CC 06-03-2025 Searchable PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber and via Teleconference
Tuesday, June 3, 2025
6:45 PM
Televised Regular City Council Meeting (6:45)
IN-PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION
Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following
ways:
1) Attend in person at Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue.
2) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV.
3) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at www.Cupertino.org/youtube
and www.Cupertino.org/webcast
Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the
following ways:
1) Appear in person at Cupertino Community Hall
2) E-mail comments by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 3 to the Council at
publiccomment@cupertino.gov. These e-mail comments will also be received by each City
Councilmember, the City Manager, and the City Clerk’s Office. Comments on non-agenda
items sent to any other email address will be included upon the sender's request.
Emailed comments received following the agenda publication, prior to or during the
meeting, will be posted to the City’s website.
Members of the public may provide oral public comments during the Meeting as follows:
Oral public comments will be accepted during the meeting. Comments may be made
during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the public
comment period for each agenda item.
Oral public comments may be made during the public comment period for each agenda
item.
Page 1
1
CC 06-03-2025
1 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Members of the audience who address the City Council must come to the
lectern/microphone, and are requested to complete a Speaker Card and identify themselves.
Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to
attend the meeting or provide comments.
3) Teleconferencing Instructions
To address the City Council, click on the link below to register in advance and access the
meeting:
Online
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_vun2Qk36TTKIIAR-15YyUA
Phone
Dial: 669-900-6833 and enter Webinar ID: 817 4634 0043 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak, *6 to
unmute yourself). Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their
phone number.
Join from an H.323/SIP room system:
H.323:
144.195.19.161 (US West)
206.247.11.121 (US East)
Meeting ID: 817 4634 0043
SIP: 81746340043@zoomcrc.com
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about
joining the webinar.
Please read the following instructions carefully:
1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your
internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and
up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain
functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer.
2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with
instructions on how to connect to the meeting. Your email address will not be disclosed to
the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your
name, you may enter “Cupertino Resident” or similar designation.
Page 2
2
CC 06-03-2025
2 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
3. When the Mayor calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on “raise hand,” or,
if you are calling in, press *9. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to
speak.
4. When called, please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic.
5. Members of the public that wish to share a document must email cityclerk@cupertino.org
prior to the meeting. These documents will be posted to the City’s website after the
meeting.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
1.Subject: Proclamation recognizing June as LGBTQ+ Pride Month
Recommended Action: Present proclamation recognizing June as LGBTQ+ Pride
Month
A - Proclamation
PRESENTATIONS
2.Subject: Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (SCCFSC) presentation on SCCFSC's
history, programs, technologies, and Firewise USA
Recommended Action: Receive the presentation from Santa Clara County FireSafe
Council
POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter within
the jurisdiction of the Council and not on the agenda for discussion. The total time for Oral
Communications will ordinarily be limited to one hour. Individual speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes. As necessary, the Chair may further limit the time allowed to individual speakers, or
reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come first heard basis, with priority
given to students. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Council from discussing or making any
decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. A councilmember may, however, briefly
Page 3
3
CC 06-03-2025
3 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers. A councilmember may also ask a question
for clarification, provide a reference for factual information, request staff to report back concerning a
matter, or request that an item be added to a future City Council agenda in response to public comment.
CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3-5)
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine City business and may be approved by
one motion. Typical items may include meeting minutes, awards of contracts, the ratification of
accounts payable, and second readings of ordinances. Any member of the Council may request to have
an item removed from the Consent Calendar based on the rules set forth in the City Council Procedures
Manual. Members of the public may provide input on one or more consent calendar items when the
Mayor asks for public comments on the Consent Calendar.
3.Subject: Approval of May 15, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the May 15, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
A - Draft Minutes
4.Subject: Approval of May 20, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the May 20, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
A - Draft Minutes
5.Subject: Second reading of an Ordinance amending Municipal Code Section 2.04.010
pertaining to Removal of Closed Session Start Time and Clarification that Meetings
Rescheduled Due to Holidays or Elections Retain Regular Meeting Status
Recommended Action: Conduct second reading and enact Ordinance No. 25-2271: "An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Title 2,
Administration and Personnel, of the City of Cupertino Municipal Code amending
Section 2.04.010, pertaining to closed session and regular meetings, by title only, and
waive the first reading."
A - Draft Ordinance
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Government Code Section 65103.5 limits the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the
review of development projects. Members of the public wishing to view plans that cannot otherwise be
distributed under Govt. Code Section 65103.5 may make an appointment with the Planning Division to
view them at City Hall by sending an email to planning@cupertino.gov. Plans will also be made
available digitally during the hearing to consider the proposal.
6.Subject: Approval of renewal of the 1992 Storm Drain Fee (with no increase) and
renewal of the 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38% increase.
Page 4
4
CC 06-03-2025
4 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Recommended Action: Adopt:
1. Resolution No. 25-036 (Attachment B) approving the renewal and collection of the
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38% increase in rates for FY 2025-
26.
2. Resolution No. 25-037 (Attachment A) approving the renewal and collection of the
1992 Storm Drain Fee with no increase in rates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26.
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution 1992 Fee
B - Draft Resolution 2019 Fee
C - Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Ordinance with Fee Report
D- Calendar Year 2022 AUP
E- Calendar Year 2023 AUP
F - Calendar Year 2024 AUP
7.Subject: Amend Chapter 16.74 of the Municipal Code to adopt CAL FIRE's
recommendations for Fire Severity Hazard Zones in the Local Responsibility Area and
Chapter 16.40 of the Municipal Code to update a reference to the updated map.
Recommended Action: Introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No.
25-2272“An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter
16.74 of the Municipal Code to adopt Fire Severity Hazard Zones in the Local
Responsibility Area and Chapter 16.40 to update a reference to the updated map”.
Staff Report
A - Draft Ordinance
B – Letter from CAL FIRE
D – Existing Chapter 16.74
C – CAL FIRE recommended LRA map for Cupertino
E – Summary of Public Comments
F – CAL FIRE Frequently Asked Questions Memo
8.Subject: Consideration of Recommended Operating and Capital Improvement Program
Budgets for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26, Adoption of the Operating and Capital
Improvement Program Budgets for FY 2025-26, Establishment of the Appropriation
Limit, and related actions; Direction on past and current City Work Program and FY
2024-25 Special Projects
Page 5
5
CC 06-03-2025
5 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Recommended Action: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-038 establishing an Operating
Budget of $131,838,401 for FY 2025-26, which includes the following changes to the FY
2025-26 Proposed Budget, published on May 1, 2025:
a. Approve the operating budget of $131,772,435, outlined in the FY 2025-26 Proposed
Budget.
b. Approve a reduction in revenues of $1,500,000 for transfers in to Fund 580
($500,000) and Fund 610 ($1,000,000) from the General Fund.
c. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($63,733) due to the elimination of the
proposed part-time Economic Development Analyst.
d. Approve additional appropriations of $146,710 for a proposed Administrative
Assistant position in the City Clerk’s division to assist with all current and future
hybrid Commissions and Committees meetings.
e. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($17,011) due to the elimination of the
proposed Assistant Director of Administrative Services
f. Approve any other recommended changes as directed by City Council
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-039 establishing a Capital Improvement Program Budget
of $4,225,000 for FY 2025-26.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 25-040 amending the Unrepresented Employees’
Compensation Program
a. Senior Business Systems Analyst Position Description; and
b. Code Enforcement Supervisor Position Description
4. Adopt Resolution No. 25-041 amending the Cupertino Employees’ Association
(CEA) Memorandum of Understanding
a. Assistant Housing Coordinator Position Description
5. Adopt Resolution No. 25-042 establishing an Appropriation Limit of $141,134,546
for FY 2025-26
6. Provide direction on any remaining past and current City Work Program currently
budget and FY 2024-25 Special Projects
7. Approve Resolution 25-043 and Budget modification number 2425-393 to reduce
expenditures by $326,266, in the General Fund to defund three special projects and two
City Work Programs
Page 6
6
CC 06-03-2025
6 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Staff Report
A – Draft Resolution – Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26
B – Draft Resolution – Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26
C – Draft Resolution – Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26
D - Budget Adjustments Summary and Detail
E – Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26
F – Appropriation Limit Price and Population Factors for Fiscal Year 2025-26
G – Proposed Budget Study Session Supplemental Report
H – Planning Commission Adopted Resolution
I - Adopted FY 2025-27 City Work Program Budget Details
J – Code Enforcement Supervisor Position Description
K - Senior Business Systems Analyst Position Description
L – Assistant Housing Coordinator Position Description
M – Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program (Redline)
N – Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program (Clean)
O - UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)
P - UNREP Salary Schedule (Clean)
Q – UNREP Salary Effective 7.01.2023
R – Draft Resolution Amending the Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program
S – CEA Local 21 Employees’ Compensation Program (Redline)
T – CEA Local 21 Employees’ Compensation Program (Clean)
U – CEA Local 21 Salary Effective 7.01.2023
V – Draft Resolution Amending the CEA Local 21 Employees’ Memorandum of Understanding
W - All Other Department Requests
X - City Council Special Project Policy
Y - All Special Projects from FY25 Q3
Z – CWP Status Updates from FY25 Q3
AA - Current CWP Status Updates for FY 23-25
AB – Ongoing Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AC– Maintenance and Equipment Purchase Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AD – Development Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AE – Special Projects as Defined in City Council Special Projects Policy
AF – Draft Resolution to Defund Special Projects
ACTION CALENDAR
9.Subject: Consider the potential purchase of and appoint a negotiator for 10480 Finch
Avenue, owned by the Cupertino Unified School District, adjacent to Sedgwick
Elementary School
Recommended Action: Appoint the Interim City Attorney and Acting City Manager to
negotiate with the Superintendent of the Cupertino Unified School District or her
designee regarding the possible purchase of 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014,
Assessor’s Parcel Number 375-40-067, from Cupertino Unified School District on terms
established by the City Council
Page 7
7
CC 06-03-2025
7 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Staff Report
A - Preliminary Environmental Assessment (September 2015)
B - Supplemental Site Investigation (November 2015)
C - School Cleanup Agreement with DTSC (June 2017)
D - Removal Action Workplan (January 2018)
E - Hazardous Materials Management Report (June 2018)
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
CITY MANAGER REPORT
10.Subject: City Manager Report
A - City Manager Report
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS
11.Subject: Councilmember Reports
A - Councilmember Report, Fruen
B - Councilmember Report, Mohan
C - Councilmember Report, Wang
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
The Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report is a tentative council meeting agenda calendar that lists
upcoming City Council meeting dates and tentative agenda items, all of which are subject to change.
12.Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
A - Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
ADJOURNMENT
Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements: Individuals who influence or attempt to influence
legislative or administrative action may be required by the City of Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance
(Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 2.100) to register and report lobbying activity. Persons whose
communications regarding any legislative or administrative are solely limited to appearing at or
submitting testimony for any public meeting held by the City are not required to register as lobbyists.
For more information about the lobbying ordinance, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 10300
Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014; telephone (408) 777-3223; email cityclerk@cupertino.org; and
website: www.cupertino.org/lobbyist.
The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation
challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is
announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.
Page 8
8
CC 06-03-2025
8 of 1012
City Council Agenda June 3, 2025
Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi-judicial) decision, interested persons must
file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the
City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal
Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s office for more information or go to
http://www.cupertino.org/cityclerk for a reconsideration petition form.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this
meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should
call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for
assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and
writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate
alternative format.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of
the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall,
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours; and in Council
packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the City web site.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section
2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter
on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written
communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do
not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not
wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made
publicly available on the City website.
Page 9
9
CC 06-03-2025
9 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13638 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 1.
Subject:Proclamation recognizing June as LGBTQ+ Pride Month
Present proclamation recognizing June as LGBTQ+ Pride Month
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™10
CC 06-03-2025
10 of 1012
Proclamation
WHEREAS, The City of Cupertino, which is committed to being welcoming
and inclusive of all people regardless of their sexual orientation,
wishes to celebrate and proclaim June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Pride Month in Cupertino; and
WHEREAS, June has been recognized as LGBTQ Pride Month since 1970,
however, the LGBTQ+ community has been fighting for basic civil
and human rights since the 1960s; and
WHEREAS, While considerable progress has been made, unacceptable
systemic discrimination and violence continue to threaten LGBTQ+
community members, disproportionately impacting marginalized
racial and gender minorities; and
WHEREAS, Courageous LGBTQI+ Americans continue to enrich every aspect
of American life—as civil servants, peace officers, first responders,
service members, and veterans; as educators, scholars, and
scientists; as doctors and diplomats; and as artists, actors,
entertainers, athletes, entrepreneurs, and so much more; and
WHEREAS, The City of Cupertino stands alongside the LGBTQ+ community
and demands equal rights for all, promoting a world in which
everyone can live free from discrimination and violence; and
WHEREAS, The City Council dedicates the month of June to our LGBTQ+
family, friends, and neighbors, and recognize that Cupertino is
blessed and enriched by the diversity of our community.
THEREFORE, I, Mayor Liang Chao, and the Cupertino City Council do hereby
Proclaim the month of June 2025 as
LGBTQ+ Pride Month
and encourage the community to support all people with equity and inclusion, and to treat
others with mutual respect and understanding in the City of Cupertino and in our country.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of
Cupertino to be affixed this Tuesday, June Third, Two Thousand and Twenty-Five.
____________________________
The Honorable Liang Chao
Mayor, City of Cupertino
11
CC 06-03-2025
11 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14023 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 2.
Subject: Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (SCCFSC) presentation on SCCFSC's history,
programs, technologies, and Firewise USA
Receive the presentation from Santa Clara County FireSafe Council
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™12
CC 06-03-2025
12 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13993 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 3.
Subject: Approval of May 15, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Approve the May 15, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™13
CC 06-03-2025
13 of 1012
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, May 15, 2025
SPECIAL MEETING
At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Liang Chao called the Special City Council Meeting to order in the
Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue and via teleconference;
and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Government Code section 54953(b)(2) Sheraton
Stockholm, Tegelbacken 6, 101 23, 101 23 Stockholm, Sweden, Hotel Lobby.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Liang Chao, Vice Mayor Kitty Moore, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila
Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang (participated remotely). Absent: None.
POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY - None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and, seeing no one, closed the public
comment period.
MOTION: Wang moved and Moore seconded to approve the items on the Consent Calendar
as presented. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore , Fruen, and
Wang. Noes: Mohan. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
1. Subject: Accept City Council Subcommittee recommendation regarding the 2025 July
4th fireworks
Recommended Action: Accept the City Council Subcommittee recommendation
regarding the 2025 July 4th fireworks
Written communications for this item included emails to Council.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
14
CC 06-03-2025
14 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 15, 2025
Page 2
2. Subject: Public Hearing Pursuant to Government Code Section 3502.3 to Receive a
Report on City of Cupertino Vacancies, and Recruitment and Retention Efforts .
(Continued from May 6, 2025)
Recommended Action: Receive the informational report on City of Cupertino
Vacancies, and Recruitment and Retention Efforts Pursuant to Government Code
Section 3502.3.
Written communications for this item included a staff presentation.
Director of Administrative Services Kristina Alfaro and Human Resources Manager
Vanessa Guerra gave a presentation.
Mayor Chao opened the public hearing and the following people spoke.
Planning Commissioner San R (representing self)
Planning Commissioner Seema Lindskog (representing self)
Mayor Chao closed the public hearing.
Moore requested an informational memorandum detailing when the vacancy
recruitments were posted, including those from 2022 and 2023.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Moore moved and Wang seconded to receive the informational report on
City of Cupertino Vacancies, and Recruitment and Retention Efforts Pursuant to
Government Code Section 3502.3. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes:
Chao, Moore, Fruen, Mohan, and Wang. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
ACTION CALENDAR
3. Subject: Per the Council's direction, review potential Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
projects to be defunded from the current approved list. (Continued from May 6, 2025)
Recommended Action: City Council shall consider:
A) Which of the following projects to consider defunding and eliminating, or;
B) Reaffirm the current Capital Improvement Programs project list.
Written communications for this item included a staff presentation and emails to the
Council.
Public Works Director Chad Mosley and CIP Project Manager Susan Michael gave a
15
CC 06-03-2025
15 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 15, 2025
Page 3
presentation.
At 6:38 p.m. Mayor Chao recessed the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 6:44 p.m. with all
Councilmembers present.
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and the following people spoke.
Bicycle Pedestrian Commissioner Herve Marcy (representing self)
Jean Bedord
Jennifer Griffin
Evan Lojewski
Planning Commissioner San R (representing self)
Betsy Megas
Planning Commissioner Seema Lindskog (representing self)
Jennifer Shearin
Louise Saadati
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Seema Swamy (representing self)
Mayor Chao closed the public comment period.
Councilmember Fruen stated that, based on prior advice from the City Attorney and
due to his financial interest in property at 6445 –6447 Bollinger Road, which would be
impacted in value by the Bollinger Road Corridor Study, he would recuse from the
discussion.
At 7:21 p.m., Councilmember Fruen left the meeting.
Council deliberated on the Bollinger Road Corridor Study (Fruen recused).
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Wang moved and Moore seconded to defund the Bollinger Road Corridor
Study. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, and Wang.
Noes: Mohan. Recuse: Fruen. Absent: None.
At 7:41 p.m. Councilmember Fruen rejoined the meeting.
Council deliberated on the other projects on the CIP list (excluding Bollinger Road
Corridor Study).
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
16
CC 06-03-2025
16 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 15, 2025
Page 4
MOTION: Moore moved and Wang seconded to defund the Silicon Valley Hopper EV
Parking, subject to identifying alternative locations. The motion passed with the
following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, Mohan, and Wang. Noes: None. Abstain:
None. Absent: None.
MOTION: Wang moved to defund the Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Bikeway Phase 2A
and Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Bikeway Phase 2B. There was no second and the
motion was not considered.
At 8:12 p.m. Mayor Chao recessed the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:18 p.m. with all
Councilmembers present.
STUDY SESSION
4. Subject: Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Proposed Budget and FY
2025-26 Capital Improvement Programs
Recommended Action: Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Proposed
Budget and FY 2025-26 Capital Improvement Programs
Written communications for this item included a staff presentation and desk item report
with staff answers to councilmember questions.
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and, seeing no one, closed the public
comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Seema Swamy, speaking on behalf of the
Commission, provided an update on the community grant funding process.
Council conducted the Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Proposed
Budget and FY 2025-26 Capital Improvement Programs.
Council provided the following direction:
• Unanimously supported including a staff proposal in the budget for funding a
position to assist with hybrid commission meetings.
Councilmembers requested staff follow-up on the following items:
Chao and Moore: Supported exploring a citywide traffic study; requested an
17
CC 06-03-2025
17 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 15, 2025
Page 5
informational memorandum evaluating process to collect data such as traffic
counts, flow, and speed surveys, along with proposed scope and cost.
Moore: Requested historical data on the City's vacancy rates.
Chao: Requested information about staffing trends, historical vs. current staffing
levels.
Moore: Look into discontinuing the remaining $100,000 in funding for Rise
engagement project work program item.
Moore: Requested clearer accounting on Sister City Program, facility use, and
free use of City facilities; requested review of agreements governing use of City
property.
• Chao: Requested consideration of adding a "nonprofit support" section in the
budget to show the actual costs associated with each supported nonprofit.
Wang: Requested clearer distinctions between resident and non-resident benefits
in the fee schedule; requested a report/informational memo on the fee schedule’s
history and structure, with comparisons.
Chao: Requested information on Blackberry Farm Pool summer staffing for
potential reopening for July 4 and impacts of decreased part-time staffing; and
whether the staffing shortage is due to reduced summer programs.
Moore: Requested information on the $1.5 million budget transfers-in for
accounts -610 and -580 and report back.
Wang and Chao: Requested an update on Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
progress and expenditures; provide spending data and return to Council for
direction before the consultant prepares the full analysis.
Moore and Chao: Requested information on how to discontinue outdated work
program items; review policies, including carryover policy, to evaluate ongoing
project funding.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:08 p.m., Mayor Chao adjourned the Special City Council Meeting.
Minutes prepared by:
___________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
18
CC 06-03-2025
18 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
24-13591 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 4.
Subject: Approval of May 20, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Approve the May 20, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™19
CC 06-03-2025
19 of 1012
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 20, 2025
REGULAR MEETING
At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Liang Chao called the Regular City Council Meeting to order in City Hall
Conference Room C, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Liang Chao, Vice Mayor Kitty Moore, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila
Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang. Absent: None.
In open session prior to closed session, Mayor Chao opened the public comment period
regarding any items on the agenda. No members of the public requested to speak and Mayor
Chao closed the public comment period.
CLOSED SESSION
1. Subject: Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation; California Government
Code Sections 54954(c) and 54956.9(e)(1): (1 case)
Council met with legal counsel regarding the anticipated litigation (1 case).
At 6:57 p.m., Mayor Chao recessed the meeting.
OPEN SESSION
At 6:45 p.m., Mayor Chao reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting in open session and led
the Pledge of Allegiance in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre
Avenue and via teleconference
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Liang Chao, Vice Mayor Kitty Moore, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila
20
CC 06-03-2025
20 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 2
Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang. Absent: None.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Floy Andrews reported on the closed session held at 6:00 p.m. There was no
reportable action.
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
2. Subject: Recognition of Public Works Week from May 18-24, 2025
Recommended Action: Recognize Public Works Week from May 18-24, 2025
Mayor Chao recognized Public Works Week from May 18-24, 2025.
POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY
MOTION: Chao moved and Moore seconded to reorder the agenda to move Item 21 Study
Session before Item 20 Third Quarter Financial Report. The motion passed with the following
vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, Mohan, and Wang. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Written communications for this item included emails to the Council.
The following members of the public spoke:
Jean Bedord discussed the process for posting written communications for City Council
meetings.
Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) discussed defunding Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) projects.
Rhoda Fry discussed the Foothill-De Anza Community College District’s purchase of
McClellan Terrace.
CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3-17)
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and the following members of the public
spoke.
Jean Bedord (Item 9)
21
CC 06-03-2025
21 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 3
Mayor Chao closed the public comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Wang moved and Moore seconded to approve Items 3-16 on the Consent Calendar.
The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, Mohan, and Wang.
Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None; and
MOTION: Wang moved and Chao seconded to approve Item 17 on the Consent Calendar. The
motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, and Wang. Noes: Mohan and
Fruen. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
3. Subject: Approval of July 9, 2024 City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the July 9, 2024 City Council meeting minutes
4. Subject: Approval of April 29, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the April 29, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Written communications for this item included a supplemental report and Attachment B
- Amended Draft Minutes.
5. Subject: Approval of May 2, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the May 2, 2025 City Council meeting minutes
Written communications for this item included a supplemental report and Attachment B
- Amended Draft Minutes.
6. Subject: Approval of May 6, 2025 Special City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the May 6, 2025 Special City Council meeting minutes
7. Subject: Approval of May 6, 2025 Regular City Council meeting minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the May 6, 2025 Regular City Council meeting
minutes
8. Subject: Consider setting a hearing date of June 17, 2025 to declare brush with potential
fire hazard a public nuisance and consider objections to proposed removal through the
Cupertino Brush Abatement Program (Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area); and
consider adopting a resolution declaring properties as having potential fire hazards
from brush a public nuisance and authorizing removal (Postponed on March 4, 2025)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No 25-029 declaring properties as having
22
CC 06-03-2025
22 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 4
potential fire hazards from brush a public nuisance; and set a hearing date of June 17,
2025 to declare brush with potential fire hazard a public nuisance and to hear objections
to proposed removal
9. Subject: Ratifying Accounts Payable for the periods ending April 11, 2025 and April 25,
2025
Recommended Action: A. Adopt Resolution No. 25-030 ratifying Accounts Payable for
the Period ending April 11, 2025; and
B. Adopt Resolution No. 25-031 ratifying Accounts Payable for the Period ending April
25, 2025
10. Subject: Accept the City's Investment Policy
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 25-032 accepting the City's Investment
Policy
11. Subject: Award a contract to Lisa Molaro dba MudnStix, a sole proprietor/individual,
for Ceramics and Art Instruction for a total not-to-exceed amount of $1,025,000.
Recommended Action: 1. Award a five-year contract to Lisa Molaro dba MudnStix to
provide Ceramics and Art Instruction at the Wilson Park Building in the amount not to
exceed $205,000 per year, totaling $1,025,000; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Lisa Molaro dba MudnStix
when all conditions have been met.
12. Subject: Award a contract to Dan Gertmenian dba Dynamic Teaching, a sole
proprietor/individual, for Math Olympiads Instruction for a total not-to-exceed amount
of $1,480,000.
Recommended Action: 1. Award a five-year contract to Dan Gertmenian to provide
Math Olympiads Instruction in the amount not to exceed $296,000 per year, totaling
$1,480,000; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Dan Gertmenian when all
conditions have been met.
13. Subject: Authorize OpenGov renewal contract for budgeting, performance,
communications, and reporting software for a total amount of $222,401 over three years
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with
OpenGov, Inc. to renew a contract for budgeting, performance, communications, and
reporting software for a total amount of $222,401 over three years.
14. Subject: Acceptance of donation from the Houston Living Trust in the amount of
$70,000 for the Cupertino Senior Center.
Recommended Action: Authorize the City of Cupertino to accept a $70,000 monetary
23
CC 06-03-2025
23 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 5
donation from the Houston Living Trust for the Cupertino Senior Center in accordance
with the City's Donation Policy.
Written communications for this item included a supplemental report with staff
responses to councilmember questions.
15. Subject: Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/2026 projects proposed to receive funding from the Road
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by Senate Bill (SB) 1.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 25-033 (Attachment A) establishing a list
of projects proposed to be funded by $1,583,075 of SB 1 revenues, estimated to be
received in FY 2025/2026
Written communications for this item included a supplemental report with staff
responses to councilmember questions.
16. Subject: Summary Vacation of a Portion of Street Along 21831 Hermosa Avenue
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 25-034 summarily vacating a portion of
street along 21831 Hermosa Avenue
Written communications for this item included a supplemental report with staff
responses to councilmember questions.
