5 miles south of the Plan Area. Fresno City College offers associate degrees and vocational training. The only postsecondary facility located within the Plan Area is A-1 Truck Driving School (A-1). A-1 provides educational assistance to students seeking to obtain a commercial driver license from the California Department of Motor Vehicles in order to operate large commercial vehicles for employment. 1.7 C. Postsecondary Education FRESNO PACIFIC UNIVERSITY FRESNO CITY COLLEGE CSUF SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY COLLEGE 12 Miles/ 22 Minutes 12 Miles/ 29 Minutes 13 Miles/ 19 Minutes 17.4 Miles/ 23 Minutes FIGURE 1-4 DRIVING DISTANCES Source: Directions, Google Maps 1-17Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction Approximately 82% of the state’s population has a high school education or higher, to include some college or an associate’s degree. 31% of the state has attained a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education. Educations levels are in the city as compared to the state. 75% of city residents have attained a high school education or higher, and 20% have attained a bachelor’s degree or higher. The West Area’s educational attainment level is lower than the state of California and the city of Fresno in all categories. 37% of West Area residents have attained a high school education or higher. Furthermore, a little over 8% of West Area residents have attained a bachelor’s degree or higher level. This subsection describes the educational attainment levels of the West Area population, as compared to the City of Fresno and the State of California. 1.7 D. Educational Attainment WEST AREA CITY OF FRESNO 37%8% 75%20% High School or Higher Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Bachelor’s Degree or HigherHigh School or Higher FIGURE 1-5 EDUCATION Source: United States Census Bureau Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-18 While the educational attainment level is lower than both the city and the state, the median household income levels of the Plan Area are higher than the city’s median household income level. The median household income for the state of California is $61,818 while the median household income for the city of Fresno is 41,531 while the median household income is $59,482. Further analysis of the Plan Area breaks down the income levels in Council District No. 1, Council District 2, Council District 3, and the growth area. The figure shows that the median household income of Council District No.2 surpasses the median household income level of both the state and city. It could be assumed that low education levels will translate to lower income levels. However, over 50% of the plan Area population is employed within the healthcare, agricultural, blue collar, or service sector employment. Blue collar employment is defined as having a job that is not performed in an administrative setting and is skills-based such as a welder, plumber, warehouse personnel, or maintenance. 1.7 E. Income and Jobs $61,818 $41,531 $59,482 $49,862 $79,566 $47,412 $61,071 State of California City ofFresno WestArea CouncilDistrict No.1 within Plan Area CouncilDistrict No.2 within Plan Area CouncilDistrict No.3 within Plan Area Sphereof Influence It is believed the reason income levels are fairly high in the Plan Area even though education levels are lower is because of blue collar and service sector employment. For example, 44% of those working within the blue collar employment sector have transportation jobs. According to a 2015 report from the American Trucking Association (ATA), the median annual wage for a truck driver is approximately $73,000. The ATA has noted compensation for truckers has increased approximately 12% per year. This is one example of an industry where the job may require only a high school diploma or GED, but the earning potential can exceed $70,000 per year. FIGURE 1-6 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME Source: ArcGIS and United States Census Bureau 1-19Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Introduction AgricultureEducation & RecreationHealth Care Service SectorBlue Collar EmploymentProfessional Service Management Business Financial Computer/Mathematical Social Sciences Social Services Legal Office/Administration Architect/Engineer Building Maintenance Construction Maintenace/Repair Transportation Production Sales Food Preparation Protective Services Health Practice Health Support Personal Service Education Library Services Arts Entertainment Recreation Farm Fisheries Forestry 32%30%17% 12%6%3% $530 $540 $680 $1,209 $1,209 $1,311 MEDIAN WEEKLY EARNINGS TOTAL AMOUNT OF JOBS 560 1,072 2,060 2,800 4,968 5,344 FIGURE 1-7 JOBS Source: 1. ESRI; Vintage 2017; 2017 Jobs (ESRI) 2. Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers- Third Quarter 2017. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Department of Labor. October 18, 2017. Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft1-20 The City of Fresno provides vital public safety services to its residents, police and fire protection. The Police Department is headquartered at 2323 Mariposa Street in Downtown. Fresno has five policing districts and the West Area is located in Police District 5 – Northwest, but the police district office is not located in the Plan Area. It is located approximately 2.5 miles east at 3080 W. Shaw Avenue. It is important to note that Ambulatory services are contracted out and performed by American Ambulance. 1.7 F. Public Safety The Fire Department is headquartered at 911 H Street with 23 stations located across Fresno. The department has two stations located in the Plan Area. Fire Station No. 16 is situated at the northeast corner of the intersection of West Clinton Avenue and North Polk Avenue at 2510 N. Polk Street. In the northern portion of the Plan Area, Fire Station No. 18 is located off of West Bullard Avenue at 5938 North La Ventana Avenue. Fire Station 18 will be relocated to a permanent location on the south side of the 6000 block of West Shaw Avenue to maximize the department’s “4 Minutes to Excellence” response time goal. Image taken by City staff, Clinton Ave and Polk Ave. 2-1Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision PLAN PROCESS & VISION2 Why are we doing this plan? The Specific Plan of the West Area (Plan Area) currently consists of a large amount of developable land within city and county limits. The West Area has the potential to grow and develop into its own vibrant community. The Specific Plan of the West Area (the Plan) seeks to provide for the orderly and consistent development that promotes and establishes the West Area as a complete neighborhood with enhanced transportation infrastructure, development of core commercial centers, creation of additional parkland, and encouraging the development of a diverse housing stock. The Plan Area does not have needed commercial amenities, forcing residents to travel east of Highway 99 for retail services. The Plan Area also lacks a complete roadway network and parkland. Graphic example of a Agrihood 2-2 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft CP C C CC CC C C CC C G G G G G G G G CMX PB PB PB PB NP NP CP NP CP NP NP NPNP NP NPNP NP NP CH EE E E E E/M/H H SS SS BP RMX NP RMX RMX RUN RUN RUN RUN RUN C PB RUN G G G C-R RUN PB VALENTINEAVEEMERSONAVE DANTE A V EBULLARD AVE GATESAVECLINTON AVEVANNESSB L V DMARKS AVE POLK AVESIERRA AVE DAKOTA AV E HUGHES AVESPRU CE AVE RIVER VISTA D R ALLUVIAL AVE ASHLAN AVE SHAW AVE EMERSONAVE PALO ALTO AVE FIGARDENDRHAYES AVE BRAWLEY AVEMILBURNAVEVALENTINE AVESPRUCE AVE SIERR A AVE ESCALON AVE BRAWLEY AVESHIELDS AVE B U LL A RD AV E C ECELIAAVEGOLDENSTATE BLV D MA RTYAVE MCKINLEY AVE HERN DON AVE BARSTOW AVE SA N TA FE AV E W EBERAVE SAN JOSE AVE R I V E R S I D E D R JEA N N E AVE BLY T HEAVE99 99 S A N JO AQ U I N R IV ERSource: City of Fresno RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) FIGURE X-X General Plan Land Use Map ´ Date: 4/2/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles COMMERCIAL Community Recreation General OPEN SPACE Community Park Open Space - Ponding Basin Neighborhood Park Open Space Park CP NP P PB PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Special School Elementary School Elementary, Middle & High School High School Church Fire Station SS E E/M/H H CH FS BOUNDARIES City Limits West Area Specific Plan Boundary Sphere Of Influence EMPLOYMENT Office Business Park Light Industrial BP MIXED USE Corridor/Center Mixed Use Regional Mixed Use CMX NMX FIGURE 2-1 2-3Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision ·|}þ ·|}þBrawleyShields GrantlandHayesMarksCorneliaAshlan Shaw Bullard Herndon Dakota Clinton Gettysburg Barstow Sierra BryanHughesPolkValentineBlytheClintonGarfield 99 BP C EC G C C G C G G NMX G G PB PB PB PB PB NP P OS CP NP NPNP NP NP NP P CH EE E E E E/M/H H SS SS CH G FS NMX NP NMXNMX CMX NP CH C BP C G C-R CMX PB CH FS G G G R CH P PB PBVALENTINE AVEEMERSONAVE DANT E AVEB U L L A R D AV E GATES AVEVAN NESS BLVDM A R KSAVEPOLKAVED AKO TA AV E HUGHESAVERIVE R VIST A D R AL L UV I A L AV E A S H L A N AV E S H AW AV E EMERSONAVE F I G ARD E NDRHAYESA VE BRAWLEYAVEMILBURN AVES P RU C E AVE S I E RR A AV EBRAWLEYAVE MC KI N L E Y AV E S HI E L D S AV E B U L L A R D A V E GOLD E N S T AT E BLV D MARTYAVE 99 H WY H E R N D O N AV E B A R S TO W AV E S A N TA FE AV E W EBER A V E S A N J O S E AV ERI V E R S I D E D R 99 Source: City of Fresno RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) FIGURE X-X Proposed Land Use Map ´ Date: 4/12/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles COMMERCIAL Community Recreation General Regional BOUNDARIES Fresno City Limts Specific Plan of the West Area Sphere Of Influence EMPLOYMENT Office Business Park Light Industrial BP MIXED USE Neighborhood Mixed Use Corridor/Center Mixed Use Regional Mixed Use NMX CMX RMX OPEN SPACE Community Park Pocket Park Neighborhood Park Open Space Park Ponding Basin CP NP P PB PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Special School Elementary School Elementary & Middle School Elementary, Middle & High School High School Church Fire Station SS E E&M E/M/H H CH FS Steering Com mittee Recommended SOI Expansion FIGURE 2-2 2-4 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 DraftVALENTINEAVEEMERSONAVE DANTE A V EBULLARD AVE GATESAVECLINTON AVEVANNESSB L V DMARKS AVE POLKAVES IERRA AVE DAK OTA AVE HUGHES AVESPRU CE AVE RIVER VISTA D R ALLUVIAL AVE ASHLAN AVE SHAW AVE EMERSONAVE PA LO A LTO AVE FIGAR DEN DRHAYE S AVE BRAWLEY AVEMILBURNAVEVALENTINE AVESPRUCE AVE SIERRA AVE ESCALON AVE BRAWLEY AVESHIELDS AVE B U L L A RD AV E C ECELIAAVEGOLDENSTATE BLV D MA RTYAVE MCKINLEY AVE HERNDON AVE BARSTOW AVE SA N TA FE AVE W EBER AVE SAN JOSE AVE R I V E R S I D E D R JEA N N E AVE BLY T HEAVE99 99 S A N JO AQ U I N R IV ERSource: City of Fresno RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) FIGURE X-X Parcels Proposed for Change General Plan Land Use Map ´ Date: 4/3/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles COMMERCIAL Community General PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Fire Station BOUNDARIES West Area Specific Plan Boundary City Limits Sphere Of InfluenceOPEN SPACE Community Park Park Ponding Basin P PB EMPLOYMENT Business Park Light Industrial BP MIXED USE Corridor/Center Mixed Use Regional Mixed UseRMX CMX FIGURE 2-3 2-5Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision ·|}þ ·|}þBrawleyShields GrantlandHayesMarksCorneliaAshlan Shaw Bullard Herndon Dakota Clinton Gettysburg Barstow Sierra BryanHughesPolkValentineBlytheClintonGarfield 99VALENTINE AVEEMERSONAVE DANT E AVEB U L L A R D AV E GATES AVEVAN NESS BLVDM A R KSAVEPOLKAVED AK O TA AV E HUGHESAVERIVE R VIST A D R AL L U V I A L AV E A S H L A N AV E S H AW AV E EMERSONAVE F I GARD E NDRHAYESA VE BRAWLEYAVEMILBURN AVES P RU C E AVE S I E RR A AV EBRAWLEYAVE MC KI N L E Y AV E S HI E L D S AV E B U L L A R D A V E GOLD E N S TA T E B LV D MARTYAVE 99 H WY H E R N D O N AV E BA RS TO W AV E S A N TA F E A V E W EBER A V E S A N J O S E AV ERI V E R S I D E D R G NMX G CH FS CMX G NMX P CH NMX CMX CH G G NMX NMX NMX NMX NMX G E PB NP CH CH NMX CH NMX CMX NMX CMX FS G C NMX G G G R NMX G PB PB GC CMX CP NMX NMX 99 Source: City of FresnoFIGURE X-X Parcels Proposed for Change Proposed Land Use Change Map ´ Date: 4/3/2019 This map is believed to be an accurate representation of the City of Fresno GIS data. However, we make no warranties either expressed or implied for the correctness of this data. 0 0.50.25 Miles RESIDENTIAL Low Density (1-3.5 D.U./acre) Medium Low Density (3.5-6 D.U./acre) Medium Density (5.0-12 D.U./acre) Medium High Density (12-16 D.U./acre) Urban Neighborhood (16-30 D.U./acre) High Density (30-45 D.U./acre) COMMERCIAL Community General Regional BOUNDARIES Specific Plan of the West Area Fresno City Limts Sphere Of Influence OPEN SPACE Community Park Neighborhood Park Park Ponding Basin CP NP P PB MIXED USE Neighborhood Mixed Use Corridor/Center Mixed UseCMX CMX EMPLOYMENT Office Business ParkBP PUBLIC FACILITIES Public/Quasi-public Facility Elementary School Church Fire Station E CH FS FIGURE 2-4 2-6 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft 2.1 Draft Land Use Map & Guiding Principles Draft Land Use Map The Steering Committee recommends refining the General Plan’s land use vision for the West Area. The draft land use map proposes the relocation of higher density land uses away from the most western and southwestern portions of the Plan Area where they are distant from public transit and community amenities and transfers those higher density land use designations to major corridors. The following are revisions to the core goals provided in the General Plan: • West Shaw Avenue Town Center. The West Shaw Avenue Town Center (the Town Center) will extend from Highway 99 to the east side of Grantland Avenue and is envisioned to be comprised of mixed-use development supported by enhanced transit service. Land on the south side of West Shaw Avenue will provide additional neighborhood and commercial mixed use opportunities. • Catalytic Corridors. This Plan proposes the designation of higher density land uses along corridors for the purpose of providing easy access to major arterials and streets, retail centers, and community amenities. Catalytic corridors will include transit services. The corridors are designed to include neighborhood and pocket parks, commercial and retail uses, educational facilities, multi- family dwelling units, and professional offices. The corridors are located on the following streets: 1. West Shaw Avenue, from Highway 99 to the east side of Grantland Avenue 2. West Ashlan Avenue, from Highway 99 to the commercial nodes located on the west side of Grantland Avenue 3. North Blythe Avenue, from West Shields to West Ashlan Avenue 4. West Clinton Avenue from Highway 99 to North Brawley Avenue 5. Veterans Boulevard, from West Gettysburg Ave- nue to West Barstow Avenue Draft Guiding Principles Outreach to the West Area community started in early 2018 with individual meetings be- tween City staff and community stakeholders, including residents, city agencies, institutional partners, elected officials, land owners, and developers. Outreach then transitioned to a kick-off survey that was released in the spring of 2018, and the results helped frame discus- sion at subsequent meetings. City Council established an 11-member Steering Committee which held regular public meetings to provide recommendations to the draft land use map and guiding principles based on input received from community members. The purpose of the draft guiding principles is to serve as a foundation for the Plan. The topic of transportation, and parks and trails has been a predominant theme at community meetings and are reflected in the draft guiding principles. 2-7Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision Transportation • Accommodate and improve roadway access, connectivity and mobility among all modes of transportation, and prioritize roadway widening where bottlenecking exists. • Accommodate planned transit services in the West Area by locating routes near or adjacent to the community centers, schools, parks, and retail centers. Off ramp to Clinton Ave from Highway 99. Graphic of a Complete Street • Provide a complete, safe, and well- maintained sidewalk network from residential neighborhoods to commercial centers, schools, parks, and community centers. • Provide a complete, safe, and well- maintained roadway network that allows for efficient and smooth access from the West Area to other sections of the city and region. FAX bus stop on Shields Ave and Brawley Ave. 2-8 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft Parks & Trails • Create parks that are within existing and planned neighborhoods that are easily accessed by community members using pedestrian and bicycle pathways, transit services, or motor vehicles, consistent with the City of Fresno’s Parks Master Plan. • Provide for the location of a flagship Regional Park in the Plan Area that has components of the Plan Area’s agricultural history through the planting of drought-resistant vegetation or trees, and the creation of public art that exhibits the Plan Area’s contribution to the agricultural industry. Agriculture • Incorporate elements of agriculture in future parks by planting a mixture of native drought tolerant vegetation, shrubs, and trees that can serve to provide shade and enhance the streetscape. • Encourage and provide land use opportunities for agri-tourism ventures to occur in the West Area. • Encourage the development of harvest – producing community gardens. Image taken by City staff, Inspiration Park. Graphic of Agritourism 2-9Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision Retail • Attract desired and needed local retail establishments to serve the needs of the West Area community. Such establishments include grocery stores, bakeries, restaurants other than fast food places, and boutiques. • Discourage the expansion of undesirable retail establishments such as liquor stores, tobacco and vapor stores, short-term loan and pawn shops, and adult stores. • Encourage the development of retail establishments along commercial corridors Housing • Encourage a variety of housing types and styles. • Encourage the development of housing to accommodate an aging population including, multi-generational houses and other elder housing options. • Reaffirm the City’s commitment and obligation to affirmatively furthering access to fair and affordable housing opportunities by strongly encouraging equitable and fair housing opportunities to be located in strategic proximity to employment, recreational facilities, schools, neighborhood commercial areas, and transportation routes. Catalytic Corridors • Encourage the orderly and consistent development of civic, parkland, retail and commercial, mixed-use, and multi-family uses along West Shaw Avenue, West Ashlan Avenue, Veterans Boulevard, West Shields Avenue, West Clinton Avenue, and Blythe Avenue. Education • Attract much needed educational opportunities for the residents of the West Area, especially for post-secondary education, and access to programs for life-long learners. Image taken by City staff, Fresh Food Center Image taken by City staff, West Area Neighborhood. Fresno City College’s $89 million southwest campus has a 2023 completion date. (Artist Rendering/SCCCD) 2-10 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft Public Safety • Provide for safe routes to schools for children, with the City and County working together with residents, to provide sidewalks in neighborhood that have sporadic access. • Work to promote Neighborhood Watch in all neighborhoods, and further assess the need for the location of emergency response facilities west of Highway 99. Pedestrian walking down street with no sidewalk in Plan Area. Safe Routes to School Program, State of California, CA.gov 2-11Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Plan & Vision 3-1Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Public Engagement PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT3 3.1 Stakeholder Input Meetings with community stakeholders provided key information to City staff about the Plan Area during the early portion of the outreach process. City staff learned about the immigrant history that dates back to the early 20th century. Stakeholders shared their concerns for the West Area including limited amenities, limited housing stock, and poor infrastructure. The concept of agri-tourism was received positively. Stakeholders discussed the lack of identity for the Plan Area and how the identity would need to be created and supported by the community. Positive Impressions All of the community stakeholders interviewed shared positive perspectives of the West Area, and link the area to having a sense of place and community, in spite of its overall lack of identity. The common positive theme was that the West Area has the potential to preserve and enhance neighborhood cohesiveness as it continues to grow. Many of the residents interviewed reported feeling the connection to neighbors through events and activities hosted by the Central Unified School District or local religious facilities. Based on the feedback provided to City staff, the West Area community mainly relies upon these two institutions as the primary channel for people to develop close-knit relationships with their neighbors. Historic Discussion Several stakeholders mentioned that the West Area is home to many first-generation families relocating from foreign countries, principally Italy and India. Italian immigrant families that settled in the West Area were principally from Tuscany. The Sikh Institute that is located within the Plan Area provides essential immigration services to Indian immigrants looking to permanently settle in the United States. The first thing many new immigrants did when they arrived in Fresno was acquire land to farm and raise a family. Some community stakeholders interviewed mentioned longstanding farmland heritage and tradition in their family that dates back to the 1902’s. Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. 3-2 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft Principal Concerns Stakeholders shared that commercial amenities are lacking in the Plan Area, residents are forced to cross Highway 99 to access retail stores, grocery stores, quality restaurants, postal service, medical facilities, and fitness facilities. Stakeholders that were interviewed felt that good parks, trails and bike paths were limited in the Plan Area. An excess of starter homes was also a concern for stakeholders; many felt that starter homers created a transient environment thereby limiting the sense of neighborhood cohesion. Those interviewed desired quality housing stock that would serve the needs of diverse household types and sizes, including multigenerational families wishing to locate or remain in the West Area. Besides housing, stakeholders voiced concerns about the limited crossing opportunities over Highway 99 and the fragmented roadway system. Agri-tourism Agri-tourism is a mixture of two industries – agriculture and tourism. Agri-tourism has gained popularity in recent years. Activities may include wagon rides, farm tours, bed-and-breakfast inns, wineries/breweries, farmers markets, wedding and special event venues, and much more. Stakeholders were supportive of this concept being incorporated into the Specific Plan of the West Area as this venture could make the West Area a destination. Plan Area Identity Community stakeholders were just as perplexed as longstanding residents were concerning the identity of the Plan Area. Some identified the area as West Fresno or West Area. Another common theme to describe the Plan Area other than West Fresno or West Area did not emerge in the discussion with community stakeholders. Community members – at large identified the Plan Area based on the recently developed or planned housing communities. The identity of the West Area will need to be authentically created and supported by the West Area community. 3.2 Community Conversations The Development and Resource Management Department held two Community Conversations at the Central High School – East Campus. The first Community Conversation was held on May 3, 2018. City staff provided a presentation followed by community members being able to provide input on various subjects within the Ideas Station. The Ideas Station consisted of six locations around the perimeter of the room that sought input from the public on desired amenities, identity of the neighborhood where they lived, what they liked and disliked about the West Area, and identity of the West Area. In addition, a space was provided for community members to share their general comments and concerns about the West Area. Community Conversation No. 1 The input from community members at the May 3, 2018 Community Conversation has formed the basis for this Plan’s guiding principles which will be discussed later in this chapter. Community members voiced frustration with having to cross Highway 99 for commercial amenities such as quality grocery produce, retail shopping stores, quality eateries, fitness centers, medical facilities, and developed park space. Highway 99 has four crossing points located at West Clinton Avenue, West Ashlan Avenue, West Shaw Avenue, and West Herndon Avenue. Lacking amenities paired with only four crossing points has created a bottlenecking situation for West Area residents. Community members voiced support for the availability of commercial amenities needed to make the Plan Area a complete neighborhood. 3-3Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Public Engagement Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. 3-4 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft Community members, like the stakeholders interviewed, were unsure about the identity of the Plan Area. Community members were able to participate in a dot-voting exercise whereby they were able to vote on potential names to identity the West Area. The results did not show a clear choice. The results showed clear opposition to certain names such as Almond Villa and Westfield. Community members were able to write in other names that also did not gain any traction among other attendees. Staff collected all of the responses from the community members and compiled them for review by the Steering Committee. Community Conversation No. 2 The 2nd Community Conversation was held on June 14, 2018 to allow community members to provide input on the location of certain land uses within the Plan Area. Community members were asked to place a green dot on a blank map to indicate support for or a red dot to indicate opposition to the location of various land use types, such as housing, retail and commercial development, higher education, and parks. At land use stations, community members were given the chance to weigh in with comments explaining the reason for the location of the red or green dot. Participants also indicated land uses that they wanted to avoid in the West Area. The input received from the 2nd Community Conversation informed the development of conceptual land use maps that were subsequently released to the public and Steering Committee. Community members wanted to trade off existing higher density planned land uses on the western and southwestern edge of the Plan Area with lower density residential land uses. Many of the higher land uses were placed along busy corridors; Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. 