17. Subject: Accept Ad-Hoc LRC City Council Subcommittee recommendation regarding
SB 753, SB 79, AB 650, AB 340, AB 648, and SB 501
Recommended Action: Accept the Ad-Hoc LRC City Council Subcommittee
recommendation regarding the following:
1. Support SB 753 (Cortese)
2. Oppose SB 79 (Weiner)
3. Support AB 650 (Papan)
4. Oppose AB 340 (Ahrens)
5. Oppose AB 648 (Zbur)
6. Support SB 501 (Allen)
PUBLIC HEARINGS – None
ACTION CALENDAR
18. Subject: Modification to a previously approved Development Permit and Architectural
& Site Approval for the Westport Development including, but not limited to, d welling
count and ground floor retail, Park Land Dedication Fees and minor changes to Building
1. (Application No(s): M-2024-003, ASA-2024-003; Applicant(s): Related California
24
CC 06-03-2025
24 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 6
(Cascade Zak); Location: 21267 Stevens Creek Boulevard; APN #326-27-048) (Continued
from May 6, 2025)
Recommended Action: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-027 approving the First Addendum
to an EIR and approving the Development Permit Amendment (M-2024- 003); and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-028 approving the Architectural and Site Approval Permit
(ASA-2024-003).
Written communications for this item included a staff presentation , developer
presentation, supplemental report with staff responses to councilmember questions, and
emails to the Council.
Councilmembers disclosed any ex parte communications prior to deliberation in this
matter.
Senior Planner Gian Martire gave a presentation.
Balint Simsik, Senior Vice President of Development with Related California, and Terry
Ervin, Vice President Operations at Oakmont Senior Living, gave a presentation.
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and the following people spoke.
Nick
Ruben Galvan, representing Norcal Carpenters Union
Jennifer Griffin
Richard Adler
Jean Bedord
Lisa Warren
Rhoda Fry
Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self)
Housing Commissioner Connie Cunningham (representing self)
Planning Commissioner Seema Lindskog (representing self)
Mayor Chao closed the public comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
AMENDED MOTION: Fruen moved an amended motion to approve the stafi-
recommended action with the following changes:
1. Amend the Resolution for M-2024-003 at Section 3, Clause 8, entitled
“Retail/Parkland In-Lieu Dedication Fee” to replace the existing text and to read as
follows:
25
CC 06-03-2025
25 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 7
a. Applicant may increase the proposed retail square footage to 6,500 square
feet, with no increased parking requirement for the additional 2,500 square-
foot retail component, in exchange for a refund of park in-lieu fees already
paid in the amount of $3 million, with said refund to be made at the time of
issuance of building permit, with no further payment of such fees required
for the additional thirteen (13) assisted living units proposed (i.e. forego
payment of approximately $300,000).
2. “Retail” here shall consist of the same retail uses as deffned in the Heart of the City
Speciffc Plan and shall be a “public accommodation or facility” as that term is
deffned in California Health and Safety Code section 19955.
3. Authorize the Director of Community Development to approve modiffcations to the
project plans reasonably necessary to accommodate the additional ground floor
retail square footage pursuant to the amendment in 1.a. above, including, but not
limited to a square footage increase in the floor area at level 6 of the building.
4. Require the City Attorney to make such changes to the Resolutions for M-2024-003
and ASA-2024-003 to give efiect to the amendment in 1.a. above and to avoid
internal inconsistencies and to conffrm the process for efiectuating any refund
necessary within fourteen (14) days of the adoption of this Resolution.
Fruen’s amended motion did not have a second and it was not considered.
MOTION: Chao and Wang seconded the Recommended Action on the agenda to:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-027 approving the First Addendum to an EIR and
approving the Development Permit Amendment (M-2024- 003); and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-028 approving the Architectural and Site Approval Permit
(ASA-2024-003).
AMENDMENT: Chao amended the motion as follows:
Strike Condition 8 in the Draft Resolution for M-2024-003:
8. RETAIL/PARKLAND IN-LIEU OF DEDICATION FEE
Applicant to consider increasing the proposed retail square footage to
8,000 square feet, with no increased parking requirement for the
additional 4,000 square feet retail component, in exchange for a refund of
park in-lieu fees already paid in the approximate amount of $3.69MM,
with no further payment of such fees required for the additional thirteen
(13) assisted living units proposed (i.e. forego payment of approximately
$300,000).
Authorize the Director of Community Development to approve modiffcations to
the project plans as reasonably necessary, in line with what Council acts on
today. (Wang accepted the amendment).
Chao’s amended motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, and
Wang. Noes: Mohan. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
26
CC 06-03-2025
26 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 8
19. Subject: Introduce an Ordinance amending Municipal Code Section 2.04.010 pertaining
to Removal of Closed Session Start Time and Clarification that Meetings Rescheduled
Due to Holidays or Elections Retain Regular Meeting Status (Continued from May 6,
2025)
Recommended Action: Introduce Ordinance No. 25-2271: "An Ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Cupertino amending Title 2, Administration and Personnel, of the
City of Cupertino Municipal Code amending Section 2.04.010, pertaining to closed
session and regular meetings, by title only, and waive the first reading."
Written communications for this item included a Desk item report Attachment C -
Amended Draft Ordinance (redline) and Attachment D - Amended Draft Ordinance
(clean).
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and, seeing no one, Mayor Chao closed
the public comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Chao moved and Moore seconded as amended to:
Introduce Ordinance No. 25-2271: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino amending Title 2, Administration and Personnel, of the City of Cupertino
Municipal Code amending Section 2.04.010, pertaining to closed session and regular
meetings, by title only, and waive the first reading;" as amended to include the modified
version of the language in the Desk Item Report Attachment C - Amended Draft
Ordinance (redline).
The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, Wang. and
Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
STUDY SESSION
21. Subject: Study Session regarding possible reactivation of and appropriate scope for the
Environmental Review Committee (“ERC”) and the Legislative Review Committee
(“LRC”), and possibly amending the scope of the Audit Committee
Recommended Action: 1. Environmental Review Committee: Direct the Planning
Commission to consider re-enacting the ERC and establishing its appropriate scope of
review for recommendation to the City Council.
2. Legislative Review Committee: Direct the current limited scope and limited duration
Ad Hoc Legislative Review Subcommittee to consider reenacting the standing
Legislative Review Committee and establishing an appropriate scope of review for
recommendation to the City Council.
3. Audit Committee: Direct the Audit Committee to consider amending its scope of
27
CC 06-03-2025
27 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 9
review for recommendation to the City Council
As noted under Postponements and Orders of the Day, this item was moved before Item
20.
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and the following people spoke.
Jennifer Griffin
Planning Commissioner San R (representing self)
Mayor Chao closed the public comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Chao and Moore seconded to:
1. Environmental Review Committee: Direct the Planning Commission to
consider re-enacting the ERC and establishing its appropriate scope of review
for recommendation to the City Council.
2. Legislative Review Committee: Direct the current limited scope and limited
duration Ad Hoc Legislative Review Subcommittee to consider reenacting the
standing Legislative Review Committee and establishing an appropriate scope
of review for recommendation to the City Council.
3. Audit Committee: Direct the Audit Committee to consider amending its scope
of review for recommendation to the City Council
The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, Wang. and
Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None.
At 9:47 p.m. Mayor Chao recessed the meeting and Councilmember Wang left the meeting. The
meeting reconvened at 9:53 p.m. with Wang absent.
20. Subject: Accept the City Manager’s Third Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year
2024-25
Recommended Action: 1. Accept the City Manager’s Third Quarter Financial Report
for Fiscal Year 2024-25
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-035 approving Budget Modification No. 2425-390,
decreasing appropriations by $(157,425) and increasing estimated revenues by
$5,411,435.
Written communications for this item included a staff presentation, revised staff
presentation, supplemental report with staff responses to councilmember questions,
Attachment H – Updated Special Projects - Based on Special Project Policy, Amended
28
CC 06-03-2025
28 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 10
Attachment B - Draft Resolution Exhibit A, Amended Attachment D – Description of
Carryovers and Adjustments as of March 31, 2025, and Attachment I - Amended Staff
Report Third Quarter Adjustments Table.
As noted under Postponements and Orders of the Day, this item was moved after Item
21.
Director of Administrative Services Kristina Alfaro and Acting Budget Manager Toni
Oasay-Anderson gave a presentation.
Mayor Chao opened the public comment period and, seeing no one, Mayor Chao closed
the public comment period.
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
MOTION: Mohan and Chao seconded to:
1. Accept the City Manager’s Third Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2024-25
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-035 approving Budget Modification No. 2425-390,
decreasing appropriations by $(157,425) and increasing estimated revenues by
$5,411,435.
The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Chao, Moore, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes:
None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR – None
CITY MANAGER REPORT
22. Subject: City Manager Report
Acting City Manager Tina Kapoor conducted the City Manager’s Report.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED – None
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:28 p.m., Mayor Chao adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting. There was no Council
discussion on the remaining agenda items.
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS
23. Subject: Councilmember Reports
29
CC 06-03-2025
29 of 1012
City Council Minutes May 20, 2025
Page 11
Councilmembers reported on their various committees and events as provided in the
published agenda.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
The Council did not hear this item.
24. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
A tentative council meeting agenda calendar was provided in the published agenda.
Minutes prepared by:
___________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
30
CC 06-03-2025
30 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13925 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 5.
Subject: Second reading of an Ordinance amending Municipal Code Section 2.04.010 pertaining to
Removal of Closed Session Start Time and Clarification that Meetings Rescheduled Due to Holidays or
Elections Retain Regular Meeting Status
Conduct second reading and enact Ordinance No. 25-2271: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino amending Title 2, Administration and Personnel, of the City of Cupertino Municipal Code
amending Section 2.04.010, pertaining to closed session and regular meetings, by title only, and waive the first
reading."
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™31
CC 06-03-2025
31 of 1012
01276.0001 2007095.1
ORDINANCE NO. __________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 2, ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL, OF
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING SECTION 2.04.010,
PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSIONS AND REGULAR MEETINGS
The City Council of the City of Cupertino finds that:
WHEREAS, the Cupertino Municipal Code currently sets a fixed start time of 6:00 p.m.
for City Council closed sessions held on regular meeting days; and
WHEREAS, often the City Council needs more time to discuss the agendized matters
than the 30-40 minutes currently provided by the codified start time of 6:00pm; and
WHEREAS, it is preferable that the City Council have the flexibility to begin closed
sessions earlier than 6:00 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council seeks to improve closed session flexibility by setting a
suggested start time of 5:30 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, the Cupertino Municipal Code does not currently clarify that meetings
moved because of a holiday or Cupertino elections are regular meetings of the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council seeks to confirm that rescheduled meetings due to holidays
or elections remain regular meetings.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE OF CITY OF CUPERTINO
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Adoption.
The Cupertino Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. Text added
to existing provisions is shown in bold double-underlined text (example) and
text to be deleted in shown in strikethrough (example). Text in existing
provisions is not amended or readopted by this Ordinance. Text in italics is
explanatory and is not an amendment to the Code.
///
32
CC 06-03-2025
32 of 1012
Closed Session Time Update and Regular Meeting Confirmation - Page 2
01276.0001 2007095.1
“Sec. 2.04.010 Regular Meetings.
The City Council shall hold regular meetings on the first and third Tuesdays of each
month at six forty-five p.m. and may adjourn any regular meeting to a date certain, which
shall be specified in the order of adjournment and when so adjourned, such adjourned
meeting shall be a regular meeting for all purposes. Such adjourned meetings may
likewise be adjourned and any so adjourned meeting shall be a regular meeting for all
purposes. The City Council may cancel a regular meeting by a vote of a majority of the
Council.
On regular meeting days, the City Council shall reserve the time beginning at five-thirty
p.m. for closed sessions.
City Council meetings that fall on legal holidays shall automatically be moved to the
following day and shall be regular meetings.
City Council meetings that fall on any Election Tuesday in a regular Cupertino election
year shall automatically be moved to the first Monday of the month and shall be regular
meetings.”
SECTION 2: Severability and Continuity.
The City Council declares that each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph,
sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every
other section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of
this ordinance. If any section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause
or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, or its application to any person or
circumstance be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful,
unenforceable or otherwise void, the City Council declares that it would have adopted
the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of such portion, and further
declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this ordinance should remain
in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated. To the extent the provisions of
this ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Cupertino
Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those
provisions and not as an amendment to or readoption of the earlier provisions.
///
33
CC 06-03-2025
33 of 1012
Closed Session Time Update and Regular Meeting Confirmation - Page 3
01276.0001 2007095.1
SECTION 3: California Environmental Quality Act.
This Ordinance is not a project under the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, together with related State CEQA Guidelines (collectively, “CEQA”) because
it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment. In the event that
this Ordinance is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption
contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty
to have no possibility that the action approved may have a significant effect on the
environment. CEQA applies only to actions which have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment,
the activity is not subject to CEQA. In this circumstance, the proposed action to remove
the fixed start time for closed session items on regular meeting days and the rescheduled
meetings shall continue to be considered regular meetings would have no or only a de
minimis effect on the environment because it is a procedural change that does not result
in a physical change to the environment. The foregoing determination is made by the
City Council in its independent judgment.
SECTION 4: Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty days after adoption as provided by Government
Code Section 36937.
SECTION 5: Publication.
The City Clerk shall give notice of adoption of this Ordinance as required by law.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance may be
prepared by the City Clerk and published in lieu of publication of the entire text. The
City Clerk shall post in the office of the City Clerk a certified copy of the full text of the
Ordinance listing the names of the City Council members voting for and against the
ordinance.
///
///
///
///
///
34
CC 06-03-2025
34 of 1012
Closed Session Time Update and Regular Meeting Confirmation - Page 4
01276.0001 2007095.1
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council on May 20,
2025 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council on June 3, 2025
by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
______________________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
Floy Andrews, City Attorney
________________________
Date
35
CC 06-03-2025
35 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13653 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 6.
Subject: Approval of renewal of the 1992 Storm Drain Fee (with no increase) and renewal of the 2019
Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38% increase.
Adopt:
1.Resolution No. 25-036 (Attachment B) approving the renewal and collection of the 2019 Clean
Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38% increase in rates for FY 2025-26.
2. Resolution No. 25-037 (Attachment A) approving the renewal and collection of the 1992 Storm
Drain Fee with no increase in rates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26.
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™36
CC 06-03-2025
36 of 1012
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 3, 2025
Subject
Approve the renewal of the 1992 Storm Drain Fee (with no increase) and renewal of the
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38% increase.
Recommended Action
Adopt:
1. Resolution No. 25-XXX (Attachment B) approving the renewal and collection of
the 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee with a 2.38 % increase in rates for
FY 2025-26.
2. Resolution No. 25-XXX (Attachment A) approving the renewal and collection of
the 1992 Storm Drain Fee with no increase in rates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26.
Executive Summary
The City is subject to regulations implemented locally by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region (Water Board) through the Municipal
Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit,
commonly referred to as the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP.) In order to provide the
services and resources necessary to meet MRP requirements, the City has established
two property-based fees to help cover the costs of compliance. These two fees are the
1992 Storm Drainage Service Charge Fee (1992 Fee) that is $12 per year for a single-
family home, and the 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee (2019 Fee) that is
approximately $47 per year for an average single-family home. The fees must be
renewed every year by the City Council and appear on property tax bills. The 2019 Fee
can be increased by CPI up to a maximum of 3% in any single year, however the 1992
Fee has no mechanism to enable an increase. Given the need for ongoing compliance
and infrastructure repair, staff recommends an increase at CPI of 2.38% which will
generate approximately $27,513 more revenue and cost the average homeowner an
additional $1.12 per year. The fees are billed via property tax bills or billed directly as
necessary.
37
CC 06-03-2025
37 of 1012
Background
In 1992, the City established the 1992 Storm Drain Fee to help cover the cost of
complying with stormwater pollution prevention permit requirements that were then in
effect. Permit requirements continued to increase, and revenue from the 1992 fees were
no longer covering costs. The 2019 Fee, a property-related fee subject to Proposition 218,
was approved by Cupertino property owners in 2019 and was authorized by Council on
July 17, 2019, for inclusion on the 2019-2020 Property Tax bills. The fees must be
renewed every year following review by the City Council. The last renewal was brought
to the City Council on June 4, 2024, with approval of the 1992 Fee at no increase and
approval of the 2019 Fee at a 2.62% increase. Given the ongoing cost of MRP compliance
and the need for infrastructure repairs, staff recommends increasing the 2019 Fee for
2025-2026 at the calculated CPI of 2.38%.
Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
City of Cupertino’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
The City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (also known as the Nonpoint
Source Program) is mandated by the State of California (State) and United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations implementing the Federal Clean
Water Act. Regulations by the EPA and the State require cities to take specific actions to
eliminate or control pollutants in water that belongs to the State. These regulations are
implemented locally by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - San
Francisco Bay Region (Water Board) through the Municipal Regional Stormwater
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, commonly referred
to as the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP.) Additional details of the City’s compliance
activities are provided in the Engineer’s Report (Exhibit A to each of the resolutions
located in Attachments A and B).
Information about the City’s stormwater pollution prevention program is also available
at www.cupertino.org/cleanwater, which includes links to a variety of resources and
guidance including an interactive creek map, a link to the City’s most recent annual
report submitted as required to the Water Board, information for developers and
contractors, and education on less toxic pest control.
Two property-based fees have been established to help cover the costs of compliance:
1992 Storm Drainage Service Charge Fee (1992 Fee)
In 1992, the City established the 1992 Fee to help cover the cost of complying with
stormwater pollution prevention requirements that were then in effect. The 1992 Fee is
applied to each property in the City, with exceptions for those owned by certain entities,
such as properties owned by the government, utility agencies, and schools, which were
exempt under the laws at the time the fee was approved. The fee is collected by the
Santa Clara County Tax Collector on behalf of the City and is subject to annual review
by the City Council. The Fee consisted of three rates, which were based on type of land
38
CC 06-03-2025
38 of 1012
use of each parcel as follows: 1) $12 for residential parcels; 2) $144/acre for apartments,
commercial and industrial parcels; and 3) $36/acre for unimproved and recreational
parcels.
The Fee has no mechanism to enable an annual increase. As such, the revenue collected
from the 1992 Fee has not increased since it was established and has remained at
approximately $375,000 per year. However, regulatory requirements, stormwater system
maintenance expenses, wages, and permit fees have not remained static since 1992, and
the cost of compliance has risen over the years. When the first MRP was approved and
implemented in 2009, and again when the second permit was adopted in 2015, permit
requirements increased significantly. The third reissuance of the Municipal Regional
Permit (MRP 3.0) was adopted on May 11, 2022, with an effective date of July 1, 2022,
and further increased requirements. In 2019, The cost of compliance significantly
exceeded the revenues from the 1992 fee and was creating a draw upon the City’s
General Fund by over $600,000 per year. Renewal of the 1992 Fee is recommended in FY
2025-26.
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee (2019 Fee)
The 2019 Fee, a property-related fee subject to Proposition 218, was approved by
Cupertino property owners in 2019 and was authorized by Council on July 17, 2019, for
inclusion on the 2019-2020 Property Tax bills. The 2019 Fee was calculated starting from
the average acreage of a median single-family residential parcel and a benchmark
amount of impervious surface. Details of the rate structure analysis can be found in the
Fee Report attached to the 2019 Fee Ordinance (Attachment C).
The 2019 Fee may be increased annually by Council to meet expenses of the Nonpoint
Source Program. The potential increase is tied to the annual change in Consumer Price
Index (CPI) as of December each year, up to a maximum of 3% in any single year. The
CPI change and fee impact is shown in the table below.
CPI change for
the period
December 2023 to
December 2024
Additional revenue the CPI
increase will generate
Fee increase for medium
residential parcel per year
2.38% $27,513 $1.12
Current rates and the proposed increased rates for a medium sized parcel (the most
common single-family parcel size) are shown in the tables below.
39
CC 06-03-2025
39 of 1012
Current Annual Rates:
40
CC 06-03-2025
40 of 1012
Annual Rates With 2.38% Increase:
Single-Family Residential *
Small (Under 0.13 acre)39.58$ per parcel
Medium (0.13 to 0.22 acre)48.07$ per parcel
Large 0.23 to 0.40 acre)60.15$ per parcel
Extra Large (over 0.40 acre)115.15$ per parcel
Condominium 1 (1 story)39.58$ per parcel
Condominium 2+(2+ stories)12.97$ per parcel
Non-Single-Family Residential **
Multi-Family Residential 33.42$ per 0.1 acre
Commercial / Retail / Industrial 43.70$ per 0.1 acre
Office 33.42$ per 0.1 acre
Church / Institutional 28.28$ per 0.1 acre
School (w/playfield)20.56$ per 0.1 acre
Park 7.72$ per 0.1 acre
Vacant (developed)2.58$ per 0.1 acre
Open Space / Agricultural
* Single-Family Residential category also includes du- tri- and four-plex units
** Non-SFR parcels are charge per the tenth of an acre or portion thereof
*** Low Impact Development Adjustment only applies to condominium and non-single-
family properties.
Land Use Category Fee
no charge
Low Impact Development Adjustment ***25% Fee Reduction
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Incentive Programs
The City continues to offer the cost-share program for low-income residents. Eligible
residents will receive a 20% reduction in their annual fee. The cost-share program is
funded by the General Fund because revenues from the 2019 Fee are restricted from
being used for a cost-share (e.g., funding a reduced rate for others property owners). An
online application form is available1 and applicants are also welcome to call 408-777-
3236 or email staff for assistance at environmental@cupertino.gov.
Fee Reduction for Commercial and Multi-family Low Impact Design Features
As allowed by the 2019 Fee Ordinance, 267 commercial and multi-family properties that
had already installed low-impact design (LID) elements such as bioswales, capture
basins, and bioretention facilities, were assigned a 25% fee reduction, consistent with the
fee schedule, after the fee was adopted. Installation of new LID features under the
requirements of C.3 in the MRP (stormwater treatment measures in new development
1 Cupertino.org/watercostshare
41
CC 06-03-2025
41 of 1012
and redevelopment projects) qualifies additional properties for the same reduction.
There is no change to this fee reduction for qualifying properties.
Audit and Review of Programs
Pursuant to the 2019 Fee Ordinance, expenses and revenues are audited annually by an
independent auditor. The final AUP reports for calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024 are
attached as Attachment D, E, and F and no exceptions were noted.
Sustainability Impact
The 1992 Fee and 2019 Fee support water pollution prevention and water conservation
(NPDES) activities. Significant sustainability benefits include the reduction or
elimination of pollutant discharges, which could degrade local creeks and threaten the
supply of clean water, as well as the capture of rainwater, which can be used as a
resource. Green Stormwater Infrastructure uses engineered features to mimic natural
processes that allow stormwater to infiltrate the groundwater system instead of entering
the storm drain system, enhancing climate change resilience.
Fiscal Impact
The combined revenues from the 1992 Fee and 2019 Fee generate approximately
$375,000 and $1.15M per year respectively, received into Fund 230 Environmental
Management/Clean Creek/Storm Drain. Projected expenses by the end of the fiscal year
are expected to come in under the approved budget, but will exceed the revenues
generated by the 1992 Fee and the 2019 Fee as shown in the table below. The proposed
budget for FY 2025-26 as shown in the table reflects full staffing, adjusted staffing
allocations, maintenance projects on aging infrastructure for storm protection,
installation of drain inlet treatments, and the other activities that ensure compliance
with the MRP.
Nonpoint Source Program Revenue and Expenses
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 (proposed)
Fund Balance (previous FY) $729,027 $373,587
Revenue 1992 Fee $375, 263 $375,263
Revenue 2019 Fee (on tax roll) $1,059,353 $1,059,353
Revenue 2019 Fee (manually billed) $96,650 $96,650
CPI increase to 2019 Fee Included above $27,513
Total Program Funding $2,260,292 $1,932,365
Program Expenses (p/budgeted) $2,616,243 $2,120,868
Outfall project $ to carry over $465,788
Program Expenses (projected actual) $1,886,705
Total Program Expenses $2,586,656
Remaining Fund Balance at end of
FY (projected) $373,587 ($654,291 )
42
CC 06-03-2025
42 of 1012
In recent years, the shortfall between the APN fee revenues and the program expenses
has been covered by the balance in Fund 230 330-301. The 2.38% increase is still
recommended because even with a projected positive fund balance at the end of FY24-
25, the budgeted expenses for FY 25-26 will exceed revenue and will likely use up the
remaining fund balance. (See table above).
City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None.
Council Goal
Fiscal Strategy, Environmental Sustainability, Quality of Life
California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Ursula Syrova, Environmental Programs and Sustainability Manager
Nicole Lee, Environmental Programs Assistant
Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Floy Andrews, City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Acting City Manager
Attachments:
A – Draft Resolution 1992 Fee
B – Draft Resolution 2019 Fee
C – Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Ordinance with Fee Report
D – Calendar Year 2022 AUP
E – Calendar Year 2023 AUP
F – Calendar Year 2024 AUP
43
CC 06-03-2025
43 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
RENEWAL AND COLLECTION OF THE EXISTING STORM DRAIN FEE
WITH NO INCREASE IN RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino enacted Municipal
Code Chapter 3.36 to meet the requirements of the federally mandated Stormwater
Pollution Prevention and Management Program, federal regulations, and the
City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and
establishing the authority for imposing and charging a storm drainage service
charge (“storm drain fee” or “fee”); and
WHEREAS, Municipal Code Chapter 9.18 provides regulations and give s
legal effect to the Municipal Regional Permit issued to the City and assures
ongoing compliance with the most recent version of the City’s NPDES permit
regarding the effect of urban stormwater runoff on the ability of the City’s storm
drain system to comply with federal and state laws; and
WHEREAS, in 1992 the City adopted a storm drain fee based on the City’s
Master Storm Drain Study runoff coefficients and average area of impervious
surface per acre based on the type of land use of each parcel; and
WHEREAS, a written report titled “Engineer’s Report, Assessment of Fees
for Storm Drainage Purposes Nonpoint Source Pollution Program” (“report”),
concerning the method of assessing fees to fund the City’s Stormwater
Management Program, was prepared by the Director of Public Works pursuant to
Section 3.36.080(B) of the City’s Municipal Code and filed with the City Clerk on
May 28, 2025; and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed rates was published in a local
newspaper on May 16, 2025 and May 23, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino finds and determines
as follows:
1. After considering the “Engineer’s Report, Assessment of Fees for Storm
Drainage Purposes Nonpoint Source Pollution Program,” attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein, and the testimony received at this public
hearing, the City Council hereby approves the report.
Attachment A
44
CC 06-03-2025
44 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 2
2. There is a need in the City to continue collecting a storm drain fee to cover
the costs of federal and state requirements, as heretofore described, in that
properties within the City will not otherwise contribute a portion of costs toward
this program and without the availability of such storm drain fee, the City’s
general fund will further be negatively impacted in such a manner as to jeopardize
other essential services.
3. The facts and evidence presented establish that there is a reasonable
relationship between the need for this fee and the impacts for which this fee shall
be used, and that there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the
properties that are to be charged this fee. These relationships or nexus are
described in more detail in the above-referenced Engineer’s Report.
4. The amounts of the fee for each category of property, as set forth below, are
reasonable amounts, because the fee is based on the percent of impervious area
established in the Master Plan, City of Cupertino Storm Drainage System and are
below the amount needed to recover the cost of storm drainage services.
5. It is further determined that each and every parcel of land to which the fee
applies will, and has received, a benefit of flood control from the storm drainage
system and that the fees imposed herein on each such parcel are in conformity
with, and in fact lower than, the benefits that such parcel has received as further
described in the report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council, that:
1. Charge. The storm drain fee shall continue to be charged to each parcel
within the City, unless exempt, to contribute to the costs of the City’s federal and
state requirements for Nonpoint Source Control and a Stormwater Management
Program.
2. Use of Revenue. The revenue derived from said fee shall be used in
connection with implementing and enforcing Chapters 3.36 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code titled “Storm Drainage Service Charge” and Chapter 9.18 titled
“Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection.”
45
CC 06-03-2025
45 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 3
3. Schedule of Charges.
a. Annual fees for each category of property will be assessed and collected as
follows:
Residential premises $ 12.00/parcel
Apartment premises $144.00/acre
Commercial/Industrial premises $144.00/acre
Unimproved/Recreational $ 36.00/acre
b. The following public properties are exempt from, and shall not be assessed
the environmental fee:
Cupertino Sanitary District
Santa Clara County
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Southern Pacific Transportation Company
State of California
The Santa Clara County Fire Department
The City of Cupertino
The Cupertino Union School District
The Foothill-De Anza Community College District
The Fremont Union High School District
The MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District
United States of America
5. Judicial Action to Challenge this Resolution. Any judicial action or
proceeding to challenge, review, set aside, void, or annul this resolution shall be
brought within 120 days from the date of its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
46
CC 06-03-2025
46 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 4
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
47
CC 06-03-2025
47 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 5
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT
ASSESSMENT OF FEES FOR STORM DRAINAGE PURPOSES
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
A. Program Description and Purpose
The purpose of this assessment is to collect fees to fund the City of Cupertino's
Nonpoint Source Pollution Prevention Program mandated by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Water Act. Regulations
by the EPA and the State of California require cities to take specific actions to
eliminate or control pollutants in waters of the State.
The term "nonpoint source pollution" represents a process whereby pollutants,
debris, trash, sediment, and chemicals which accumulate on streets, in
neighborhoods, at construction sites, in parking lots, and on other exposed
surfaces are washed off by rainfall and carried away by stormwater runoff (via
city drain inlets and pipes installed for flood control) into local creeks and the
San Francisco Bay. Sources of these pollutants may include automobile exhaust
and oil, pesticides, fertilizers, eroded soil, detergents, pet waste, paint, litter,
and other material carried through the City's storm drainage system without
treatment directly to the Bay. Many of these pollutants are hazardous to aquatic
and human life.
The City of Cupertino has implemented several mandated and pro-active
programs to mitigate this problem. Among other activities, these programs
include an illegal storm drain discharge investigation and elimination
complaint response program; scheduled proactive inspections of outdoor
housekeeping practices at business sites within the City; sweeping of
residential and commercial streets; installation of trash capture devices and
curb drain inlet screens to prevent litter from entering the City's storm drainage
system; inspection and cleaning of storm drain structures and trash capture
devices; public education and engagement with teachers and students,
educational activities offered at City events; and a popular, unique, and well
established District-wide third-grade creek education & field trip program led
by the City's naturalist at McClellan Ranch Preserve and Stevens Creek.
48
CC 06-03-2025
48 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 6
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board)
approved the first Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) on October 14, 2009, and,
on November 18, 2015, adopted the second regional permit (MRP 2.0) with
additional requirements that became effective on January 1, 2016. A further
update and reissuance (MRP 3.0) were adopted by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and became effective on July 1, 2022. The MRP was issued to the
City of Cupertino and 75 agencies or co-permittees which discharge storm
water through municipal drainage systems to local creeks and the San
Francisco Bay. The City of Cupertino and 14 other co-permittees in Santa Clara
County are members of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution
Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) which works collaboratively to maintain
compliance with MRP 3.0. In addition to conducting local activities, City staff
work closely with the other SCVURPPP jurisdictions to implement pollution
prevention, source control, monitoring, and educational programs.
B. Recent Notable Activities
In FY 2019-2020, the Nonpoint Source budget was increased to accommodate
a new street sweeping contract, enhanced assessment and maintenance of
aging structures, and additional staff to clean and maintain the city’s storm
drain system. The City’s storm drain system consists of 2173 drain inlets and
90 miles of storm drainage pipes. Of the drain inlets, 200 are fitted with full
trash capture devices and 271 have curb screens. Maintenance of these assets
includes twice per year cleaning of inlets and trash capture devices which
protects the city from flooding while preventing stormwater pollution. In FY
24-25, an equivalent total of 4.32 full time employees are included in the
Nonpoint Source program budget distributed across 23 positions with varying
allocations of each person’s time. This represents a slight decrease from the
previous fiscal year due to the City’s financial challenges. The year before that,
the Environmental Programs Division absorbed the Sustainability Division,
which triggered a reorganization resulting in shifts to funding allocations as
well. Most notably, in FY 23-24 one part-time staff went through an internal
recruitment process to become a full-time Environmental Compliance
Technician to meet the increased demands of MRP compliance and to
accommodate succession planning. The part-time position was eliminated.
One maintenance worker was covered at 100%, but that was shifted to 35%
during the response to the financial crisis. Remaining positions are allocated at
between 0.02% - 50%.
49
CC 06-03-2025
49 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 7
C. Estimated Expenditures
The total amended budget to implement the required programs described
above for FY 24-25 is shown in the table below along with a breakdown of past
actuals, current actuals as of Q3, and budgeted expenses for FY 25-26:
FY 23-24
Actuals
FY 24-25
Budgeted
FY 24-25 Q3
7/1/2024-
3/31/2025
FY 25-26
Requested
Budget
Staffing $811,310 $805,035 $575,218 $781,734
Materials $60,243 $76,021 $40,488 $112,193
Contract Services $433,395 $1,097,278 $284,869 $443,007
Allocations $346,142 $598,995 $449,246 $773,020
Cost Share & Rebate
Programs $19,558 $39,914 $24,307 $10,914
Special Projects $12,161 $— $— $—
Outfall Repair (as
carryover) $465,788
Total Expenses $1,682,809 $2,616,243 $1,374,128 $2,586,656
Expected Final $1,886,705
Activities undertaken within the Nonpoint Source program for permit
compliance:
Countywide Program
SCVURPPP Program Assessment - Regional Permit Implementation
Regional Watershed Monitoring (administered by EOA, Inc.1)
State NPDES2 Permit Fees
Countywide Public Education and Municipal Staff Training
CA Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Participation
County Policy Development
Operations and Maintenance
1 EOA, Inc. is the environmental engineering and regulatory consulting firm that manages the Santa Clara
Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program for the co-permittees www.eoainc.com.
2 NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
50
CC 06-03-2025
50 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 8
Catch Basin and Frequent Trash Capture Device Cleaning
Installation of Trash Capture and Retractable Screen Devices
On-call Emergency Spill and Discharge Response
Staff and Equipment to Implement City's Mandated Litter Reduction Plan
Street Sweeping
Assessment and repair of storm drain infrastructure
City Public Education Awareness
Public Outreach Materials & Events
Third-Grade Creek Education for Local Schools
Support High School Students' Watershed and Creek Education Support
De Anza College and Community Environmental Education
Community Engagement - Creek Cleanup & Watershed Monitoring
Events
Staff to Conduct Public Education, Training and Outreach
CA Product Stewardship Council membership (Extended Producer
Responsibility)
Local Programs
Development, Administration, and Evaluation of Mandated Programs
Environmental Impact and New and Redevelopment Review
Rain barrel, rain garden, and landscape conversion rebates
Ordinance Revisions
Database Maintenance
Illegal Discharge Complaint Investigation and Enforcement
Industrial/Commercial Discharger Inspection Program
Construction Site Inspection Program
Verification of Treatment Measure Maintenance by Private Property
Owners
Low Impact Development (LID) and Green Infrastructure Management
Litter Reduction Education and Enforcement
City's Participation in Multiple Countywide and Regional Programs
Annual Parcel Stormwater Fee Assessment
Other Staffing Costs
Cost Allocations
D. Revenue And Assessment
51
CC 06-03-2025
51 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 9
Revenues generated to fund this program come from two fees assessed on
parcels in Cupertino. The Storm Drain Fee was established in 1992. Revenues
from that fee are inadequate to meet the expenses associated with
maintaining the storm drain system in Cupertino and ensuring compliance
with the MRP, so the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee was established
in 2019 and first appeared on 2019-2020 property tax bills. Revenue from the
two fees as assessed on the 2024-2025 tax roll and direct-billed are shown
below:
FY 24-25 Assessed Actuals
Number of Parcels
1992 Storm Drain Fee $375,262.68 16,641
2019 Clean Water and Storm
Protection Fee $1,156,002.21 16,624
Total Assessed $1,531,264.89
1992 Storm Drain Fee
Fees are based on a factor calculated from the City's Master Storm Drain
Study runoff coefficients and average area of impervious surface per acre
based on type of land-use development. The factor for each category is based
on a comparison to an average residential parcel assigned a factor of one.
Certain parcel-owners such as schools and government entities were exempt
from such fees in 1992 and as such are not assessed this fee.
The 1992 fees assessed on the 2024-2025 tax roll were applied to residential,
commercial, and vacant or recreational use parcels.
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee
The Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee is imposed on properties that shed
water, directly or indirectly, into the City’s storm drainage system, and is
calculated to be proportionate to the amount of stormwater runoff contributed
by each parcel, which is in turn proportionate to the amount of impervious
52
CC 06-03-2025
52 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 10
surface area. The details of the methodology are described in the Fee Report as
prepared by SCI Consulting Group (SCI) in February of 2019 that is attached
to the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee ordinance. The calculations are
informed by the City’s 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan, which includes an
analysis of the percentage of impervious area for Cupertino, and rates are
further calculated by parcel size and land use category. Unlike the 1992 fee, the
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection fee is subject to treatment under prop
218 and as such all parcels are assessed the fees without exemptions for parcel-
owners such as schools and government entities.
The fees assessed on the 2024-2025 tax rolls were applied to parcels in fourteen
categories including single-family residential parcels in four sizes,
condominiums, and apartments, commercial, office, institutional, recreational,
and vacant. Fees billed directly to parcel-owners that do not receive property
tax bills (such as schools and government) applied to 78 parcels.
For both of the fees, in coordination with the City’s contracted consultant for
this purpose, each parcel was identified, and a fee established in a separate
report submitted to the County entitled Certification of Special Assessment
Annual Enrollment which lists the APN and associated fee. The consultant
used by the City, SCI, prepares both forms and submits them to the County in
accordance with the annual deadline in early August so that the fees can appear
on the property tax bills. Additionally, SCI staff are available to answer
questions via a phone number provided on the tax bill.
D. Annual Review
The 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee included annual review
requirements beginning with FY 2020-2021 as described in ordinance 19-2183
(Chapter 3.38 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). Section 3.38.040 describes the
review process and allows for an annual increase based on the change in CPI
as of December each year, up to 3% maximum, if actual additional costs are
incurred.
Expenses attributed to the Nonpoint Source Program from the previous fiscal
year through to next fiscal year’s projections are shown in the table in section
C above.
53
CC 06-03-2025
53 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 11
A full year of expenses and revenues for the Nonpoint Source Program were
audited under the City’s annual external audit and reviewed by the City’s
Audit Committee. An additional Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUP) audit
specific to the Nonpoint Source Program was developed to further assess this
program using a calendar year cycle. The AUP was performed on calendar
years 2022, 2023, and 2024 (Attachment D to the staff report) and no exceptions
were noted. The City requests preparation of calendar year AUPs for the
stormwater program in order to provide more up to date findings to the City
Council for review during this annual process, which must happen prior to the
normal fiscal year cycle in order to meet County tax roll deadlines.
Chad Mosley
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
54
CC 06-03-2025
54 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
RENEWAL AND COLLECTION OF THE EXISTING 2019 CLEAN WATER
AND STORM PROTECTION FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
WHEREAS, on March 5, 2019, the City Council of the City of Cupertino
adopted Resolution 19-022 initiating proceedings to obtain approval of the
proposed 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee (“Fee”), which is a property
related fee conforming to Article XIII D, Section 6 of the California Constitution ,
and approved the Fee Report for the Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee (“Fee
Report”) which sets forth the basis and the amount of the 2019 Clean Water and
Storm Protection Fee on various parcels of land in order to finance, in compliance
with Article XIIID of the Constitution, the costs of the City’s Clean Water and
Storm Protection Program; and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2019, a notice of public hearing was mailed to all
property owners whose property would be subject to the Fee, in accordance with
California Health and Safety Code Section 5473.1; and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution 19 -041
finding that a majority protest does not exist and ordering a mailed ballot
proceeding for the proposed Fee proceeding in accordance with Article XIII of the
Constitution, Section 53755.5 of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2019, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 19-
2183 establishing Chapter 3.38 of the Municipal Code to establish the Clean Water
and Storm Protection Fee; and
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2019, ballots were mailed to all property owners
whose property would be subject to the Fee; and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2019, by its Resolution 19-096 the City Council
adopted Ordinance No. 19-2183 establishing Chapter 3.38 of the Municipal Code,
found that the Fee was approved by 51.15% of the returned ballots from property
owners of the property subject to the Fee and thereby ordered that the Fee for fiscal
year 2019-20 be levied at the rates specified in the Fee Report; and
WHEREAS, Sections 3.38.040 through 3.38.070 of the Ordinance
establishing the 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee allow the City Council
Attachment B
55
CC 06-03-2025
55 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
to review the Fee annually and apply a rate increase based on the change in the
Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) up to a maximum increase of 3% in any single year,
and to collect the Fee on the property tax roll in the same manner, by the same
persons, and at the same time as, the general taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino finds and determines
as follows:
1. There is a need in the City to continue collecting the Clean Water and Storm
Protection Fee to cover the costs of the Clean Water and Storm Protection Program;
and
2. The facts and evidence presented establish that there is a reasonable
relationship between the need for this Fee and the impacts for which this Fee shall
be used, and that there is a reasonable relationship between the Fee’s use and the
properties, which are to be charged the Fee. These relationships or nexus are
described in more detail in the above referenced Fee Report; and
3. The amounts of the Fee for each category of property, as set forth below in
the Schedule of Charges, are reasonable amounts, because the amounts are based
on the methodology established in the Fee Report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council, that:
1. Charges. The 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee shall continue to
be charged to each parcel within the City to contribute to the costs of the City’s
Clean Water and Storm Protection Program. The Fee charged will be increased by
2.38% for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.
2. Use of Revenue. The revenue derived from said Fee shall be used in
connection with implementing and enforcing Chapters 3.38 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code titled “Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee” and Chapter 9.18
titled “Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection.”
3. Schedule of Charges.
a. Annual fees for each category of property will be assessed and collected
as follows:
56
CC 06-03-2025
56 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Single-Family Residential *
Small (Under 0.13 acre)39.58$ per parcel
Medium (0.13 to 0.22 acre)48.07$ per parcel
Large 0.23 to 0.40 acre)60.15$ per parcel
Extra Large (over 0.40 acre)115.15$ per parcel
Condominium 1 (1 story)39.58$ per parcel
Condominium 2+ (2+ stories)12.97$ per parcel
Non-Single-Family Residential **
Multi-Family Residential 33.42$ per 0.1 acre
Commercial / Retail / Industrial 43.70$ per 0.1 acre
Office 33.42$ per 0.1 acre
Church / Institutional 28.28$ per 0.1 acre
School (w/playfield)20.56$ per 0.1 acre
Park 7.72$ per 0.1 acre
Vacant (developed)2.58$ per 0.1 acre
Open Space / Agricultural
* Single-Family Residential category also includes du- tri- and four-plex units
** Non-SFR parcels are charge per the tenth of an acre or portion thereof
*** Low Impact Development Adjustment only applies to condominium and non-single-
family properties.
Land Use Category Fee
no charge
Low Impact Development Adjustment ***25% Fee Reduction
4. Judicial Action to Challenge this Resolution. Any judicial action or
proceeding to challenge, review, set aside, void, or annul this resolution shall be
brought within 120 days from the date of its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
57
CC 06-03-2025
57 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
58
CC 06-03-2025
58 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT
ASSESSMENT OF FEES FOR STORM DRAINAGE PURPOSES
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROGRAM
A. Program Description and Purpose
The purpose of this assessment is to collect fees to fund the City of Cupertino's
Nonpoint Source Pollution Prevention Program mandated by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Water Act. Regulations
by the EPA and the State of California require cities to take specific actions to
eliminate or control pollutants in waters of the State.
The term "nonpoint source pollution" represents a process whereby pollutants,
debris, trash, sediment, and chemicals which accumulate on streets, in
neighborhoods, at construction sites, in parking lots, and on other exposed
surfaces are washed off by rainfall and carried away by stormwater runoff (via
city drain inlets and pipes installed for flood control) into local creeks and the
San Francisco Bay. Sources of these pollutants may include automobile exhaust
and oil, pesticides, fertilizers, eroded soil, detergents, pet waste, paint, litter,
and other material carried through the City's storm drainage system without
treatment directly to the Bay. Many of these pollutants are hazardous to aquatic
and human life.
The City of Cupertino has implemented several mandated and pro-active
programs to mitigate this problem. Among other activities, these programs
include an illegal storm drain discharge investigation and elimination
complaint response program; scheduled proactive inspections of outdoor
housekeeping practices at business sites within the City; sweeping of
residential and commercial streets; installation of trash capture devices and
curb drain inlet screens to prevent litter from entering the City's storm drainage
system; inspection and cleaning of storm drain structures and trash capture
devices; public education and engagement with teachers and students,
educational activities offered at City events; and a popular, unique, and well
established District-wide third-grade creek education & field trip program led
by the City's naturalist at McClellan Ranch Preserve and Stevens Creek.
59
CC 06-03-2025
59 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board)
approved the first Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) on October 14, 2009, and,
on November 18, 2015, adopted the second regional permit (MRP 2 .0) with
additional requirements that became effective on January 1, 2016. A further
update and reissuance (MRP 3.0) were adopted by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and became effective on July 1, 2022. The MRP was issued to the
City of Cupertino and 75 agencies or co-permittees which discharge storm
water through municipal drainage systems to local creeks and the San
Francisco Bay. The City of Cupertino and 14 other co-permittees in Santa Clara
County are members of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution
Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) which works collaboratively to maintain
compliance with MRP 3.0. In addition to conducting local activities, City staff
work closely with the other SCVURPPP jurisdictions to implement pollution
prevention, source control, monitoring, and educational programs.
B. Recent Notable Activities
In FY 2019-2020, the Nonpoint Source budget was increased to accommodate
a new street sweeping contract, enhanced assessment and maintenance of
aging structures, and additional staff to clean and maintain the city’s storm
drain system. The City’s storm drain system consists of 2173 drain inlets and
90 miles of storm drainage pipes. Of the drain inlets, 200 are fitted with full
trash capture devices and 271 have curb screens. Maintenance of these assets
includes twice per year cleaning of inlets and trash capture devices which
protects the city from flooding while preventing stormwater pollution. In FY
24-25, an equivalent total of 4.32 full time employees are included in the
Nonpoint Source program budget distributed across 23 positions with varying
allocations of each person’s time. This represents a slight decrease from the
previous fiscal year due to the City’s financial challenges. The year before that,
the Environmental Programs Division absorbed the Sustainability Division,
which triggered a reorganization resulting in shifts to funding allocations as
well. Most notably, in FY 23-24 one part-time staff went through an internal
recruitment process to become a full-time Environmental Compliance
Technician to meet the increased demands of MRP compliance and to
accommodate succession planning. The part-time position was eliminated.
One maintenance worker was covered at 100%, but that was shifted to 35%
during the response to the financial crisis. Remaining positions are allocated at
between 0.02% - 50%.
60
CC 06-03-2025
60 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
C. Estimated Expenditures
The total amended budget to implement the required programs described
above for FY 24-25 is shown in the table below along with a breakdown of past
actuals, current actuals as of Q3, and budgeted expenses for FY 25-26:
FY 23-24
Actuals
FY 24-25
Budgeted
FY 24-25 Q3
7/1/2024-
3/31/2025
FY 25-26
Requested
Budget
Staffing $811,310 $805,035 $575,218 $781,734
Materials $60,243 $76,021 $40,488 $112,193
Contract Services $433,395 $1,097,278 $284,869 $443,007
Allocations $346,142 $598,995 $449,246 $773,020
Cost Share & Rebate
Programs $19,558 $39,914 $24,307 $10,914
Special Projects $12,161 $— $— $—
Outfall Repair (as
carryover) $465,788
Total Expenses $1,682,809 $2,616,243 $1,374,128 $2,586,656
Expected Final $1,886,705
Activities undertaken within the Nonpoint Source program for permit
compliance:
Countywide Program
SCVURPPP Program Assessment - Regional Permit Implementation
Regional Watershed Monitoring (administered by EOA, Inc.1)
State NPDES2 Permit Fees
Countywide Public Education and Municipal Staff Training
CA Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Participation
County Policy Development
Operations and Maintenance
Catch Basin and Frequent Trash Capture Device Cleaning
1 EOA, Inc. is the environmental engineering and regulatory consulting firm that manages the Santa Clara
Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program for the co-permittees www.eoainc.com.
2 NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
61
CC 06-03-2025
61 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Installation of Trash Capture and Retractable Screen Devices
On-call Emergency Spill and Discharge Response
Staff and Equipment to Implement City's Mandated Litter Reduction Plan
Street Sweeping
Assessment and repair of storm drain infrastructure
City Public Education Awareness
Public Outreach Materials & Events
Third-Grade Creek Education for Local Schools
Support High School Students' Watershed and Creek Education Support
De Anza College and Community Environmental Education
Community Engagement - Creek Cleanup & Watershed Monitoring
Events
Staff to Conduct Public Education, Training and Outreach
CA Product Stewardship Council membership (Extended Producer
Responsibility)
Local Programs
Development, Administration, and Evaluation of Mandated Programs
Environmental Impact and New and Redevelopment Review
Rain barrel, rain garden, and landscape conversion rebates
Ordinance Revisions
Database Maintenance
Illegal Discharge Complaint Investigation and Enforcement
Industrial/Commercial Discharger Inspection Program
Construction Site Inspection Program
Verification of Treatment Measure Maintenance by Private Property
Owners
Low Impact Development (LID) and Green Infrastructure Management
Litter Reduction Education and Enforcement
City's Participation in Multiple Countywide and Regional Programs
Annual Parcel Stormwater Fee Assessment
Other Staffing Costs
Cost Allocations
D. Revenue And Assessment
Revenues generated to fund this program come from two fees assessed on
parcels in Cupertino. The Storm Drain Fee was established in 1992. Revenues
62
CC 06-03-2025
62 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
from that fee are inadequate to meet the expenses associated with
maintaining the storm drain system in Cupertino and ensuring compliance
with the MRP, so the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee was established
in 2019 and first appeared on 2019-2020 property tax bills. Revenue from the
two fees as assessed on the 2024-2025 tax roll and direct-billed are shown
below:
FY 24-25 Assessed Actuals
Number of Parcels
1992 Storm Drain Fee $375,262.68 16,641
2019 Clean Water and Storm
Protection Fee $1,156,002.21 16,624
Total Assessed $1,531,264.89
1992 Storm Drain Fee
Fees are based on a factor calculated from the City's Master Storm Drain
Study runoff coefficients and average area of impervious surface per acre
based on type of land-use development. The factor for each category is based
on a comparison to an average residential parcel assigned a factor of one.
Certain parcel-owners such as schools and government entities were exempt
from such fees in 1992 and as such are not assessed this fee.
The 1992 fees assessed on the 2024-2025 tax roll were applied to residential,
commercial, and vacant or recreational use parcels.
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee
The Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee is imposed on properties that shed
water, directly or indirectly, into the City’s storm drainage system, and is
calculated to be proportionate to the amount of stormwater runoff contributed
by each parcel, which is in turn proportionate to the amount of impervious
surface area. The details of the methodology are described in the Fee Report as
prepared by SCI Consulting Group (SCI) in February of 2019 that is attached
63
CC 06-03-2025
63 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
to the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee ordinance. The calculations are
informed by the City’s 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan, which includes an
analysis of the percentage of impervious area for Cupertino, and rates are
further calculated by parcel size and land use category. Unlike the 1992 fee, the
2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection fee is subject to treatment under prop
218 and as such all parcels are assessed the fees without exemptions for parcel-
owners such as schools and government entities.
The fees assessed on the 2024-2025 tax rolls were applied to parcels in fourteen
categories including single-family residential parcels in four sizes,
condominiums, and apartments, commercial, office, institutional, recreational,
and vacant. Fees billed directly to parcel-owners that do not receive property
tax bills (such as schools and government) applied to 78 parcels.
For both of the fees, in coordination with the City’s contracted consultant for
this purpose, each parcel was identified, and a fee established in a separate
report submitted to the County entitled Certification of Special Assessment
Annual Enrollment which lists the APN and associated fee. The consultant
used by the City, SCI, prepares both forms and submits them to the County in
accordance with the annual deadline in early August so that the fees can appear
on the property tax bills. Additionally, SCI staff are available to answer
questions via a phone number provided on the tax bill.
D. Annual Review
The 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee included annual review
requirements beginning with FY 2020-2021 as described in ordinance 19-2183
(Chapter 3.38 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). Section 3.38.040 describes the
review process and allows for an annual increase based on the change in CPI
as of December each year, up to 3% maximum, if actual additional costs are
incurred.