3-5Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Public Engagement Coffee with the Clergy City staff held a meeting with local church leaders in the West Area called “Coffee with the Clergy” that shared the progress of the project, and encouraged them to be a part of the plan process. This meeting, coordinated by the Mayor’s Office, provided a safe forum for church leaders to discuss concerns they have received by their church members. Many of the concerns were echoed by community stakeholders during individual interviews and community members during the Community Conversations. However, pastoral staff members that work directly with youth and their families shared an interest for the location of organizations that support positive recreation and after-school programs such as a Boys and Girls Club or YMCA be planned for within the West Area. community members expressed support for removing higher density land uses from the center of the quarter sections as it currently appears in the General Plan. It was at this meeting where residents began to express support for the location of Regional Park within the Plan Area; this desire has been translated into a formal recommendation from the Steering Committee. Community expressed support for land use changes that provided opportunities for higher education facilities, retail, and agri-tourism to be principally located within the Plan Area, predominantly situated on and south of West Shaw Avenue. Image taken by City staff, West Area Commuity Conversation. 3-6 Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | May 2019 Draft 3.3 Community Survey A ten-question community survey was made available as a paper copy and online for community members to complete. The survey served as an additional channel for community members to provide input on visioning in the West Area. The survey collected 373 responses over the course of two months. Below are the results: ?What are your reasons for choosing to live and/or work in the Plan Area? The majority of survey respondents indicated that affordable cost of living, quality of education provided by CUSD, and the rural atmosphere were the reasons for the choosing to live in the Plan Area. ?What aspects would discourage you from remaining in the West Area? Nearly 75% of the respondents indicated that an increase in crime would be the primary aspect that would discourage someone from remaining in the Plan Area. Lack of housing options, incomplete transportation infrastructure, and lacking recreational and commercial amenities would also serve as a factor to discourage West Area residents from remaining in the Plan Area. ?How satisfied are you with the quality of life within the West Area? Out of 373 respondents, over 67% of them are either satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of life in the West Area. ?What improvements do you believe need to occur within the West Area? Responses to this question were largely related to the desire to provide for additional or new commercial establishments within the West Area, and the installation of transportation infrastructure to improve traffic flow. The year is 2035, and the Fresno Bee is preparing an article on the improvements that have occurred within the West Area. What should the highlight of the article be? Nearly 50% of the respondents want the highlight of the article to be improved traffic flow across Highway 99. Respondents specifically targeted the Shaw Avenue interchange as one of the main sources of congestion to gain access to Highway 99 and or the east side of highway. What do you think about housing options within the West Area? A plurality of the respondents believes there are too many apartments, townhouses, or condominiums in the Plan Area. Respondents also believe there are not enough luxury or custom housing options, and not enough housing to accommodate multi-generational households. What kinds of commercial development would you like to see within the West Area? Respondents were permitted to select as many options that were applicable to their desired choice for commercial development. Twenty-four options were presented for respondents to select; the leading choices selected by survey respondents included supermarkets, movie theaters, bakeries, and restaurants other than fast food establishments. ? ? ? 3-7Specific Plan of the West Area: Initiation Report | Public Engagement Do you agree with the idea that West Shaw Avenue, from Highway 99 to Grantland Avenue, should serve as the town center for the West Area? Nearly 70% agreed with the idea that West Shaw Avenue should serve as the town center or main commercial hub for the Plan Area. Agri-tourism is a mix of two industries – agriculture and tourism. Agri-tourism has gained popularity in recent years. Activities can include wagon rides, farm tours, bed-and- breakfasts, wineries/breweries, farmers markets, wedding and special events venue, festivals, and much more. Do you believe the concept of agri-tourism should be incorporated into the Specific Plan of the West Area? Close to 80% of respondents support the concept of agri-tourism being incorporated into this Plan. What name do you think should be used to identify the West Area? The leading choice by a plurality result is River West with only 35% supporting the name. Community members did not seem to settle on the name River West as the identity for the West Area. The result of this portion of the survey pairs with the response from community stakeholders and other community members. ? ? ? A section of Sendero Farm where 63 households from the Rancho Mission Viejo development participate in farming and learn about agriculture, Image by The Orane County Register. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1648 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 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 four Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes in the amount of $560,544 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Quinn Company of Fresno,California,for the purchase of four Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes in the amount of $560,544. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Works (DPW)and Department of Public Utilities (DPU)are requesting approval to purchase four Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes in the amount of $560,544.The new backhoes will be used for construction and maintenance throughout the city.Of the four backhoes,three will be purchased as additions for DPW and one will be purchased as a replacement for DPU.The equipment will be purchased through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND DPW,Street Maintenance Division provides service to the residents of Fresno through the construction and maintenance of roadways.This work is performed with medium-size backhoes City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1648 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-A construction and maintenance of roadways.This work is performed with medium-size backhoes utilized to excavate old roadway and move material during the paving and patching process.As new funding sources for street maintenance have become available,the Streets Maintenance Division has recognized a need to grow its backhoe fleet to meet the needs of new and future projects. DPU,Wastewater Management Division provides service to the residents of Fresno through the collection and treatment of wastewater produced by the city.The Wastewater Treatment Plant operates 1,750 acres of percolation ponds requiring continuous maintenance and construction.This work is performed with a medium-size backhoe,which has reached the end of its useful life.The unit identified for replacement is 13 years old and is three generations behind the current emissions standard. The new Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes 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 backhoes will feature a newly-developed hydraulic system that allows full operation at a lower RPM,increasing fuel efficiency across all aspects of operation.The City of Fresno has been using Caterpillar 430 series backhoes for more than 17 years and has found them to be reliable and effective.The Department of Transportation,Municipal Fleet Division recommends this purchase based on the needs of the two divisions and condition of the equipment identified for replacement. The backhoes will be purchased following a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell,formerly NJPA.Sourcewell utilizes a rigorous request for proposal (RFP),which includes development of solicitation document and proposal evaluation criteria,public advertisement,a five-to six-week response period and a pre-proposal conference.Upon closing of the response period,a committee evaluates proposals to determine the responsiveness against the pre-determined RFP evaluation criteria.Multi-year contracts are awarded based on the evaluation scores.The purchase price for each unit is $140,136.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 Guidelines Section 15378,the award of this contract does not qualify as a “project.” LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable because these backhoes will be purchased using a cooperative purchase agreement. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase these items.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the Caterpillar 430F2 backhoes has been included in the FY19 adopted budget under the operations of the Streets Division and Wastewater Management Division.Attached is a list of funding sources for the equipment included in this award. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1648 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-A Attachments: Acceptance and Award CAT Contract Combined Ads Comment and Review Evaluation RFP 5th Year Extension Funding Sources City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Bid Information /∠Home ∠List of Bids Bid Information Bid Information for 032515 Bid Number 032515 Description HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Published By National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type Open to all suppliers Contract Type RFP Procurement Name Procurement Published Date 01/23/2015 Closing Date 03/25/2015 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 Deadline: Tender Area NDA Requirement N/A NOI Date N/A Site Meetings N/A HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. 032515 Closing Date: 03/25/2015 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 # 032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. Proposals will be received until MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. No Bid Document Selected 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. Seq. Seq. Name Name Description Description Size Size Page Page NDA NDA Required Required Preview Preview Document Document FREE Electronic Distribution of Bid Document(s) Pending Biddingo Approval Pending Biddingo Approval Requirements Bid Advertisement Bid Document Selected Categories (Biddingo Category) Attached Bid Documents Page 1 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 1/23/2015https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/225660/1147030 Doc. 1 Details may be obtained by letter of request to Maureen Knight.docx How to obtain RFP 11753 1 Name / Email Name / Email Address Address Phone Phone Fax Fax No Bidder Invited © Copyright 2015 R2CoW. All Rights Reserved. Powered by [ SUPPORT (Download Training Manuals) ] ABOUT SSL CERTIFICATES Invited Bidders Page 2 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 1/23/2015https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/225660/1147030 Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES https://www.merx.com/...LID=1&HID=&hauth=%2bxzD5uZneLFsXVZnibKK%2bA%3d%3d&hcode=iMZ1kuVTUnBwdeDkwBd3FQ%3d%3d[9/30/2016 2:11:36 PM] Help Contact Us Tutorial Logout OPPORTUNITY ABSTRACT FRANÇAIS Print-friendly Version Document Request List: N/A HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES Disclaimer Header Reference Number PR318461 Solicitation Number 032515 Buying Organization National Joint Powers Alliance Source ID PP.CO.USA.868485.C88455 Associated Components Yes Non-disclosure Agreement Not required. Dates Published 2015-01-23 Revised Closing 2015-03-25 04:30 PM Central Daylight Saving Time CDT Details Opportunity Access Open Category Industrial Equipment Construction Products GSINS Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES https://www.merx.com/...LID=1&HID=&hauth=%2bxzD5uZneLFsXVZnibKK%2bA%3d%3d&hcode=iMZ1kuVTUnBwdeDkwBd3FQ%3d%3d[9/30/2016 2:11:36 PM] Region of Delivery Canada Agreement Type Tender Type Request for Proposal (RFP) Estimated Value Pre-bid Meeting Optional 2015-03-04 10:00 AM Central Standard Time CST Webcast/Conference Call Site Visit Not Applicable Bid Security Required No Deadline for Bidders' Questions 2015-03-18 Notice Description HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES 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 # 032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. Proposals will be received until MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 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 Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES https://www.merx.com/...LID=1&HID=&hauth=%2bxzD5uZneLFsXVZnibKK%2bA%3d%3d&hcode=iMZ1kuVTUnBwdeDkwBd3FQ%3d%3d[9/30/2016 2:11:36 PM] Fax (218)894-3045 Email ginger.line@njpacoop.org Website URL Print-friendly Version Document Request List: N/A Awards: View 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 government department. MERX, the Minister nor the Contracting Authority will assume responsibility or liability for the accuracy of the information contained in the publication. © 2016 MERX National Cooperative Contract Solutions -Heavy Construction Equip.with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies 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 # 032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. 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 MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. Pre-Proposal Conference: March 4, 2015 at 10:00 am CT Sealed proposals due: March 25, 2015 at 4:30 pm CT Proposals will be publicly opened: March 26, 2015 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 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: *is a required field Vendor Name * Vendor Address * Vendor City * Vendor State * Vendor Zip Code * Contact Name * Contact Email * Vendor Phone Number * Submit Home > National Cooperative Contract Solutions >Become a Vendor >Current & Pending Solicitations > -Heavy Construction Equip. with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies Page 1 of 3National Joint Powers Alliance :: - Heavy Construction Equip. with Related Accessories, ... 1/23/2015http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/become-vendor/current-p... 12-Step Procurement Process About Us Affiliations & Relationships Become a Member Become a Vendor Get to Know NJPA Current & Pending Solicitations - Instructional and Leadership Training Development as related to systems solutions - Technology Solutions with related equipment and accessories Event Seating with Related Accessories - Mobile Refuse - Information Security Assessments - Office, School and, Other Workplace-Related Supplies and Services - Staffing and Professional Employment Related Services PAINT AND WALL COVERINGS WITH RELATED SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES - Agricultural Tractors with Related Equipment and Accessories - Pre-Engineered Buildings with Related Materials, Site Prep, Install and Ancillary Services Furniture with Related Accessories and Services - Heavy Construction Equip. with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies Vendor Reference Guide Contracts - General Contracts - Fleet Contracts - ezIQC Construction Cooperative Health Page 2 of 3National Joint Powers Alliance :: - Heavy Construction Equip. with Related Accessories, ... 1/23/2015http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/become-vendor/current-p... Current & Pending Solicitations FAQs How to Purchase Legal Authority National Cooperative Leasing NJPA Access for Vendors Search Vendors & Products Tribal What Can NJPA Do For You Vendor Newsletter Page 3 of 3National Joint Powers Alliance :: - Heavy Construction Equip. with Related Accessories, ... 1/23/2015http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/become-vendor/current-p... Metro [C M Y K] K1 Friday, Jan. 23, 2015 General Policies Review your ad on the first day of publication.If there are mis- takes, notify us immediately. We will make changes for errors and adjust your bill, but only if we receive notice on the first day the ad is published. We limit our liability in this way, and we do not accept liability for any other damages which may re- sult from error or omission in or of an ad. All ad copy must be ap- proved by the newspaper, which reserves the right to re- quest changes, reject or proper- ly classify an ad. The advertis- er, and not the newspaper, is re- sponsible for the truthful con- tent of the ad. Advertising is al- so subject to credit approval. NOTICE:Appointment of Washing- ton State Fiscal Agent - The Wash- ington State Finance Committee has by Resolution 1160 appointed US Bank National Association as Washington’s next state-wide fis- cal agent pursuant to RCW 43.80. 120. The four-year contract is to be effective February 1, 2015. CERTIFICATE OF ASSUMED NAME , State of Minnesota, Pursuant to Chapter 333 Minnesota Statutes: the undersigned, who is or will be conducting business in the State of Minnesota under an assumed name, hereby certifies: 1. State the exact assumed name under which the business is or will be conducted: Twin City Restaurant Equipment & Supply 2. State the address of the principal place of business: 14552 268th Avenue NW Zimmerman, MN 55398 3. List the name and complete street address of all persons con- ducting business under the above Assumed Name: Pietrafitta’s Italian Market, LLC 14552 268th Avenue NW Zimmerman, MN 55389 4. I certify that I am authorized to sign this certificate and I further certify that I understand that by signing this certificate, I am subject to the penalties of perjury as set forth in Minnesota Statutes section 609.48 as if I had signed this certifi- cate under oath. Dated: January 20, 2015 Signed: Lisa Pietrafitta, Director of Operations The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA),on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher educa- tion, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and international- ly, issues this Request For Propos- al (RFP) to result in a national con- tract solution for the procurement of #032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED AC- CESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. 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 MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Cen- tral Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. RFPs are also advertised on www.njpacoop. org. Beginning April, 2015, RFPs will be advertised on www. njpacoop.org and will no longer be advertised in the Star Tribune. Global Academy ("District")re- quests proposals for group insur- ance coverage for the health plan year beginning July 1, 2015. Sealed proposals will be accepted in paper form until 5:00 pm central time on Monday, March 9, 2015 at 4065 Central Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421. Copies of the request for proposal and exhibits may be requested from Helen Fisk, Director (helen.fisk@ globalacademy.us), and will be sent electronically at no charge. District reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive informalities. District reserves the right to select the proposal which it determines to be in the best in- terest of the District. Blown-In Insulation Free estimates anytime. 763-221-5717 HANDYMAN Remodels specializing in tile, paint, decks & fence. Free Estimates. Insured. 28 years exp. No job too small. John 612-200-8096 û PAINTING/WALL REPAIR û QUALITY Work at a REASON- ABLE Rate. 763-464-1918 or svobodapainting.com Licensed RN will provide care in your south metro home. Home care/hospice experience. Four to 10 hr days. 952-463-0233 HEALING MASSAGE - Swedish & LOMI LOMI, By Licia 763-533-5561 MASSAGE MELTDOWN 24/7, in/out. Full body $50. 612-578-5513 Wild Nasty Babes!!! 18+ Hot Live 1 on 1! 1-800-350-4323 MEET HOT MEN Browse Ads FREE! 952-938-8700 FREE Code 2558, 18+ HOT LOCAL BABES EVERYBODY TRY IT FREE! 1-888-434-2223 18+ Visit Star Tribune Auction Hub Find thousands of items from local auction companies. www.startribune.com/auctions PLYMOUTH SALE 5060 Archer Lane SAT-SUN 9-3 #’s at 8am Sat DIR: Hwy 55 WEST, RT on Peony Lane, RT on Schmidt Lake Rd, LEFT on Archer. See www.estatesales.net for pics! JBH and ASSOCIATES Mpls Estate Sale 3336 40th Ave S. Fri 10-5, Sat 10-4. Sun 10-2. 60+ yr accumulation. House & gar packed! See list at www.rosesvintage.com BLOOMINGTON, The Gables 9741 Grand Ave. , Jan. 23 & 24, 10a to 5p. Beautiful furniture, hospi- tal bed & medical equip, HH. BLOOMINGTON ESTATE House for Sale. Sat 9-3/Sun 10-3 Details at www.estatesales.ne t Anoka Fri & Sat Jan 23-24 from 9-4 Household, tools, furn, antiques. 624 Benton St, Anoka WE PURCHASE FINE ART and limited ed. prints. 612-501-8998 **HOPKINS ANTIQUE MALL** 68 DEALERS 2 LEVELS 1008 Mainstreet Hopkins, 952-931-9748, Mon-Sat 11-6, Sun 11-5 Closed Major Holidays BUYING old toys, metal trucks, Hot Whls, Tonka, action figs, GI Joe, Star Wars, sport cards, etc. 612.817.0537 COIN SHOW Sun. Jan. 25 at 9a to 4:30p, American Legion, 6501 Port- land Ave. S., Richfield. wocgs.com TOY CAR SHOW & SWAP MEET Sun 1/25, VFW, 7775 Medicine Lake Road, Golden Valley. Early adm. 10am, $5. Doors open noon-3, $2. All kinds of toy cars & toys. Questions: Warren 612-636-2450 Wanted Antiques/Collectibles for possible trade Greg 651-659-0199 Mpls Firewood 3 yr dry oak + birch 4’x8’x16"= $150 or 2/$250, free del + stack, call or text 612-845-0957 SOLID DRY RED OAK/MIXED 4’x8’x16” $130 (2/$240). Credit/cash. Call 612-750-8131 or 320-390-0217 BEDS BEDS BEDS 612-782-9595 TWIN MATTRESS AND BOX $125 FULL MATTRESS AND BOX $140 QUEEN MATTRESS AND BOX $150 KING MATTRESS AND BOX $250 FACTORY SEALED IN PLASTIC DELIVERY AVAILABLE KAWAI KG-2A 1994 GRAND PIANO,5’ 10", polished ebony. Successor model new is $27,500. Rarely played. Stunning. Exceptional quality. $14,700. 651-552-1396 612-790-0440 PIANO 1909 6’ GABLER GRAND PIA- NO Fully restored. 1 time New Year Special! $4,900/bo. 218-476-2012 Tanning Beds I have over 20 used tanning beds for sale starting at $400 with warranty. 952-807-2728 Alaskan Malamute 2 Females Gr/Wh. AKC Born 10/27/14 Vet checked Vacc current. Health guar. 763-689-1975 Alaskan Malamute Pups , giant, AKC CampbellsAlaskanMalamutes.com 763-493-2074 or 763-257-5089 Beagle Purebred Beagles. 3rd set shots, registered, vet checked, Born 10-28, Tri color. $400 320-286-2516 BERNESE/GOLDENDOODLE PUPS Black & white, vet checked, shots. M $1200, F $1500. 507-358-4074 BOSTON TERRIER PUPPIES, brindle, reg AKC, family rsd. Ready in 5 wks. M $700 F $750. 320-547-0035 eves BRUSSELS GRIFFON,black/tan, Rottweiler looks, but v. tiny, vet/ shots, F $995, M $650. 612-224-2577 BULLDOGGE OLDE ENGLISH PUPS Vet checked. 612-290-9381 www.bulldogsbyoandb.com English Mastiff AKC M&F Moving, must sell by 1/30/15, $800. 605-957-4430 French Bulldog $2700, Stunning Blue Brindle, Born 10/16/14, AKC, Shot UTD, Health Guarantee. 507-382-6828 French Bulldog Reg F, 9mos, $1300. 1 Blue M 17wks, AKC, @ higher price. 763-434-3945 or 763-438-8310 GERMAN SHEPHERD AKC PUPS Champion bloodlines, both parents, black/tan & black sables, shots, wormed, vet checked, family raised. Will meet. M/F $550. 320-894-9808. wolfdogkisses@yahoo.com German Shepherd Dog (GSD)AKC, Wht, blk/tan, vet chkd, shots, de- wormed, dews, $500. 320-309-5852 German Shepherd Pups,AKC reg. GSD pups ready for new homes, family raised, $1000, 320-282-8292 GERMAN SHEPHERD PUPS AKC. US/German Lines. Guar. 715-537-5413. www.jerland.com GOLDENDOODLE - MINIS M/F, ivory, caramel, reds, ready to go 2/14, puppiesupnorth.com 320-250-2464 GOLDENDOODLE PUPS Stunning Mini & Standards. All colors. Health guaranteed. Family raised. letsplaykennels.com 507-696-2848 Goldendoodles, Mini Fam rsd, vet, shots, will be 15 lbs, Nonshed, Start- ing at $1000. 612-839-7766 Golden Retrievers AKC English Cream/Light Gold, Family/Running/ Hunting, M$700 F$750. 605-929-9715 GOLDEN Retrievers Since 1950! English Creme AKC OFA. Champion sired. $1500-$1800 920-277-6015.Will meet. southbranchgoldens.com GREAT DANE AKC Pups vet chk, shots, wormed, mixed colors, avail Jan 30 beautiful babies 763-786-4527 Great Pyrenees Purebred Pups M/F, 1st shots, vet chk, $475. 763-688-1312 HAVANESE MALES:AKC, 1 Sable, 2 Chocolates, 1 Black & White Adult. Fridley, MN 763 - 571 - 3881 IRISH SETTERS, PUREBRED ACK, reg- istered, 4 M, ready to go 1/31, $50 to hold. Shots & vet chkd. $500. WILL MEET 320-304-0423 Jack Russell Pups 2 purebred male pups shots and wormed well social- ized $300 507-822-0107 LAB AKC PUPS Yellow, Ivory or black, ‘Blocky’, excellent bloodlines, Raider line.Good Lookin’ Pups! M $400 / F $450. 320-749-2428 LAB, AKC, RED.Excellent hunting and family pet! Born 12/14, M/F, $600. 320-808-9957 LABRADOODLE MINIS & SPOODLES ivory, tan, blk, and choc, M/F, puppiesupnorth.com 320-250-2464 LABS AKC Choc & Black. Exc family pet & bloodlines, dews, shots, hips. M/F $500-$700. 320-864-6238 LANDSEER NEWFOUNDLAND/ GREAT PYRENEES CROSS PUPS,1st shots. $500-$650. 763-227-7353 LHASA OPSA AKC Reg.long haired pony tail beauties, born 12/1/14, Average weight 10 to 15 pounds. $350 320-444-0389 Newfoundland AKC Puppies Taking Deposits F & M, Br, Br/Wh, Irish Spot Mom & Dad on site. available 2/14 cedarlakenewfies@yahoo.com Pomeranian Teacup Pups. and Stud Service. 612-205-8571 bloomsandpoms@gmail.com Poodle, Standard puppies, 1 M, 3 F, UTD shots, Vet checked, 8 weeks, Ready, $1,000, 507-920-6547 SCHNAUZER Mini CKC Female, choc parti, shots, dews, very social, rsd w/TLC, $500. 