Expenses attributed to the Nonpoint Source Program from the previous fiscal
year through to next fiscal year’s projections are shown in the table in section
C above.
A full year of expenses and revenues for the Nonpoint Source Program were
audited under the City’s annual external audit and reviewed by the City’s
Audit Committee. An additional Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUP) audit
64
CC 06-03-2025
64 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
specific to the Nonpoint Source Program was developed to further assess this
program using a calendar year cycle. The AUP was performed on calendar
years 2022, 2023, and 2024 (Attachment D to the staff report) and no exceptions
were noted. The City requests preparation of calendar year AUPs for the
stormwater program in order to provide more up to date findings to the City
Council for review during this annual process, which must happen prior to the
normal fiscal year cycle in order to meet County tax roll deadlines.
Chad Mosley
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
65
CC 06-03-2025
65 of 1012
Attachment C
ORDINANCE NO. 19-2183
AN ORDINANCE OF Tlill C ITY COUN ClL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTlNO
ADDING CHAPTER 3 .38 OF THE MUNICIPAL C ODE TO ESTABLISH THE
CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE
WHEREAS, the City of Cuperti no («City") oversees and manages a municipal separate stonn
sewer system (''MS4"), which includes making capital improvements, overseeing maintenance and
operations, and conducting activi ties to ensure compliance with all state and federal regulations
associated with the C lean Water Act and the City's National Pollutant Di scharge Elimination
System ("NPDES") pennit; and
WHEREAS, the C ity's MS4 is made up of a comprehensive drainage infrastructure system that
includes man-made drainage elements such as curbs and gutters, ditches, culverts, pipelines,
manholes, catch basins (inlets) and outfall structures; and
WHEREAS, the C ity, through its MS4, provides storm drainage services ("Services") that
include, but are not limited to, collecting, conveying, protecting, treating, and managing storm
water runoff from improved parcels within tbe City; and
'WHEREAS, in 1992, the City adopted a $12 per residence storm drain service charge to conserve
and protect the MS4 from the burden placed on it by the increasing flow of nonpoint source runoff
and to otherwise meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act, EPA regulations and the City's
NP DES penni ts, which charge has not been increased s inc e its inception; and
WHEREAS, the City does not currently have adequate funding to fully finance the system needs
of its MS4 , and in order to finance the infrastructure, maintenance, and regulatory oversight of the
MS4 and the provision of services, the City Council has d etermined that there is a need to adopt an
additional fee ("Clean Water and St01m Protection Fee"), in compliance with Article XIIID of the
California Constitution (Proposition 218), to cover the costs associated with capital improvements,
operations and maintenance, and regulatory compliance needs of the MS4; and
WHEREAS , on March 5, 2019, the City Council approved the Fee Report for the 2019 Clean
Water and Stonu Protection Fee Report ("Fee Report") that sets forth the basis and the amount of
the Clean Water and Storm Protection Fees on various parcels of land in order to finance, in
compliance with Article XIIID of the Constitution, the clean water and storm protect ion program
needs and is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council on March 5, 2019 adopted Resolution No. 19-022 initiating
proceedings in accordance with Article XIIID of the Constitution, approving the Fee Report, and
setting the date of May 7, 2019 for a public hearing and directing the mailing of a notice to the
owners of real property affected by the proposed Clean Water and Stonn Protection Fee, which
included a description of the proposed Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee, the amount to be
charged, the total amount to be collected, and the right of property owners to protest the Clean
Water and Storm Protection Fee;and
WHEREAS, the City Council on March 5 , 2019 adopted Resolution No. 19-023 estab lishing
procedures fo r conducting a baUot proceeding in accordance with Article XIIID of the
Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee is a property-related fee, subject to
Propositi on 218 .
1
66
CC 06-03-2025
66 of 1012
·wHEREAS, the City mailed i1otices of a public hearing on March 19 , 2019 and conducted said
public heming on May 7, 2019 and h eard testimony from residents and property owners regarding
the proposed Clean Water and Stonn Protection Fee, and a majority protest was found not to exist;
and
WHEREAS , the City Council introduced this Ordinance on May 7, 2019, after a duly noticed
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Article XIIID of the Constitution requires that the property-related fees defined in
the Fee Report and included in this Ordinance shall not be imposed unless and until that fee is
submitted and approved by a majority vote of the property owners of the properly subject to the
Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee· and
WHEREAS , upon introduction of this Ordinance, tbe City Council will direct that it be submitted
to the affected property owners in a mail ballot proceeding in accordance with Article XIIID of the
Cons titution , Sectioh 53 755 .S of the Government Code, and City of Cupertino Resolution No . 19-
023 .
NOW, THEREFORE , the Cow1ciJ of the City of Cupertino does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE -Chapter 3.38 of the Cupertino Municipal Code is hereby established to
read as follows :
3.38 .010 Purpose of the Fee-Limitation of Use.
A. The purpose of the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee is to conserve and protect
the City 's essential values of maintaining our aging stotm drainage infrastructure, e11couraging
groundwater replenishment , and maintaining a sustainable environment in accordance with tbe
Clean Water Act , EPA regu1ations and the City 's NPDESpermits.
B. The specific purpose of the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee established pursuant
to this chapter is to derive fee revenue which shall only be used for the acquisition, construction ,
reconstruction, maintenance, and operation of the storm drainage system of the City or related
green infrastructure or other activities required by the City 's NPDES pennits, to repay principal
and interest on any bonds which may hereafter be issued for said purposes, to repay loans or
advances which may hereafter be made for said purposes, ahd for any other purpose set forth in
Section3 .38 .160 .
C. The Clean Water and Storm Protection fee is imposed pursuant to Articles XIll C and
D of the California Constitution , Government Code Sections 38900 -38901 and 53755 -53756,
and Health and Safety Code Section 5471 -5473 .11 .
D . Proceeds frotn the Clean Water and Storm Protection. fee will be deposited in the
"environmental management / clean creeks fund " created by Section 3 .36 .170 of Chapter 3.36
of the Municipal Code (Stonn Drainage Service Charge) as the "stonn drainage service charge
fund" and subsequently rnnan1ed , and may be comingled with the revenues of the City's storm
drainage service charge because they are authorized to be used for th.e same purposes .
3.38.020 De6nitions.
Except where the context otherwise requires , the following definitions in this section shall
govern the construction of th.is chapter:
2
67
CC 06-03-2025
67 of 1012
A. "City" means and includes all territory lying within t be municipal bounda1ies of the City of
Cupertiuo as presently existing plu all Le1Tit01y which may be added thereto duting the effect term of
the ordinance codified herein.
B. "Condominium" means a parcel that is an individually-owned single residential ll.llll attached
to an undivided or joint ownership of the remaining pmtion of the property. The ·•condominium 1 '
category refers to a condominium comp lex where each residential unit has no other units above or below
it. The ''Condominium 2+' refers to a condominium complex where residential units are built above or
below other reside1ltial wJits .
C. "Director of Public Works" means the Di.rector of Public Works and his/her duly authorized
agents and representatives.
D. "Fee Repo1t'' means the report prepared by SCI Consulting Group dated February 2019
which was approved by the City Counci l on March 5, 2019 in Section 2 of Resolution No . 19-022 . The
Fee Repoli sets forth the rate structure and methodology of apportionment of the fee to variouscatego1ies
of parcels and sha ll be the basis for the Clean Water and Stenn P rotection Fee.
E. "Director of Administrative Services" means the Director of Administrative Services of the
City of upertino and his/her duly authorized agents and representatives.
F. "Impervious Area" means any part of any parcel that bas been modified by the action of any
person in a manner which reduces the land's natural ability to absorb and hold storm and surface water .
This includes, but is not limited to, activities such as : grading of property, the creation of any hard
surface area which either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil mantle, or the hardening of
an existing surface which causes water to flow at an increased rate. Common impervious areas include,
but are not limited to, roof tops, walk-ways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or
asphalt paving, gravel roads, or any cleared, graded, paved, graveled, or compacted surface or paved
earthen materials used for vehicular travel, or areas covered with surfaces which similarly impede the
natural infiltration of surface water into soil mantle. Impervious area can be expressed as a percentage of
a parcel's total size .
G. "Maintenance and operation" means the administration, operation, maintenance and repair of
any facility in the City's storm drai n system, including, but not l imited to:
1. Items ordinarily recognized as capital items (e .g., acquisition of interests in land)
when reasonably necessary to support operations;
2 . Street sweeping, catch basin cleaning, and capture and removal of trash from the storm drain
system;
3 . Replacement ofpo1tions of existing facilities damaged or destroyed as a result of accident or
natutaJ disasters or found to be of inadequate size or condition;
4. Damages or settlements paid in the course of, or because of, threatened or actual legaJ
actions related to the City's stonn drain system or non-point sourceprogram;
5. Regional monitoring, pennit fees public educatfon and awareness programs regarding the
City's stom1 drain system and the City's nonpoint sourceprogram;
6 . Management of the City's non-point sow-ce-program including, but not limited to, BMP
manuals , public outreach, printed materials, City staff and legal costs relatedthereto.
3
68
CC 06-03-2025
68 of 1012
H. ''Multi-Family Residential" means parce1s improved or used for a residence for .five or more
families liviJ1g independently of each other and doing their own cooking and which is llOt separately
assessed by the county tax assessor for each such family dwelling. This term is synonymous witb
"apartment."
I. "Open Space" means laud that is substantially in a natural condition and includes agricultural
or other lands that demonstrate storm water absorption equal to or greater than natural conditions .
J. "Parcel " means a wtit of land which is designated by the tax assessor of Santa Clara County
for property tax purposes.
K. ''Rate Category" means a group of parcels that are of similar imperviousness characteristics
and are charged the same rate. Si11gle-Family Residential Parcels are categorized by size; Non-Siugle-
Farn:ily Parcels are categorized by impervious percentage ranges.
L. "Single-Fami ly Residential" means parcels, other than multi-family parcels, improved or used
solely as a residence for one, two, three or four fruu.ilies living separately in separate dwelling units.
M . "Storm drainage system" means any pipe, conduit, or sewer oftbe City designed or used for
the collection, conveyance and management of storm and surface waters and drainage including
unpolluted cooling water and unpolluted industrial process water but excluding any community sanitary
sewer system.
N. "Vacant (developed) means a parcel which bas been altered from its natural condition
through grading or compaction activity or .in another manner which reduces the land's natural ability to
absorb and hold storm and surface water without any stmctw-e existing upon it.
3.38.030 Determinatio n and Imposition of Fee for Fiscal Year 2019-20.
For purposes specified in Section 3 .38.010 the Clean Water and Stonn Protection fees
established pursuant to thls chapter are hereby prescribed and imposed, and shall be paid to and collected
by the City, for services and facilities furnished by the City in connection with its stonu drainage system
to or for each parcel whlch is benefited directly or indirectly by said storm drainage system or aby part
thereof, or from which any storm water is conveyed or discharged directly or indirectly into the stonn
drainage system. Said fee is imposed annually and will be assessed and collected as follows:
A. Single-Family Residential Class
Category Parcel Size (acres) Annual Fee per Parcel
SmaU Under 0.13 $36.58
Medium 0 .13 to 0.22 $44.42
Large 0 .23 to 0.40 $55.58
Extra Large Over0.40 $106.42
Condominium 1 Na $36 .5&
4
69
CC 06-03-2025
69 of 1012
I Condominium 2+ Na $1 l .99
B. Non-Single-Family Residential Class
I Category' Annual Fee
per0.10 Acre
of Pare l Size2
Multi-Family $30.88
Commercial / Retail / Industrial $40.38
Office $30.88
Church/ lnstitutional $26.13
Schoo} with play field $19.00
Park $7.13
Vacant (developed) $2.38
Rate Strncture Notes:
l. The Rate Category for any Non-Single-Family parcel shall be assigned by the description
of the land use of the parcel. For Non-Single-Family land uses that do not fit the
descriptions in Table 5 of the Fee Report (for example, mixed use parcels), the rate with
the nearest percent impervious area shown in Table 5 of the Fee Report shall be assigned
to a parcel.
2. Non-Single-family fees are calculated in 0.1-acre increments. For example, an office
parcel is charged at $30.88 for each tenth of an acre or portion thereof.
C . Non-single-family parcels and condominium parcels that comply with the version of
Provision C ,3 (New Development and Redevelopm ent Requirements) of the City's NPDES permit that is
applicable at the time of building permit issuance shall have their fees reduced by 25% in recognition of
the reduced impact on the City's storm drainage system inherent in C.3 compliance, as documented in the
Fee Report (Low Impact Development Rate Adjustment). Other single-family residential parcels do not
qualify for this rate reduction. C.3 compliance will be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Director
of Public Works, who may also establish procedures to verify and validate such compliance on a peiiodic
basis.
D. For non-single-family residential parcels that have both improvements and significant
open space areas (described in the Fee Report as "hybrid parcels'), the chargeable acreage shall be
adjusted downward in recognition that the open space areas do not increase the need for the fee.
5
70
CC 06-03-2025
70 of 1012
e. Open space and agticultural parcels are not subject to the Clean Water and Stonu
Protection fees .
3.3 8.040 Ann ual Rev iew of Fee .
Commencing with FiscaJ Year 2020-21, the City Co uncil shall, by xesolution, annually determine
the Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee in accordance with the fo llowing:
A. In no event shall the rate for any category of property be increased beyond the rate approved
by a majority vote of property owners subject to the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee. Commencing
in Fiscal Year 2020-21 , the amow1t of the Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee may be increased by an
amount equal to the change in the Conswner Price Index for all Urban Consumers for the area including
Santa C lara County (the "CPI'), including all items as published by the U .S. Bureau of Labor S tatistics as
of December of each succeeding year, uot to exceed a maximum increase of three percent (3%) in any
s ingle year , Adjustments will only occur if actual additional costs areincurred.
B. The Clean Water and Stonn Protection fee shall not be deemed to be increased iu the event
the actual fee upon a parcel in any given year is higher due to a change in use of the subject parcel or an
increase in tbe amount of the impervious area of the subject parcel.
C. In any year in which the City Council does not change the Cl ean Water and Storm Protection
fee rate, pursuant to the voter-approved CPI allowable annual increase, the previously adopted fee sha ll
continue in full force and effect for the next fiscal year.
D . The City Counci l shall not be required to enact a CPI increase each year. 3.38.040.A.
3.38.0 50 Variou s Actions.
Without a vote of the property owners, in any year the City Council may do any and all of the
following: (a) discontinue the Clean Water and Storm Protect ion fee; (b) reduce the rate for all parcel
categories; or ( c) increase the rate up to or below the maximum voter-authorized rate if it has been
previously set below such rate.
3.38.0 60 Effe cti ve Date of Fees.
The Clean Water and Sto1m P rotection fees shall become effective on July 1, 2019 .
3.38 .0 70 Fees Collected wi th General Taxes .
A Subject to the exceptions hereinafter set forth, the City elects, as an alternative procedure for
the coUection of Clean Water and Stonn Protection. fees prescribed or imposed by the provisions of this
chapter, to have all such Clean Water and Storm Protection fees for each ii.seal year collected on the tax
roll in the same manner by the same persons and at the same time as, and together with and not
separately from , its general taxes .
B. The Director of Public Works is hereby directed to prepare and fi l e with the C ity Clerk, on or
before the fifteenth day of June of each year, or such other date or dates as the City Council may specify
by resolution, a written report containing a description of each and every parcel of real property receiving
the benefit of the stonn drainage system mentioned in this chapter, except for those parcels the fees for
which ar-e not to be collected on the tax roll , and the amount of the Clean Water aud Sto1m Protectionfees
6
71
CC 06-03-2025
71 of 1012
for each parcel for the forthcoming fiscal year, compu ted in confonnity with the fees prescdbed by the
provisions of th.is chapter.
C. The City Clerk sllall cause notice of the filing of said report and of a time and place of
hearing thereon to be published , prior to the date for hearing, in a newspaper of genera l circulation printed
and published within the ity . The publication of said notice shall be once a week for two consecutive
weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published once a week or more often, with at least five days
intervening between the respective pub lication dates. not c w1ting such publication dates , are sufficient.
The period of notice commences upon the first day publication and terminates at the end of the fourteenth
day .
D. At the time stated in the above-mentioned notice, the City ouncil sha ll bear and con ider all
objections or protests, if any, to the report refen-ed to in said notice, and may continue the bearing from
time to time. Jf the Council finds that protest is made by owners of a majority of separate parcels of
prope1ty described in the report, then the report sha ll not be adopted , and fees shall be collected separately
from the tax roU and shall not constitute a lien against any parcel orparcels .
E. Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may adopt, revise, change, reduce, or
modify any fee or ovenule any ot all objections and shal l make its detenuination upon each fee as
describ ed in said report, which detemlination shall be final.
F. l. On or before the first day of August of each year following such fina l detennination, the
ity Clerk shall file with the Finance Director a copy of the report with a statement endorsed
thereon over the City Clerk's signature that it has been fina ll y adopted by the CityCouncil.
2. The Finance Director shall thereupon cause said fees to be placed on the prope1ty tax roll and
collected by the County for the City, as hereinafter provided. The County 's tax collector shall
enter the amounts of tbe fees against the res pective pa rcels as they appear on the cunent
assessment ro ll. If the property is not described on the roll , the County 's tax collector may enter
the description thereon , together with the amounts of the fees as shown in the report.
G. The amount of the fees shall constitute a lien against the parcel against which the fee has
been imposed as of noon on the first M011day in March immediately preceding the date of the levy.
H. The tax collector shall include the amount of the fees on bills for taxes levied against the
respective pa rcels. Thereafter the amount of the fees shall be co ll ected at the same time and in the same
manner and by the same persons as, together with and not separately from, the genera l taxes for the City
and shall be delinquent at the same time and thereafter be subject to the same delinquency penalties .
l. All laws applicable to the levy, collection and enforcement of general taxes of the Cjty
including , but not limited to , those pertaining to matters of delinquency, co ll ection cancellation, refund
and redemption, are applicable to such fees .
.I. The tax collector may, at the tax collectors discretion, issue separate bills for such fees and
separate receipts for collection on account of such fees .
K. If any parcels receiving benefit from the sto1m drainage system are omitted from the
abovementioned report or said tax roll, either because the fee therefor shalJ not have yet been ascertained
by the City as of the date of said report, or for any other reason , the Clean Water and Storm Protection fee
for such parcels shall be collected in the manner provided elsewhere in this chapter. If the fee for any
parcels, as shown on said report for the forthcoming fisca l year, should be less than what should bethe
7
72
CC 06-03-2025
72 of 1012
fee therefor under the provisiolls of this chapter , the balance of such fee shall be collected in the manner
provided elsewh ere in this chapter. If, however , the fee for any parcels shown in the report and collected
on Lh e tax roll should exceed the oon-ect fee for such parcels for the fiscal year, the Finance D irector shall
refund the excess amount so collected .
3.38.080 Payment of Balance of Fee.
A. lf the fee for any parcels placed on the tax roll , or for any parcels collected based upon
billing, was less tban what should be the fee therefor under the provisions of this chapter due to en·or, the
balance o f said fee shall be collected by a bill or invoice based on a detailed statement showing the basis
of the calculations, the location of the parcels and other relevant information, and prepared on or after
January 1st for the preceding six months from July to December during which a discrepancy between the
amouot collected and tbe conect fee is discovered, and on or after July 1st for the preceding six months
from January to June during which such a discrepancy is cliscovered . The Finance Director shall mail
said bill or invoice to the person or persons listed as the owners of the parcels on the last equalized
assessment roll of the County at the address shown on such assessment roll or to the successor in interest
of such owner if the name and address of such successor in interest is known to the Finance Director.
Failure to mail any such bill or invoice, or failw-e of any owner to receive any such bill or invoice shall
not excuse the owner of any parcels from the obligation of paying the balance of any Clean Water and
S tonn Protection fee for any parcels owned by him or her.
B. The interested owner may, at any reasonable time, review the detailed statement prepared by
the Finance Director.
C. The balance of the Clean Water and Stonn Protection fee for such parcels shall be due and
payable on the date the bill or invoice referred to in this section ismailed .
3.38.090 Collection of Fees Omitted from Tax Roll-Billing.
A. The Finance Director shall semi-annually, on or after July 1st, prepare or cause to be
prepared a detailed statement containing the basis ofthe calculations , the location of the parcels and other
relevant information, showing the total monthly fee for the preceding six months from January to June
and on or after January 1st , for the preceding six months from July to December for any parcels the fee
for which should be collected on the tax roll pursuant to Section 3.38.070A but was omitted from the
r eport r efen-ed to i.11 Section 3 .38.070B, or parcels the fee for which is collected pursuantbilling.
B . An invoice may be rendered for a period of less than six months if the commencement dateof
fees is other than July 1st or January 1st, as may be the case with newaccounts .
C. On the basis of the statement, the Finance Director shall prepare a bill or invoice showing the
total fee for such six months or less , and shall mail said bill or invoice to the person or persons listed as
the owners of the parcels on the last equalized assessment roll of the County at the address shown on such
assessment roll , or to the successor in interest of such owner if the name and address of such successor io
interest is . known to the Director. Failure to mail any such bill or invoice, or failure of any owner to
receive any such bill or invoice shall not excuse the owner of any parcels from the obligation of paying
any Clean Water and Storm Protection fee for any parcels owned by bim or her.
D. The interested owner may , at any reasonable time, review the detailed statement prepared by
the Finance Director.
8
73
CC 06-03-2025
73 of 1012
B. The Clean Water and Storm Protection fee for such parcels shall be due and payable
immediately upon receipt of the bill or invoice refened to in this section.
3.38.100 Payment ofFees-Owne1· Responsibility.
The owner of any parcel is and shall be responsible for payment of any and all Clean Water and
StomJ Protection fees applicable to parcels owned by him or her. It shall be and is hereby made the duty
of each such owner to provide to the Finance Director information sufficient to calculate th e land atea of
the parcels within thirty days after request of the Finance Director and ascertain from the Finance Director
the amount and due date of any such fee applicable to parcels owned by such owner and to pay such fee
when due and payable. It also shall be and is hereby made the duty of all owners of all parcels to infonn
the Finance Director immediately of all circumstances, and of any change or changes in any
circumstances , which will in any way affect the applicability of any fee . In pa1ticular, but oot by way of
limitation, an owner of any parcel shall immediately inform the Finance Director of any sale or transfer of
such parcel by or to such owner.
3.38.110 Payment of Fees-Location.
Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this chapter all Clean Water and Storm Protect ion
fees sha ll be payable at the office of the Finance Director in the City Hall of the City.
3.38.120 Payment of Fees-Delinquency Date.
Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this chaptei-eacb Clean Water and Stonn Protection
fee shall be deUnquent if not paid on or before the fortieth day immediately following 'the date upon
which such Clean Water and Stonn Protection fee became due and payable.
3.38.130 Penalty for Delinquency.
Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in th.is chapter, whenever any Clean Water and Storm
Protection fee becomes delinquent, there shall be imposed a penalty equal to one hundred percent of the
amow1t as set forth under Section 3.38 .030 .
3.38.140 Disputed Fees.
If any owner disputes the amount of the fee in any bill or invoice , the owner shall , within thirty
days from and after the date such bill or invoice is mailed, and no later, file a claim with the Finance
Director accompanied by detailed supporting factual data in support of the claim. lt shall be the duty of
each such owner to prove to the Finance Director, that such fee is in error and the COffect amount thereof.
lf the finance Director detetmines that the bill or invoice was in error, the Finance Director shall correct
said bill . Failure to dispute the amount of the fee in accordance with this section shall be deemed
acceptance of the correctness of the fee .
3.38 .150 Fiscal Accountability
A The City shall retain an independent auditor to conduct an annual audit of the Clean Water
and Stonn Protection Fee and environmental management/ clean creeks fund as part of its comprehensive
annual financial report. The auditor shall include an accotuiting of the revenue received from the fee and
expenditures thereof in the audited financial statements. The auditor's report shall be presented to the
City Cou cil and made available to the public. The Director of Adminish·ative Services or the Director of
Public Works shall prepare and present to the City CounciJ an annual report in conjunction withthe
9
74
CC 06-03-2025
74 of 1012
annual audjl that reviews the status and perfonnance of the programs, services and projects fonded wholly
or paitially with proceeds of the Clean Water and Stom1 Protection Fee.
B . The City Council shall either select a citizen's oversight committee or assign oversight
duties to a pre-ex.isling oversight committee to review and report annually on the receipt of revenue and
expenditure of funds from the stom1 drainage service charge fund authorized by thi s chapter .
3.38.160 Special Fund-Restricted U e of Revenues.
A All revenues collected pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be placed into a
special fund, which is known as the "environmental management/ clean creeks fund ," created by Section
3 .36.170 of Chapter 3 .36 of the Mumcipal Code (Stonn Dra inage Service Charge). Such revenues may be
used for the purpose specified in Section 3.38 .010, and for no other purpose; provided, however, that
moneys deposited in the fund may be used for direct and administrative costs of the City in collecting the
Clean Water and Storm Protection fees imposed by this part and for direct and indirect overhead costs of
the City in perfomJing any tasks, including, but not limited to, calculation of th e benefits received by
prope1ties from the stonn drainage system.
B. As used in this section, • direct costs'' means wages and salaries a11d costs of employee fringe
benefits incurred by the City, aud mileage reimbw-sement attributable to said collection activities. As
us ed in this section, "admi.n.istrative costs" includes, but is not limited to all costs for computer service,
materials, postage, supplies and equipment.
C. Notwithstanding subsections 3.38 .160A and 3.38. l 60B interest on revenues in the
environmental management / clean creeks fwid may be credited to the general fund of the City or to any
other fund in the discretion of the City Council.
3.38.170 Refunds.
Whenever any refunds should become owing by virtue of any relief granted by the City Council
pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.38.140 or by virtue o f any error made in ascertaining the fee
applicable to any parcels, the Finance Director is authorized to make such refunds and to expend for such
purpose the moneys in the environmental management/ clean creeks fund. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Sect ion 3.38.140, any claim for refund for fees collected under Section 3.38 .070 must be
made within one yeru· after the date bills for ta es are received by the owner. The City shall not be liable
for interest or any amount determined to be refundable.
3.38.180 Inspection of Parcels Authorized.
The Director of Public Works, the Finance Director and their authorized representatives are
hereby given power and authority to ente r upon and within any parcels to ascertain the nature of such
parcels; to inspect, observe, and review the benefit received from the storm drain system as may be
allowed by law .
3.38.190 Payment of Delinquent Fees-City Enforcement Powers.
A. Notwithstanding other rem edies, in the event of the failure of any owner to pay when due any
Clean Water and Storn1 Protection fees applicable to parcels owned by such owner, the City may enforce
payment of such delinquent fees by instituting action in any cowt of competent jurisruction to collect any
fees wluch may be due and payable in the same manner as any other debts owing to the City may be
collected.
10
75
CC 06-03-2025
75 of 1012
B. Any and aJI delinqueut payments may be placed on the ta · roll , and collected with properly
tax.es , as provided in Section 3.38.070 .
C. Such other action may be taken as may be authorized by law and by the CityC0tmcil.
D. Remedies under this secti011 are in addition to and do not supersede or limit any and all other
remedies, civil and criminal.
SECTION TWO -CEQA EXEMPTION
The City Council finds, based on its own independent judgement, that the proposed amendments to the
Cupertino Municipal Code are statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and
CEQA Guidelines 15273(a) -Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges and categorically exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 . A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk.
SECTION THREE -INCONSISTENCIES REPEALED
This Ordinance is intended to be controlling on the authority to establish the Clean Water and Storm
Protection fee, and shall supersede all prior ordinances , resolutions, rules or regulations that in conflict
wherewith. Any provision of tJ1e Cupertino Municipal Code, or appendices thereto, or any other
ordinances of the City inconsistent herewith, are repealed only to the extent of such inconsistencies a11d
no further.
SECTION FOUR-™-PLEMENTATION
The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take any action and sign any documents necessary
to implement this ordinance.
SECTION FIVE -SEVERABil,ITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid , such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining po11ions
of the Ordinance. The Council of the City of Cupertino hereby declares that they would ha e passed this
Ordinance and each section or subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective oftbe fact that
any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid .
SECTION SIX-EFFECTIVE DATE· PlJBLICATION.
The City Clerk is directed to post and publish this ordinance in accordance with law in a newspaper of
general circulation printed and published in the County of Santa Clara, or as otherwise required by law.
This ordinance shall take effect as provided by Government Code Section 36937.
11
76
CC 06-03-2025
76 of 1012
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino on the 7u , day of May
2019 and enacted al a regul ar meeting of the City Council of the Ci ty of Cupertino after certi fi cation of the
ballot results on the 16 1h day of July 20]9.
Members of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
Schruf, Chao, Paul, Sinks, Willey
None
ABSENT : None
ABSTAIN: None
SI~
l _/ 1~1k.\\~
Steven Scharf, Mayor Date \
City of Cupertino
ATTEST:
6Ai:.9 L,l'))--&--/1'}_
Date
Grace Schmidt, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
·J~A ?(3oL {\
Heather Minner, City Attorney Date
Exhibit A (Attachment Bl) -Fee Report for the 2019 Clean Water and Stonn Protection Fee Report
77
CC 06-03-2025
77 of 1012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
·COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA )
CITY OF CUPERTINO )
I, GRACE SCHMIDT, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City
Council of the City of Cupertino, California , do hereby certify the attached
to be a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. 19-2183, which was
enacted on July 16 th , 2019, and that it has been published or posted
pursuant to law (G.C. 40806).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal
this 16 th day of July, 2019.
GRACE SCHMIDT, City Clerk and Ex-officio Clerk
of the City Council of the City of Cupe1iino, California
78
CC 06-03-2025
78 of 1012
Attac hment B I
CITY OF CUPERTINO
FEE REPORT
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE
FEBRUARY 2019
PURSUANT TO THE ARTICLES XIII( & 0 OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION,
AND THE GOVERNMENT (ODE SECTIONS 38900-38901 ET AL.
ENGI NEER OF WORK:
SCI ConsultingGroup
4745 MANGELS BOULEVARD
FAIR FIELD, CA LI FORNIA 94534
PHO NE 707.430.4300
FAX 707.430.4319
WWW .SCI-CG.COM
79
CC 06-03-2025
79 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY COUNCIL
Steven Scharf, Mayor
Liang Chao , Vice Mayor
Darcy Paul, Councilmember
Rod Sinks, Councilmember
Jon Willey, Councilmember
INTERIM CITY MANAGER
Timm Borden
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Roger Lee, Acting Director
ENGINEER OF WORK
Jerry Bradshaw, SCI Consulting Group
2019 CLEAN WATER ANO STORM PROTECT ION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
PAG E i
Cl Consulting Group
80
CC 06-03-2025
80 of 1012
PAGE ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................. 1
OVERV IEW ........................................................................................................ , ..... , ....... 1
CITY1S FACILITIES ............................................................................................................ 1
STORMWATER FUNDING BACKGROUND ............................................................................ 2
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF STORMWATER FEE ................................................................... 2
FACILITIES AND SERVICES ...................................................................................................... 4
FINANCIAL NEEDS AND REVENUE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................... 5
SUMMARY OF CLEA N WAT ER AND STORM PROTECTION SYS TEM NEEDS ........... , .................. 5
ANNUA L REV ENUE REQUIREMEN T ..................................................................................... 6
RATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 7
SINGLE-FA MILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS AS BENCHMARK ..................................................... 7
NON-SING LE-FAM IL Y RESIDENTIA L PARCELS ..................................................................... 9
Low IMPACT DEVELOPMEN T RATE ADJUSTMENT.. ............................................................ 11
STORMWATER FEE CALCULATION ................................................................................... 12
A NNUAL COS T INDEXING ....... , .... , ................................................................................... 14
MANAGEMENT AND USE OF STORMWATER FUNDS .. , ......................................................... 14
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 15
APPENDIX A-REGULATORY ASSESSMEN T & COST AND REVENUE ANALYS IS ..................... 15
APPENDIX 8-PERCEN TAGE OF IMPERVIOUS AREA ES TIMA TIONS ...................................... 28
APPENDI X C-STORMWATER RATES FROM OT HER MUNICIPA LITIES ............... , ... , .............. 30
CITY OF CUPERTINO
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FE E REPOR T
FEBRUARY 2019
S C ons ufti n gGro u p
81
CC 06-03-2025
81 of 1012
PAGE iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 -SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REVENUES ............................. , .......................................... 5
TABLE 2-SUMMARY OF PROGRAM COSTS ........ , ................................... " .............. , ................. 6
TABLE 3-ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT ....................................................... 6
TABLE 4-SUMMARY OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS ............................................... 9
TAB LE 5-SUMMARY OF NON-SFR PARCELS ........................................................................ , 10
TABLE 6-Low IMPACT DEV ELOPMENT RATE ADJUSTMENT ANALYSIS ..................................... 12
TABLE 7-PROPOSED 2019 CLEAN WATER & STORM PROTECTION FEE SCHEDU LE ................. 13
TABLE 8 -PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA FROM STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN .......... , ............. 28
TABLE 9-PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FROM STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN ............ 29
TABLE 10-RECENT STORM DRAIN BALLOT MEASURES .......................................................... 31
TABLE 11 -SAMPLE OF RATES FROM OTHER MUNICIPALIT IES ................................................. 32
CITY OF CUPERTINO
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
C t ConsultingGroup
82
CC 06-03-2025
82 of 1012
INTRODUCTION AND EXECUT IVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
The City of Cupertino ("City '') has engaged SCI Consulting Group to study, make
recommendations , and assist in the Implementation of a funding approach for its municipal
separate storm sewer system 1 ("MS4'') including environmental programs , maintenance and
operations, and compliance with all state and federal regulations associated with the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 2 ("NPDES ") permit.
Since 2013 the City's Public Works Department has developed several planning documents
pertaining to its Clean Water and Storm Protection program ("Program "). These Include the
Trash Reduction Plan (2014 ), the Green Infrastructure Plan currently under development (to
be completed in 2019) and the Storm Drain Master Plan ("SDMP ,'' completed in 2018),
These plans made it clear that the Program would need to expand its levels of service to
achieve the goals of responsible environmental stewardship and smart investment in the
City's aging infrastructure.
In 2018 1 the City embarked on a two-phase project to determine the feaslbillty of
implementing a dedicated , sustainable revenue stream to fund the City's Clean Water and
Storm Protection needs . The first phase included exploring potential funding sources ,
estimating user rate ranges for various budget scenarios , and conducting a public opinion
survey of Cupertino residents and property owners to determine storm drain-related priorities
and willingness to support a fee for these services . The City Council has now embarked on
the second phase : implementation of a funding mechanism . This Fee Report is the first step
in that process .
CITY'S FACILI TI ES
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The City operates and maintains a storm drainage system, as it is empowered to do per
Government Code Sections 38900 and 38901 . This system is comprised of integrated storm
drain pipes , inlets , outfalls . culverts , and ditches which divert stormwater to local creeks to
prevent flooding . As the community grew and neighborhoods and business districts
expanded, the City's storm drainage system was developed . When the first NPDES perm it
was issued in the early 1990s, the City recognized the fiscal burden these new clean water
requ irements would bring and established a property fee on mos! parcels to fund this activity .
Since that time the City has worked diligently and efficiently to continue meeting the ever-
increasing requirements of the NPDES permit , while the State 's clean water requirements
have evolved into a comprehensive environmental stewardship program .
1 In this report , the terms ''storm sewer." ''storm drainage," "storm protection ," and
''stormwater" are used interchangeably, and are considered to be synonymous .
2 Created in 1972 by the Clean Water Act , the NPDES permit program is authorized by the
EPA to allow state governments to perform many perm itting , administrative, and
enforcement aspects of the program .
►
DRAFT -2019 CLE AN WAT ER AND STO RM PROTECTIO N FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
S IConsu ltin gGroup
83
CC 06-03-2025
83 of 1012
The operations and maintenance ("O&M") side of the Program has also developed many
activities that support a clean water supply and maintain the City's aging infrastructure to
protect the neighborhoods and businesses from local flooding . On average, the industry-
standard life expectancy of a storm drain system is approximately 60 years . The majority of
the City's storm drain pipes were installed approximately 50 or more years ago, leaving the
City with a system that is approaching the end of its useful life. Moreover, as noted in the
Storm Drain Master Plan, so"me of the drainage system does not have adequate capacity .
STORMWATER FUNDING BACKGROUND
The City historically has funded lts clean water program and storm drain matntenance activity
primarily through two sources : The General Fund and the Storm Drainage Service Charge 3
established in 1992. The 1992 charge, established at $12 per year for single-family
residential and $144 per acre for commercial parcels, has not been increased since its
inception .4 For more than a decade, the General Fund has carried the increasing burden of
the Program. As a result, the City has needed to limit capital expenditures and keep
operations and maintenance activities to a less than desirable level of service, mostly
responding to storm-related emergencies and basic regulatory compliance .
The scale and projected needs of the system in a time of competing demands on the General
Fund point toward the need for developing a separate , dedicated and sustainable funding
stream. As many other municipalities in California have done, including San Jose and Palo
Alto, the City of Cupertino is considering developing a new, additional, more secure and
predictable source of funding for the Program . This Fee Report is the first step in that
process, should the City decide to proceed .
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF STORMWATER FEE
CITY OF CUPERTINO
This Report calculates the Stormwater Fee as a property-related fee . Property-related fees
are subject to the requirements of Articles XIIIC and D of the State Constitution, which were
approved by voters in 1996 through Proposition 218, as well as the Proposition 218 Omnibus
Implementation Act (Government Code Sections 53750-53758).
Any property-related fee must comply with requirements of Article XIIID, Section 6. These
include the following :
■ Revenues derived from the fee shall not exceed the funds required to provide the
property-related service;
■ Revenues derived from the fee shall not be used for any purpose other than that for
which the fee was imposed;
■ The amount of a fee upon any parcel or person as an inciden t of property ownership
shall not exceed the proportional costs of the service attributable to the parcel;
3 Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 3.36.
4 This "freeze" on the stormwater fees are due primarily to the stringent requirements of
Proposition 218 for a ballot measure to increase fees .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
ConsuJ tingGroup
84
CC 06-03-2025
84 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
p
• No fee may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used by , or
immediately available to , the owner of the property in question . Fees based on
potential or future use of service are not permitted . Standby charges , whether
character ized as charges or assessments , shall be classified as assessments and
shall not be imposed without compliance with the assessment section of the code;
and
• No fee may be imposed for general governmental services including, but not limited
to, police, fire , ambulance or library services where the service is available to the
public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to the property owners .
----------2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
.ConsuftingGro-up
85
CC 06-03-2025
85 of 1012
FACILITIES AND SERVICES
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The City operates and maintains a municipal separate storm sewer sys tem wi thin the City 's
boundaries . The system is made up of man -made drainage systems including , bu t not limited
to , curbs and gutters, ditches , culverts , pipelines , manholes , catch bas ins (inlets) and outfall
structures . The natural creek system that runs throughout the City serves as the backbone
of the City 's system . While primary maintenance of those creeks is the responsibility of the
Santa Clara Valley Wate r District, the City , through its Program, collaborates with the Water
District fo r creek stewardship and educational act ivities . The system se rves the entire Ci ty.
The primary storm drainage service provided by the City is the collection , conveyance , and
overa ll management of the stormwater runoff from parcels. By definition, all parcels that
shed stormwater into the City 's system, either directly or indirectly utilize, or are served by,
the City 's storm dra inage system . The need and necessity of this service are derived from
property imp rovements , which historically have increased the amount of stormwater runoff
from the parcel by co nstructing impervious surfaces such as rooftops, pavement areas , and
certain types of landscaping that restrict or retard the percolat ion of water into the soil lens
beyond the conditions found ih the natural, or unimproved, state , As such , open space land
(in a natural cond ition) and agricultural lands that demonstrate stormwater abso rption equal
to or greater than natural conditions are not charged a fee . Othe r vacant land that was once
im proved or has been prepa red for future improvements do not qualify as open space or
natura l land and will typically be charged a fee .
The 2018 SDMP conta ins a thorough set of maps and lists of va rious elements within the
stormwater system . Those descriptions are the basis for this Report .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTEC TION FEE REP ORT
FEB RUA RY 20 19
SCI C o nsultiJlgGroup
86
CC 06-03-2025
86 of 1012
Pa u5
FINANCIAL NEEDS AND REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
SUMMARY OF CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION SYSTEM NEEDS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
As part of.the fee implementation task, the SCI team conducted an analysis of the City 's
Clean Water and Storm Protection system needs . This analysis is contained in a technica l
memorandum dated February 20 , 2019 from the firm of Larry Walker Associates and is
included in Appendix A of this Report. This analysis reviewed existing revenues and
estimated the true costs to the Program of prevent ing local flooding and remaining in
compliance with the current NPDES permit , commonly known as the Municipal Regional
Permit ("MRP ") issued by the Water Board to all Phase 1 permittees in the San Francisco
Bay area. The first MRP was issued in 2009 . The second MRP was issued in 2015 and is
referred to as MRP 2.0.
PROGRAM REVENUES
The first step of the analysis was to review the revenues available to the City 's Program.
Based on information provided by the City, the existing revenues are projected through
Fiscal Year 2023-24 as shown in Table 1 below. These values are drawn from
Appendix A, Table 1.
TABLE 1 -SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REVENUES
, Shown in thousands
, ~~~ F~re
,Revenue Category 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24
Storm water Charges $ 370 $ 370 $ 370 $ 370 $ 370 $ 370
Other Revenue $ 9 $ 9 $ 9 $ 9 $ 9 $ 9
General Fund Tra nsfer In $ 818 $ . $ $ -$ . $
TOTAL Revenues $ 1,197 $ 379 $ 379 $ 379 $ 379 $ 379
PROGRAM COSTS
The City's Program is influenced primarily by the requ irements to prevent local flooding and
to comply with the MRP 2.0. Cost estimates were based on budgetary and supplemental
information provided by the City . In broadly assessing the Program 's costs and following the
City's current Budget structure, two main categories were used: Operations and
Maintenance ("O&M ") Costs, and Clean Water Program 5 Costs . These categories reflect
how the City generally allocates funds to implement its day-to-day storm drainage-related
operations.
5 The City's Budget document uses "Non-Po int Source " as the name for the Clean Water
program .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTEC TI ON FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
C I C o nsu ttin gGrou p
87
CC 06-03-2025
87 of 1012
Page6
More detailed info rma tion can be found in Appendix A. The program costs are summarized
in Table 2 below . The total costs shown in the right-hand column is for the five future years.
These values are drawn from Appendix A, Table 2.
Category . :
Clean Water
TOTAL COSTS
TABLE 2-SUMMARY OF PROGRAM COSTS
Shown in thousands
Cu rrent Future
18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 TOTAL
$ 477
$ 721
$ 552 $ 569 $ 586 $ 603 $ 622 ,.
891 918 964 994 1,025 4,792
$ 1,197 $ 1,443 $ 1,487 $ 1,550 $ 1,597 $ 1,647 $ 7,724
ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The proposed fee is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 2019-20 . Therefore, the data
presented in Appendix A for prior years do not factor into the analysis . What remains is a
five-year window in which projected revenue sources and projected costs are presented .
Over the five fiscal years, the projected costs exceed revenues by $6.0 million . This is the
amount that the proposed Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee would need to generate
in order to bring the Program into balance. The resulting revenue requirement is therefore
based on an annual revenue , adjusted for inflation at 3.0% per year over the five-year period,
tha t totals $6.0 million over those five years . These projections are summarized in Table 3
below.
TABLE 3-ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT
Shown In thousands
Ca tegory
Expenditures
Shortfall
Current Future
18-19
na
na
na
19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24
1,443 1,487 1,550 1,597 1,647
$11,064) $11,108) $11,171) $(1,218) $(1,268)
TOTAL .. .
7,724
$ 15,829}
Revenue Requirement* $ 1,098 $ 1,131 $ 1,165 $ 1,200 $ 1,236 $ 51828
• Revenues ore increased by 3.0% annually for inflation
2019 CLEAN WATER ANO STORM PROTECT IO N FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
S rconsultingG.roup
88
CC 06-03-2025
88 of 1012
< . 7
RATE STRUCTURE ANAL YSIS
Proposition 218 states that the amount of a fee upon any parcel shall not exceed the
proportional costs of the service attributab le to the parcel. It also states that no fee may be
imposed for a service unless that service is actual ly used by , or immediately availab le to,
the owner of the property. As noted earl'ier , all properties that shed stormwater into the Citys
system are served by that system . In compliance with Propos~ion 218 , the proposed 2019
Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee will only be imposed on properties that shed water,
directly or indirectly, into the City 's system . Additionally, the amount of use attributed to each
parcel is proportionate to the amount of stormwater runoff contributed by the parcel 1 which
is, in turn, proportionate to the amount of impervious surface area on a parcel (such as
building roofs and pavements).
SINGLE-FAM ILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS AS BENCHMARK
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The most widely used method of establish Ing storm drainage rates 6 is to use the average or
median single-family residential parcel 7 ("SFR ") as the basic unit of measure , or benchmark,
which is called the single-family equivalent , or "SFE." Since the metric for this fee structure
is impervious surface area, a benchmark amount of impervious surface area CISA") must
be established .
Cupertino has a wide range of sizes of SFR parcels , which have varying percentages of
impervious area ("%IA"). Generally, smaller , denser parcels tend to have a higher proportion
of impervious area than larger, less dense parcels, which tend to have a lower percentage
of impervious area. (This can be best visualized by the fact that larger residential properties
tend to have a larger proportion of pervious landscaping , and: therefore a smaller proportion
of impervious area.) Therefore, the range of SFR was broken into four size categories as
shown in Table 4 below with the medium category containing the largest number of parcels .
The City's 2018 SDMP includes an analysis of the %IA for Cupertino .8 The SDMP findings
of ¾IA for various land uses were used as a basis for this Report . Since the categories in
the SDMP don 't completely align with the rate categories established in this Report, some
adjustments were made. A summary of these adjustments is shown in Appendix B.
The median sized SFR parcel is 0.17 acre (approximately 7,405 square feet), which is also
the median parcel size for the medium SFR rate category . That size of parcel is considered
6 Stormwater Utility Survey, 2017 , page 2, Western Kentucky University.
7 The SFR category also includes multiplex parcels of two , three or four units, since the lot
development characteristics do not vary significantly from the SFR parcels of similar size .
In all, this includes the approximately 496 multiplex parcels In the City, which were
distributed to the same four parcel size categories as the other SFRs. Any residential
structure with five or more units is categorized as multi-family residential ("MFR "), which is
calculated separately .
8 Section 2.2.3, page 2~6 of the City of Cupertino Storm Drain Master Plan .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPO RT
FEBRUARY 2019
Co n s ultingGroup
89
CC 06-03-2025
89 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
to fall into the low-density residential category of the SDMP, which is reported to have a %IA
of 55%. Therefore, the median parcel in Cupertino contains 4,073 square feet of impervious
surface area ("ISA ") as shown in the calculation below. This will be used as the benchmark
(1 SFE) for all other size categories and other non-residential land uses .
1 SFE = %IA x M edian Parce l Siz
= 55 % X 7,405 4
= 4,073 sf
This becomes the basis for calculating the SFEs for all other types of land uses. The %IA
for each size category,was applied to the median size parcel. in that category to calculate its
median !SA The SFE per parcel for each size category is a simple ratio of the median ISA
for each category to the ISA (4,073 sQ for the benchmark category of medium-sized parcels
as shown ih the following formula:
SFE p er Parce l =
SPECIAL NOTES ON CONDOMINIUMS
M edian ISA
4,073
Condominium units are particularly difficult to categorize as they are often on very small
individual parcels yet share larger common areas that are made up of landscaped {pervious)
areas , parking lots and shared roofs , and other recreational uses (either pervious or
impervious). The data for these variables is not readily available , so some assumptions are
made about their characteristics.
Condominiums can be grouped into two categories : High density where they tend to have
units on multiple floors (similar to apartment buildings), and medium density where they are
only one unit high (i.e ., townhomes), For the medium-density condominium units, the
presence of common areas with landscape features make them very similar to the small-lot
SFR parcels, and therefore they are assigned the same ISA (3,354 sij and SFE per parcel
as a small -lot SFR parcel.
For the high-density condominium units , further analysis was done . Fourteen condominium
complexes with 1,246 unit~ were iden ti fied throughout the City . Using aerial photographs ,
measurements were made of the impermeable areas . A strong trend was found such that
the average ISA per unit was 1,099 square feet. Therefore, the high-density condominiums
are assigned an ISA of 1,099 square feet This is 33% of the ISA for the medium-density
condominiums.
Table 4 below shows a summary of the SFEs for single-famlly residential parcels .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
fC o n s uttiogGroup
90
CC 06-03-2025
90 of 1012
Page9
TABLE 4-SUMMARY OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS
I
Med ian
Tota l Tota l Parce l SFE pe r
I Lot Type Parcel Size Range Parce ls * Acres• Size % I A** IS A Parcel
Acres SF SF
Small under 0.13 1,526 159 4,792 70% 31354 0.82
Medium 0.13 to 0.22 8,958 1,510 7,405 55 % 4,073 1.00
Large 0.23 to 0.40 1,542 420 11,326 45% 5,097 1.25
Extra Large over 0.40 345 460 27,878 35% 9,757 2.40
Condosl (one story) 2,221 95 na na 3,354 0.82
Condos 2+ (2 + stories) 1,246 46 na na 1,099 0.27
15,838 2,690
• Total Pa ree ls an d Acres do not fact or i nto the basis of t he SFE calculation; they are shown for
informa tional purposes on ly.
NON-SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCELS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Unlike the SFR parcels, the non-SFR parcels can vary widely in size as well as
characteristics . For this reason, the parcels have been grouped into land use categories
according their %IA characteristics (as shown in Appendix B). The SFE for each land use
category is based on a per-acre basis , so size can be a variable in the calculat ion of the fee .
The SFE-per-acre can be computed for each category using the following formula :
(43,560 sf I acre) x % I A SFE p er Acre = ~--~-~---
4,073 sf
where 4,073 square feet is the amount of ISA in one SFE.
Table 5 below shows a summary of resulting the non-single-family parcel SFEs for each
non-SFR land use category.
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STOR M PROTECTION FEE REP ORT
FEBRUARY 2019
CfCon suJtin gGroup
91
CC 06-03-2025
91 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERT INO
Page 10
TABLE 5-SUMMARY OF NON-SFR PARCE LS
I Total Total SFE per
land Use Category Parcels* Acres* % I A** Acre
Multi-Family (Apartments) 79 200 65% 6.95
Commefcial /Retail/ Industrial 256 441 85% 9.09
Office 217 372 65% 6.95
C:hurch / Institutional 39 98 55% 5.88
School (w/playfield) 16 329 40% 4.28
Park 3 53 15% 1.60
Vacant (devel oped) 134 153 5% 0.53
Open Space/ Agricultural 240 1,192 na
TO TAL 984 2,837
• To ta I Pa rce Is and Acr es do not fact or into th e b a s i s of the SFE ca I cu l a t i on ; th e y a re
shown for info rm ati ona I p u rp o se s only.
0 %IA is taken fro m Appendix B
Each individual parcel 's SFE is then calculated by multiplying the parcel size (in acres 9)
times the SFE per acre for that land use category , as shown in the following formula:
SFE = Pa rce l S ize (a cr es) x SFE p er Acre
DEVELOPED VACANT 10 PARCELS
Developed vacant parcels are devo id of obvious structures or improvements but are
distinguished from undeveloped vacant land by one of severa l character istics. Typically , a
developed vacant parcel has been graded to be ready for building construction (possibly as
part of the original subdivision or adjacent street grading). In some cases , the parcel
previously contained a structure or improvement that has been removed , but its fundamental
alteration from a natural state remains . Although developed vacant parcels may have
significant vegetative cover , the underlying soil conditions resulting from grading work or
previous improvements usually cause some rainfall to runoff into the storm dra inage system .
The %IA for developed vacant parcels is reasonably assumed to be 5%, which is also used
as a minimum value of imperviousness for any land use type (excluding open space and
agricu ltural land -see next section). Vacant parcels that have sign ificant impervious paving
rema ining from prior improvements may be classified as Commercial or some other
classification best representing the %IA of the parcel.