320-760-6839 SCHNAUZER PUPS,AKC, family raised, vet chkd, males, started house breaking, $600. 952-469-4189 SHIH POO PUPS,males, cream and tan, 1st shots, guarantee. $320. Will meet. 507-368-4857 YORKIEPOO Toy All Black, loves kids, 3 m 10/16. Vet chk, pup shots, non shed, $650. Eagan, 651-456-0957 SCOTTSDALE, AZ BEAUTIFUL 3BR HOUSE, 1 story, furnished, overlook- ing lake & community swimming pool in McCormick Ranch gated community. $1250/week. $250 de- posit. 651-301-1204 CAPTIVA ISLAND, FL ON THE BEACH! 2BR, 2BA condo, sleeps 6. 3/6 - 3/13. 651-247-4577 GUN & KNIFE SHOW Buy•Sell•Trade Jan 24-25, Sat 9am-5pm, Sun 9-3. ANOKA ARMORY 763-754-7140 * * BLOOMINGTON * * Beautiful 1BR & 2BR Senior Apts w/new oak cabinets, ceramic tile, dishwasher, microwave, balcony! Underground heated parking, elevator, busline. No pets. Available now. 1BR for $849. 2BR for $949. THIS IS A MUST SEE! 763-323-7914 8848 Nicollet Ave S www.daystarapts.com 1525 south 4th Street PUBLIC NOTICE - RIVERSIDE PLAZA- SECTION 8 WAITING LIST OPENING The Section 8 waiting lists for studio, one bedroom and two bedroom units at Riverside Plaza will open on February 1, 2015. If you are interest- ed in applying for the waiting list, please stop by 1600 South 6th Street in Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 to pick up an application. Our office hours are Monday through Friday from 9:00 am and 5:00 pm. If your name is already on our waiting list, Riverside Plaza will maintain your name and the date and time you ap- plied for the waiting list. You must update your personal information by responding to the correspon- dence you receive from our office annually. Riverside Plaza is an Equal Employer and Housing Opportunity property. $1,134. 612-337-2682 ANOKA Homes On The River 763-421-7578. 1 BR apts. We have turned the old Anoka Electric build- ing into luxury apts. Granite counter tops, stainless steel appliances, ce- ramic tile floors, high industrial looking ceilings, washer & dryer in each unit. $900-$1,480 per mo. 709 West Central Ave SE PUBLIC NOTICE COMMUNITY PLAZA SECTION 8 WAITING LIST OPENING The Section 8 waiting lists for two bedroom and three bedroom units at Community Plaza will open on February 1, 2015. If you are interest- ed in applying for the waiting list, please stop by 1600 South 6th Street in Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 to pick up an application. Our office hours are Monday through Friday from 9:00 am and 5:00 pm. If your name is already on our waiting list, Community Plaza will maintain your name and the date and time you ap- plied for the waiting list. You must update your personal information by responding to the correspon- dence you receive from our office annually. Community Plaza is an Equal Employer and Housing Oppor- tunity property. $1,041. 612-337-2612 MPLS 32nd St & 3rd Ave S Nice, clean 2 rooms in dplx. Starting @ $475/mo + dep, utils pd, 6 mo lease, No smk, refs req’d. 612-823-3040 ROBIN HOTEL FURN SLEEP RMS Sec bldg. No Smoke/no drink. Sgl $160+ /dbl $190+ per wk + security de- posit. Call 763-519-0000 M-F Only WEST METRO Room for rent in beautiful farm home, 30 minutes West of 494 on Hwy 7, $650 + utils. Pets allowed, 612-418-0218 TWIN CITY PUBLIC CAR AUCTION Sat, January 24. See Bargain Lot for list. www.TwinCitiesAuctions.com 651-633-9655 BMW 745 2005 Li C, AT, 200K+mi, 7509 Oakland Av S $4783.33 owed. 2/16/15 1:00pm Sale. WBAGN63515DS57627 2010 CHEV IMPALA LS................$5999 No Credit, Bad Credit, No Problem! $500 Dn $159 Per Mo. 763-780-5500 GUARANTEED CREDIT APPROVAL û JANUARY SPECIALS û 97 Honda Civic ........................... $1799 01 Saturn SL ................................ $2595 00 Mercury Sable ....................... $2795 96 Buick Skylark ...85K act mi ... $2899 99 Cadillac Seville ..................... $3019 00 Ford Expedition .................... $3199 01 Chrysler PTCruiser ............... $3295 02 Mercury Mountaineer ......... $3299 03 Toyota Corolla ....................... $3795 98 IsuzuTrooper ......................... $3799 01 Mazda Protege ..................... $3995 04 Hyundai Sante Fe ................. $4495 05 Nissan Sentra ........................ $5499 Morrie’s Nissan 763.765.1518 $350 & up On Most Junk and Repairable Autos More on Most ‘00 & up Flatbed Towing Service Serving Entire Metro 7 days a Week Same Day Service 612-554-9469 $$ Up to $7500 $$ Junkers & Repairables More if Saleable - Free Towing - - No Hassles - - Lic. MN Dealer - BBB A+ Rating - Bonded and Insured - - Entire Metro Area - ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY RECYCLER CROSSTOWNAUTO.NET 612-861-3020 651-645-7715 Twin City Public Car Auction SATURDAY, JANUARY 24, 11AM Preview: Friday 2pm-5pm, Sat 9am. National Guard-Brdwy & Central Av 1025 Broadway St NE, Mpls, 55413 INDOORS 55 Cars, Trucks, Vans! ’08 Pontiac G6, ’07 Nissan Versa, ’07 Equinox, ’07 Taurus, ’05 Corolla, ’04 Saturn Ion, ’03 Accords (2), ’03 Saturn Vue, ’02 Saturn Wgn, ’02 Explorer, ’01 Hondas (2), ’01 Intrigue, ’98 CRV + 40 MORE! 27 Years - 17,000 Vehicles Sold! NOT A SALVAGE AUCTION! ENGINE & TRANS GUARANTEED CASH & PRIZE DRAWINGS! www.TwinCitiesAuctions.com 651-633-9655 Lic #23367, S Doll CHEVROLET MISCELLANEOUS BMW Proposals for Bids Certi�cates of Assumed Name Proposals for Bids General Notices Placeanadtoday. Put an ad in. Get the word out. Call612.673.7000,fax612.673.4884 orgotostartribune.com/placeads. 2402600R/5/14 All rental advertising in the Star Tribune is subject to the laws which make it illegal to advertise "any preference, limitation or dis- crimination based on race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, creed, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, handicap, disabili- ty, familial status or status regarding public assistance or an intention to make any such preference, limitation or discrimination". The Star Tribune will not knowingly accept any advertisements which are in violation of the law. All dwellings advertised in the Star Tribune publications are available on an equal opportunity basis. Resources: Mpls. Civil Rights 612-673-3012 MN Human Rights 651-296-5663 Rental Home Line 612-728-5767 HUD 1-800-669-9777 40 Temporary Full-Time Positions available in Cold Spring, MN through Work Force Development Systems, LLC and Gold’n Plump Poultry, LLC as joint employers: Seasonal Generalists, 3/1/2015 - 10/31/2015. The Seasonal Generalist is responsible for performing a variety of production centered tasks to support the production of value added poultry products. Supports and fills in for absences of utility and process control positions. Processes product using tools and equipment to cut, trim, tray, weigh, etc. in accordance with United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Gold’n Plump Poultry, LLC product standards and procedures. Assists in maintaining the smooth operation of the department by gathering, distributing and monitoring department supplies to support the production schedule; helps maintain production equipment as needed to ensure product quality and quantity are being met; maintain proper product temperature while scaling, moving, recording and storing product and supplies; assists in maintaining the production area for cleanliness in accordance with company sanitation standard operating procedures (SSOP). Perform audits to monitor established control points; review Infinity data and respond to signals supporting compliance to specifications; communicate real time results to processing support on the floor; input collected data into reporting format that can be utilized by supervisors and managers to monitor real time results. $13.00 p/hr. @ 40 hours per week, one 8 hour shift per day, shifts vary. Overtime, at $19.50, will depend on business needs. Experience not required. Ability to sufficiently read, write and speak English. Basic math skills including: addition, subtraction, division, multiplication and percentage calculations. Basic data entry skills. Ability to work with minimal supervision and communicate questions and concerns effectively to maintenance and/or leadership. Housing available at employee’s expense. On-the-job training provided; will fulfill 3/4th wage guarantee under H2B program; tools and supplies provided. Daily transportation to/from worksite provided. Transportation/subsistence paid for costs incurred for reporting to worksite. Applicants may apply for any or all of the jobs listed. When applying please identify the job by GNP Cold Spring, MN you are applying to for the entire period of employment specified. Ad is placed in connection with future application for H2B workers. If interested contact Peggy Brown at pbrown@gnpcompany.com or PO box 1106, St Cloud, MN, 56302. Or Gloria Bostic at gloria.bostic@state.mn.us. Refer to ID 8041160 when applying FLEET DRIVERS WANTED 3668/12/14 Opportunities for full-time hours available. Great working atmosphere and a potential to earn up to $17/hour77 with benefits. Paid training and uniforms provided. Call now: 612-673-4222 or go to StarTribunecompany.com Make $500–$750 just by getting hired. (Limited-time only) 5152140S/5/14 Dressforsuccess. See Stylepoints in Thursday’s Variety. Digupgardeningtips. Read Variety H+G every Wednesday. 5152140S/5/14 Friday, January 23, 2015 l STAR TRIBUNE l K1 Ad Number:Insertion Number:Size:Color Type:0000060684-01N/A1 Col x 2.81 in0Advertiser:Agency:Section-Page-Zone(s):Description:National Joint Powers AllianceN/AK-1-SouthwestThe National Joint Powers Allianc...Friday, January 23, 2015 USA TODAYFRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2015 MONEY 5B Advertise in USA TODAY! (800) 397-0070 sales@russelljohns.com Place your advertisement in USA TODAY’s Marketplace Classified section today! NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICE 1-800-THE-LOST MISSING ASHLEE DAUGHERTY From:Tracy, CA NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN Sex:Female Race: White Hair:Brown Eyes:Brown DOB: Jan 26, 1997 Missing: May 19, 2014 Age Now:17 To view more Classified listings, visit: www.USATODAYClassifieds.com NOTICES Super Bowl Hotels Final Four, Olympics & more www.14sb.com ! Call 917-224-1231Dial 1-4Super-Bowl TICKETS PUBLIC NOTICE BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES Ready for Financial Security? 100% Commissions Paid... Member to Member. wow-factor-team-build-usa.com CASHBACK GROCERIES 10% Rewards! Any Store! Affiliates PAID DAILY! Call M-F 10-4 ET FREE Info. 646.829.9260 A high street beauty salon based in Rochester, Minnesota is currently looking for Nail Tech & Cosmetologist. Kindly send your CVs at Careers@ Tamimiinvestments.com EMPLOYMENT PERSONALS PERSONALS MEET HOT LOCAL SINGLES Browse Ads & Reply FREE,18+ Call for Your Local Number 888-634-2628, Code 3268 CAREERS BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES FINANCIAL SERVICES *** BAD/NEGATIVE CREDIT *** Removed From Credit Report Guaranteed or your Money Back. Toll Free: 1-877-775-6932 Private Money: Investment & Commercial Properties, NV only, Fast Close, No Appraisals Needed American Mortgage Services 702-429-3994 NMLS #382900, Agent #6603 Real Estate AUCTION! 35+/- Deeded Properties in McCall, Idaho - Lake front homes and cabin www.CorbettBottles.com NASCARTeam. Own all or part of championship run team. Serious funded investors only. Call now for 2015 season ownership. 515-493-9345 Russ HOWTO EARN UPTO $1,000+ DAILY! Get Paid up to 72 Times Daily! No Selling! Free Money Making Website!!www.EasyMoneyFormula.com Mfg & Distr. 20 years 25% net on $5mm sales in 2014 Turnkey. $4.5mm. No Earnouts No Brokers 714-200-8778 Manufacturer looking to sell its accounts receivable at a large discount, fully insured 616-559-0101 john@vsproductsinc.com 100% FINANCING, OAC FROM $59,900 Anywhere - Worldwide 100%TURNKEY $$ 1-877-500-7603 $$ WWW.DRSS9.COM OWNYOUROWN • DOLLAR STORE • DOLLAR PLUS STORE • BIG BOX DOLLAR STORE • MAIL/PACK / SHIP & BUSINESS CENTER STORE • DISCOUNT PARTY STORE • TEENS/ TWEENS STORE • $10 CLOTHING STORE • FROZEN YOGURT STORE 14 Years Surefire Success System! Brings Cash Directly To Your Mailbox! No Explaining, Selling or Convincing Comp Opp. Call 888-236-2580 BUSINESS GO PUBLIC WITH YOUR COMPANY We Take Companies Public Including Start-Ups tcc5.com 310-888-1870 Executive Cash Flow 30k In 30 Days. Call 800-691-4496 WWW.DEBTFREECASHRICH.COM MARKETPLACE MERCHANDISE GREAT GIFT Crutch & Cane Users! Non slip tips on Water/Snow Maximum Traction Available at Amazon.com or TipsThatGrip.com ILLUMINATI Only known biography of an actual member of the Illuminati. Buy now at www.michelnizan.com HEALTH/FITNESS AUCTIONS PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT BUSINE$$ $245K-$1M Possible Coaching Others To Create Wealth With Our Coaching System. Not MLM. FREE Webinar at www.SimplyCreateWealth.com REPLACE OBAMACARE with national insurance. RUN FOR CONGRESS next year. http://www.thehumanrightsparty.org DISTRIBUTORSHIP MONEY MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL SERVICES: Territories available now for our automated check cashing and cash advance kiosk No Bad Checks Guarantee. Visit: sam4quickcash.com Call 1-855-236-1729 SAVE MORE $$$ ON YOUR INCOME TAXES FIN D OUT HOW AT www.australianbulk.com.au BUSINESS CONNECTIONS Corporation For Sale Established 1995 Private Banking Credit Lines 855-227-4462 BECOME A SEMINAR MILLIONAIRE! HOW?WITH ADVANCE PAID REGISTRATIONS NATIONWIDE 305 546 3745 TRAVEL SPORTS AND RECREATION TIMESHARE BOOKS/MOVIES/MUSIC CALL RTR NOW Free Information about thousandsof low cost Timeshares,Campsites.NO COMMISSIONS.1-800-444-4456 USA & CanadaResort Timeshare Resales, Inc.www.resorttimeshareresales.com $50,000 Per Month Pot’l. Franchise-style Online Business. www.50000PerMonth.com Latinamericano Gold FIEBRE DE ORO ANTIINFLAMATORIO!! Reciba Ingresos Ilimitados!! 800-242-4714 *I WILL HELP 300 EARN SIX FIGSTHIS YEAR!Only a few Top Spots Left! Hurry!www.2MinuteYouth.com 919-841-8116 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 #032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. 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 MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. Craft breweries have a seem-ingly endless resource to tap as away to keep innovation flowing:home brewers.The latest — and perhaps big-gest — example of a home brewerhitting the big time: Florida Keysbrewer Pat Kennedy, whose newKey lime-zested Keybilly IslandAle debuts in stores in SouthFlorida this week.It’s slightly sweet, with a mod-est alcohol level of 5.4% and atartness that could go over wellwith the Margaritaville masses.“It’s a very unique beer recipefrom a very unique guy, and weare proud of being his partner,”said Tim Schoen, a former An-heuser-Busch executive who in2012 co-founded Brew Hub,which is producing Keybilly Is-land Ale.With a large 100-bar-rel brewing system andan experimental eight-barrel system, Brew Hubserves as a place whereother brewers can maketheir beer without in-vesting in a facility. Justhitting the market: Golf-Beer, made at Brew Hubas part of its partnershipwith pro golfers KeeganBradley, Freddie Jacob-son and Graeme McDow-ell. But Keybilly IslandAle is the first of severallifestyle craft beers thatBrew Hub is making itself at itsLakeland, Fla., brewery. BrewHub’s embrace of home brewerinspiration isn’t new — althoughit’s one of the rare times a homebrewer’s concoction has gottenpermanent production.Boston Beer Co., maker ofSamuel Adams beers, has con-ducted a Longshot home brewcontest since 1996 in which awinning home brew is madeavailable to the public in a limitededition variety pack. And StoneBrewing Co. hosts an annualcompetition with the AmericanHomebrewers Association, withthe winner’s recipe used as a spe-cial collaboration release in bot-tles and on draft. About 1.2 millionAmericans brew beer athome. Giants of the craftbeer industry such asBoston Beer’s Jim Koch,Sierra Nevada Brewing’sKen Grossman and Dog-fish Head Craft Brew-ery ’s Sam Calagione “allwere home brewers atone point,” Schoen said.As breweries experi-ment with new tastes,home brewers are “acreative pipeline for thefuture of craft beer,” hesaid.From the outset,Brew Hub’s mission includedhelping home brewers make it tomarket. That has led to hundredsof e-mails and phone calls fromhome brewers. “It’s a testamentto Pat that he broke through,”Schoen said.Kennedy, 47, of Islamorada,Fla., a salesman with LobsterTrap Art, had been fine-tuninghis Keybilly beer since 2010. Ini-tially, he used Key lime rind, butswitched to juice to get the tangfor his beer, which gets its namefrom “Keybilly,” a slang term forpeople who embrace the FloridaKeys lifestyle.Then, he won several awards ataregional contest. “It was evolv-ing into this really great beer,” Kennedy said. “I was trying tothink how do I get from my back-yard to have my beer on theshelf?”After learning about BrewHub, he fired o several e-mailsand phone calls and eventuallysent some beer in June 2013 tothe company headquarters in St.Louis. But it didn’t survive thehot summer FedEx trip. In along-shot tactic, Kennedy drovetwo hours and showed up unan-nounced at the Boca Raton homeof Brew Hub’s chief brewer, PaulFarnsworth.“My knees were knocking, andIthought this guy might shootme,” Kennedy said. But Farns-worth invited him in, and chattedwith the home brewer for an houror so. “He didn’t try it in front ofme,” Kennedy said. About amonth later, Farnsworth toldKennedy that Brew Hub was in-terested in making his beer. “I al-most had a heart attack,”Kennedy said. Once Brew Hub began opera-tions in August 2014, test batchesof Keybilly Island Ale were soldas “brewer’s choice” beers in itstasting room. “That is where wezeroed in” on the final recipe,Schoen said.“We are” said Schoen, “on apath that is unprecedented for ahome brewer.” KERRY KRUMENACKER Home brewerPat Kennedy,outside ofBrew Hub inLakeland,Fla., namedhis beer afteraslang termfor peoplewho embracethe FloridaKeys lifestyle. Homebrewerhits thebig time Key lime-zested beer goes to market, with some help Mike Snider USA TODAY BREW HUBBrew HubCEO TimSchoen poursKeybilly Is-land Ale atthe breweryin Lakeland,Fla. The beerhits stores inSouth Floridathis week. SAN FRANCISCO By and large, thelives of the tech rich and famousaren’t the stu of tabloid fodder.Maybe the occasional tale of anextravagant party here or a stun-ning summer house there.But then in the fall of 2013,Google X executive ForrestHayes, 51, was found dead on hisyacht. Heroin was in his system.An alleged Internet-sourced callgirl was on the run.Turns out having a head fortechnology doesn’t preclude hav-ing a dark side. Hayes’demise isthe focus of “Kiss of Death andthe Google Exec,” airing on CBS’48 Hours on Saturday at 10 p.m.ET/PT.“Hayes led a double life, buthe’s taking a lot of his secrets tohis grave,” says CBS reporterMaureen Maher, who filmed partof the show ’s segment aboard theexecutive’s lavish 46-foot yachtEscape. Maher notes that being aboardthe floating crime scene providedinsight into a man “who likednice things,” which included up-grading the captain’s chair withan $8,000 replacement “and hav-ing this posh place outfitted withdozens of HD -quality cameras.”Those cameras ultimately cap-tured the one-time automotivemarketing exec turned Googleemployee’s death after a night ofpartying with Alix Tichelman, 28,a tattooed, raven-haired, allegedcall girl who advertised her for-pay companionship via a websitecalled SeekingArrangement.com.Tichelman is currently await-ing trial in Santa Cruz, Calif.,where Hayes and his family lived.She stands accused of givingHayes his final lethal dose of her-oin and not calling for help whenhe became unresponsive.Hayes’ story intrigued Maherfrom the start. “Here’s a guy whohad everything, a wife, five chil-dren and a fantastic job. Whatcould you possibly want outsideof that?” she says. But trying to get at the bottomof Hayes’ other, murkier lifeproved di cult. “Not a singlefriend or family member wouldtalk to us,” Maher says.Maher says the segment fea-tures interviews with friends ofTichelman, whose alleged de-scent into the world of sex anddrugs was punctuated by the her-oin death of a former boyfriend inAtlanta. In that instance, shecalled 911 for help. “What reallytroubles prosecutors here is thatshe didn’t call 911 when Hayeswas clearly in trouble,” says Mah-er, adding that Tichelman wan-dered around the boat tidying upfor many minutes before leaving,all while her date was uncon-scious nearby. Google exec’s death fodder for ‘48 Hours’ Examines‘doublelife’ withdrugs andallegedescort Marco della Cava USA TODAY USA TODAYGoogle exec-utive ForrestHayes died in2013 on hisyacht aftertaking a fataldose of her-oin. APAlix Tichel-man, 28, isawaiting trialin SantaCruz, Calif. Opportunity Notice Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments and Supplies Opportunity Information Organization: National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA), on behalf of Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties Organization Address: Reference Number: AB-2015-00493 Solicitation Number: 2015-032515 Solicitation Type: Request for Proposal Posting (MM/dd/yyyy): 01/23/2015 12:00:00 PM Alberta Time Closing (MM/dd/yyyy): 03/25/2015 04:30:59 PM Alberta Time Last Update (MM/dd/yyyy): 01/23/2015 10:28:05 AM Alberta Time Agreement Type: AIT & NWPTA Region of Opportunity: Open Region of Delivery: Alberta Opportunity Type: Open & Competitive Commodity Codes: N3805K: Earth and Rock Hauling Trucks and Trailers N3805FB: Loaders, Scoop Type, Wheeled 4X4, One Cubic Yard or Larger N3805B: Excavator, Hydraulic, Crawler Mounted N3805C: Excavator, Hydraulic, Truck Mounted N3830K: Rippers, Tractor Mounting N3805L: Scrapers, Tractor N3825: Road Clearing and Cleaning Equipment N3805: Earthmoving and Excavating Equipment N3805FC: Loaders, Scoop Type, Wheeled 4X4, One Cubic Yard or Less N3805D: Graders, Road, Motorized Category: Goods Potential vendors (bidders) may view the bid package here. Interested vendors (bidders) who wish to submit a response to this opportunity should register their interest by downloading the document(s) from the bid package. Expressing interest means that you will automatically receive an e-mail notification each time an amendment is made to the opportunity for which you have 'expressed an interest'. Response Submission: The National Joint Powers Alliance 202 - 12th Street NE Staples, MN 56479 USA Response Contact: Yahn, Johnathan Contracts and Compliance Officer 202 - 12th Street NE P.O. Box 219 Staples, Minnesota 56479 Tel: (218)895-4144 Email: RFP@njpacoop.org Response Specifics: All proposals must be physically delivered to the NJPA at the specified address. In the attached requested form (Section 4 E) and with all required hard copy documents and signature forms/pages as loose pages at the front of the Vendor's response. Opportunity 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 #032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Miranda Andersen Administrative Coordinator – Aggregated Business Services From: Ginger Line [mailto:Ginger.Line@njpacoop.org] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 9:06 AM To: Miranda Andersen Cc: Carolyn Boyle Subject: Ad placement Attached please find the RFP and Forms Package for our Heavy Construction RFP. Thank you. Ginger Line, CPPB Senior Procurement Contract Analyst phone 218-894-5483 email ginger.line@njpacoop.org 1 National Joint Powers Alliance® (herein NJPA) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (herein RFP) for the procurement of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES RFP Opening MARCH 26, 2015 8:00 a.m. Central Time At the offices of the National Joint Powers Alliance® 202 12th Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479 RFP #032515 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 # 032515 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning JANUARY 23, 2015. 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 MARCH 25, 2015 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened MARCH 26, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. RFP Timeline JANUARY 23, 2015 Publication of RFP in the print and online version of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, in the print and online version of the 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. MARCH 4, 2015 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). MARCH 18, 2015 Deadline for RFP questions. MARCH 25, 2015 Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be 4:30 p.m. Central Time returned unopened. MARCH 26, 2015 Public Opening of Proposals. 8:00 a.m. Central Time 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. Currency C. Exclusive Vendor D. FOB E. Hub Partner F. Proposer G. Request for Proposal H. Sourced Goods I. Time J. Total Cost of Acquisition K. 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” as used herein shall consist of: this RFP, pricing, 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 on or after award and will provide final clarification of terms and conditions of the award. B. CURRENCY All transactions are payable in U.S. dollars on U.S. sales. All administrative fees are to be paid in U.S. dollars. C. EXCLUSIVE VENDOR A sole Vendor awarded in a product category. NJPA reserves the right to award to an Exclusive Vendor in the event that such an award is in the best interests of NJPA Members nationally. A Proposer that exhibits and demonstrates the ability to offer and execute an outstanding overall program, demonstrates the ability and willingness to serve NJPA current and qualifying Members in all 50 states and comply with all other requirements of this RFP, is preferred. D. FOB FOB stands for “Freight On Board” and defines the point at which responsibility for loss and damage of product/equipment purchased is transferred from Seller to Buyer. “FOB Destination” defines that transfer of responsibility for loss is transferred from Seller to Buyer at the Buyer’s designated delivery point. FOB does not identify who is responsible for the costs of shipping. The responsibility for the costs of shipping is addressed elsewhere in this document. E. HUB PARTNER An organization that a member requests to be served through with an Awarded Vendor for the purposes of complying with a Law, Regulation, or Rule to which that individual NJPA Member deems to be applicable in their jurisdiction. F. PROPOSER A company, person, or entity delivering a timely response to this RFP. G. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Herein referred to as RFP. H. SOURCED GOODS A Sourced Good or Open Market Item is a product within the RFP’s scope - generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or purchase of contract items - which a member wants to buy under contract from an Awarded Vendor that is not currently available under the Vendor’s NJPA contract. I. TIME Periods of time, stated as number of days, shall be in calendar days. J. TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION The Total Cost of Acquisition for the equipment/products and related services being proposed is the cost of the proposed equipment/products and related services delivered and operational for its intended purpose in the end-user’s location. K. VENDOR A Proposer whose response has been awarded a contract pursuant to this RFP. 4 2 ADVERTISEMENT OF RFP 2.1 NJPA shall advertise this solicitation: 1) for two consecutive weeks in both the hard copy print and on- line editions of the MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE; 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; 4) in the hard copy print and online editions of the USA Today; and 5) 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 bidding 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 hosts 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 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 have the ability to participate in cooperative purchasing activities as a result of specific laws of their own state. These laws can be found on our website at http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/legal-authority/. 5 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 the time and effort of Municipal and Public Agencies who would have been otherwise charged with soliciting vendor responses to individual RFP’s, 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 reviews and recommends vendors for to award a national contract by the action of the NJPA Board of Directors. NJPA’s primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract which 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 term contract with a fifth year contract option resulting from this RFP; 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”; 6 3.11.4 Deliver wide spectrums of solutions to meet the needs and requirement of NJPA and NJPA Member agencies. 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 goals and scope of this RFP, NJPA is requesting responders to demonstrate their ability to serve the needs of NJPA’s national membership. It is NJPA’s intent and desire to award a contract to a single exclusive Vendor to serve our membership’s needs. To meet the goals of this RFP, NJPA reserves the right to award a Contract to multiple Proposers where the result justifies a multiple award and multiple contracts are deemed to be in the best interests of NJPA Member agencies. 3.13 Non-Manufacturer Awards: NJPA reserves the right to make an award related to this invitation 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 proposed submission if that fact is properly identified. 3.15 Dealer/Re-seller as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a dealer or re-seller 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. Where appropriate, 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 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES . 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: For purposes of the scope of this solicitation: 3.17.1 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: 3.17.1.1 Wheel or track loaders, motor graders, excavators, bull dozers, compactors, scrapers, vocational trucks, articulated trucks, cranes, paving machines, screeds, pavement milling machines, and rollers. 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 Respondents must meet at least ONE of the following three requirements (A through C) to be considered within the scope of this solicitation. A) The response must include at least one of EACH of the following: a wheeled or track loader with published net horsepower in excess of 300 H.P., an excavator with published operating weight in excess of 60,000 lbs., or a motor grader with published operating weight in excess of 35,000 lbs. B) The response must include at least one crane with a published maximum lifting capacity exceeding 300 tons and a published maximum boom length exceeding 150 feet. C) The response must include at least one of EACH of the following: a paver, a pavement milling machine, or a screed. For purposes of this Section 3.17.2.1, the term “published” means that the information is readily available through the respondent’s printed literature or website and that the respondent has verified the accuracy the information. 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 8 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. 3.23 Sole Source of Responsibility- NJPA desires a “Sole Source of Responsibility” Vendor. This means 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 which provides a single price for equipment/products, delivery, and installation to a properly operating status. Generally this is the most desirable solution as 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 are invited to offer the CHOICE of good – better – best multiple grade solutions to NJPA and NJPA Members’ needs. 3.24.1.4 Proven – Accepted – Leading Edge Technology: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers are invited to provide an appropriate identified spectrum of technology solutions to compliment or enhance the functionality of the proposed solutions to NJPA and NJPA Members’ needs both now and into the future. 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. 9 3.25 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES 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 the date awarded by the NJPA Board of Directors or the day following the expiration date of an existing NJPA procurement contract for the same or similar product/equipment and services. 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 Estimated Contract Volume: Estimated quantities and sales volume are based on potential usage by NJPA and NJPA Member agencies nationally. 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 were opened regarding this RFP. 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 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 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 which, in the opinion of NJPA unduly enlarge the proposal response may reduce 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 10 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. 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 explicitly disclosed in the “Total Cost of Acquisition” section of your proposal response. 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 which 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 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 NJPA solicitations and contract process will not offer specific specifications for proposers to meet or base your response on. This RFP is a “Solutions Based Solicitation.” This means the proposers are asked to understand and anticipate the current and future needs of NJPA and the nationally located NJPA membership base, within the scope of this RFP, and including specifications commonly desired or required by law or industry standards. Your 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 NJPA does not typically provide product and service specifications; rather NJPA is requesting an industry standard or accepted specification for the requested product/equipment and services. Where specific line items are specified, those line items should be considered the minimum which can be expanded by the Proposer to deliver the Proposer’s “Solution” to NJPA and NJPA Members’ needs. 4 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING YOUR PROPOSAL A. INQUIRY PERIOD 4.1 The inquiry period shall begin at the date of first advertisement and continue to the “Deadline for Requests.” RFP packages shall be distributed to Potential Bidders during the inquiry period. The purpose for the defined “Inquiry Period” is to ensure proposers have enough time to complete and deliver the proposal to our office. B. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE 11 4.2 A non-mandatory pre-proposal conference will be held at the date and time specified in the time line on page one of this RFP. Conference call and web connection information will be sent to all Potential Proposers through the same means employed in their inquiry. The purpose of this conference call is to allow Potential Proposers to ask questions regarding this RFP and hear answers to their own questions and the questions of other Potential Proposers. Only answers issued in writing by NJPA to questions asked before or during the Pre-proposal Conference shall be considered binding. C. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PERSONNEL 4.3 Vendor will designate one senior staff individual who will represent the awarded Vendor to NJPA. This contact person will correspond with members for technical assistance, questions or problems that may arise including instructions regarding different contacts for different geographical areas as needed. 4.4 Individuals should also be identified (if applicable) as the primary contacts for the contents of this proposal, marketing, sales, and any other area deemed essential by the Proposer. D. PROPOSER’S EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS 4.5 Any exceptions, deviations, or contingencies a Proposer may have to the terms and conditions contained herein must be documented on Form C. 4.6 Exceptions, deviations or contingencies stipulated in Proposer’s Response, while possibly necessary in the view of the Proposer, may result in disqualification of a Proposal Response. E. PROPOSAL FORMAT 4.7 It is the responsibility of all Proposers to 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. Negligence in preparing a Proposal confers no right of withdrawal after the deadline for submission of proposals. 4.8 All proposals must be properly labeled and sent to “The National Joint Powers Alliance®, 202 12th ST NE Staples, MN 56479.” 4.9 Format for proposal response: All proposals must be physically delivered to NJPA at the above address in the following form and with all required hard copy documents and signature forms/pages inserted as loose pages at the front of the Vendor’s response: 4.9.1 Hard copy original signed, completed, and dated forms C, D, F and hard copy signed signature page only from forms A and P from this RFP; 4.9.2 Hard copies of all addenda issued for the RFP with original counter signed by the Proposer; 4.9.3 Hardy copy of Certificate of Insurance verifying the coverage identified in this RFP; and 4.9.4 A complete copy of your response on a CD (Compact Disc) or flash drive. The copy shall contain completed Forms A, B, C, D, F & P, your statement of products and pricing (including apparent discount) together with all appropriate attachments. Everything you send with your hard copy should also be included in the electronic copy. As a public agency, NJPA proposals, responses and awarded contracts are a matter of public record, except for that data included in the proposals, responses and awarded contracts that is classified as nonpublic; thus, pursuant to statute, NJPA policies and RFP terms and conditions, all documentation, except for that data which is nonpublic is available for review by the public through a public records request. If you wish to request that 12 certain information that falls within Minnesota Statute §13.37 be redacted, such request must be made within thirty-days of award/non-award. 4.10 All Proposal forms must be submitted in English and 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. If a Proposer chooses to use alternative documents for their response, the Proposer will be responsible for ensuring the content is effectively equal to the NJPA form and the document is in a format readable by NJPA. 4.12 It is the responsibility of the Proposer to be certain the proposal submittal is in the physical possession of NJPA on or prior to the deadline for submission of proposals. 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 cannot be responsible for late receipt of proposals. Proposals received by the correct deadline for proposal submission will be opened and the name of each Proposer and other appropriate information will be publicly read. 4.13 Corrections, erasures, and interlineations on a Proposer’s Response must be initialed by the authorized signer in original ink on all copies to be considered. 4.14 Addendums to the RFP: The Proposer is responsible for ensuring receipt of all addendums to this RFP. 4.14.1 Proposer’s are responsible for checking directly with the NJPA website for addendums to this RFP. 4.14.2 Addendums to this RFP can change terms and conditions of the RFP including the deadline for submission of proposals. F. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THIS RFP 4.15 Upon examination of this RFP document, Proposer shall promptly notify NJPA of any ambiguity, inconsistency, or error they may discover. Interpretations, corrections and changes to this RFP will be made by NJPA through addendum. Interpretations, corrections, or changes made in any other manner will not be binding and Proposer shall not rely upon such. 4.16 Submit all questions about this RFP, in writing, referencing HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or RFP@njpacoop.org. Those not having access to the Internet may call Jonathan Yahn at (218) 895-4144. Requests for additional information or interpretation of instructions to Proposers or technical specifications shall also be addressed to Jonathan Yahn. NJPA urges Potential Proposers to communicate all concerns well in advance of the deadline to avoid misunderstandings. Questions received less than seven (7) days ending at 4:00 p.m. Central Time of the seventh (7th) calendar day prior to proposal due-date cannot be answered; however, communications permitted include: NJPA issued addenda or potential Vendor withdrawal of their response prior to RFP submission deadline. 4.17 If the answer to a question is deemed by NJPA to have a material impact on other potential proposers or the RFP itself, the answer to the question will become an addendum to this RFP. 4.18 If the answer to a question is deemed by NJPA to be a clarification of 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. 13 4.19 As used in this solicitation, clarification means communication with a Potential Proposer for the sole purpose of eliminating minor irregularities, informalities, or apparent clerical mistakes in the RFP. 4.20 Addenda are written instruments issued by NJPA that modify or interpret the RFP. All addenda issued by NJPA shall 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 said materials. Copies of addenda will also be made available on the NJPA website at www.njpacoop.org by clicking on “Current and Pending Solicitations” and from the NJPA offices. No questions will be accepted by NJPA later than seven (7) days prior to the deadline for receipt of proposals, except Each Potential Proposer shall ascertain prior to submitting a Proposal that it has received all addenda issued, and the Proposer shall acknowledge their receipt in its Proposal Response. 4.21 An amendment to a submitted proposal must be in writing and delivered to NJPA no later than the time specified for opening of all proposals. G. MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL OF A SUBMITTED PROPOSAL 4.22 A submitted proposal may not be modified, withdrawn or cancelled by the Proposer for a period of ninety (90) days following the date proposals were opened. Prior to 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 shall be submitted in writing and include the signature of the Proposer and shall be delivered to NJPA prior to the deadline for submission of proposals and it shall be so worded as not to reveal the content of the original proposal. However, the original proposal shall 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 are then fully in conformance with the Instructions to Proposer. 4.23 Examples of Value Added Attributes: Value-Added attributes, products and services are items offered in addition to the products and services being proposed which adds value to those items being proposed. The availability of a contract for maintenance or service after the initial sale, installation, and set-up may, for instance, be “Value Added Services” for products where a typical buyer may not have the ability to perform these functions. The opportunity to indicate value added dimensions and such advancements will be available in the Proposer’s Questionnaire and Proposer’s product and service submittal. 4.24 Value added equipment/products and services and expanded services, as they relate to this RFP, will be given positive consideration in the award selection. Consideration will be given to an expanded selection of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES and advances to provide equipment/products/services or supplies meeting and/or exceeding today’s industry standards and expectations. A value add would include a program or service that further serves the members needs above and possibly beyond standard expectation and complements the equipment/products/services and training. Value added could include areas of equipment, product and service, sales, ordering, delivery, performance, maintenance, technology, and service that furthers the functionality and effectiveness of the procurement process while remaining within the scope of this RFP. 4.25 Minority, Small Business, and Women Business Enterprise (WMBE) participation: It is the policy of some NJPA Members to involve Minority, Small Business, and WMBE contractors in the process to purchase equipment/products and related services. Vendors should document WMBE status for their organization AND any such status of their affiliates (i.e. Supplier networks) involved in carrying out the activities invited. The ability of a Proposer to provide “Credits” to NJPA and NJPA Members in these subject areas, either individually or through related entities involved in the transaction, will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. NJPA is committed to facilitating the realization of such “Credits” through certain structuring techniques for transactions resulting from this RFP. 14 4.26 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: There is a growing trend among NJPA Members to consider the environmental impact of the equipment/products and related services they purchase. “Green” characteristics demonstrated by responding companies will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. Please identify any Green characteristics of the equipment/products and related services 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. 4.27 On-Line Requisitioning systems: When applicable, on-line requisitioning systems will be viewed as a value-added characteristic. Proposer shall include documentation about user interfaces that make on-line ordering easy for NJPA Members as well as the ability to punch-out from mainstream e-Procurement or Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems that NJPA Members may currently utilize. 4.28 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing options for the products and services being proposed will be viewed as a Value Added Attribute. H. PROPOSAL OPENING PROCEDURE 4.29 Sealed and properly identified Proposer’s Responses for this RFP entitled HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES will be received by Jonathan Yahn, Contracts and Compliance Manager, at NJPA Offices, 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 until the deadline for receipt of, and proposal opening identified on page one of this RFP. We document the receipt by using an atomic clock; an NJPA employee electronically time and date stamps all Proposals immediately upon receipt. The NJPA Director of Contracts and Marketing, or Representative from the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee, will then read the Proposer’s names aloud. A summary of the responses to this RFP will be made available for public inspection in the NJPA office in Staples, MN. A letter or e-mail request is required to receive a complete RFP package. Send or communicate all requests to the attention of Jonathan Yahn 202 12th Street Northeast Staples, MN 56479 or RFP@njpacoop.org to receive a complete copy of this RFP. Method of delivery needs to be indicated in the request; an email address is required for electronic transmission. Oral, facsimile, telephone or telegraphic Proposal Submissions or requests for this RFP are invalid and will not receive consideration. All Proposal Responses must be submitted in a sealed package. The outside of the package shall plainly identify HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. To avoid premature opening, it is the responsibility of the Proposer to label the Proposal Response properly. I. NJPA’S RIGHTS RESERVED 4.30.1 Reject any and all Proposals received in response to this RFP; 4.30.2 Disqualify any Proposer whose conduct or Proposal fails to conform to the requirements of this RFP; 4.30.3 Have unlimited rights to duplicate all materials submitted for purposes of RFP evaluation, and duplicate all public information in response to data requests regarding the Proposal; 4.30.4 Consider a late modification of a Proposal if the Proposal itself was submitted on time and if the modifications were requested by NJPA and the modifications make the terms of the Proposal more favorable to NJPA, and accept such Proposal as modified; 4.30.5 At its sole discretion, reserve the right to waive any non-material deviations from the requirements and procedures of this RFP; 4.30.6 Extend the Contract, in increments determined by NJPA, not to exceed a total contract term of five years; and 15 4.30.7 Cancel the Request for Proposal at any time and for any reason with no cost or penalty to NJPA. 4.30.8 Correct or amend the RFP at any time with no cost or penalty to NJPA. If NJPA should correct or amend any segment of the RFP after submission of Proposals and prior to announcement of the Awarded Vendor, all Proposers will be afforded ample opportunity to revise their Proposal to accommodate the RFP amendment and the dates for submission of revised Proposals announced at that time. NJPA will not be liable for any errors in the RFP or other responses related to the RFP. 4.30.9 Extend proposal due dates. 5 PRICING 5.1 NJPA requests Potential Proposers respond to this RFP only if they are able to offer a wide array of equipment/products and services and at prices lower and better value than what they would ordinarily offer to single government agency, larger school district, or regional cooperative. 5.2 RFP is an Indefinite Quantity Equipment/Products and Related Service Price and Program Request with potential national sales distribution and service. If Proposer’s solution requires additional supporting documentation, describe where it can be found in your submission. If Proposer offers the solution in an alternative fashion, describe your solution to be easily understood. All pricing must be copied on a CD or thumb drive along with other requested information as a part of a Proposer’s Response. 5.3 Regardless of the payment method selected by NJPA or NJPA Member, a total cost associated with any purchase option of the equipment/products and services and being supplied must always be disclosed at the time of purchase. 5.4 All Proposers will be required to 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 but not limited to “Hot List,” “Sourced Product/Equipment” and “Volume Discounts,” as well as financing options such as leasing. All pricing documents should include an effective date, preferably in the top right corner of the first page of each pricing document. A. LINE-ITEM PRICING 5.5 A pricing format where specific individual products and/or services are offered at specific individual Contract prices. Products/equipment and/or related services are individually priced and described by characteristics such as manufacture name, stock or part number, size, or functionality. This method of pricing offers the least amount of confusion as products/equipment and prices are individually identified however, Proposers with a large number of products/equipment to propose may find this method cumbersome. In these situations, a percentage discount from catalog or category pricing model may make more sense and increase the clarity of the contract pricing format. 5.6 All Line-Item Pricing items must be numbered, organized, sectioned, including SKU’s (when applicable) and 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 The purpose for a searchable excel spreadsheet format for Line-Item Pricing is to be able to quickly find 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 which is typically found on an invoice or price quote for such products/equipment and related services. 16 5.9 All products/equipment and related 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 are asked to 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 A specific percentage discount from a Catalog or List price” defined as a published Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) for the products/equipment or related 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 equipment/products or related 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 must be included in their 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. D. HOT LIST PRICING 5.16 Where applicable, a Vendor may opt to offer a specific selection of products/services, defined as Hot List pricing at greater discounts or related advantages than those listed in the standard Contract pricing. All product/service pricing, including the Hot List Pricing, must be submitted electronically provided in Excel format. Hot List pricing must be submitted in a Line-Item format. Equipment/products and related 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 when applicable may also be used to discount and liquidate close-out and discontinued equipment/products and related 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 equipment/products and related services be offered pursuant to this Contract at prices above this ceiling price without request and approval by NJPA. Contract prices may be reduced to allow for volume considerations and commitments and to meet the specific and unique needs of an NJPA Member. 5.19 Allowable specific needs may include competitive situations, certain purchase volume commitments or the creation of custom programs based on the individual needs of NJPA Members. F. VOLUME PRICE DISCOUNTS / ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES 5.20 Proposers are free to offer volume commitment discounts from the contract pricing documented in a Contract resulting from this RFP. Volume considerations shall be determined between the Vendor and individual NJPA Members on a case-by-case basis. 