9 Parcel size for non -SFR parcels is calculated to the tenth of an acre or portion thereof.
10 "Vacant" in this Report refers to land that is devo id of improvements. It does not refer to
land with vacant bu il dings or improvements , which wou ld continue to shed water to the
MS4 the same as if they were occupied .
2019 CLEAN WAT ER AN D STOR M PROT ECTI ON FEE REP OR T
FEB RUA RY 2019
C IConsultingGroup
92
CC 06-03-2025
92 of 1012
OPEN SPACE AND AGRICULTURAL PARCELS ARE Nor CHARGED
The City's storm drain system was developed in response to land development over the
many decades . Tracts of land that have not yet been developed, or have been used primarily
for agricultural purposes , have not created an impac t on the system beyond the natural
condition , and are therefore considered to receive no service from the system , In practical
terms, these parcels generate no additional storm runoff beyond the natural condition . For
these reasons, open space and agricultural parcels are not charged a Fee .
HYBRID PARCELS
Some parcels may have both improvements as well as significant open space areas , For
such parcels that contain a residence, the open space acreage does not increase the fee
because residential parcels are not charged on a per-acre basis . Rather , they are charged
based on the median ISA for that size category.
For such parcels that contain non-residential improvements (which are charged on a per-
acre basis), the chargeable acreage should be adjusted downward to reflect the improved
area only, leaving the open space area "invisible" to the fee calculation. Where parcels have
been found in this category, that acreage adjustment has been made .
Low IMPACT DEVELOPMENT RATE ADJUSTMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The current NPDES Permit requires certain properties to construct stormwater treatment
and attenuation facilities 1 also known as low impact development ("LID"), These facilities are
typically designed to capture a portion of the storm flows, retain them , and enable them to
infiltrate into the ground . While this is intended to help filter pollutants from the water , it also
can reduce the parcel 's stormwater runoff quantity to some extent , wh ich in turn can reduce
a parcel's impact on the system . In addition to NPDES -required L'ID 1 other parcel owners
may elect to follow LID guidelines voluntarily .
The section of the MRP that requires LID facilities is Provision C.3 (New Development and
Redevelopment). Compliance with C.3 is a well-established and convenient metric on which
to base customer activities that further Program goals and affect Program costs . C.3
compliance can have impacts to many of the Program elements. In order to analyze the
extent to which C.3 compliance will impact Program costs, each Program element was rated
with one of four impact levels : none (0%), minor (25%), medium (50%), and major (80%.).
By applying those impact levels to the costs of each Program element, it was determined
that compliance with Provision C.3 equates to approximately 25% of the overall Program
costs . Table 6 below shows the results of that analysis .
Based on that analysis , a commensurate reduction in the fees for certain CJ-compliant
parcels is warranted . However, C.3 compliance brings with it some additional administrative
burdens to verify ongoing compliance . While this burden is relatively minor, for single-family
parcels where the annual fee is also relatively small, the administrative burden negates the
LID benefits to the program . Therefore, single-family residential parcels do not qualify for
the reduced fee . Conversely , C.3 compliance fo r condominiums is typically accomplished
on a collective basis , so the minor administrative burden is spread across many parcels
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
I ConsuJtingGro up
93
CC 06-03-2025
93 of 1012
Page 12
making it ins ignificant. Therefore, a 25% red uction in fees will be applied to all C.3-compliant
parcels that are either non-single-family or condominium.
TABLE 6-Low IMPACT DEVELOPMENT RATE ADJUSTMENT ANALYSIS
E ... :, ...
OJ 0 ·-0 i
~
C C "'D -
______ MRP Prov ision ____ L _~ ___ f __ :[ ____ _ __ _ _ Notes _____ _
Operations & Maintenance
Program Management
C.2 Municipal Operations
Clean Water Program
Cl
C.2
C.3
C.4
C.5
C.6
c.7
C.8
C.9
C.10
C.11
C.12
C.13
C.17
Perm it Compliance
Municipal Operation s
New Development and
Redevelopment
Industrial and Commercial
Site Controls
Illicit Discharge Detection and
Elimination
Construction Site Control
Publlc Information and
Outreach
Water Quality Monitoring
Pesticides Toxicity Control
T rash load Reduction
Mercury Controls
PCBs Controls
Copper Controls
Annua l Reports
Bm Does not lessen Program Management
burden
Reduces storm flows in minor storm,
reducing burden on operations
Is a small part of overall Program
Compliance
Does not lessen Municipal Operations
compliance burden
Is all about C.3
Provides controls
Does not lessen Illicit Discharge burden
Does not lessen Construction Controls
burden
Aids In educating property owners
Does not lessen WQ Monitoring burden
Capture & infiltration may filter out
pesticides
Many C.3 devices are considere d a
partial trash capture dev ice
Capture & infiltration may filter out
pollutants
Capture & infiltration may filter out
pollutants
Capture & infiltration may filter out
pollutants
Does not lessen reporting requirements
STORMWATER FEE CALCULATION
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The primary metric in this analysis is the SFE as illustrated above. To arrive at the fee
amount for the various land use categories , the total City-wide SFEs must be divided into
the total revenue requirement to arrive at the rate per SFE. Using the analysis above, that
calculation is represented by the following formula :
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
C C o n s ultingGroup
94
CC 06-03-2025
94 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
SFERate Annual R evenu e R equirement
Total SFEs
Or, using numbers from the analysis :
SFE Rate = $1 ,097,787
24,713 .810
= $44.42 per SFE
Page 13
This SFE rate amount is then multiplied by the SFEs per parcel or acre for the various land
use categories to arrive at the Stormwater Fee Rate Schedule shown in Table 7 below.
TABLE 7-PROPOSED 2019 CLEAN WATER & STORM PROTECTION FEE SCHEDULE
l Proposed Fee
_ ~ land Use Category SF~_ ~~t_e_ _ FY 2019 -_20
Single-Fam i ly Residential *
Small (under 0.13 acre) 0.824 $ 36.58 per parcel -Medium (0.13 to 0.22 acre) 1.000 $ 44.42 per parcel
Large (0 .23 to 0.40 acre) 1.251 $ 55.58 per parcel
Extra Large (over 0.40 acre) 2.396 $ 106.42 per parcel
Condominium 1 (1 story) 0 .824 $ 36.58 per parcel -.
Condominium 2+ (2+ stories) 0.270 $ 11.99 per parcel -
Non-Single-Family Residential * *
Multi-Family Residential 0 .695 $ 30.88 per 0 .1 acre
Commercial/ Retail/ Industrial 0 .909 $ 40 .38 per 0 .1 acre
Office 0.695 $ 30.88 per 0.1 acre
Church/ Institutional 0 .588 $ 26 .13 per 0 .1 acre
School (w/playfield) 0.428 $ 19.00 per 0.1 acre
Park 0 .160 $ 7 .13 per 0.1 acre
Vacant (developed) 0.053 $ 2.38 per 0.1 acre
Open Space/ Agricultural no charge
Low Impact Development Adjustment •0 25% Fee Reduction
• SFR category also includes duplex, triplex and four-plex units .
'* Non-SFR parcel size is calculated to the tenth of an acre o r portion thereof.
•** Low Impact Development Adjustment only applies to condominium and non-s ing le-family
properties.
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBR UARY 2019
SC Consulting.G r o u p
95
CC 06-03-2025
95 of 1012
P ga 14
ANNUAL COST INDEXING
The 2019 Clean Wate r and Storm Protection Fee is subject to an annual adjustmen! tied to
the Consumer Price lndex~U for the San Jose Area as of December of each succeeding
year (the "CPI"), with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. Any ,change in the
CPI ih excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as the ''Unused CPI" and shalli be used
to increase the maximum author iz ed rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. The
maximum authori zed rate is equal to the maximum rate in the first fiscal year the Fee was
approved adjusted annually by the lower of either 3% or the change in the CPI plus any
Unused CPI as described above .
MANAGEMENT AND USE OF STORMWATER FUNDS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
The City shall deposit into a sepa rate account(s) all 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection
Fee revenues collected and sh all appropriate and expend such funds only for the purposes
outlined by this Report . The specific assumptions utilized in this Report , the specific
programs and projects listed , and the division of revenues and expenses between the two
primary categories (Clean Water and O&M) are used as a reasonab le model of futu re
revenue needs and are not intended to be binding on future use of funds ,
The specific assumptions utilized in this Report, the specific programs or projects listed , and
the division of revenues and expenses between the two primary categories (Glean Water
and O&M) are used as a reasonable model of future revenue needs and are not intended to
be binding on future use of funds .
Dated: February 20 , 2019
Eng ineer of Work
By ?(~
Jerry Bradshaw, License No . C48845
2019 CL EA N WATER AND STORM PR OT ECTI ON FEE REP ORT
FEBRUARY 20 19
SC1ConsultfrtgGroup
96
CC 06-03-2025
96 of 1012
aeh
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A-REGULATORY ASSESSMENT & COST AND REVENUE ANALYSIS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
On the following pages is a regulatory assessment and cost and revenue analyses , drawn
from a technica l memorandum prepared for th is project by Larry Walker Associates , The
information contained in this Appendix forms a basis for the fee calculations in the main body
of this Fee Report and is referenced as appropr iate .
2019 CL EA N WATE R AND STO RM PROTECTION FEE REP ORT
FEB RU ARY 2019
Con s ulti.n gGrou
97
CC 06-03-2025
97 of 1012
Memorandum
DATE :
TO :
SUBJECT :
Cc:
Febmaiy 20, 2019
Susan Barnes , SCI Consulting Group
Fee Study Report: Regulatory Assessment
& Cost and Revenue Analysis
Jerry Bradshaw, SCI Consulting Group
Cheri Donnelly, City of Cupertino
Jo Anne Johnson, City of Cupe1iino
Karen Ashby, Lany Walker Associates
1. INTRODUCTION
L A R R Y
WALKER
ASSOCIATES
Rachel Wa rren
Airy Krich-Brinton
1480 Drew Ave ., Su ite 100
Davis , CA 95618
530.753 .6400
RachelW@ lwa .com
Alr{K@lwa .com
In the early l 990s, in response to the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) amendment of l 987 to
address urban stonnwater runoff pollution from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
(MS4s) and the pending federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
regulations that would implement the amendment, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) issued municipal stormwater Phase 1 NPDES
pennits to the countywide urban areas of Santa Clara, Alameda, San Mateo , and Contra Costa .
These countywide areas had individual pennits until 2009, when the Regional Water Board
issued a Mwlicipal Regional Stormwater Pennit (MRP). L The MRP was subsequently reissued in
2015 .2
The current MRP regulates stonnwater discharges from municipalities in Alameda, Contra
Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties (including the City of Cupe1ii110 ), as well as the
cities of Fairfield, Suisun City, and Vallejo in Solano County . The MRP includes requirements
for the following components, including an increased focus on requirements for control of
specific pollutants to address some of the more persistent water quality issues:
• C. l Discharge Prohibitions and Receiving Water Limitations
• C .2 Municipal Operations
• C .3 New Development and Redevelopment
• C.4 Industrial and Commercial Site Contra.ls
• C.5 Illicit Discharge and Elimination
• C.6 Conshuction Site Contro ls
• C .7 Public Lnfmmation and Outreach
1 Order R2 -2009-0074 .i s amended by Order No. R2-201 L-0083
2 Order No . R2 -20 I S-0049
Appendix-A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 16
98
CC 06-03-2025
98 of 1012
• C.8 Water Quality Monitoring
• C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Controls
• C . l O Trash Reduction
• C.11 Mercury Controls
• C .12 PCB Controls
• C.13 Copper Controls
• C. l 4 Bacterial Controls
• C.15 Exempted and Conditionally Exempted Discharges
• C.16 Discharges to Areas of Special Biological Significance
• C.17 Annual Repo1ts
The City of Cupertino (City) is committed to water quality and watershed stewardship by
continuing to build a safer, healthier, and more aesthetically pleasing community through
programs , initiatives, and ordinances that align with MRP activities. Over the years, the range of
actions taken by the City bas greatly increased in response to evolving regulatory requirements
and commwtity needs .
As a part of the stormwater program initiative 1 tbe City leverages its resomces by paiticipating in
a comprehensive effort in the Santa Clara Valley, the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution
Prevention Program (SCVURPPP), which was initiated in 1990 and is organized, coordinated,
and implemented in accordance with a memorandwn of agreement (MOA) between its 15
member agencies. The Santa Clara Valley collaboration is further supplemented by participation
in the regional Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). In
addition to directly benefitting member agencies with access to better science, the regiona]
collaborations enhance technical approaches and ensure consistent messaging to the public and
community decision makers . Implemented when the fast stonnwater pennits were issued to
Santa Clara Valley pe1mittees, the coJlaboration has effectively assisted member agencies in
maintaining storm.water programs that achieve federally and State-mandated water quality
regulations .
The putpose of this Technical Memorandum is to develop a planning-level cost estimate for the
full costs of implementing the stormwater program, which may be used to support a funding
measure for the City ·s st01m drain operations and maintenance and Clean Water Program needs .
The assessment includes a summary of known revenues and estimate s of p1ior year, current year,
and future implementation costs of the stormwater program.3 This info1mation may also he used
in the future to budget program funding and/or to identify other potential funding sources , This
memorandum is organized as follows:
l . Introduction
2. Approach
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Overall Summary
3 .2 . City Expenditures
3 Prior year is fis cal year 2017-2018 ; curren t is fiscal year 20 18-2019 ; future 1s fis ca l years 2019 -2020 through
2023-2024.
Appendi x.A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 17
99
CC 06-03-2025
99 of 1012
2. APPROACH
To understand the funding needs for the stormwater program, the 'true' costs for full
implementation of the MR.P requirements must be understood . However, tracking and compiling
staff time and resources across multiple departments can be a complex and tim e-cons ulllin g
process. To identify the implementation costs for the City as comprehensively and efficiently as
possible, an interview was conducted with key City staff, which included stmctured questions
and discussions regarding the agency 's staffing, implemei1tation approach for the range ofMRF
requirements prior and cuiTent stormwater program revenues, and the estimated costs for
program implementation . The revenues and expenditures were compiled and assigned to two
main categories , which reflects how the City generally allocates funds to implement its day-to-
day stormwater-related operations:
• Operations and Maiutenance (O&M): This includes ongoing and routine ac6vities
supp01ti.11g the O&M of the stormwater infrastructure, including inspection and cleaning
of storm drain inlets, st01m cl.rain lines, and trash capture devices , as well as street
sweeping management (prin1ariJy MRP provision C.2).
• Clean Water Program: This includes ongoing and routine activities that are directly
related to water quality improvement., s uch as implementation of the MRP requirements,
participation in the SCVURPPP , clean creek programs , community outreach , business
and construction site inspections street sweeping, and implementation of the City 's trash
reduction plan (all MR.P provisions, with the exception of green infrastructure projects).
3. RESULTS ANO DISCUSSION
A summary and discussion of total City costs for implementation of the MRP during the prior
year (2017-2018) current year (2018-2019), and future years (2019-2020 through 2023-2024), is
provided within t his section . The cost inform atio n is presented io two ways: a summary of City
expenditures by cost category (O&M and Clean Wa ter Program) (3.1. Overall Summary) and a
detailed breakdown of expenditures (3.2 . City Expenditures) as they relate to the two cost
categories. The approach and assumptions used to develop each of these summaries are
desc1ibed below . All costs are in present-val ue doll ars.
3.1. Overall Summary
Costs fo r the full implementation of the stormwater program were estimated based on budgetary
and supplemental infonnation provided by the City , The approach and assumptions used were as
follows :
• The rev enue and expenditures for 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 were based on the City 's
2018 and 20 I 9 Adopted Bud ge ts.
• Futme revenue was assumed to be the same as that for the ciment fiscal year, 2018-2019
without the transfers in from the G eneral Fund (i .e., $379 000) (Table 1).
• The category-specific expenditure tot als in Table 2 were taken directly from the detailed
City Expenditures for 2017-2018 tlu·ougb 2023-2024 (see Section 3.2 , Table 4).
• Future cost projections were based on the available costs from 2017-2018, information
obtained during City staff in tervi ews, and a percentil e multiplier (3% for personnel costs
and non-personnel costs and 3 .57% for participation in SCVURPPP). Additional details
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water an d Storm Protection Fee Report Page 18
100
CC 06-03-2025
100 of 1012
regarding assumptions for futurn , potential cost i.ncrnases related to specific MRP
provisions are provided in 3.2. City Expenditures.
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Proteolion Fee Report Page 19
101
CC 06-03-2025
101 of 1012
This page left intentionally blank for printing piuposes
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 20
102
CC 06-03-2025
102 of 1012
The estimated revenue for 2017-2018 through 2023-2024 is shown in Table 1 and Figure I.
Table 1. Overall Summary of Revenue
-
PriorlaJ CurrentCaJ Future -Projected
Revenue Category 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
O&M Fund 100-85
Total Fund Revenue $1,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Transfer in (General Fund) $448 ,250 $476,503 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Clean Water Program Fund 230-81
Fines and forfeitures $6 ,000 $9 ,000 $9 ,000 $9,000 $9,000 $9 ,000 $9,000
Charges for services $380 ,000 $370 ,000 $370,000 $370,000 $370,000 $370 ,000 $370,000
Transfer in (General Fund) $375,720 $341 ,785 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Revenue $1,211,670 $1,197,288 $379,000 $379,000 $379,000 $379 ,000 $379,000
[a] Values are from the City's Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Adopted Budget' (2018 Adopted Budget and 2019 Adopted Budget for both Non-Point Source (Fund 230-81 ) (p. 407-409) and
Storm Drain Maintenance (Fund 100-85) (p. 434-435)).
4 https ://www .c upe,ti110.org/home/ howdocument?id=2 l 776
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 21
103
CC 06-03-2025
103 of 1012
The total estimated expenditures for 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 (based on the 2018 and 2019 Adopted Budgets) and the total estimated
expenditures for the next five years, organized by cost category, are shown in Table 2 and Figure 1.
Table 2. Overall Summary of Total Estimated Costs for MRP, by Cost Category and Fiscal Year
Prior[a] CurrentCaJ Future -Projected
Cost Category 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
O&M
$449,950 $476,503 $552,000 $569,000 $586,000 $603,000 $622 ,000 F1,md 1 00-S5
Clean Water Program $761,720 $720,785 $891,000 $918,000 $964,000 $994,000 $1,025,000
Fund 230-81
Total Expenses $1,211,670 $1,197,288 $1,443,000 $1,487,000 $1,550,000 $1,598,000 $1,646,000
[a] Values are from the City's Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Adopted Budget' (2018 Adopted Budget and 2019 Adopted Budget for both Non-Point Source (Fund 230-81) (p . 407-409) and
Stonn Drain Maintenance (Fund 100-85) (p. 434-435)),
s hll[Js ://www .c u perti no.ore:/home/showd oc ument'!id=2 l 776
P. ,dix A 2019 Clean Water and St 0 rotection Fee Report Pager
104
CC 06-03-2025
104 of 1012
$1,800,000
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$0
17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24
-o&M, Fund 100-85 -clean Water Program, Fund 230-81 Total Revenue
Figure 1. Overall Summary of Total Estimated Costs and Revenue for MRP, by Cost Category and
Fiscal Year
3.1.1. Overall Summary: Discussion
Below are a few key observations regarding the overall estimated expenditw·es:
• During the observed time period, the estimated cost of stoimwater program
implementation will exceed the estimated, dedicated revenue (Figure 1).
• The Clean Water Program costs account for the larger portion (62%, as a seven-year
average) of the City 's stormwater-related costs.
• Overall, it is anticipated that the City's stormwater program will spend similar
percentages on O&M and the Clean Water Program annually . Additional, one-time cost
increases are included for the Clean Water Program in FY 2021-2022 , based on potential
increases in MRP requirements (as described in 3.2. City Expenditures).
• Based on the information available and the assumptions made, the total cost of the
sto1mwater program is expected to increase by 36% between 2017-2018 and 2023-2024
(Figure 1). However, it should be noted that the cost increase could be greater depending
upon the requirements of the final , renewed MRP.
o Between 2018-2019 and 2019-2020, a 21 % increase in the total cost of the
sto11nwater program is anticipated to occur. This increase is based on a thorough
evaluation of the City personnel and non-personnel costs required to implement the
current MRP provisions and provide stmm protection (as described in 3.2. City
Expenditures).
Append ix A 2019 Clean Water and Stonn Protection Fee Report Page 23
105
CC 06-03-2025
105 of 1012
3.2. City Expenditures
osts for the implementation of the storm water program for the MRP were estimated based on
budgetaiy and supplemental information provided by the City. When detennining which costs to
include, the City consider d, at a rn.inimum , the following:
• Labor·
• Materials;
• Contract Services;
• Contingencies; and
• Cost Allocation.
The following key pieces of infonnation were provided by the City:
• "Fund 230-81 -Environmental Programs FY17 _18 Expenctitw·e (Actual)" spreadsheet,
which details the expenditures for the Clean Water Program by expense type for FY
2017-2018 .
• 'Fund 230 -81 -Environmental Programs FY 17 _ 18 Revenu e (Actual) ' spreadsheet,
which details the revenues for the Clean Water Program by expense type for FY 2017-
2018 .
• "Fund 230-81 -Environmental Programs FY] 8 _ 19 Expenditure (Budget)' spreadsheet,
which details the amended budget and expenditures to date fol' the Clean Water Program
by expense type for FY 2018-2019 .
• "Fund 23 0-81 -Environmental Programs FY18_19 Revenue (Budget)" spreadsheet,
which details the amended budget and revenues to date for the Clean Water Program by
expense type for FY 2018-2019.
• '10 0-85 -818 FY17 _ 18 Expense (actual)" spreadsheet, which details the expenditures for
O&M by expense type for FY 2017-2018 .
• '100 -85-818 FYl8_19 Expense (Budget)" spreadsheet, which details the amended
budget and expenses to date for O&M by expense type for FY 2018-2019 .
• Hard copy tables describing the staff positions under '230-8 1-8 02 Env Mgmt Cln Crk
Stnn Drain -Environmental Programs -Non Point Sow·ce'' and FTE-General Fund . '
• Hard copy "Resolution 18-039, Schedule B-Engi neering " describing the various fees
effective July 1, 2018.
• The City's Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Adopted Budget 6 detailing the revenue , expenditure,
and General Fund Costs for the 2018 adopted Budget and 2019 Adopted Budget for both
Non-Point Source (Fund 230-81) (p. 407-409) and Storm Drain Maintenance (Fund 100-
85) (p. 434-435).
6 http ://www .cupcrtino .org/ho me/showdocument?id= 1776
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 24
106
CC 06-03-2025
106 of 1012
The approach and assumptions used were as follows:
• All costs were id ntified as O&M Costs or Clean Water Program Costs (Table 4).
• The City s "Cost Allocation" for each fund, which includes overhead costs such as
Human Resow-ces, Finance 1 and lnfo1mation Technology Support, are divided as follows :
o The fulJ Cost Allocation amount for O&M (Fund l 00-85) is accounted for under
Provision C .2.
o The Cost Al location amount for Clean Water Program (Fund 230 -81) is allocated
propmtionally to specific. !v1RP provisions based on the identified labor costs.
• The City 's contribution to SCVURPPP was detennined as follows:
o Based on the Memorandum of Agreement , the Cityf s rumual , propo1tional cost share
is 2 .46% of the annual SCVURPPP Program Budget .
o The City's payment h.istory (JuJy 2008 through July 2018) wa~ used to determine the
average annual increase in the City's contribution (3.57%). Thjs multiplier was used
to estimate contributions for future years.
o The total SCVURPP contribution was distributed equally amongst the MRP
provisions (C.2 through C.13).
• Future costs were projected as follows:
o Future projections were based on the available costs from 2017-2018 and a percentile
multiplier (3% for personnel costs and non-personnel costs and 3.57% for
participation in S VURPPP). This is based on preliminary feedback from Regional
Water Board staff that the MRP should oat change significantly . However, if
significant changes are made to the MRP during the renewal process, then the
estimates should be modified accordingly.
o Implementation costs for specific MR.P provisions are anticipated to require an
additio11al increase dwing the first year of the next l\.1RP tem,.7 These increases were
applied as additive percent increases only for FY 2021-2022. These are preliminary
estimates, and the actual cost increases are to be detennined upon adoption of the new
MRP . These provisions, the anticipated, potential cost increase for each, and the
rationale for the potential increase are as follows :
-C.3 New Development and Redevelopment (5%). This estimated increase is
based on potential expansion of the C.3 requirements to small projects and
single-family residences, which would necessitate updating the application
materials and guidance, including the C .3 Technical Guidance . In addition,
there will be increased costs associated with enhanced O&M requirements for
green infrastmcture projects. This does not include costs for
implementation/instatlation of green infrastmcture projects.
7 The cu1Tent NlRP expire on December 31 , 2020 . If th e MRP is reissued on schedule, the new MRP will begin to
be implemented on January 1, 2021. Th e e i ncreases have been applied to the anticipated, first full year of
implementation of the new MRP, beginning July I , 2021 .
Append ix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 25
107
CC 06-03-2025
107 of 1012
-C.10 Trash Load Reduction (7.5°/c>), This estimated increase is based on
anticipated, new monitoring/assessment costs and implementation
reqt1irements, including the assessment of private catchments. In addition, by
2022, the City wit I need to achieve 100% reduction of the trash load from its
base trash generation level; based on the 2017-2018 Annual Report the City
is cun-ently achieving 93% reduction.
-C.11 Mercury Controls and C.12 Polych l orioated B ipbenyls (PCBs)
Control s (7 .5%}. This estimated increase is based on implementation of new
programs for building demolition to address mercmy and PCBs.
-C.17 Annual Reports (5%). This estimated increase is based on anticipated
changes in reporting requirements and the potential for some increased costs
related to electronic reporting (via EPA) and cost repmting (via the state).
o No incremental projections were made for expenses described as "one-time costs."
The total expenditures for 2017 -2018 (prio year) and 2018-2019 (cw-rent year), based on the
adopted budgets for those years, and the total, estimated expenditmes for the next five years
(:fu t1ire), organized by cost category (fund) and MRP provision, are shown in Table 4 .8 Only
total fund values are included foT 2017-2018 and 2018-2019.