17 5.21 Nothing in this Contract establishes a favored member relationship between the NJPA or any NJPA Member and the Vendor. The Vendor will, upon request by NJPA Member, extend this same reduced price offered or delivered to another NJPA Member provided the same or similar volume commitment, specific needs, terms, and conditions, a similar time frame, seasonal considerations, locations, competitively situations and provided the same manufacturer support is available to the Vendor. 5.22 All price adjustments are to be offered equally to all NJPA Members exhibiting the same or substantially similar characteristics such as purchase volume commitments, and timing including the availability of special pricing from the Vendor’s suppliers. 5.23 The contract awarded vendor will accept orders for additional quantities at the same prices, terms and conditions, providing the NJPA Member exercises the option before a specific date, mutually agreed upon between member and contract awarded vendor at time of original purchase order. Any extension(s) of pricing beyond the specific date shall be upon mutual consent between the NJPA Member and the contract awarded vendor. 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 identify your deviation from the “Total Cost of Acquisition” of contracted equipment/products. The Proposal should reflect that the “contract does not provide for delivery beyond Proposer’s dock, nor any set-up activities or costs associated with those delivery or set-up activities.” In contrast, proposed terms including all costs for product/equipment and services delivered and operational at to the end-user’s location would require a disclosure of “None.” H. SOURCED PRODUCT/EQUIPMENT / OPEN MARKET ITEMS 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 product/equipment and/or related services that are within the related scope of this RFP, which are not included in an awarded Vendor’s line-item product/equipment and related service list or catalog. These items are known as Sourced Product/Equipment or Open Market Items. 5.27 An awarded Vendor resulting from this RFP may “Source” equipment/products and related services for NJPA or an NJPA Member to the extent they: 5.27.1 Identify all such equipment, products and services as “Sourced Products/Equipment ” or “Open Market Items” on any quotation issued in reference to an NJPA awarded contract, and provided to either NJPA or an NJPA Member; and 5.27.2 Follow all applicable acquisition regulations pertaining to the purchase of such equipment, products and services, as defined by NJPA or NJPA Member receiving quotation from Vendor; and 5.27.3 Ensure NJPA or the NJPA Member has determined the prices as quoted by the Vendor for such equipment, products and services are deemed to be fair and reasonable and are acceptable to the member/buyer; and 18 5.27.4 Identify all product/equipment sourced as a part of an NJPA contract purchase with all required NJPA reporting and fees applying. 5.28 Cost plus a percentage is an option in pricing of sourced goods. I. PRODUCT & PRICE CHANGES 5.29 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 the NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form (located at the end of this RFP and on the NJPA website) and signature of an authorized Vendor employee. All changes are subject to review and approval by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager, signed in acceptance by the NJPA Executive Director and acknowledged by the NJPA Contract Council. Submit request via email to your Contract Manager and PandP@njpacoop.org. 5.30 NJPA’s due diligence in analyzing any request for change is to determine if approval of the request 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 vendor contact via email. 5.31 Vendor must complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items or services subject to change, provide sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and include a compete restatement of pricing document in appropriate format (preferably Excel). The pricing document must identify all equipment/products and services being offered and must conform to the following NJPA product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA Contract #) (effective pricing date); for example, “COMPANY 012411-CPY eff 02-12-2013.” 5.32 New pricing restatement must include all equipment/products and services offered regardless of whether their prices have changed and 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 equipment/products and related services may be added to a contract if such additions are within the scope of the RFP. New equipment/products and related services may be added to a Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during that Contract to the extent those equipment/products and related services are within the scope of this RFP. Those requests are subject to review and approval of NJPA. Allowable new equipment/products and related services generally include new updated models of equipment/products and related services and or enhanced services previously offered which could reflect new technology and improved functionality. 5.34 DELETIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item or service is no longer available and thus not relevant to the contract; for example, discontinued, improved, etc. 5.35 PRICE CHANGES: Request prices changes in general terms along with the justification by product category for the change; for example, a 3% increase in XYZ Product Line is due to a 3% increase in petroleum, or this list of SKUs/ product descriptions is increasing X% due to X% increase in cost of raw materials. 5.35.1 Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates price reductions are due to advancement of technologies and market place efficiencies. 5.35.2 Price increases: Typical acceptable increase requests include increases to Vendor input costs such as petroleum or other applicable commodities, increases in product utility of new compared to old equipment/product or service, etc. Vendor must include reasonable documentation for the claims cited in their request along with detailed justification for why the increase is needed. 19 Special details for price changes must be included with the request along with both current and proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to this form, including letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Price increases will not exceed industry standard. 5.36 Submit the following documentation to request a pricing change: 5.36.1 Signed NJPA Price and Product Change Form 5.36.2 Single Statement of Pricing Excel spreadsheet identifying all equipment/products and services being offered and their pricing. Each complete pricing list will be identified by its “Effective Date.” Each successive price listing identified by its “Effective Date” will create a “Product and Price History” for the Contract. Each subsequent pricing update will be saved using the naming convention of “(Vendor Name) pricing effective XX/XX/XXXX.” 5.36.2.1 Include all equipment/products and services regardless of whether their prices have changed. By observing this convention we will: 5.36.2.1.1 Reduce confusion by providing a single, easy to find, current pricing sheet for each Vendor. 5.36.2.1.2 Create a historical record of pricing. 5.37 NJPA reserves the right to review additional catalogs being proposed as additions or replacements to determine if the represented products and services reflect and relate to the scope of this RFP. Each new catalog received may have the effect of adding new product offerings and deleting products no longer carried by the Vendor. New catalogs shall apply to the Contract only upon approval of the NJPA. Non- approved use of catalogs may result in termination for convenience. New price lists or catalogs found to be offering non-contract items during the Contract may be grounds for terminating the Contract for convenience. 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 Proposers may use the multiple tabs available in an Excel workbook to separately list logical product groupings or to separately list product and service pricing as they see fit. 5.40 All equipment/products and services together with their pricing, whether changed within the request or remaining unchanged, will be stated on each “Pricing” sheet created as a result of each request for product, service, or pricing change. 5.41 Each subsequent “Single Statement of Product and Pricing” will be archived by its effective date therefore creating a product and price history for any Contract resulting from this RFP. Proposers are required to create a historical record of pricing annually by submitting updated pricing referred to as a “Single Statement of Product/Equipment and Related Services Contract Price Update”. This pricing update is required at a minimum of once per contract year. J. PAYMENT TERMS 5.42 Payment terms will be defined by the Proposer in the Proposer’s Response. Proposers are encouraged to offer payment terms through P Card services if applicable. 5.43 If applicable, identify any leasing programs available to NJPA and NJPA Members as part of your proposal. Proposers should submit an example of the lease agreement to be used and should identify: 20 5.43.1 General leasing terms such as: 5.43.1.1 The percentage adjustment over/under an index rate used in calculating the internal rate of return for the lease; and 5.43.1.2 The index rate being adjusted; and 5.43.1.3 The “Purchase Option” at lease maturity ($1, or fair market value); and 5.43.1.4 The available term in months of lease(s) available. 5.43.2 Leasing company information such as: 5.43.2.1 The name and address of the leasing company; and 5.43.2.2 Any ownership, common ownership, or control between the Proposer and the Leasing Company. K. SALES TAX 5.44 Sales and other taxes shall not be included in the prices quoted. Vendor will charge state and local sales and other 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 shall be responsible for taxes imposed on another party as a result of or arising from the transactions contemplated by a Contract resulting from this RFP. L. SHIPPING 5.45 NJPA desires an attractive freight program. A shipping program for material only proposals, or sections of proposals, must be defined as a part of the cost of equipment/products. If shipping is charged to NJPA or NJPA Member, only the actual cost of delivery may be added to an invoice. Shipping charges calculated as a percentage of the product price may not be used, unless such charges are lower than actual delivery charges. COD orders will be accepted if both parties agree. It is desired that delivery be made within ninety-days (90) of receipt of the Purchase Order. 5.46 Selection of a carrier for shipment or expedited shipping will be the option of the party paying for said shipping. Use of another carrier will be at the expense of the party who requested. 5.47 Proposers must define their shipping programs for Alaska and Hawaii and any location not served by conventional shipping services. Over-size and over-weight items and shipments may be subject to custom freight programs. 5.48 All shipping and re-stocking fees must be identified in the price program. Certain industries providing made to order product/equipment may not allow returns. Proposers will be evaluated based on the relative flexibility extended to NJPA and NJPA Members relating to those subjects. 5.49 Proposer agrees shipping errors will be at the expense of the Vendor. 5.50 Delivery effectiveness is very important aspect of this Contract. If completed deliveries are not made at the time agreed, NJPA or NJPA Member reserves the right to cancel and purchase elsewhere and hold Vendor accountable. If delivery dates cannot be met, Vendor agrees to advise NJPA or NJPA Member of the earliest possible shipping date for acceptance by NJPA or NJPA Member. 21 5.51 Delivered products/equipment must be properly packaged. Damaged equipment/products will not be accepted, or if the damage is not readily apparent at the time of delivery, the equipment/products shall be returned at no cost to NJPA or NJPA Member. NJPA and NJPA Members reserve the right to inspect the equipment/products at a reasonable time subsequent to delivery where circumstances or conditions prevent effective inspection of the equipment/products at the time of delivery. 5.52 Vendor shall deliver Contract conforming products/equipment in each shipment and may not substitute products/equipment without 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 equipment/products which are not under Contract and described in its paper or electronic price lists or sourced upon request to any member under this Contract. In the event of the delivery of non- conforming equipment/products, NJPA Member will notify the Vendor as soon as possible and the Vendor will replace non-conforming equipment/products with conforming equipment/products acceptable to the NJPA member. 5.54 Throughout the term of the Contract, Proposer agrees to pay for return shipment on equipment/products that arrives in a defective or inoperable condition. Proposer must arrange for the return shipment of damaged equipment/products. 5.55 Vendor may not substitute equipment/products unless agreed to by both parties. 5.56 Unless contrary to other parts of this solicitation, if the product/equipment or the tender of delivery fail in any respect to conform to this Contract, the purchasing member may: 1) reject the whole, 2) accept the whole or 3) accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest. 6 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 importance of those criteria by assigning possible scores for each category on Form G of this RFP. 6.2 NJPA shall use a final overall scoring system to include consideration for best price and cost evaluation. NJPA reserves the right to assign any number of point awards or penalties it considers warranted if a Proposer stipulates exceptions, exclusions, or limitations of liabilities. Strong consideration will be given to the best price as it relates to the quality of the product and service. However, price is ultimately only one of the factors taken into consideration in the evaluation and award. 6.3 Responses will be evaluated first for responsiveness and thereafter for content. The NJPA Board of Directors will make 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.” B. PROPOSER RESPONSIVENESS 6.4 All responses are evaluated for level one and level two responsiveness. If a response does not reasonably and substantially conform to all the terms and conditions in the solicitation or it requests unreasonable exceptions, it may be considered non-responsive. 6.5 All proposals must contain answers or responses to the information requested in the proposal forms. The following items constitute the test for “Level One Responsiveness” and are determined on the proposal opening date. If these are not received, your response may be disqualified as non-responsive. 22 6.6 Level One Responsiveness includes: 6.6.1 received prior to the deadline for submission or it will be returned unopened; 6.6.2 properly addressed and identified as a sealed proposal with a specific opening date and time; 6.6.3 pricing document (with apparent discounts), sample certificate of liability insurance and all forms fully completed even if “not applicable” is the answer; 6.6.4 original signed, completed and dated RFP forms C, D, and F hard copy signed signature page Only from forms A and P from this RFP and if applicable, all counter signed addenda issued in relation to this RFP; 6.6.5 an electronic copy (CD or flash drive) of the entire response; and 6.6.6 falls within the scope as determined by the NJPAs Proposal Evaluation Committee. 6.7 “Level Two” responsiveness is determined through the evaluation of the remaining items listed under Proposal Evaluation Criteria below. These items are not arranged in order of importance and each item may encompass multiple areas of information requested. Any questions not answered will result in a loss of points from relevant Form G criteria and may lead to non-award if too many areas are unanswered resulting in the inability for evaluation team to effectively review your response. C. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA 6.8 Evaluation Criteria: Forms A and P includes a series of questions encompassing, but not limited to, the following categories: 6.8.1 Company Information & Financial Strength 6.8.2 Industry Requirements & Marketplace Success 6.8.3 Ability to Sell & 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 & Financing Options 6.8.8 Warranty 6.8.9 Equipment/Products/Services 6.8.10 Pricing & Delivery 6.8.11 Industry Specific Items 6.9 Evaluation of each Proposer’s Response will take into consideration as a minimum response but not necessarily limited to these items. D. OTHER CONSIDERATION 6.10 The Proposer is required to have extensive knowledge and at least three (3) years of experience with the related activities surrounding the selling of the equipment/products and/or related services. 23 6.11 NJPA reserves the right to accept or reject newly formed companies solely based on information provided in the proposal and/or its own investigation of the company. 6.12 If a manufacturer or supplier chooses not to produce or supply a full selection and representation of product/equipment and related services it has available which fall within the scope of this RFP, such action will be considered sufficient cause to reduce evaluation points. 6.13 NJPA reserves the right to request and test equipment/products and related services from the apparent successful Proposer. Prior to the award of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer, if requested by NJPA, shall furnish current information and data regarding the Proposer’s resources, personnel, and organization within three (3) days. 6.14 Past performance information is relevant information regarding a Proposer’s actions under previously awarded contracts to schools, local, state, and governmental agencies and non-profit agencies. It includes the Proposer’s record of conforming to specifications and standards of good workmanship. The Proposer’s history for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to member satisfaction shall be under evaluation. Ultimately, Past Performance Information can be defined as the Proposer’s businesslike concern for the interests of the NJPA Member. 6.15 NJPA shall reserve the right to reject any or all proposals. E. COST COMPARISON 6.16 NJPA uses a variety of evaluation methodologies, including but not limited to a cost comparison of specific and deemed to be like equipment/products. NJPA reserves the right to use this process in the event the Proposal Evaluation Committee feels it is necessary to make a final determination. 6.17 This process will be based on a point system with points being awarded 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 NJPA Evaluation Committee and the unit cost will be used as a basis for determining the point value. The “Market Basket” will be selected by NJPA from all product categories as determined appropriate by NJPA. F. MARKETING PLAN 6.18 A key element of an NJPA awarded a contract will be based on your marketing response to this solicitation. An awarded Vendor’s sales force will be the primary source of communication to the customers and NJPA members directly relating to the contract success. Success in marketing is dependent on delivery of messaging and communication relating to the contract value, knowledge of contract, proper use and the delivery of contracted equipment/products and related services to the end user. Much of the success and sales reward is a direct result of the commitment to the Contract by the vendor and sales teams. NJPA reserves the right to deem a proposer non- responsive or to not award based on an unacceptable or incomplete marketing plan 6.19 NJPA marketing expectations include: 6.19.1 Vendors ability to demonstrate the leveraging of a national sales force and/or dealer network. Vendors must demonstrate the ability to sell, service and deliver products and equipment through acceptable distribution channels to customers and NJPA members in all 50 states. Demonstrate fully the sales and service capabilities of your company through your response; outline Vendor’s national sales force network in terms of numbers and geographic location and method of distribution of the equipment/products and related services. Service may be independent of the equipment/product sales pricing but is encouraged to be a part of your response and contract. 24 6.19.2 Vendor is invited to demonstrate the ability to successfully market, promote and communicate the opportunity of an NJPA contract to current and potential members nationwide. NJPA desires a marketing plan that communicates the value of the contract to members. 6.19.3 Vendor is expected to be receptive to NJPA sales trainings. Vendor shall provide a venue for appropriate personnel from both management and the sales force who will be trained. NJPA commits to providing contract sales training and awareness regarding all aspects of communicating the value of the contract itself including: the authority of NJPA to offer the contract to its Members, value and utility the contract delivers to NJPA Members, scope of NJPA Membership, authority of NJPA Members to utilize NJPA procurement contracts, marketing and sales methods, and overall vertical strategies. 6.19.4 Vendor is expected to demonstrate the intent to a commit to full embracement of the NJPA contract. Identify the appropriate levels of sales management and sales force that will need to understand the value of and the internal procedures necessary, to deliver the NJPA contract solution and message to NJPA and NJPA Members. NJPA shall provide a general schedule and a variety of methods surrounding when and how those individuals will be trained. 6.19.5 Vendor will outline their proposed involvement in the promotion of a contract resulting from this RFP through applicable industry trade show exhibits and related customer meetings. Proposers are encouraged to consider participation with NJPA at NJPA embraced national trade shows. 6.19.6 Vendor must exhibit the willingness and ability to actively market and develop contract specific marketing materials including, but not limited to: 6.19.6.1 Complete Marketing Plan. Proposer shall submit a marketing plan outlining how the Vendor will launch the NJPA contract to current and potential NJPA Members. NJPA requires the Awarded Vendors to embrace and actively promote the Contract in cooperation with the NJPA. 6.19.6.2 Printed Marketing Materials. Proposer will initially produce and thereafter maintain full color print advertisements in camera ready electronic format including company logo and contact information to be used in the NJPA directory and other approved marketing publications. 6.19.6.3 Contract announcements and advertisements. Proposer will 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. Proposer will identify how an Awarded Contract will be displayed and linked on the Proposer’s website. An on-line shopping experience for NJPA Members is desired when applicable. 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. 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 Vendors shall provide evidence of liability insurance coverage identified below in the form of a Certificate of Insurance or an ACCORD binder form with their proposal. Upon Award issued pursuant to 25 this contract and prior to the execution of any commerce relating to such award, Vendor will be responsible for providing verification, in the form of a Certificate of Insurance identifying the coverage required below and identifying NJPA as a “Certificate Holder.” Vendor will be responsible to maintain such insurance coverage at their own expense throughout the term of any contract resulting from this solicitation. 6.22 Any exceptions and/or assumptions to the insurance requirements must be identified on Attachment C. Exceptions and/or assumptions will be taken into consideration as part of the evaluation process; however, vendors must be specific. If vendors do not specify any exceptions and/or assumptions at time of proposal submission, NJPA will not consider any additional exceptions and/or assumptions during negotiations. Upon contract award, the successful 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 shall not begin until after the awarded vendor has submitted acceptable evidence of the required insurance coverage. Failure to maintain any required insurance coverage or acceptable alternative method of insurance will be deemed a breach of contract. 6.23.1 Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance: Vendor shall 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 herein are minimum requirements for this Contract and in no way limit the indemnity covenants contained in this Contract. NJPA in no way warrants 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, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors and 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 in no way warrants that the above required minimum insurer rating is sufficient to protect the Vendor from potential insurer solvency. 6.26 Subcontractors: Vendors’ certificate(s) shall include all subcontractors as additional insureds under its policies or Vendor shall furnish to NJPA separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to the minimum requirements identified above. H. ORDER PROCESS AND/OR FUNDS FLOW 6.27 Please propose an order process and funds flow. The Business-to-Government order process and/or funds flow model involves NJPA Members issuing Purchase Orders directly to a Vendor and pursuant to a Contract resulting from this RFP. Administrative fees may also be used for purposes as allowed by Minnesota State Law and approved by the Board of Directors. 6.28 Additional Terms and Conditions can be added at the PO level if both Vendor and Member agree. I. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 26 6.29 Proposer agrees to authorize and/or allow for an administrative fee payable to NJPA by an Awarded Vendor in exchange for its facilitation and marketing of a Contract resulting from this RFP to current and potential NJPA Members. This Administration Fee shall be: 6.29.1 Calculated as a percentage of the dollar volume of all equipment/products and services provided to and purchased by NJPA Members or calculated as reasonable and acceptable method applicable to the contracted transaction; and 6.29.2 Included in, and not added to, the pricing included in Proposer’s Response to the RFP; and 6.29.3 Designed to offset the anticipated costs of NJPA’s involvement in contract management, facilitating marketing efforts, Vendor training, and any order processing tasks relating to the Contract resulting from this RFP. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as allowed by Minnesota law. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as allowed by Minnesota law. 6.29.4 Typical administrative fees for a B-TO-G order process and funds flow is 2.0%. NJPA does not mandate a specific fee percentage, we merely state that 2% is a typical fee across our contracts. The administrative fee percent varies among vendors, industries and responses. 6.29.5 NJPA awarded contract holder is responsible for the Administrative Fee and related reporting. 6.30 The opportunity to propose these factors and an appropriate administrative fee is available in the Proposer’s Questionnaire Form P. J. VALUE ADDED 6.31 Examples of Value Added Attributes: Value-Added attributes, products and services are items offered in addition to the products and services being proposed which adds value to those items being proposed. The availability of a contract for maintenance or service after the initial sale, installation, and set-up may, for instance, be “Value Added Services” for products where a typical buyer may not have the ability to perform these functions. 6.32 Where to document Value Added Attributes: The opportunity to indicate value added dimensions and such advancements will be available in the Proposer’s Questionnaire and Proposer’s product and service submittal. 6.33 Value added equipment/products and services and expanded services, as they relate to this RFP, will be given positive consideration in the award selection. Consideration will be given to an expanded selection of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES and advances to provide products/services, supplies meeting and/or exceeding today’s industry standards and expectations. A value add would include a program or service that further serves the members needs above and possibly beyond standard expectation and complements the equipment/products and services and training. Value added could include areas of product and service, sales, ordering, delivery, performance, maintenance, technology, and service that furthers the functionality and effectiveness of the procurement process while remaining within the scope of this RFP. 6.34 Minority, Small Business, and Women Business Enterprise (WMBE) participation: It is the policy of some NJPA Members to involve Minority, Small Business, and WMBE contractors in the process to purchase product/equipment and related services. Vendors should document WMBE status for their organization AND any such status of their affiliates (i.e. Supplier networks) involved in carrying out the activities invited. The ability of a Proposer to provide “Credits” to NJPA and NJPA Members in these subject areas, either individually or through related entities involved in the transaction, will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. NJPA is committed to 27 facilitating the realization of such “Credits” through certain structuring techniques for transactions resulting from this RFP. 6.35 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: There is a growing trend among NJPA Members to consider the environmental impact of the equipment/products and related services they purchase. “Green” characteristics demonstrated by responding companies will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. Please identify any Green characteristics of the product/equipment and related services 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 On-Line Requisitioning systems: When applicable, on-line requisitioning systems will be viewed as a value-added characteristic. Proposer shall include documentation about user interfaces that make on-line ordering easy for NJPA Members as well as the ability to punch-out from mainstream e-Procurement or Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems that NJPA Members may currently utilize. 6.37 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing options for the products and services being proposed will be viewed as a Value Added Attribute. 6.38 Technology: Technological advances, increased efficiencies, expanded service and other related improvements beyond today’s NJPA member’s needs and applicable standards. K. WAIVER OF FORMALITIES 6.39 NJPA reserves the right to waive any minor formalities or irregularities in any proposal and to accept proposals, which, in its discretion and according to the law, may be in the best interest of its members. 7 POST AWARD OPERATING ISSUES A. SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENTS 7.1 Purchase Order. Purchase Orders for equipment/products and/or related services may be executed between NJPA or NJPA Members (Purchaser) and awarded Vendor(s) or Vendor’s sub-contractors pursuant to this invitation and any resulting Contract. NJPA Members are instructed to identify on the face of such Purchase Orders that “This purchase order is issued pursuant to NJPA procurement contract #XXXXXX.” A Purchase Order is an offer to purchase product/equipment and related services at specified prices by NJPA or NJPA Members pursuant to a Contract resulting from this RFP. 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 shall be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of a competent jurisdiction with respect to the purchaser. Each and every provision of law and clause required by law to be included in the Purchase Order shall be read and enforced as though it were included. If through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not included, or is not currently 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(s) shall be a court of competent jurisdiction to the Purchaser. 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. The purpose of these additional terms and conditions is to formally introduce job or industry specific requirements of law such as prevailing wage legislation. Additional terms and conditions can include specific local policy requirements and standard business practices of the issuing Member. Said additional terms and conditions shall not interfere with the general purpose, intent or currently established terms and conditions contain in this RFP document. 28 7.4 Specialized Service Requirements. In the event 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, NJPA Member and 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 Vendor. Any separate agreement developed to address these specialized service or performance requirements is exclusively between the NJPA Member and Vendor. NJPA, its agents, Members and employees shall not be made 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 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 product/equipment and related services. If a purchase order is cancelled for lack of a required performance bond by the member agency, it shall be the recommendation of NJPA 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 OR CUSTOMER STATE LAWS OR LOCAL POLICY IS TO BE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON AND SECURED BETWEEN THE VENDOR AND THE CUSTOMER/MEMBER. B. NJPA MEMBER SIGN-UP PROCEDURE 7.6 Awarded Vendors will be responsible for familiarizing their sales and service forces with the various forms of NJPA Membership documentation and shall encourage and assist potential Members in establishing Membership with NJPA. NJPA membership is at no cost, obligation or liability to the Member or the Vendor. C. REPORTING OF SALES ACTIVITY 7.7 A report of the total gross dollar volume of all equipment/products and related services purchased by NJPA Members as it applies to this RFP and Contract will be provided quarterly to NJPA. The form and content of this reporting will provided by NJPA to include, but not limited to, name and address of purchasing agency, member number, amount of purchase, and a description of the items purchased. 7.7.1 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors are responsible for providing a quarterly sales report of contract sales every quarter regardless of the existence or amount of sales. D. AUDITS 7.8 No more than once per calendar year during the Contract term, Vendor may be required to make available to NJPA the invoice reports and/or invoice documents from Vendor pertaining to all invoices sent by Vendor and all payments made by NJPA members for all equipment/products and related services purchased under the awarded Contract. NJPA must provide written notice of exercise of this requirement with no less than fourteen (14) business days’ notice. NJPA may employ an independent auditor or NJPA may choose to conduct such audit on its own behalf. Upon approval and after the auditor has executed an appropriate confidentiality agreement, Vendor will permit the auditor to review the relevant Vendor documents. NJPA shall be responsible for paying the auditor’s fees. The parties will make every reasonable effort to fairly and equitably resolve discrepancies to the satisfaction of both parties. Vendor agrees that the NJPA may audit their records with a reasonable notice to establish total compliance and to verify prices charged under of the Contract are being met. Vendor agrees to provide verifiable documentation and tracking in a timely manner. E. HUB PARTNER 29 7.9 Hub Partner: NJPA Members may request to be served through a “Hub Partner” for the purposes of complying with a Law, Regulation, or Rule to which that individual NJPA Member deems to be applicable in their jurisdiction. Hub Partners may bring value to the proposed transactions through consultancy, Disadvantaged Business Entity Credits or other considerations. 7.10 Hub Partner Fees: Fees, costs, or expenses from this Hub Partner levied upon a transaction resulting from this contract, shall be payable by the NJPA Member. The fees, costs, or expenses levied by the Hub Vendor must be clearly itemized in the transaction; and to the extent that the Vendor stands in the chain of title during a transaction resulting from this RFP, the documentation shall be documented to show it is “Executed for the Benefit of [NJPA Member Name].” 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 Vendor shall immediately notify NJPA members upon receipt of order(s) when an out-of-stock occurs. Vendor shall inform the NJPA member regarding the anticipated date of availability for the out-of-stock item(s), and may suggest equivalent substitute(s). The ordering organization shall have the option of accepting the suggested equivalent substitute, or canceling the item from the order. Under no circumstance is Proposer permitted to make unauthorized substitutions. Unfilled or substituted item(s) shall be indicated on the packing list. H. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP 7.13 NJPA reserves the right to cancel the whole or any part of a resulting Contract due to failure by the Vendor to carry out any obligation, term or condition as described in the below procedure. Prior to any termination for cause, the NJPA will provide written notice to the Vendor, opportunity to respond and opportunity to cure. Some examples of material breach include, but are not limited to: 7.13.1 The Vendor provides products/equipment or related services that does not meet reasonable quality standards and is not remedied under the warranty; 7.13.2 The Vendor fails to ship the products/equipment or related services or provide the delivery and services within a reasonable amount of time; 7.13.3 NJPA has reason to believe the Vendor will not or cannot perform to the requirements or expectations of the Contract and issues a request for assurance and Vendor fails to respond; 7.13.4 The Vendor fails to observe 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 and/or receipt of funds as established by the NJPA and the Vendor in the Contract. 7.13.6 The Vendor fails to report quarterly sales; 7.13.7 The Vendor fails to actively market this Contract within the guidelines provided in this RFP and the expectations of NJPA defined in the NJPA Contract Launch. 30 7.13.8 In the event the contract has no measurable and defining value or benefit to NJPA or the NJPA member. 7.14 Upon receipt of the written notice of concern, the Vendor shall have ten (10) business days to provide a satisfactory response to the NJPA. Failure on the part of the Vendor to reasonably address all issues of concern may result in Contract cancellation pursuant to this Section. If the issue is not resolved within sixty (60) days, contract will be terminated. 7.15 Any termination shall have no effect on purchases that are in progress at the time the cancellation is received by the NJPA. The NJPA reserves the right to cancel the Contract immediately for convenience, without penalty or recourse, in the event the Vendor is not responsive concerning the remedy, the performance, or the violation issue within the time frame, completely or in part. 7.16 NJPA reserves the right to cancel or suspend the use of any Contract resulting from this RFP if the Vendor files for bankruptcy protection or is acquired by an independent third party. Awarded Vendor will be responsible for disclosing to NJPA any litigation, bankruptcy or suspensions/disbarments that occur during the contract period. Failure to disclose may result in an immediate termination of the contract. 7.17 NJPA may execute Contract termination 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. 7.18 NJPA may cancel any Contract resulting from this solicitation without any further obligation if any NJPA employee significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the Contract on behalf of the NJPA is found to be in collusion with any Proposer to this RFP for their personal gain. Such cancellation shall be effective upon written notice from the NJPA or a later date if so designated in the notice given. A terminated Contract shall not relieve either party of financial, product or service obligations due to participating member or NJPA. 7.19 Events of Automatic termination to include, but not limited to: 7.19.1 Vendor’s failure to remedy a material breach of a Contract resulting from this RFP within sixty (60) days of receipt of notice from NJPA specifying in reasonable detail the nature of such breach; and/or, 7.19.2 Receipt of written information from any authorized agency finding activities of Vendors engaged in pursuant to a Contract resulting from this RFP to be in violation of the law. 8 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. ADVERTISING A CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP 8.1 Proposer/Vendor shall not advertise or publish information concerning this Contract prior to the award being announced by the 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 NJPA’s interest in a contract resulting from this RFP: Not withstanding its own use, to the extent NJPA issues this RFP and any resulting contract for the use of its Members, NJPA’s interests and liability for said use shall be limited to the competitive proposal process performed and terms and conditions relating to said contract and shall not extend to the products, services, or warranties of the Awarded Vendor or the intended or unintended effects of the product/equipment and services procured there from. 31 8.3 NJPA Compliance with Minnesota Procurement Law: NJPA will exhaust all avenues to comply with each unique state law or requirement whenever possible. It is the responsibility of each participating NJPA member to ensure to their satisfaction that NJPA contracting process falls within these laws and applicable laws are satisfied. An individual NJPA member using these contracts is deemed by their own accord to be in compliance with their own requirements and procurement regulations. 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 shall govern NJPA contracts resulting from this solicitation. 8.5 Jurisdiction: Any claims pertaining to this RFP and any resulting Contract that develop between NJPA and any other party must be brought forth only in courts in Todd County in the State of Minnesota unless otherwise agreed to. 8.5.1 Purchase Orders issued pursuant to a contract resulting from this solicitation shall be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of a competent jurisdiction with respect to the purchaser. 8.6 Vendor Compliance with applicable law: Vendor(s) shall comply with all federal, state, or local laws applicable to or pertaining to the transaction, acquisition, manufacturer, suppliers or the sale of the equipment/products and relating services resulting from this RFP. 8.7 Other Laws, whether or not herein contained, shall be included by this reference. It shall be Proposer’s/Vendor’s responsibility to determine the applicability and requirements of any such laws and to abide by them. 8.8 Indemnity: Each party agrees it will be responsible for its own acts and the result thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. NJPA’s liability shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section §3.736, and other applicable law. 8.9 Prevailing Wage: It shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to comply, when applicable, with prevailing wage legislation in effect in the jurisdiction of the purchaser (NJPA or NJPA Member). It shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to monitor the prevailing wage rates as established by the appropriate department of labor for any increase in rates during the term of this Contract and adjust wage rates accordingly. 8.10 Patent and Copyright Infringement: If an article sold and delivered to NJPA or NJPA Members hereunder shall be protected by any applicable patent or copyright, 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 it by any person on account of the use or sale of such articles by NJPA or NJPA Members in violation or right under such patent or copyright. C. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT 8.11 No right or interest in this Contract shall be assigned or transferred by the Vendor without prior written permission by the NJPA. No delegation of any duty of the Vendor shall be made without prior written permission of the NJPA. NJPA shall notify members by posting approved assignments on the NJPA website (www.njpacoop.org) within 15 days of NJPA’s approval. 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 guarantee to perform all obligations under this Contract. NJPA reserves the right to reject the acquiring person or entity as a Vendor. A change of name agreement will not change the contractual obligations of the Vendor. 32 D. LIST OF PROPOSERS 8.13 NJPA will not maintain or communicate to a list of proposers. All interested proposers must respond to the solicitation as a result of NJPA solicitation advertisements indicated. Because of the wide scope of the potential Members and qualified national Vendors, 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 solicitation 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 will become property of the NJPA and will become public record in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 13.591, after the evaluation process is completed. If the Responder submits information in response to this RFP that it believes to be nonpublic information, as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statute § 13.37, the Responder must: 8.15.1 make the request within thirty days of award/non-award, and include the appropriate statutory justification. Pricing is generally not redactable. The NJPA Legal Department shall review the statement to determine whether the information shall be withheld. If the NJPA determines to disclose the information, the Bids & Contracts department of the NJPA shall inform the Proposer, in writing, of such determination; and 8.15.2 defend any action seeking release of the materials it believes to be nonpublic information, and indemnify and hold harmless the NJPA, its agents and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against the NJPA in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. 8.16 This indemnification survives the NJPA’s award of a contract. In submitting a response to this RFP, the Responder agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the confidential information is in possession of the NJPA. When the situation warrants, Proposer may be able redact additional nonpublic information after the evaluation process if legal justification is provided and accepted by NJPA. G. ENTIRE AGREEMENT 8.17 The Contract, as defined herein, shall constitute the entire understanding between the parties to that 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 shall be 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 shall be deemed to 33 commence when the party declaring force majeure notifies the other party of the existence of the force majeure and shall be 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 shall not include late deliveries of equipment/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 shall notify the other party of such delay within forty-eight (48) hours. I. GRATUITIES 8.19 NJPA may cancel an awarded Contract by written notice if it is found 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 the NJPA. J. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 8.20 Proper and applicable Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) that are in full compliance with OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard must be provided by the Vendor to NJPA or NJPA Member at the time of purchase. K. LICENSES 8.21 Proposer shall maintain a current status on all required federal, state, and local licenses, bonds and permits required for the operation of the business that is anticipated to be conducted with NJPA and NJPA members by the Proposer. 8.22 All responding Proposers must be licensed (where required) and have the authority to sell and distribute offered equipment/products and related services to NJPA and NJPA Members nationally. Documentation of required said licenses and authorities, if applicable, is requested to be included in the proposer’s response. L. MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND SUB-CONTRACTORS 8.23 The awarded Vendor shall be required to supply the names and addresses of sourcing suppliers and sub-contractors as a part of the purchase order when requested by NJPA or the NJPA member. M. NON-WAIVER OF RIGHTS 8.24 No failure of either party to exercise any power given to it hereunder, nor to insistence upon strict compliance by the other party with its obligations hereunder, and no custom or practice of the parties at variance with the terms hereof, nor any payment under a Contract resulting from this RFP shall constitute a waiver of either party’s right to demand exact compliance with the terms hereof. Failure by NJPA to take action or assert any right hereunder shall not be deemed as waiver of such right. N. PROTESTS OF AWARDS MADE 8.25 Protests shall be filed with the NJPA’s Executive Director and shall be resolved in accordance with appropriate Minnesota state statutes. Protests will only be accepted from Proposers. A protest must be in writing and filed with NJPA. A protest of an award or proposed award must be filed within ten (10) calendar days after the public notice or announcement of the award. A protest must include: 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); 34 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 NJPA solicitation and submitting a proposal 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 cancellation of any 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 shall 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 shall 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, statutory provision or are otherwise unenforceable under the laws or regulations of any government or subdivision thereof, such terms shall be deemed stricken from an awarded Contract resulting from this RFP, 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 shall be considered a contract of employment. The relationship between NJPA and an Awarded Contractor is one of independent contractors each free to exercise judgment and discretion with regard to the conduct of their respective businesses. The parties do not intend the proposed Contract to create, or 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. 9 FORMS 35 [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 NJPA should correspond with from now through the Award process: Name: _____________________________________ E-Mail address: _______________________________________ Provide an answer to all questions directly below each question (do not leave blank, mark NA if not applicable) and address all requests made in this RFP. Please supply any applicable supporting information and documentation you feel appropriate in addition to answers entered to the Word document. All information must be typed, organized, and easily understood by evaluators. Please use the Microsoft Word document version of this questionnaire to respond to the questions contained herein. Company Information & Financial Strength 1) Why did you respond to this RFP? 2) What are your company’s expectations in the event of an award? 3) Provide the full legal name, address, tax identifications number, and telephone number for your business. 4) Demonstrate your financial strength and stability. 5) Are you now, or have you ever been the subject of a bankruptcy action? Please explain. 6) Provide a brief history of your company that includes your company’s core values and business philosophy. 7) How long has your company been in the HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES industry? 8) Is your organization best described as a manufacturer or a distributor/dealer/re-seller for a manufacturer of the products/equipment and related services being proposed? a) If the Proposer is best described as a re-seller, manufacturer aggregate, or distributor, please provide evidence of your authorization as a dealer/re-seller/manufacturer aggregate for the manufacturer of the products/equipment and related services you are proposing. b) If the Proposer is best described as a manufacturer, please describe your relationship with your sales/service force and/or Dealer Network in delivering the products/equipment and related services proposed. c) Are these individuals your employees, or the employees of a third party? d) If applicable, is the Dealer Network independent or company owned? 9) Please provide your bond rating, and/or a credit reference from your bank. 10) Provide a detailed explanation outlining the licenses and certifications that are both required to be held, and actually held by your organization in pursuit of the commerce and business contemplated by this RFP. 11) Provide a detailed explanation outlining licenses and certifications both required to be held, and actually held, by third parties and sub-contractors to your organization in pursuit of the commerce contemplated by this RFP. If not applicable, please respond with “Not Applicable.” 12) Provide all “Suspension or Disbarment” information as defined and required herein. 13) In addition to the $1.5 million in General Liability and/or in conjunction with umbrella insurance coverage, what level of automobile and workers compensation insurance does your organization currently have? If none, please explain. 