8 The total cost for each cost category (fund) are also summarized in Table 2 ,
Appendix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 26
108
CC 06-03-2025
108 of 1012
Table 4 . City Estimated Expenditures for MRP, by Cost Category (Fund) and Fiscal Year
PriorlaJ CurrentCaJ
Fund MRP Provision 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020
Fund 100-85, Operations & Maintenance
Program Managemen t $59,000
C .2 Mun icipal Operations $493 ,000
Fund Total $449,950 $476,503 $552,000
F und 230-8 1, Clean W ater Program
C .1 Perm it Compliance $23,000
C.2 Mun icipal Operations $148,000
C .3 New Development and Redevelopment $70,000
C.4 Industrial and Commercial Site Controls $83 ,000
C.5 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination $129,000
C.6 Construction Site Control $43 ,000
C .7 Public Information and Outreach $118,000
C.8 Water Quality Mon itoring $11 ,000
C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Control $21 ,000
C .10 Trash Load Reduction $130,000
C .11 Mercury Contro ls $24,000
C .12 PCBs Controls $51,000
C .1 3 Copper Controls $11,000
C.17 Annual Reports $29,000
Fund Total $761 ,720 $720,785 $891 ,000
Total $1,211,670 $1 ,197,288 $1,443 ,000
-
2020-2021
Future -Projected£bl
2021-2022
$61 ,000 $63 ,000
$508 ,000 $523,000
$569,000 $586,000
$24,000 $25,000
$153 ,000 $157,000
$72,000 $77,000
$86 ,000 $88,000
$133,000 $137,000
$44,000 $46,000
$122,000 $126 ,000
$11,000 $12 ,000
$21,000 $22,000
$134,000 $148,000
$25 ,000 $27,000
$52 ,000 $57 ,000
$11,000 $12 ,000
$30,000 $33,000
$918,000 $964,000
$1 ,487,000 $1 ,550,000
202.2-2023 2023-2024
$6 5,000 $67,000
$539 ,000 $555 ,000
$603,000 $622,000
$25 ,000 $26,000
$162,000 $167,000
$80,000 $82,000
$91,000 $94,000
$141,000 $145 ,000
$47,000 $49 ,000
$129,000 $1 33 ,0 00
$12 ,000 $1 3 ,000
$23 ,000 $23 ,0 00
$152,000 $157 ,000
$27,000 $2 8 ,000
$59,000 $61 ,000
$12,000 $13 ,000
$34,000 $35 ,000
$994,000 $1,025,000
$1,598,000 $1,646,000
[a] Values are from the City's Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Adopted Budget" (2018 Adopted Budget and 20 19 Adopted Budget for both Non-Point Source (Fund 230-81) (p . 407-409) and
Storm Drain Maintenance (Fund 100-85) (p . 434-435)).
[b] Each value for the fiscal years under the "Future -Projected " column is considered to be estimated and has been rounded to the nearest $1 ,000 ; thus , summ in g individ ual values
may result in a slightly different total than those shown in the "Fund Total " and "Total " rows .
9 http ://www .cupertino .org/home/ howdocument?id=2 l 776
Append ix A 2019 Clean Water and Storm Protection Fee Report Page 27
109
CC 06-03-2025
109 of 1012
PAGE28
APPENDIX 8-PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS AREA ESTIMATIONS
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Section 2.2.3 of the Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP , 2018) provided information about the
percentage of impermeable area (%IA) for various land use types . Table 8 below
summarizes that information .
TABLE 8-PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA FROM STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN
:Land Use % I A --------------
Commercial/Industrial 85
Very Low Density Res. 35
Low Density Res . 55
Low -Medium Density Res 70
Medium Density Res 80
High Density Res . 75
Medium -High Density Res . 70
Open Water 100
Parks/Open Space 15
Publ ic (Schools, Gov't, etc.) 45
Quasi-Public/Institutional 65
Transportation/Right of Way 90
Undeveloped 0
Several of the SDMP land use types were the same as the rate categories for this Report .
However, some of the rate categories in this Report did not precisely match the land uses in
the SDMP, so adjustments were made. Table 9 below shows the SDMP categories on the
left side and the Fee Report rate categories on the right side . The ones in green matched
suffic iently to use the m outright. The ones in beige required some adjustments, which are
explained below the Table .
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
SCI Consulting G ro~p
110
CC 06-03-2025
110 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Pag..i 29
TABLE 9-PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FROM STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN
I _ Storm_ Drain_Ma_st_e_!_!>lan _ _ ~ __ __fe~ Repo_rt _
Low-Medium IDensity Res 70 7,0 Small SFR
Low Density Res. 55 55 Medil!Jm SFR
45 Large SFR
Very low Density Res. 35 35 Very Large SFR
Quasi-Public/Institutional 65 65 Multi-fam
Colil'lmercial/lndustrial 85 85 Comm/ln€lusl
Ql!lasi-Pul!Jlic/lnstitutional 65 65 €:Jf.fice
Public (Schools, Gov't, etc.) 45 55 Institutional
40 Schools
Parks/Open SJ!)ace 15 Il.5 Pa~~s
Undeveloped 0 5 Vacant
0 Open Space
EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS TO %IA
• Large Single-Family Residential-This category fa lls between the Medium and Very
Large categories without a corresponding land use in the SDMP. That gap was split
evenly to arrive at a %IA of 45%. This created an array of %IA for the residential
rate categories that aligns well with other communities and associated fee reports .
• Institutional & Schools -The SDMP grouped schools with other governmental uses ,
however the Fee Report distinguishes between governmental/institutional uses and
schools (with play field areas). The SDMP blended rate of 45% was used as a basis
to split the Fee Report categories to arrive at %IA values of 55% and 40%,
respectively . Again, these values align relatively well with other communities and
associated fee reports .
• Vacant & Open Space -The SDMP assigned a value of 0% for the undeveloped
land use while the Fee Report distinguishes between open space/natural terrain and
vacant land that has been developed (but not improved). It is assumed that the
SDMP blended the two categories, which was split for the Fee Report categories to
arrive at %IA values of 5% and 0%, respectively. Further justification for the %IA of
zero for open space land is provided in the body of the Fee Report . Again, these
values align relatively well with other communities and associated fee reports.
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPOR T
FEBRUARY 2019
Con s ultjngGrroup
111
CC 06-03-2025
111 of 1012
APPENDIX C-ST0RMWATER RATES FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES
CITY OF CUPERTINO
There have been relatively few voter-approved local revenue measures in the past 15 years
to support stormwate r programs in California . A summary of those efforts plus some others
in process or being studied is shown in Table 10 on the following page , in roughly
chronological order . Amounts are annualized and are for single family residences or the
equivalent.
20 19 CLEAN WATER AND STO RM PROTE CTION FE E REP ORT
FEB RUARY 2019
I ConsuJti ngG,-oup
112
CC 06-03-2025
112 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Page 3i
TABLE 10-RECENT STORM DRAIN BALLOT MEASURES
I Annual
Municipality Status R Year Mechanism ate
San Clemente
Carmel
Palo Alto
Los Angeles
Palo Alto
Rancho Palos Verde
Encinitas
Ross Valley
Santa Monica
San Clemente
Solana Beach
Woodland
Del Mar
Hawthorne
Santa Cruz
Burlingame
Santa Clarita
Stockton
County of Contra Costa
Santa Clara Valley Water
Dis t rict
City of Berkeley
County of LA
San Clemente
Vallejo San & Flood
Culver City
Palo Alto
Town of Moraga
City of Berkeley
Los Angeles Flood
Control
City of Los Altos
City of Alameda
County of San Joaquin
City of Sacramento
City of Salinas
City of Santa Clara
County of San Mateo
County of El Dorado
County of Orange
County of Ventura
Successful
Unsuccessful
Unsuccessful
Successful
Successful
Successful , then recalled and
reduced
Unsuccessful
Successful, Overturned by
Court of Appeals, Decertified
by Supreme Court
Successful
Successfully renewed
Non -Bal loted , Threatened by
lawsuit, Ba l loted, Successfu l
Unsuccessful
Successful
Unsuccessful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Unsuccessful
Unsuccessful
Successful
Successful
Deferred
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Unsuccessful
Successful
Successful
In Process
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
Studying
$
$
s
s
60.15 1
38 .00
57.00
28 .00
$ 120.00
2002
2003
2003
2004
2005
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Special Tax -G. 0. Bond
Balloted Property-Related Fee
S 200.00 2005, 2007 Balloted Property-Related Fee
$ 60.00 2006
s 125.00 2006
s 87.00 2006
s 60 .15 2007
s 21.84 2007
s 60.00 2007
$ 163.38 2008
$ 30.00 2008
s 28.00 2008
s 150.00 2009
$ 21.00 2009
s 34.56 2009
s 22 .00 2012
s 56 .00 2012
varies 2012
$ 54 .00 2012
$ 74 .76 2013
s 23 .00 2015
$ 99 .00 2016
s 163 .80 2017
$ 120.38 2018
$ 42 .89 2018
s 83 .00 2018
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
Non -Balloted Property-Related
Fee adopted in 2004,
challenged, ballot ed an d failed
in 2006
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Special Tax
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Non-Balloted & Balloted
Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Special Tax
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Special Tax
Measure M -GO Bond
NA
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Special Tax
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Reauthorization of 2005 Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Re lated Fee
Special Tax
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
Balloted Property-Related Fee
NA
Balloted Property-Related Fee
NA
NA
NA
NA
2019 CLEAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
SCI Cons ultingGroup
113
CC 06-03-2025
113 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Page 32
In addition to the agencies listed above in Table 10 that have gone to the ballot for new or
increased Stormwater Fees , there are several other municipalities throughout the State that
have existing Stormwater Fees in place. Some of these rates are summarized in Table 11
below. Amounts are annualized and are for single family residences or the equivalent.
The City 's proposed $44.42 SFR rate is well within the range of stormwater rates adopted
by other municipa lities .
TABLE 11 -SAMPLE OF RATES FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES
. . 1. Annua l f Munic1pa 1ty Type o Fee
Rate
-------
Bakersfield $ 200.04 Property-Related Fee
Culver City $ 99 .00 Special Tax
Davis $ 84.94 Property-Related Fee
Elk Grove $ 70.08 Property-Related Fee
$ 190.20 Property-Related Fee
Hayward $ 28.56 Property-Related Fee
Los Angeles $ 27 .00 Special tax
Palo Alto $ 136.80 Property-Related Fee
Redding $ 15.84 Property -Related Fee
Sacramento (City) $ 135.72 Property-Related Fee
Sacramento (County) $ 70.08 Property-Related Fee
San Bruno $ 46.16 Property-Related Fee
San Clemente $ 60.24 Property-Related Fee
San Jose $ 91.68 Property-Related Fee
Santa Cruz $ 109.08 Special Tax
Stockton* $ 221.37 Property-Related Fee
Vallejo Sanitation and Flood
$ 23.64 Property-Related Fee Control District
West Sacramento $ 144.11 Property-Related Fee
Woodland $ 5.76 Property-Related Fee
* This is the ca l cu l ated average rate for the City of Stockton, which has 15
rate zones with rates ranging from $3 .54 to $65 1.68 per year.
2019 CL EAN WATER AND STORM PROTECTION FEE REPORT
FEBRUARY 2019
S CIConsuHingG roup
114
CC 06-03-2025
114 of 1012
115
CC 06-03-2025
115 of 1012
116
CC 06-03-2025
116 of 1012
117
CC 06-03-2025
117 of 1012
118
CC 06-03-2025
118 of 1012
119
CC 06-03-2025
119 of 1012
120
CC 06-03-2025
120 of 1012
121
CC 06-03-2025
121 of 1012
122
CC 06-03-2025
122 of 1012
123
CC 06-03-2025
123 of 1012
124
CC 06-03-2025
124 of 1012
125
CC 06-03-2025
125 of 1012
126
CC 06-03-2025
126 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13818 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 7.
Subject:Amend Chapter 16.74 of the Municipal Code to adopt CAL FIRE's recommendations for Fire
Severity Hazard Zones in the Local Responsibility Area and Chapter 16.40 of the Municipal Code to update a
reference to the updated map.
Introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 25-2272“An Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Cupertino amending Chapter 16.74 of the Municipal Code to adopt Fire Severity Hazard Zones in the
Local Responsibility Area and Chapter 16.40 to update a reference to the updated map”.
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™127
CC 06-03-2025
127 of 1012
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 3, 2025
Subject
Amend Chapter 16.74 of the Municipal Code to adopt CAL FIRE's recommendations for
Fire Severity Hazard Zones in the Local Responsibility Area and Chapter 16.40 of the
Municipal Code to update a reference to the updated map
Recommended Action
Introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 25-____ (Attachment A): “An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 16.74 of the
Municipal Code to adopt Fire Severity Hazard Zones in the Local Responsibility Area
and Chapter 16.40 to update a reference to the updated map”.
Executive Summary
Recent changes to state law require local jurisdictions to adopt all three Fire Hazard
Severity Zone (FHSZ) classification categories—Very High, High, and Moderate—based
on CAL FIRE’s 2025 hazard maps. The proposed ordinance reflects these updates,
applies the highest FHSZ designation to parcels with multiple FHSZ classifications, and
updates code references accordingly. These designations affect building construction
and fire code standards applicable to these properties. While the City has received
questions from residents—primarily regarding insurance implications—no formal
objections or suggestions for expanded designations have been submitted. Adoption of
this map does not affect availability of insurance or rates, since insurance companies use
fire risk maps prepared by them, which are different from the fire hazard map
recommended by CAL FIRE. The Public Safety Commission reviewed the matter in May
and raised additional concerns, including fire prevention funding, community
engagement, and the long-term implications of hazard designations. The ordinance is
exempt from CEQA and supports the City’s environmental sustainability goals.
Background
Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 51177-51179, in February and March
2025, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) issued maps to
indicate the State Marshall’s recommendations for the three Fire Hazard Severity Zones
128
CC 06-03-2025
128 of 1012
(FHSZ) classifications for all Local Responsibility Area (LRA)1 throughout the state.2 The
City has received formal notification from CAL FIRE (Attachment B) and, pursuant to
Government Code Section 51175, at a minimum, must adopt a map adopting the
recommendations produced by the State (Attachment C) no later than June 24, 2025.
FHSZ consist of Very High, High, and Moderate designations, classified by the zone’s
risk of fire hazard severity. This classification by CAL FIRE is based on consistent
statewide criteria and the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those
areas. FHSZ classifications are based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other
relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by CAL FIRE as a
major cause of wildfire spread. The FHSZ classifications were determined by CAL FIRE
using updated data and modeling.3
The Office of the State Fire Marshal has been required to identify FHSZ in the State
Responsibility Area (SRA)4 since 1981. However, it wasn’t until the “Bates Bill” (AB 337,
1992), prompted by the 1991 Oakland Hills Fire, that CAL FIRE was required to evaluate
FHSZ in the LRAs and to make a recommendation to local jurisdictions where Very
High FHSZ exist.
The evaluation process is directed by State law and the last LRA maps were made
available in 2008/2009. The 2009 LRA maps identified approximately 10 properties
(primarily at the terminus of Upland Way) as Very High FHSZ (identified in red in the
current Chapter 16.74 – see Attachment D) with several properties identified as High
FHSZ (identified in an orange-yellow color in the current Chapter 16.74 – see
Attachment D). While the City was only required to adopt CAL FIRE’s Very High FHSZ
recommendations, the City Council at the time, upon advice from the Santa Clara
County Fire District, also adopted CAL FIRE’s High FHSZ recommended areas as part
of the City’s Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area with Ordinance No. 09-2042.5 In 2021,
State law (Government Code Section 51179) changed to require local agencies to adopt
all three FHSZ classifications, Very High, High and Moderate, in the LRA.6
1 Local Responsibility Area (LRA) include areas, such as incorporated cities, urban regions,
agricultural lands, and portions of the deserts, where local governments are responsible for
wildfire protection. Within LRAs, fire protection services are typically provided by city fire
departments, fire protection districts, county agencies, and by CAL FIRE under contract.
2 These maps are available on CALFIRE’s website.
3 CALFIRE has provided information on their Fire Hazard Severity Zones website on how they
conducted their analysis and developed their recommendations.
4 CAL FIRE is responsible for providing fire protection services for approximately 31 million
acres within the State of California, called the State Responsibility Area (SRA), where the State
has the financial responsibility for wildfire protection, prevention and suppression.
5 Cupertino Ordinance 09-2042
6 Senate Bill 63 (Stern, 2021) Government Code 51178 was amended to add the Moderate and
High Fire Hazard Severity Zones with the Very High in local jurisdictions.
129
CC 06-03-2025
129 of 1012
Properties in those areas designated as Very High or High FHSZ are required to meet
the following requirements:
1. In Very High FHSZ:
a. Vegetation management standards, related to defensible space clearance, in
Government Code Section 51182, and
b. Ignition-resistant building for all new buildings, or major remodels classified
as new construction by the Building Official, per Chapter 7A of the CA
Building Code for commercial development and Section R337 of the CA
Residential Code for residential development.
2. In High FHSZ: Wildfire resistant construction standards for all new buildings, or
major remodels classified as new construction by the Building Official, per
Chapter 7A of the CA Building Code for commercial development and Section
R337 of the CA Residential Code for residential development.
3. In both Very High and High FHSZ: Conduct a natural hazard real estate
disclosure at time of sale per CA CIV 1102.19 (AB 38, 2019).
Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
As previously stated, the City must at a minimum adopt the State’s recommended areas
for all three FHSZ classifications in the LRA. Notwithstanding the minimum FHSZ that
the City is required to adopt by State law, under the authority included in Government
Code 51175, the City may re-designate areas already designated to a higher FHSZ or
designate areas not included in the recommended CAL FIRE maps as Moderate, High,
or Very High FHSZ. The City may not, however, reduce the recommended designations,
or boundaries, included on the CAL FIRE maps. No changes have been proposed to
CAL FIRE’s recommendations.
Chapter 16.74 has been updated to reflect CAL FIRE’s recommendations. It should be
noted that since some parcels have multiple FHSZ designations, CAL FIRE has provided
guidance that in adopting the map, City’s should apply the highest designation
recommended for that property to the entire property for clarity. Meaning, if a property
has Very High FHSZ and Moderate FHSZ designations per CAL FIRE’s map, the entire
parcel would have a Very High FHSZ on the adopted map. In addition, minor edits have
been made to Chapter 16.40.200 to update a reference to the updated map/section. These
changes have been reflected in the proposed draft Ordinance (see Attachment A).
Public Safety Commission Review
At a special meeting on May 8, 2025, the Public Safety Commission reviewed CAL FIRE
recommendations. Comments from the commissioners included:
• Low response/engagement rate from the community
• Impacts of federal cuts to fire prevention
• Need for cameras/sensors for early fire detection
• Home insurance and whether the City can work with insurance companies to
make sure residents do not lose their coverage
• Impact of designations to home prices
• Ways for the City to reduce hazard designations for future maps
130
CC 06-03-2025
130 of 1012
Community Input
In accordance with State law, the public must be allowed 90 days to review the maps
and provide their input. The City has made these maps and an input form available on
the City’s website since March 11, 2025. In addition, the City sent letters to all the
property owners within the designated and potential FHSZ to inform them of their
property’s inclusion in the FHSZ areas.
While there have been several questions from the community about CAL FIRE’s process,
no input has been received about increasing the FHSZ or redesignating areas.
Community comments and questions are included in Attachment E.
One question asked frequently is related to how the new FHSZ map affects the ability
for property owners to obtain or retain home insurance. CAL FIRE provides the
following information in their Frequently Asked Questions Memo (see Attachment F) as
it pertains to the question about homeowners’ insurance: “Insurance companies use risk
models, which differ from hazard models, because they consider the susceptibility of a structure to
damage from fire and other short-term factors that are not included in hazard modeling. It is
unlikely that insurance risk models specifically call out CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones as
a factor, but much of the same data that is used in the fire hazard severity zone model are likely
included in the insurance companies’ risk models. However, insurance risk models incorporate
many additional factors and factors that change more frequently than those that CAL FIRE
includes in its hazard mapping, which is built to remain steady for the next 10+ years.”
Sustainability Impact
Adoption of the map and implementation of the requirements of the Building Code
would improve the City’s resistance to the impacts of wildfires and improve long-term
sustainability. Wildfires that transition to a structure-to-structure conflagration have
acute and far-reaching consequences, not only for the environment and climate, but also
for the stability and well-being of impacted communities. These fires release large
amounts of pollutants into the air, including soot and carbon dioxide, which contribute
to climate change and degrade air quality. Additionally, toxic byproducts from burning
structures, vehicles, and other synthetic material can pose significant health risks to
residents and responders.
A commitment to strong fire safety regulations ultimately benefits the entire
community—protecting public health, safeguarding financial resources, and ensuring a
resilient and sustainable future.
Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.
City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None
Council Goal
Environmental Sustainability.
131
CC 06-03-2025
131 of 1012
California Environmental Quality Act
These actions are taken to protect the environment and are, therefore, exempt from
CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section 15308.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Piu Ghosh, Planning Manager
Sean Hatch, Building Official
Reviewed by: Luke Connolly, Assistant Director of Community Development
Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development
Floy Andrews, City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Acting City Manager
Attachments:
A – Draft Ordinance
B – Letter from CAL FIRE
C – CAL FIRE recommended LRA map for Cupertino
D – Existing Chapter 16.74
E – Summary of Public Comments
F – CAL FIRE Frequently Asked Questions Memo
132
CC 06-03-2025
132 of 1012
133
CC 06-03-2025
133 of 1012
134
CC 06-03-2025
134 of 1012
135
CC 06-03-2025
135 of 1012
136
CC 06-03-2025
136 of 1012
137
CC 06-03-2025
137 of 1012
138
CC 06-03-2025
138 of 1012
139
CC 06-03-2025
139 of 1012
140
CC 06-03-2025
140 of 1012
141
CC 06-03-2025
141 of 1012
142
CC 06-03-2025
142 of 1012
143
CC 06-03-2025
143 of 1012
144
CC 06-03-2025
144 of 1012
145
CC 06-03-2025
145 of 1012
146
CC 06-03-2025
146 of 1012
147
CC 06-03-2025
147 of 1012
148
CC 06-03-2025
148 of 1012
149
CC 06-03-2025
149 of 1012
150
CC 06-03-2025
150 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-13924 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 8.
Subject:Consideration of Recommended Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2025-26, Adoption of the Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for FY 2025-26,
Establishment of the Appropriation Limit, and related actions; Direction on past and current City Work
Program and FY 2024-25 Special Projects
1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-038 establishing an Operating Budget of $131,838,401 for FY 2025-26, which
includes the following changes to the FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget, published on May 1, 2025:
a. Approve the operating budget of $131,772,435, outlined in the FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget.
b. Approve a reduction in revenues of $1,500,000 for transfers in to Fund 580 ($500,000) and Fund
610 ($1,000,000) from the General Fund.
c. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($63,733) due to the elimination of the proposed part-
time Economic Development Analyst.
d. Approve additional appropriations of $146,710 for a proposed Administrative Assistant
position in the City Clerk’s division to assist with all current and future hybrid Commissions and
Committees meetings.
e. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($17,011) due to the elimination of the proposed
Assistant Director of Administrative Services
f. Approve any other recommended changes as directed by City Council
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-039 establishing a Capital Improvement Program Budget of $4,225,000 for FY
2025-26.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 25-040 amending the Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program
a. Senior Business Systems Analyst Position Description; and
b. Code Enforcement Supervisor Position Description
4. Adopt Resolution No. 25-041 amending the Cupertino Employees’ Association (CEA) Memorandum
of Understanding
a. Assistant Housing Coordinator Position Description
5. Adopt Resolution No. 25-042 establishing an Appropriation Limit of $141,134,546 for FY 2025-26
6. Provide direction on any remaining past and current City Work Program currently budget and FY
2024-25 Special Projects
7. Approve Resolution 25-043 and Budget modification number 2425-393 to reduce expenditures by
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™151
CC 06-03-2025
151 of 1012
25-13924 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 8.
7. Approve Resolution 25-043 and Budget modification number 2425-393 to reduce expenditures by
$326,266, in the General Fund to defund three special projects and two City Work Programs
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™152
CC 06-03-2025
152 of 1012
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 3, 2025
Subject
Consideration of Recommended Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2025-26, Adoption of the Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for FY
2025-26, Establishment of the Appropriation Limit, and related actions; Direction on past and
current City Work Program and FY 2024-25 Special Projects
Recommended Action
1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX establishing an Operating Budget of $131,838,401 for FY
2025-26, which includes the following changes to the FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget,
published on May 1, 2025:
a. Approve the operating budget of $131,772,435, outlined in the FY 2025-26 Proposed
Budget.
b. Approve a reduction in revenues of $1,500,000 for transfers in to Fund 580 ($500,000)
and Fund 610 ($1,000,000) from the General Fund.
c. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($63,733) due to the elimination of the
proposed part-time Economic Development Analyst.
d. Approve additional appropriations of $146,710 for a proposed Administrative
Assistant position to assist with all current and future hybrid Commissions and
Committees meetings.
e. Approve a reduction in expenditures of ($17,011) due to the elimination of the
proposed Assistant Director of Administrative Services
f. Approve any other recommended changes as directed by City Council
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX establishing a Capital Improvement Program Budget of
$4,225,000 for FY 2025-26.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX amending the Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation
Program
a. Senior Business Systems Analyst Position Description; and
b. Code Enforcement Supervisor Position Description
153
CC 06-03-2025
153 of 1012
2
4. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX amending the Cupertino Employees’ Association (CEA)
Memorandum of Understanding
a. Assistant Housing Coordinator Position Description
5. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX establishing an Appropriation Limit of $141,134,546 for FY
2025-26
6. Provide direction on any remaining past and current City Work Program currently budget
and FY 2024-25 Special Projects
7. Approve Resolution 25-XXX and Budget modification number 2425-393 to reduce
expenditures by $326,266, in the General Fund to defund three special projects and two
City Work Programs
Executive Summary
Overall, the Final Budget for both Operating and Capital Budgets for Fiscal Year 2025-26 is
recommended at $136,063,401 across all funds with estimated revenues of $133,654,373, which
includes the use of one-time funds of $2,373,901. Focusing on the General Fund, the City’s largest
tax-supported fund, a proposed budget of $99,186,741, with estimated revenues of $97,229,134
resulting in a use of fund balance $1,957,607.