14) Within the RFP category there is potential to be several different sub-categories of solutions; list sub category title/s that best describe your equipment/products, services and supplies. Industry Requirements &Marketplace Success 15) List and document recent industry awards and recognition. 16) Supply three references/testimonials from customers of like status to NJPA Members to include Government and Education agencies. Please include the customer’s name, contact, and phone number. 37 17) Provide a list of your top 5 Government and/or Education customers (entity name is optional) including: entity type, the state the entity is located in, scope of the project/s, size of transaction/s and dollar volumes from the past 3 fiscal years. 18) What percentages of your current (within the past three (3) fiscal years) national sales are to the government and education verticals? Indicate government and education verticals individually. Proposer’s Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 19) Please describe your company sales force in terms of numbers, geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their attention focused on the sale and services of the equipment/products contemplated in this RFP? 20) Please describe your dedicated dealer network and number of individual sales force within your dealer network in terms of numbers, geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their attention focused on the sales distribution and delivery of your equipment/products and related services contemplated in this RFP? 21) Please describe your dedicated company service force or dedicated network in terms of numbers, geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their attention focused on the sale of the equipment/products and related services contemplated in this RFP? 22) Please describe your dedicated dealer service force or network in terms of numbers geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their attention focused on the sale of the equipment/products and related services contemplated in this RFP? Additionally, please describe any applicable road service and do they offer the ability to service customers at the customer’s location? 23) Describe in detail your customer service program regarding process and procedure. Please include, where appropriate, response time capabilities and commitments as a part of this RFP response and awarded contract. 24) Identify any geographic areas or NJPA market segments of the United States you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. 25) Identify any of NJPA Member segments or defined NJPA verticals you will NOT be offering and promoting an awarded contract to? (Government, Education, Non-profit) 26) Define any specific requirements or restrictions as it applies to our members located off shores such as Hawaii and Alaska and the US Islands. Address your off shore shipping program on the Pricing form P of this document. Marketing Plan 27) Describe your contract sales training program to your sales management, dealer network and/or direct sales teams relating to a NJPA awarded contract. 28) Describe how you would market/promote an NJPA Contract nationally to ensure success. 29) Describe your marketing material, and overall marketing ability, relating to promoting this type of partnership and contract opportunity. Please send a few representative samples of your marketing materials in electronic format. 30) Describe your use of technology and the internet to provide marketing and ensure national contract awareness. 31) Describe your perception of NJPA’s role in marketing the contract and your contracted products/equipment and related services. 32) Describe in detail any unique marketing techniques and methods as a part of your proposal that would separate you from other companies in your industry. 33) Describe your company’s Senior Management level commitment with regards to embracement, promoting, supporting and managing a resultant NJPA awarded contract 34) Do you view your products/equipment applicable to an E-procurement ordering process? ____ Yes ____ No a) If yes, describe examples of E-procurement system/s or electronic marketplace solutions that your products/equipment was available through. Demonstrate the success of government and educations customers to ordering through E-procurement. 35) Please describe how you will communicate your NJPA pricing and pricing strategy to your sales force nationally? Other Cooperative Procurement Contracts 36) Describe your level of experience with national, state and local cooperative contracts. 37) What is the annual dollar sales volume generated through each of the contract(s) identified in your answer to the previous question. 38) Identify any GSA Contracts held or utilized by the Proposer. 38 39) What is the annual combined dollar sales volume for each of these contracts? 40) If you are awarded the NJPA contract, are there any market segments or verticals (e.g., higher education, K-12 local governments, non-profits etc.) or geographical markets where the NJPA contract will not be your primary contract purchasing vehicle? If so, please identify those markets and which cooperative purchasing agreement will be your primary vehicle. 41) How would you leverage an NJPA awarded contract in your sales process? 42) Identify a proposed administrative fee payable to NJPA for facilitation, management and promotion of the NJPA contract, should you be awarded. This fee is typically calculated as a percentage of Contract sales and not a line item addition to the customers cost of goods. Value Added 43) If applicable, describe any product/equipment training programs available as options for NJPA members. If applicable, do you offer equipment operator training as well as maintenance training? ____ Yes ____ No 44) Is this training standard as a part of a purchase or optional? 45) Describe current technological advances your proposed equipment/products and related services offer. 46) Describe your “Green” program as it relates to your company, your products/equipment, and your recycling program, including a list of all green products accompanied by the certifying agency for each (if applicable). 47) Describe any Women or Minority Business Entity (WMBE) or Small Business Entity (SBE) accreditations and the general minority and small business program of your organization as it relates to a Contract resulting from this RFP. 48) Identify any other unique or custom value added attributes of your company or your products/equipment or related services. What makes your proposed solutions unique in your industry as it applies to NJPA members? 49) Other than what you have already demonstrated or described, what separates your company, your products/equipment and related services from your competition? 50) Identify and describe any service contract options included in the proposal, or offered as a proposed option, for the products/equipment being offered. 51) Identify your ability and willingness to offer an awarded contract to qualifying member agencies in Canada specifically and internationally in general. 52) Describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in your proposal. 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: __________________________________ Web site: _______________________________________________________________________________ Voids sometimes exist between management (those who respond to RFPs) and sales staff (those who contact NJPA Members) that result in communication problems. Due to this fact, provide the names of your key sales people, phone numbers, and geographic territories for which they are responsible COMPANY PERSONNEL CONTACTS Authorized Signer for your organization*: Name: _________________________________________________________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone: ___________________________________ * By executing Form F, the “Proposer’s Assurance of Compliance,” you are certifying this person identified here has their authorization to sign on behalf of your organization: Author of your proposal response Name:__________________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Your Primary Contact person regarding your 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: _____________________________________________________________________________ Note: Original must be signed and inserted in the inside front cover pouch. Any exceptions to the Terms, Conditions, Specifications, or Proposal Forms contained herein shall be noted in writing and included with the proposal submittal. Proposer acknowledges that the exceptions listed may or may not be accepted by NJPA and may or may not be included in the final contract. NJPA may clarify exceptions listed here and document the results of those clarifications in the appropriate section below. Section/page Term, Condition, or Specification Exception NJPA ACCEPTS Proposer’s Signature: ______________________________________________________ Date: ________________ NJPA’s clarification on exception/s listed above: 41 Contract Award RFP 032515 # FORM D Formal Offering of Proposal (To be completed Only by 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 I/we have examined this RFP and, being familiar with all of the instructions, terms and conditions, general specifications, expectations, technical specifications, service expectations and any special terms, do hereby propose, fully commit and agree to furnish the defined equipment/products and related services in full compliance with all terms, conditions of this RFP, any applicable amendments of this RFP, and all Proposer’s Response documentation. Proposer further understands they accept the full responsibility as the sole source of responsibility of the proposed response herein and that the performance of any sub- contractors employed by the Proposer in fulfillment of this proposal is the sole responsibility of the Proposer. Company Name: _______________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Company Address: _______________________________________________________________________________ City:_________________________________________ State: ____________ Zip: __________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Authorized Signature (ink only): _________________________________ __________________________________ (Name printed or typed) 42 Form E Contract Acceptance and Award (To be completed only by NJPA) NJPA 032515 # ______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Proposer’s full legal name Your proposal is hereby accepted and awarded. As an awarded Proposer, you are now bound to provide the defined product/equipment 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 or rejected by NJPA on Form C. The effective start date of the Contract will be ___________________________, 20________ and continue for four years from the board award date. This contract has the consideration of a fifth year renewal option at the discretion of NJPA. National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ _______________________________________ NJPA Executive Director (Name printed or typed) Awarded this _______ day of_________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number 032515 # NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ ________________________________________ NJPA Board Member (Name printed or typed) Executed this ______ day of __________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number 032515 # Proposer hereby accepts contract award including all accepted exceptions and NJPA clarifications identified on FORM C. Vendor Name ____________________________________________ Vendor Authorized signature: _______________________________ __________________________________ (Name printed or typed) Title: _____________________________________________________________ Executed this _____________ day of ___________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number 032515 # 43 Form F PROPOSER ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE Proposal Affidavit Signature Page PROPOSER’S AFFIDAVIT The undersigned, representing the persons, firms and corporations joining in the submission of the foregoing proposal (such persons, firms and corporations hereinafter being referred to as the “Proposer”), being duly sworn on his/her oath, states to the best of his/her belief and knowledge: 1. The undersigned certifies the Proposer is submitting their proposal under their true and correct name, the Proposer has been properly originated and legally exists in good standing in its state of residence, that the Proposer possesses, or will possess prior to the delivery of any equipment/products and related services, all applicable licenses necessary for such delivery to NJPA members agencies nationally, and that they are authorized to act on behalf of, and encumber the “Proposer” in this Contract; and 2. To the best of my knowledge, no Proposer or Potential Proposer, nor any person duly representing the same, has directly or indirectly entered into any agreement or arrangement with any other Proposers, Potential Proposers, any official or employee of the NJPA, or any person, firm or corporation under contract with the NJPA in an effort to influence either the offering or non-offering of certain prices, terms, and conditions relating to this RFP which tends to, or does, lessen or destroy free competition of the Contract sought for by this RFP; and 3. The Proposer or any person on his/her behalf, has not agreed, connived or colluded to produce a deceptive show of competition in the manner of the proposal or award of the referenced contract; and 4. Neither the Proposer nor any officer, director, partner, member or associate of the Proposer, nor any of its employees directly involved in obtaining contracts with the NJPA or any subdivision of the NJPA, has been convicted of false pretenses, attempted false pretenses or conspiracy to commit false pretenses, bribery, attempted bribery or conspiracy to bribe under the laws of any state or federal government for acts or omissions after January 1, 1985; and 5. The Proposer has examined and understands the terms, conditions, scope, contract opportunity, specifications request and other documents of this solicitation and that any and all exceptions have been noted in writing and have been included with the proposal submittal; and 6. If awarded a contract, the Proposer will provide the equipment/products and/or services to qualifying members of the NJPA in accordance with the terms, conditions, scope of this RFP, Proposer offered specifications and other documents of this solicitation; and 7. The undersigned, being familiar with and understand the expectations requested and outlined in this RFP under consideration, hereby proposes to deliver through valid requests, Purchase Orders or other acceptable forms ordering and procurement by NJPA Members. Unless otherwise indicated, requested and agreed to on a valid purchase order per this RFP, only new, unused and first quality equipment/products and related services are to be transacted with NJPA Members relating to an awarded contract; and 8. The Proposer has carefully checked the accuracy of all proposed products/equipment and related services and listed total price per unit of purchase in this proposal to include shipping and delivery considerations. In addition, the Proposer accepts all general terms and conditions of this RFP, including all responsibilities of commitment as outlined and proposed; and 44 9. In submitting this proposal, it is understood that the right is reserved by the NJPA to reject any or all proposals and it is agreed by all parties that this proposal may not be withdrawn during a period of 90 days from the date proposals were opened regarding this RFP; and 10. The Proposer certifies that in performing this Contract they will comply with all applicable provisions of the federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, and orders; and 11. The Proposer understands that submitted proposals which are marked “confidential” in their entirety, or those in which a significant portion of the submitted proposal is marked “nonpublic” will not be accepted by NJPA. Pursuant to Minnesota Statute §13.37 only specific parts of the proposal may be labeled a “trade secret.” All proposals are nonpublic until the contract is awarded; at which time, both successful and unsuccessful vendors’ proposals become public information. 12. The Proposer understands and agrees that NJPA will not be responsible for any information contained within the proposal. 13. By signing below, the Proposer understands it is his or her responsibility as the Vendor to act in protection of labeled information and agree to defend and indemnify NJPA for honoring such designation. Proposer duly realizes failure to so act will constitute a complete waiver and all submitted information will become public information; additionally failure to label any information that is released by NJPA shall constitute a complete waiver of any and all claims for damages caused by the release of the information. [The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank. Signature page below] 45 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: Contact Person for Questions: _____________________________________________________________________________________ (Must be individual who is responsible for filling out this Proposer’s Response form) Address: ____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: _______________________________________________________________________________ Telephone Number: _____________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________ E-mail Address:______________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature: _________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Name (typed): ______________________________________________________________________ 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: __________________________________________________________________________________ 46 Form G OVERALL EVALUATION AND CRITERIA For the Proposed Subject HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES Conformance to Terms & Conditions 50 Financial, Industry Requirements & Marketplace Success 75 Proposer’s Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 100 Proposer’s Marketing Plan 50 Value Added Attributes 75 Warranty 50 Equipment/Products and Related Services 200 Pricing 400 TOTAL POINTS 1000 Reviewed by: _________________________________________ Its_________________________________ _________________________________________Its_________________________________ 47 Form P PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE Payment Terms, Warranty, Products/Equipment/Services, Pricing and Delivery, Industry Specific Proposer Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Questionnaire completed by: ______________________________________________________________ Payment Terms and Financing Options 1) Identify your payment terms if applicable. (Net 30, etc.) 2) Identify any applicable leasing or other financing options as defined herein. 3) Briefly describe your proposed order process for this proposal and contract award. (Note: order process may be modified or refined during an NJPA member’s final Contract phase process). a. Please specify if you will be including your dealer network in this proposal. If so, please specify how involved they will be. (For example, will he Dealer accept the P.O.?), and how are we to verify the specific dealer is part of your network? 4) Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process? Warranty 5) Describe, in detail, your Manufacture Warranty Program including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims procedure, and overall structure. 6) Do all warranties cover all products/equipment parts and labor? 7) Do warranties impose usage limit restrictions? 8) Do warranties cover the expense of technicians travel time and mileage to perform warranty repairs? 9) Please list any other limitations or circumstances that would not be covered under your warranty. 10) Please list 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? Equipment/Product/Services, Pricing, and Delivery 11) Provide a general narrative description of the equipment/products and related services you are offering in your proposal. 12) Provide a general narrative description of your pricing model identifying how the model works (line item and/or published catalog percentage discount). 13) Please quantify the discount range presented in this response pricing as a percentage discount from MSRP/published list. 14) Provide an overall proposed statement of method of pricing for individual line items, percentage discount off published product/equipment catalogs and/or category pricing percentage discount with regard to all equipment/products and related services and being proposed. Provide a SKU number for each item being proposed. 15) Propose a strategy, process, and specific method of facilitating “Sourced Equipment/Products and/or related Services” (AKA, “Open Market” items or “Non-Standard Options”). 16) Describe your NJPA customer volume rebate programs, as applicable. 17) Identify any Total Cost of Acquisition (as defined herein) cost(s) which is NOT included “Pricing” submitted with your proposal response. Identify to whom these charges are payable to and their relationship to Proposer. 18) If freight, delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA member, describe in detail the complete shipping and delivery program. 48 19) As an important part of the evaluation of your offer, indicate the level of pricing you are offering. Prices offered in this proposal are: ________a. Pricing is the same as typically offered to an individual municipality, Higher Ed or school district. ________b. Pricing is the same as typically offered to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations or state purchasing departments. _________c. Better than typically offered to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations or state purchasing departments. ________d. Other; please describe. 20) Do you offer quantity or volume discounts? _____ YES _____ NO Outline guidelines and program. 21) Describe in detail your proposed exchange and return program(s) and policy(s). 22) Specifically identify those shipping and delivery and exchange and returns programs as they relate to Alaska and Hawaii and any related off shore delivery of contracted products/ equipment and related services 23) Please describe any self-audit process/program you plan to employ to verify compliance with your anticipated contract with NJPA. Please be as specific as possible. Industry-Specific Items 24) What is your US market share for the solutions you are proposing in this response? 25) Do you hold any industry-specific quality management system certifications such as ISO 9001? 26) Do you hold any environmental management system certifications such as ISO 14001? 27) What is your Canadian market share (if any) for the solutions you are proposing in this response? 28) Is your warranty program handled directly, or does it require a pass through to another manufacturer? 29) For how many years have the models you are proposing in this response been available in the marketplace? 30) What is your parts order fill rate? 31) Do you provide preventive maintenance programs for the solutions you are proposing in this response? Signature: ___________________________________________________________Date: _______________________ 49 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 XX Form D: Formal Offering of Proposal X X Form E. Contract Acceptance and Award X Form F: Proposers Assurance of Compliance XX 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 50 Section 1. Instructions For Vendor Pursuant the NJPA RFP, 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 Price and Product Change Request Form and signature of an authorized Vendor employee in section 5. All changes are subject to review and approval by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager, signed in acceptance by the NJPA Executive Director and acknowledged by the NJPA Contract Council. Submit request via email to your Contract Manager AND: PandP@njpacoop.org. NJPA’s due diligence in analyzing any request for change is to determine if approval of the request 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 vendor contact via email. Vendor must complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items or services subject to change, provide sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and include a compete restatement of pricing document in appropriate format (preferably Excel). The pricing document must identify all equipment/products and services being offered and must conform to the following NJPA product/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 equipment/products and services offered regardless of whether their prices have changed and 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 equipment/products and related services may be added to a contract if such additions are within the scope of the RFP. DELETIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item or service is no longer available and thus not relevant to the contract; for example, discontinued, improved, etc. PRICE CHANGES: Request prices changes in general terms along with the justification by product category for the change; for example, a 3% increase in XYZ Product Line is due to a 3% increase in petroleum, or this list of SKUs/ product descriptions is increasing X% due to X% increase in cost of raw materials. Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates price reductions are due to advancement of technologies and market place efficiencies. Price increases: Typical acceptable increase requests include increases to Vendor input costs such as petroleum or other applicable commodities, increases in product utility of new compared to old equipment/products or service, etc. Vendor must include reasonable documentation for the claims cited in their request along with detailed justification for why the increase is needed. Special details for price changes must be included with the request along with both current and proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to this form, including letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Refer to section 4 of 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 51 Section 3. Detailed Explanation of Need for Changes List equipment/products and/or services that are changing, being added or 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. SAMPLES: 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 52 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 PandP@njpacoop.org. ☐ Yes ☐ No Section 5. Signatures __________________________________________________________ ________________________ Vendor Authorized Signature Date ____________________________________________ Print Name and Title of Authorized Signer __________________________________________________________ _________________________ NJPA Executive Director Signature Date 53 Appendix A NJPA The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential Member agencies to include all Government, Higher Education, K12 Education, Non-Profit, Tribal Government, and all other Public Agencies located nationally 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 Department Division Add?Qty.Funding Year Fund description DPW Streets Add 1 FY19 SB1 DPW Streets Add 1 FY19 SB1 DPW Streets Add 1 FY19 Prop. 111 - Special Gas Tax DPU WWTP Replace 1 FY19 Wastewater Enterprise City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1653 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:BRIAN SPINDOR, PE(WA), Assistant Director - Wastewater Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division DEJAN PAVIC, PE, Public Utilities Manager Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering BY:CHARLES MASTERS, Engineer II Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Sewer Improvements in the Vicinity of North First Street and East Dakota Avenue (Bid File 3635) (Council District 7): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1,Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $729,049. 3.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines for Sewer Improvements in the Vicinity of North First Street and East Dakota Avenue (Project);award a construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation,Inc.,in the amount of $729,049;and authorize the Director of Public Utilities, or designee, to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After a detailed analysis of the wastewater collection system,the Wastewater Collection Sewer Master Plan identified sewer pipes and appurtenances in need of rehabilitation and replacement. The scope of work for the Project will correct sewer system structural deficiencies in the vicinity of North Fresno Street and East Dakota Avenue.The Department of Public Utilities (DPU),Wastewater City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1653 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-B North Fresno Street and East Dakota Avenue.The Department of Public Utilities (DPU),Wastewater Management Division,is seeking to award a construction contract for the Project to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $729,049. BACKGROUND In 2015,inspections of the Fresno’s sewer system were conducted in the process of preparing the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan.The goal of these inspections was to evaluate the structural and capacity handling capability of all the downtown sewer pipes.Through this investigation,several segments of these sewer pipes were found to have structural deficiencies such as cracks and voids,some were found to be past the design useful life,and other pipes are undersized per the current City Standard design requirements. The ages of the pipes in the Project area range from 1950 to 1955.The typical design life of a sewer pipe is 50 to 75 years.The advanced age and structural deficiencies discovered in these areas require that portions of the sewer pipes be rehabilitated. The Project consists of the rehabilitation of sewer mains by means of Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) liner installation in following locations:6-inch diameter sewer main in East Sussex Way between North Fresno Street and North Mariposa Street,6-inch diameter sewer main in East Saginaw Way between North Fresno Street and North Mariposa Street,8-inch diameter sewer main in East Ashlan Avenue between North Angus Street and North Sherman Street,8-inch diameter sewer main in East Buckingham Way between North Angus Street and North Sherman Street,8-inch diameter sewer main in North Sherman Street between North Angus Street and East Sussex Way,8-inch diameter sewer main in North Sherman Street alley between North Angus Street and North First Street,8-inch diameter sewer main in North Angus Street between East Ashlan Avenue and East Buckingham Way, 8-inch diameter sewer main in North Angus Street alley between East Pontiac Way and East Dakota Avenue,8-inch diameter sewer main in North Orchard Street rear easement between East Saginaw Way and East Dakota Avenue,and 8-inch diameter sewer main in North First Street rear easement between East Saginaw Way and East Dakota Avenue.Additionally,localized point repairs will take place in areas of severe damage at various locations along these sewer mains.Sewer rehabilitation was proposed where capacity deficiencies,structural deficiencies,and advanced age of pipe were identified. Plans and specifications were prepared for this Project.A Notice Inviting Bids was published on April 3,2019,and posted on the City’s Planet Bids website.The specifications were distributed to eight prospective bidders and faxed to ten Builder Exchanges.One sealed bid proposal was received and publicly opened on April 23,2019.The bid proposal was in the amount of $729,049.The bid will expire within 64 days of bid opening,on June 26,2019.Upon receiving only one bid proposal,a canvas of several local contractors previously engaged in various City projects was conducted to determine reasons for the lack of interest in bidding on this Project.These contractors reported that this Project would require staffing and scheduling that conflict with other projects they have committed to.Given the current unavailability of these contractors and the history of work performed for the City by the lowest responsive and responsible bidder,staff recommends acceptance of the results of the bidding process for this Project. Emmett’s Excavation,Inc.,was found to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a bid amount of $729,049.The staff determination was posted on the City’s Planet Bids website on April 30,2019.Staff recommends that City Council award a construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation,City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1653 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-B 30,2019.Staff recommends that City Council award a construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $729,049. Their bid price is 53% below the budget allocation of $1,555,400. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment for this Project and has determined that it falls within Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1,Section 15301 (Existing Facilities),because this contract involves normal operation and maintenance of existing public sewer facilities. 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 was not implemented because the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is a local business. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.This Project is located in Council District 7.This Project is identified in the Wastewater Management Division’s five-year Capital Improvement Plan.Funds in the amount of $1,555,400 for this Project are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2019 Sewer Enterprise Fund 40501. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Bid Evaluation & Fiscal Impact Statement Attachment 2 - Sample Contract Attachment 3 - Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ K:\FORMS\EVALUATIONFORM FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROGRAM: Sewer Improvements in the Vicinity of N. First Street and E. Dakota Avenue Fund:40501 Org:413501 Project:RC00168 Activity:4CCNT Res Type:J5723 Account:57507 TOTAL OR ANNUALIZED RECOMMENDATION CURRENT COST Direct Cost $729,049.00 Indirect Cost* $262,000.00 TOTAL COST $991,049.00 Additional Revenue or Savings Generated Net City Cost Amount Budgeted (If none budgeted, identify source) $1,555,400.00 *Indirect Costs Inspection $ 76,000.00 Administration _ $ 11,000.00 Contract Compliance _$ 5,000.00 Other _ $170,000.00 DPW 23.0/01-06-12 DPW NO FED DIV I.pdf 1.18 rev. 03-18 CONTRACT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK OF IMPROVEMENT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] (hereinafter referred to as “Contractor”) as follows: 1. Contract Documents. The “Notice Inviting Bids,” “Instructions to Bidders,” “Bid Proposal,” and the “Specifications” including “General Conditions,” “Special Conditions,” and “Technical Specifications” for the following: [Title] (Bid File No. [Bid File No.]) [Alternates (if any)] copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the drawings, plans, and documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including Performance and Payment Bonds, if required, and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2. Price and Work. For the monetary consideration of [Written Dollar Amount] dollars and [Written Cents Amount] cents ($[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 #:ID19-1670 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-C REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:WILMA QUAN, City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager BY:LAURA MERRILL, Deputy City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager COURTNEY ESPINOZA, Program Implementation Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the 2017 Transformative Climate Communities (TCC)Grant and Transform Fresno Plan projects: 1.Approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (EOC) for Project 2 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno totaling $3,208,377.70 in TCC funding and Project 20 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno:EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives totaling $530,000 as a leverage only project; and 2.Approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with the City of Fresno Department of Public Works for Project 9 Mariposa Plaza totaling $3,859,000; and 3.***RESOLUTION -40th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR)No.2018- 157 appropriating $137,800 from the TCC Grant (Requires 5 affirmative votes)(Subject to Mayor’s veto). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission for Project 2 regarding EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno and Project 20 regarding EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno:EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives;approve a Sub-Recipient Agreement with City of Fresno Public Works Department for Project 9 regarding Mariposa Plaza;authorize the City Manager to execute all related documents to the administration,modification,monitoring and closeout of the Sub-Recipient Agreements for Projects 2,9,and 20;and adopt the 40th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2018-157 appropriating $137,800. City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1670 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-C EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On February 28,2019,the City Council unanimously voted to approve a Master Grant Agreement (MGA)with the Strategic Growth Council (SGC)for the TCC grant award with the understanding that the Sub-Recipient Agreements between the City and Partners who will be receiving funds to implement components of the Transform Fresno Plan would be brought forward for subsequent Council consideration as they meet the required SGC readiness thresholds and receive a notice to proceed from SGC.The following projects have met the necessary thresholds and are ready to begin implementation. ·Project 2 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno ·Project 20 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno: EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives ·Project 9 Mariposa Plaza BACKGROUND The Transform Fresno Plan was created by a participatory steering committee comprised of community stakeholders from the Chinatown,Downtown and Southwest Fresno neighborhoods.On February 28,2019,the City Council unanimously approved the MGA which binds the City and SGC with the understanding that Sub-Recipient Agreements between the City and Partners who will be receiving funds to implement components of the Transform Fresno Plan would be brought forward for subsequent Council consideration as they meet the required SGC readiness thresholds and receive a notice to proceed from SGC.The projects referenced below have met those thresholds and are ready to begin implementation: Project 2 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno The project will install energy efficiency and solar water heating measures on 170 single-family homes in Southwest Fresno.The project will also assess,design,and install 510,000 watts of solar photovoltaic systems on 135 single-family homes in the TCC Project Area.Fresno EOC will provide on the job training and Sun Power certification of crews from the target area (approximately 6 trainees total).Fresno EOC and Project 3 GRID Alternatives will coordinate their outreach and installation plans.Fresno EOC will provide technical support to homeowners during the post- installation warranty period.Project 2 has not incurred any changes in budget or scope as originally shown in the MGA. Project 20 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and Green House Gas Reductions in Southwest Fresno: EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives Fresno EOC will identify approximately 135 households that may qualify for the EFMP Plus-Up program through the TCC-funded CCI Project #2.Valley CAN will assess the qualifications of the households to participate in the EFMP Plus-Up program and will provide approximately 50 vehicle replacements,20 home charging stations,10 home service panel upgrades,and 40 PG&E Clean Fuel Rebate Program Incentives. Project 20 is a leverage only project. Project 9 Mariposa Plaza The Mariposa Plaza Activation project refreshes a significant downtown plaza and enhances its City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1670 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:3-C The Mariposa Plaza Activation project refreshes a significant downtown plaza and enhances its connection to the future High Speed Rail station.Renovations will include tree planting,landscaping, installation of permeable paving,and a rainwater capture pavilion.It will maintain its historic use as a place for public speaking and community events.The project adds to these functions by improving the infrastructure for those events and rearranging the relationship between the historic stage and the open audience area.Project 9 has not incurred any changes in budget or scope as originally shown in the MGA. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Project 2 is not subject to the requirements of CEQA.Public Resources Code Section 21080.35(a) specifically states that the installation of solar energy systems on the roofs of existing buildings,as proposed by Project 2, is not subject to the divisions that sets forth the requirements of CEQA. Project 9 was analyzed under Environmental Assessment No.EA-17-008.The project was determined to be Categorically Exempt by the Director of the Development and Resource Management Department,pursuant to Article 19 of the State CEQA Guidelines under Section 15302/Class 2 and Section 15332/Class 32.A notice of exemption was filed with the County Clerk on May 30,2017 and was posted for 30 days with no comments or appeals received within the 30 day comment period. Project 20 is statutorily exempt from CEQA as the issuance of building permits is a ministerial action, statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Article 18,Statutory Exemptions,Section 15268 of the State CEQA Guidelines [Public Resources Code 21080(b)(1)]. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered based upon conditions of state funding. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.Funding for Transform Fresno Plan projects lead by Partners will be a direct pass-through of TCC grant funds and will be distributed on a reimbursement basis. Attachments: 1.Sub-recipient Agreement with Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission for Projects 2 and 20 2.Sub-recipient Agreement with City of Fresno Department of Public Works for Project 9 3.RESOLUTION - 40th amendment to the AAR No. 2018-157 appropriating $137,800 4.Sub-Recipient Agreement Status Summary City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Transform Fresno Partner Sub‐recipient Agreement StatusProject # Project Name Partner Project Type Total TCC FundingTotal Leverage CommitmentCouncil Date1 Chinatown Housing Project Fresno Housing AuthorityAffordable Housing and Sustainable Communities $ 11,785,221.00 $ 12,822,370.00 TBD 2 EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and GHG Reductions in SW Fresno Fresno Economic Opportunities CommissionLow-Income Weatherization $ 3,208,377.70 $ - Pending May 16, 2019 3 GRID Solar Collaborative Single-Family Partnership GRID Alternatives Low-Income Weatherization $ 883,826.41 $ 535,807.55 4/11/20194 GRID Solar Collaborative Multi-Family Partnership GRID Alternatives Low-Income Weatherization $ 352,549.43 $ 109,999.95 4/11/20195 Southwest Fresno Trail City of Fresno Urban Greening $ 1,978,959.00 $ - TBD 6 Chinatown Urban GreeningCity of Fresno Urban Greening $ 6,965,696.00 $ - TBD 7 Clean Shared Mobility NetworkFresno Metro Black Chamber of CommerceLow Carbon Transportation: Car Sharing and Mobility $ 7,717,014.21 $ 2,292,900.00 TBD 8 Annadale Mode ShiftSelf Help Enterprises Active Transportation $ 343,000.00 $ 150,000.00 TBD 9 Mariposa Plaza City of Fresno Urban Greening $ 3,859,000.00 Pending May 16, 2019 10 ERP Green Toddler ParkEarly Readers Preschool Urban Greening $ 59,140.00 TBD 11 Southwest Urban Forest Expansion City of FresnoUrban and Community Forestry $ 212,199.21 TBD 12 Yosemite Village Permaculture Community Garden & Urban Farm Incubator Fresno Metro MinistryUrban and Community Forestry $ 367,500.00 $ 434,153.00 4/11/201913 Park at MLK Magnet Core City of Fresno Urban Greening $ 5,430,466.53 $ 1,500,000.00 TBD 14 Inside Out Community GardenFresno Economic Opportunities CommissionUrban and Community Forestry $ 98,000.00 TBD 15 Southwest Fresno Community Food Hub: Community Orchard Fresno Food CommonsUrban and Community Forestry $ 262,500.00 $ 436,255.00 TBD 16 Southwest Fresno Community Food Hub: Urban Heat Island MitigationFresno Food Commons Urban Greening $ 62,220.00 $ 70,500.00 TBD 17 Southwest Fresno Community Food Hub: Edible Food Rescue and Distribution Fresno Food CommonsFood Waste Prevention and Rescue $ 1,488,280.00 $ 2,062,365.80 TBD 18 Fresno City College: West Fresno Satellite CampusState Center Community College DistrictUrban Greening $ 16,542,745.66 $ 70,000,000.00 TBD 19 Chinatown Property Based Improvement District City of Fresno Leverage Only $ - $ 75,000.00 N/A 20EOC Partnership for Energy Savings and GHG Reductions in SW Fresno: EFMP Plus-Up Vehicle Replacement and Incentives Fresno Economic Opportunities CommissionLeverage Only $ - $ 530,000.00 Pending May 16, 2019 21 TCC ConnectorCity of Fresno Transportation DepartmentLeverage Only $ - $ 3,532,774.00 N/A 22 Southwest Offsite Improvements City of Fresno Leverage Only $ - $ 15,732,648.00 N/A WDP Workforce Development PlanCity of Fresno, Youth Action Project, and Fresno Area Workforce Investment BoardTransformative Plans 3,209,932.00$ 20,000.00$ TBD CEP Community Engagement PlanCity of Fresno, USGBC Central CaliforniaTransformative Plans 1,029,623.00$ 763,152.00$ TBD DAP Displacement Avoidance Plan City of Fresno Transformative Plans -$ 60,500.00$ TBD GAGrant Administration City of Fresno Grant Administration 643,749.85$ -$ 2/28/2019TOTAL66,500,000.00$ 111,128,425.30$ 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 40th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2018-157 APPROPRIATING $137,800 FOR THE TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE COMMUNITIES (TCC) GRANT PROJECTS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2018-157 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Transformative Climate Comm $ 137,800 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Transformative Climate Comm Revenues: Account: 33401 State-Grant $ 137,800 Fund: 22063 Org Unit: 189901 Total Revenues $ 137,800 Appropriations: Account: 58002 Outside Agency Support $ 137,800 Fund: 22063 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00863 Total Appropriations $ 137,800 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $137,800 for the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) grant projects. 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 , 2019 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2019 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2019 Mayor Veto: , 2019 Council Override Veto: , 2019 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1663 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:4-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL DATE:May 16, 2019 FROM:PAUL CAPRIOGLIO, Council President District 4 SUBJECT Appoint a member and an alternate to the San Joaquin Valley Special City Selection Committee RECOMMENDATION Appoint a member and an alternate to the Committee. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Councilmember Olivier previously sat on this Committee. The alternate seat was vacant. BACKGROUND The City of Fresno currently has no representation on this Committee. Appointing a Councilmember and an alternate to this Committee ensures the City of Fresno has representation. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS N/A LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A FISCAL IMPACT N/A Attachment: Purpose of the Committee City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Special City Selection Committee On September 30, 2008 Governor Schwarzenegger signed SB 1548 (Florez) which creates Section 40600.5 of the Health and Safety Code (H&SC) establishing a valley- wide Special Selection Committee which is charged with making appointments of city representative to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (District’s) Governing Board. The Special City Selection Committee consists of one member selected by a majority vote of the council of each city located within the District. An alternate can be selected to attend if the primary member is unable to attend a meeting. For more information go to: https://www.valleyair.org/Programs/SpecialCitySelection/SCSC_idx.htm City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1683 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:4-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 16, 2019 FROM:Miguel Arias, Councilmember for District 3, Esmeralda Soria, Councilmember for District 1, Nelson Esparza, Councilmember for District 7, City Council Offices SUBJECT Actions pertaining to non-transient motels: 1.BILL - (for introduction) adding Article 18 to Chapter 10 of the Fresno Municipal Code adopting a non-transient motel inspection program. 2.RESOLUTION--Initiating a Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Fresno to add section 15-2769 relating to non-transient residence requirements, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5803-a(1). RECOMMENDATION The sponsors recommend Council approve a bill for introduction adopting a non-transient motel inspection program by adding Article 18 to Chapter 10 of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC),and approve a Resolution Initiating a Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Fresno to add section 15-2769 relating to non-transient residence requirements,pursuant to FMC section 15- 5803-a(1). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed ordinance would create a non-transient lodging inspection program by adding Article 18 to Chapter 10 of the FMC,authorizing inspection of all rental units to ensure compliance with minimum health and safety standards.The proposed Resolution would initiate a text amendment to the City’s Zoning Ordinance,directing staff to review and analyze the proposed draft ordinance defining and setting minimum standards for non-transient lodging. BACKGROUND The proposed ordinance would create a non-transient lodging inspection program by adding Article 18 to Chapter 10 of the FMC,authorizing inspection of all rental units to ensure compliance with minimum health and safety standards.It would make renting or occupying a rental unity subject to a pending enforcement unlawful until it passes inspection.Non-transient lodging with frequent calls for emergency services,a history of complaints or code violations,or lodging over forty years old would City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID19-1683 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:4-B emergency services,a history of complaints or code violations,or lodging over forty years old would be prioritized for inspection.A correction notice would be issued,including a time and date of re- inspection.If compliance is not achieved,remedies include issuing administrative citations, abatement proceedings, civil injunction, petition for receivership, and/or criminal prosecution. The proposed Resolution would initiate a text amendment to the City’s Zoning Ordinance,directing staff to review and analyze the proposed draft ordinance defining and setting minimum standards for non-transient lodging,and to bring the proposed ordinance before the Airport Land Use Commission and Planning Commission for consideration. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the documents as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable because this item does not involve a bid or award of a contract. FISCAL IMPACT The non-transient lodging inspection program will be part of the City’s Rental Inspection Program. Non-transient lodging operators will be billed a per-unit inspection fee up to $100,which will be set forth in the Master Fee Schedule. Attachments: Bill for introduction Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1691 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:4-C REPORT TO COUNCIL May 16, 2019 RESOLUTION - Supporting Senate Bill 18 - Keep Californians Housed Act City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1660 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:5-A CLOSED SESSION May 16, 2019 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION - Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(2) 1. City of Fresno v. Garney Pacific Company dba Garney Construction Company City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID19-1687 Agenda Date:5/16/2019 Agenda #:5-B CLOSED SESSION May 16, 2019 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -PUBLIC SECURITY -Government Code Section 54957 (a) 1.Discuss security of City Hall City of Fresno Printed on 3/17/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™