The proposed budget included the following requests:
• $2,280,000 in one-time funds for City Work Program (CWP) items
• $3,983,565 in department requests, including special projects and staffing changes, and
• Request to add three new positions, two part-time positions, and four new classifications
for existing positions that will not result in additional full-time positions.
The final budget includes the following additional changes since the proposed budget was
printed:
• Removing the request for a part-time management analyst in Economic Development,
bringing part-time staffing request to one.
• Removing the request for an Assistant Director of Administrative Services classification
• Adding a new Administrative Assistant position to assist with hybrid meetings bringing
full-time staffing requests to four
• Transferring Economic Development division from Community Development back to
Administration
• Transferring the Strategic Plan special project from Administrative Services to
Administration, and
• The reduction of transfer in revenues to enterprise fund 580 and internal service fund
610 that were inadvertently placed in those funds.
154
CC 06-03-2025
154 of 1012
3
Reasons for Recommendation
At its May 15, 2025 meeting, City Council received the proposed budget and directed staff to
bring it back for final adoption on June 3.
This report consists of the initial proposed budget that was printed on May 1, 2025, as well as any
subsequent modifications made to date. Most of these modifications were also presented to
Council on May 15 and include unforeseen adjustments to expenditures and revenues that have
emerged since the publication of the Proposed Budget. New to the adjustments is the request to
include the addition of one full-time position for an Administrative Assistant in the City Clerk’s
Office to support hybrid meetings as highlighted in the informational memo dated May 29, 2025,
and the reduction of transfers in totaling $1.5 million that were inadvertently included, the
transfer of Economic Development division back to Administration from Community
Development and the removal of the request to add the Assistant Director of Administrative
Services. Those changes are summarized by funds below:
Changes to Revenues
Changes to Expenditures
Fund Type Proposed
Revenues
Changes
Since
Proposed
Final Revenues
General 97,229,134$ -$ 97,229,134$
Special Revenue 14,322,146$ -$ 14,322,146$
Debt Service 2,676,600$ -$ 2,676,600$
Capital Projects 4,000,000$ -$ 4,000,000$
Enterprise 7,326,084$ (500,000)$ 6,826,084$
Internal Service 9,600,409$ (1,000,000)$ 8,600,409$
TOTAL 135,154,373$ (1,500,000)$ 133,654,373$
155
CC 06-03-2025
155 of 1012
4
Changes to Fund Balance/Net Position
In addition, responses to Council’s questions during the Proposed Budget Study Session are
included in Attachment G.
The Final Budget for the upcoming fiscal year highlights a decrease in both expenditures and
revenues compared to the previous year's Adopted Budget. Total expenditures for all funds are
proposed at $136.1 million, a $10.6 million or 7.2%, decrease from the previous year’s Adopted
Budget. Similarly, total revenues for all funds are anticipated to be $133.7 million, a $5.7 million
or 4.1%, decrease from last year’s Adopted Budget. The decrease in expenditures and revenues is
primarily due to a decrease in Capital Improvement Projects.
General Fund expenditures are at $99.2 million, which is an increase of $9.1 million or 10.2%, from
the previous year's Adopted Budget. General Fund revenues are anticipated to be $97.2 million,
which is a $7.4 million or 8.3%, increase from the previous year's Adopted Budget.
The following table shows the City’s budget by fund type.
Fund Type Proposed
Expenditure
Changes
Since
Proposed
Final Expenditure
General 99,120,775$ 65,966$ 99,186,741$
Special Revenue 10,810,122$ -$ 10,810,122$
Debt Service 2,676,600$ -$ 2,676,600$
Capital Projects 4,225,000$ -$ 4,225,000$
Enterprise 9,153,170$ -$ 9,153,170$
Internal Service 10,011,768$ -$ 10,011,768$
TOTAL 135,997,435$ 65,966$ 136,063,401$
Fund Type
Proposed Change
in Fund
B a lance/Net
Position
Changes
Since
Pr oposed
Final Change in Fund
Balance/Net Position
General 1,891,641$ 65,966$ 1,957,607$
Special Revenue (3,512,024)$ -$ (3,512,024)$
Debt Service -$ -$ -$
Capital Projects 225,000$ -$ 225,000$
Enterprise 1,827,086$ 500,000$ 2,327,086$
Internal Service 411,359$ 1,000,000$ 1,411,359$
TOTAL 843,062$ 1,565,966$ 2,409,028$
156
CC 06-03-2025
156 of 1012
5
General Fund
The General Fund is the City's primary operating fund. It accounts for basic services such as
public safety, public works, community development, park maintenance, code enforcement, and
the administrative services required to support them. The fund generates revenue from the City's
discretionary funding sources (e.g., sales tax, property tax, transient occupancy tax, and utility
tax). As a rule, General Fund resources are used only to fund operations that do not have other
dedicated (restricted) funding sources. Operations that rely heavily upon non-General Fund
resources, such as street maintenance, solid waste collection, and recreation, are accounted for in
other funds. Information on these funds may be found in the Other Funds section of this
document on page 13.
As illustrated in the following chart, most of the General Fund supports costs for Public Works,
Law Enforcement, and Community Development.
Fund Type Final Revenues Final
Expenditure
Final Change in Fund
Balance/Net Position
General 97,229,134$ 99,186,741$ (1,957,607)$
Special Revenue 14,322,146$ 10,810,122$ 3,512,024$
Debt Service 2,676,600$ 2,676,600$ -$
Capital Projects 4,000,000$ 4,225,000$ (225,000)$
Enterprise 6,826,084$ 9,153,170$ (2,327,086)$
Internal Service 8,600,409$ 10,011,768$ (1,411,359)$
TOTAL 133,654,373$ 136,063,401$ (2,409,028)$
157
CC 06-03-2025
157 of 1012
6
General Fund Expenditures
FY 2025-26 expenditures are estimated at $99.2 million, which represents a $9.1 million or 10.2%
increase compared to the adopted budget from the previous year. This increase is primarily
attributed to increases in salaries for additional position requests, increases in contracts and
increases in special projects and capital outlay.
158
CC 06-03-2025
158 of 1012
7
General Fund expenditures increased by $65,966 from the $99.1 million the Proposed Budget
printed on May 1, 2025, to the final budget due to:
Description Expenditure Change
Administration – Transfer in of Economic Development $999,057
Community Development – Transfer Out of Economic
Development
-$999,057
Eliminate request for additional part time Management Analyst
in Economic Development
-$63,733
Add one new full-time position, Administrative Assistant $146,710
Eliminate request for an Assistant Director of Administrative
Services
-$17,011
Total $65,966
The estimates for FY 2025-26 General Fund expenditures are based on a thorough analysis of
anticipated personnel and non-personnel costs. To create a more fiscally responsible budget,
department budgets reflect a base budget with only justified ongoing expenses. This accounts for
changes in personnel costs as well as any other anticipated or known increased costs in FY 2025-
26.
Personnel Costs
In FY 2025-26, personnel costs are expected to reach $34.8 million, accounting for 35% of the
General Fund expenditures. These costs include salaries and compensation for benefited and
2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2025-26 Per cent
EXPENDITURES Actual Actual Adopted Proposed Final Change
Employee Compensation 21,760,345 21,367,731 23,388,317 24,182,741 24,197,538 3.5%
Employee Benefits 8,464,077 9,503,988 11,329,376 10,595,638 10,643,857 -6.1%
Total Personnel Costs 30,224,422 30,871,719 34,717,693 34,778,379 34,841,395 0.4%
Non-Personnel Costs
Materials 5,507,090 5,215,228 5,775,194 6,174,481 6,174,481 6.9%
Contract Services 21,845,913 25,655,721 29,216,149 31,496,502 31,496,502 7.8%
Cost Allocation 10,385,961 10,257,656 10,638,580 11,993,327 11,993,327 12.7%
Capital Outlay & Special Projects 3,020,115 3,683,913 1,165,000 2,968,433 2,968,433 154.8%
Contingencies 277 5,732 254,580 50,000 50,000 -80.4%
Other Uses 619,687 482,077 925,000 1,065,000 1,065,000 15.1%
Total Non-Personnel 41,379,044 45,300,327 47,974,503 53,747,743 53,747,743 12.0%
Transfers 12,344,345 6,595,284 7,349,598 10,594,653 10,594,653 44.2%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 83,947,811$ 82,767,330$ 90,041,794$ 99,120,775$ 99,183,791$ 10.2%
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
159
CC 06-03-2025
159 of 1012
8
part-time staff (68%), retirement benefits (15%), and other fringe benefits (17%), such as health
coverage.
To obtain these figures, the City extracted data from the payroll system and made necessary
updates to account for vacant positions, new hires, salary adjustments, and reallocated positions.
Furthermore, the projected costs of benefits for the upcoming year, such as retirement and health
plans, were taken into consideration. A transfer to the Retiree Medical Fund for retiree healthcare,
which is an ongoing expense, is budgeted in FY 2025-26.
The FY 2025-26 Final Budget includes funding for a total of 211 positions, representing an increase
of four positions from the FY 2024-25 Amended Budget.
Non-Personnel
Non-Personnel budgets were developed based on previous year's base budget and adjusted for
the current year's needs. One-time projects were excluded to reflect ongoing expenditure needs.
Materials and contract services were adjusted by CPI, where applicable.
Major changes from the prior fiscal year include:
• Employee Compensation – Increasing primarily due to step progressions and requests to
add additional full-time and part-time staffing.
• Contract Services – Increasing primarily due to the Hopper Community Shuttle costs,
which has some offsetting revenue and increase cost for the Sheriff’s Law Enforcement
Contract at 6%.
• Cost Allocation – Increasing because of our new Cost Allocation model and increased
budget across service providing departments.
• Capital Outlays and Special Projects – Increasing due to a more robust City work Plan,
and increased funding request for maintenance projects.
Contingencies
Contingencies for individual program budgets were calculated based on FY 2025-26 base budget
numbers and then incorporated into the materials budget. This has resulted in the City Manager
Contingency being the only remaining contingencies in the budget.
General Fund Revenue
The City's General Fund revenues for the upcoming fiscal year are projected to be $97.2 million,
representing an increase of $7.4 million or 8.3% from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget. This
160
CC 06-03-2025
160 of 1012
9
increase is primarily due to an increase in Property Tax, Intergovernmental Revenues, and
Franchise Fees. There have been no changes to General Fund revenues since the Proposed Budget
study session on May 15.
Property tax - Increasing by $2.2 million primarily due to actual growth in FY25 and updated
budget methodology to align budget with actuals.
Franchise fees - Increased by $0.9 million primarily due to actual growth in FY25 and updated
budget methodology to align budget with actuals.
Intergovernmental revenues are higher due to an increase in funds received from other cities and
grant funds for the hopper shuttle.
General Fund – Fund Balance
FY 2025-26 total fund balance is estimated to be $155.3 million, a decrease of $2.0 million, or 1.2%,
from the FY 2024-25 Projected Budget; however, this does not account for the $2.0 million vacancy
2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 Percent
REVENUES Actuals Actuals Adopted Final Change
Sales Tax 34,819,341 30,961,166 11,648,962 11,983,958
2.9%
Property Tax 31,889,638 33,036,853 33,174,977 35,413,310
6.7%
Transient Occupancy 7,062,150 6,486,798 7,731,947 7,500,000
-3.0%
Utility Tax 4,103,906 3,935,917 4,130,140 4,206,907
1.9%
Franchise Fees 3,995,018 4,313,669 3,509,346 4,394,563
25.2%
Other Taxes 1,471,789 1,621,328 1,684,329 1,736,718
3.1%
Licenses & Permits 4,093,631 4,412,057 3,665,866 4,261,859
16.3%
Use of Money & Property 3,033,683 9,098,441 4,697,122 6,538,880
39.2%
Intergovernmental 7,771,411 1,404,322 2,471,990 3,569,332
44.4%
Charges for Services 10,841,202 12,181,459 15,102,136 15,162,032
0.4%
Fines & Forfeitures 303,573 416,402 395,000 410,760
4.0%
Miscellaneous 1,306,454 2,199,861 1,210,653 1,668,815
37.8%
Transfers in 861,140 111,000 15,000 15,000 0.0%
Other financing sources 272,396 127,037 367,000 367,000
0.0%
TOTAL REVENUES 111,825,331$ 110,306,310$ 89,804,468$ 97,229,134$ 8.3%
GENERAL FUND REVENUE SUMMARY
161
CC 06-03-2025
161 of 1012
10
savings discussed later in the report under the Forecast section. It’s important to note that the
only portion available for use, according to City policy, is unassigned funds. Committed funds,
such as the For Future Use Reserve, are set aside for specific purposes determined by City Council
resolution. Restricted funds, such as the Section 115 Pension Trust, are allocated for specific
purposes stipulated by external resource providers.
Of the total fund balance, $42.6 million is categorized as unassigned and available; however,
approximately $14.3 million of this amount is tied to the Vallco Town Center project. While the
current accounting reflects the assumption that all revenue and contracted expenditures for the
project have been recognized, Vallco is a multi-year effort, likely spanning a decade. Key long-
term costs, including staff salaries and benefits associated with managing and supporting the
project, have not yet been fully incurred or accounted for. As a result, this portion of the
unassigned balance should not be viewed as fully available, as the project is expected to
ultimately net to a zero fiscal impact to the City.
The following table shows changes to fund balance for the General Fund since the close of FY
2022-23:
162
CC 06-03-2025
162 of 1012
11
Classification 2022-23
Actual
2023-24
Actual
2024-25
Adopted
Budget
2024-25
Year End
Projected
2025-26
Final Budget
Nonspendable
Loans Receivable 970,962 428,431 435,000 428,431 435,000
Advance to Other Funds 3,000,000 3,000,000 - 3,000,000 3,000,000
Inventories/Prepaid Items 29,626 21,383 - 21,383 21,383
Total Nonspendable 4,000,588 3,449,814 435,000 3,449,814 3,456,383
Restricted
CASp Certification and Training - 7,628 12,377 7,628 7,628
Section 115 Pension Trust 19,088,859 21,663,664 19,088,859 21,663,664 21,663,664
Public Access Television - 1,639,443 1,565,153 429,443 429,443
Public Art In-Lieu - - - - -
Total Restricted 19,088,859 23,310,735 20,666,389 22,100,734 22,100,734
Committed
Sales Tax Repayment Reserve - 74,500,000 77,554,500 - -
For Future Use Reserve - - - 64,500,000 64,500,000
Economic Uncertainty Reserve 24,000,000 24,000,000 21,346,728 18,000,000 22,543,315
Capital Projects Reserve 10,000,000 10,000,000 - - -
Sustainability Reserve 127,891 127,891 127,891 127,891 127,891
Total Committed 34,127,891 108,627,891 99,029,119 82,627,891 87,171,206
Assigned
Reserve for Encumbrances*9,735,187 4,741,474 7,000,000 - -
Total Assigned 9,735,187 4,741,474 7,000,000 - -
Total Unassigned 71,603,813 25,965,405 23,630,860 49,069,295 42,561,802
TOTAL FUND BALANCE 138,556,339$ 166,095,319$ 150,761,368$ 157,247,734$ 155,290,125$
*Beginning with the FY 2025–26 Budget,the City will no longer present projected or proposed fund balance
amounts. Instead,prior year actuals will be updated to reflect recorded activity. This adjustment is being made to
align with the City's practice of budgeting under the assumption that all appropriations will be fully expended
within the fiscal year.
163
CC 06-03-2025
163 of 1012
12
General Fund Forecast
Since the City has reached resolution on the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration
(CDTFA) Audit, this budget focuses on the 10-year forecast post audit resolution. While long-
term projections inherently carry more uncertainty than short-term projections, they remain a
valuable tool for identifying potential structural budget issues in advance.
The following chart illustrates the City’s structural deficit beginning in FY 2033-34, driven by
expenditure growth averaging 3.76% annually, compared to revenue growth at a more modest
1.71%. Although this updated forecast is a marked improvement from the FY 2024-25 Adopted
Budget forecast, which projected six years of deficits, it now reflects modest deficits in only the
final two years of the 10-year horizon. This change is primarily attributable to upward
adjustments in expenditure assumptions, particularly in the areas of materials, contracts, and
special projects. Notably, the City’s law enforcement contract costs have materialized at a 6%
annual growth rate, higher than the 4% previously assumed in the forecast.
Additionally, the forecast accounts for ongoing expenditure growth related to personnel. These
include requests for four new full-time positions and one part-time position, totaling $851,293 in
additional salary and benefit costs, as well as $544,340 in additional materials and contracts.
It’s important to note that the 10-year forecast differs from the FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget in its
treatment of staffing vacancies. While the proposed budget reflects a shortfall of approximately
164
CC 06-03-2025
164 of 1012
13
$2.0 million, this gap is not present in the forecast due to the application of a 6% vacancy factor
in FY 2025-26 and FY 2026-27. The proposed budget assumed a 4% vacancy rate; however, the
forecast increases this to 6% in the near term to better reflect recent trends in vacancy savings.
Beginning in FY 2027-28, the forecast reverts to a 4% vacancy rate, consistent with more stable
staffing levels and a fiscally prudent long-term approach. This adjustment ensures a realistic view
of potential expenditure savings without understating long-term costs.
Additionally, the forecast does not yet reflect revenue adjustments from proposed user fee
increases scheduled for consideration by City Council on July 2, 2025.
In the out years, the deficit is primarily driven by two factors: a recession scenario modeled in FY
2027-28, and the sunset of the Utility Users Tax in FY 2030-31.
Despite these pressures, the forecast demonstrates that the City is well-positioned to maintain
balanced budgets without drawing on reserves during the majority of the 10-year period.
Fund Balance Outlook
The City’s long-standing commitment to fiscal discipline has resulted in a strong fund balance
position, which provides flexibility to address future funding challenges. As of FY 2025-26, the
General Fund’s total fund balance is projected at $157.3 million, with the Unassigned portion
totaling $44.9 million.
As discussed during the mid-year, largely due to City fiscally prudent decisions to reduce the FY
2023-24 and FY 2024-25 budgets in addition to the CDTFA settlement and water system lease, the
City's 10 year forecast positively improved with only the last two years of the forecast showing
minor deficits compared to last year's forecast showing 6 years in the red.
The forecast anticipates total fund balance growing from an estimated $157 million at the end of
FY 2026 to $178 million on FY 2035. Key reserve categories include:
- Future Use Reserve - Maintains a consistent balance of $64.5 million throughout the
forecast period, available for use as determined by City Council.
- Economic Uncertainty Reserve - Grows incrementally due to projected increases in
General Fund revenues and expenditures, supporting the City’s ability to weather
economic shocks. Section 115 Pension Trust - Grows initially through investment
earnings. The trust may be used to offset CalPERS costs and ensure long-term pension
funding stability.
- Unassigned Fund Balance - Projected to grow steadily from $44.1 million in FY 2026,
peaking in FY 2031 before returning to $44.1 million in FY 2035, largely reflecting the
impact of structural surpluses and prudent expenditure assumptions.
165
CC 06-03-2025
165 of 1012
14
As emphasized during the FY 2024-25 Mid-Year Update, the positive trajectory in this forecast is
largely a result of proactive reductions to the FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 budgets, the favorable
resolution of the CDTFA audit, and the City’s recently executed water system lease agreement.
Overall, this forecast reaffirms the City’s commitment to responsible financial management and
positions Cupertino to remain resilient in the face of future uncertainties.
Other Funds
This section combines all non-general funds. Discussion at the fund type level can be found in
the All Funds Summary of the budget.
166
CC 06-03-2025
166 of 1012
15
All Other Funds Expenditures
Expenditure sources decreased by $19.8 million from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget. This is
primarily due to a reduction in Capital Outlays due to a decrease in CIP projects in FY 2025-26.
No changes have been made to all other funds expenditures since the budget study session on
May 15.
All Other Funds Revenues
Revenue sources decreased by $13.1 million from FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget. This decrease is
primarily due to a reduction in Intergovernmental revenue anticipated from federal and state
grants. Since the proposed budget study session on May 15, all other funds revenues have
decreased by $1,500,000 as shown in the chart above. This was due to a correction of transfers out
that were inadvertently included in the proposed budget document.
2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2025-26
Actual Actual Adopted Proposed Final
Employee Compensation 5,327,164 5,348,486 5,526,311 5,333,643 5,333,643
Employee Benefits 1,716,224 2,903,259 2,609,854 2,230,186 2,230,186
Materials 2,316,457 2,480,125 2,785,973 3,070,406 3,070,406
Contract Services 7,189,075 5,891,885 6,190,610 6,226,298 6,226,298
Cost Allocation 2,028,766 2,203,606 3,895,296 4,807,709 4,807,709
Capital Outlays 9,012,370 8,300,842 18,759,024 3,583,075 3,583,075
Special Projects 2,828,968 1,576,185 3,239,420 4,107,412 4,107,412
Contingencies - - 89,946 - -
Debt Services 2,675,800 2,677,600 2,676,200 2,676,600 2,676,600
Transfers Out 4,500,904 5,612,269 8,262,580 2,015,000 2,015,000
Other Financing Uses 960,438 732,685 960,440 1,149,020 1,149,020
Total Expenditure Uses $ 38,556,165 $ 37,726,941 $ 54,995,654 $ 35,199,349 $ 35,199,349
EXPENDITURE USES
2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2025-26
Actual Actual Adopted Proposed Final
Other Taxes 891,503 349,283 4,628,530 4,637,703 4,637,703
Use of Money & Property 1,079,748 4,027,375 2,113,944 1,380,981 1,380,981
Intergovernmental 4,143,771 5,437,152 14,860,441 5,366,533 5,366,533
Charges for Services 12,389,180 11,777,241 11,844,814 11,880,319 11,880,319
Fines and Forfeitures 23,371 2,746 20,000 10,000 10,000
Miscellaneous Revenue 1,526,977 1,024,658 - 1,519 1,519
Transfers In 15,984,109 12,096,553 15,597,178 14,094,653 12,594,653
Other Financing Sources 466,620 30,750 468,984 553,531 553,531
Total Revenue Sources $ 36,505,279 $ 34,745,757 $ 49,533,891 $ 37,925,239 $ 36,425,239
REVENUE SOURCES
167
CC 06-03-2025
167 of 1012
16
All Other Funds Fund Balance/Net Position
Fund Balance/Net Position sources decreased by $0.5 million from the prior year Adopted
Budget due to overall expenditures exceeding revenues.
Requests for Funding
City Work Program (CWP)
For the FY 25-27 CWP, Council prioritized a total of 19 projects at the March 18 City Council
meeting. In total, the new projects require $2.28 million in additional funding that are being
requested as part of the final budget. Details on funding for each project are included in
Attachment I.
Special Projects
Special Projects are listed in the table below by department.
Program Project Expenditure Funding
Source
ADMINISTRATION
126 Administration 100-12-126-
750-277
Cupertino 70th
Anniversary
Celebration
5,000 General
Fund
100-12-120-
750-279
Strategic Plan 200,000 General
Fund
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 205,000
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
425 Administrative
services
100-41-425-
750-278
Citywide
Purchasing
Training
20,000 General
Fund
426 Administrative
services
100-41-426-
750-280
Tax Measure 20,000 General
Fund
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 40,000
2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2025-26
Actual Actual Adopted Proposed Final
Beginning Balance 98,065,778 99,344,693 94,961,562 87,890,754 87,890,754
Change in Fund Balance (3,446,543) (4,383,131) (7,070,808) 1,048,579 (451,421)
Ending Balance $ 94,619,235 $ 94,961,562 $ 87,890,754 $ 88,939,333 $ 87,439,333
CHANGES TO FUND BALANCE
168
CC 06-03-2025
168 of 1012
17
Program Project Expenditure Funding
Source
INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY
310 Information
Services
610-34-310-
750-250
Adapt TS
Expansion
225,000 Innovation
&
Technology
TOTAL INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY 225,000
PUBLIC WORKS
122 Public works 100-81-122-
750-281
Greenhouse
Gas Inventory
Assessment
40,000 General
Fund
836 Public Works 570-87-836-
750-025
Energy
Management
System
Replacement
160,000 General
Fund
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 200,000
TOTAL OTHER SPECIAL PROJECTS $ 670,000
All Other Department Requests
These requests can be found in Attachment Y. Please note that special projects also appear under
department requests in order to illustrate total requests.
Staffing
Position Additions
The FY 2025-26 Final Budget proposes funding for a total of 211 positions, representing an
addition of 4 positions from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget.
Full-Time
Department Proposal Costs
ADMIN SERVICES 1 Management Analyst (Grants) CWP $207,883
PUBLIC WORKS 1 Maintenance Worker I/II $125,236
ADMINISTRATION 1 Receptionist $113,774
1 Administrative Assistant (Hybrid Meetings) $146,710
TOTAL ALL FULL TIME STAFFING REQUEST $593,603
169
CC 06-03-2025
169 of 1012
18
Part-time
Department Proposal Costs
ADMINISTRATION 1 Comms and Marketing Coordinator $66,351
TOTAL ALL PART TIME STAFFING REQUEST $66,351
New Classifications
Current Classification Current
Salary
&
Benefit
Cost
Proposed
Classification
Proposed
Salary &
Benefits
Costs
Difference
Business Systems Analyst $239,147 Sr. Business Systems
Analyst
$253,803 $14,656
Sr. Code Enforcement
Officer
$189,006 Code Enforcement
Supervisor
$242,552 $53,546
Housing Manager $275,760 Assistant Housing
Coordinator
$170,634 $(105,126)
Total $703,913 $666,989 $(36,924)
Budget Adjustments Summary and Detail
The changes are discussed further below and are also detailed in Attachment D.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
On April 2, 2025, the City Council conducted a study session to review the Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). The FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget for CIP is $2 million, along with $225,000
ongoing administrative support. This also includes the annual transfer in from the General Fund
of $2,000,000. The chart below does not include ongoing cost of $225,000 for CIP Preliminary
Planning & Design and Capital Project Support which are part of the CIP base budget.
Ongoing Challenges
The city is continuing to navigate a major loss in sales tax revenues along with stagnation in its
transient occupancy taxes and the potential loss of Utility User Tax that is set to sunset in FY2030.
170
CC 06-03-2025
170 of 1012
19
In addition, expenditure increases continue to outpace revenue growth as shown by growing
deficits in the last two year of the forecast.
Appropriations Limit
Article XIII B of the California Constitution established appropriations limits on government
agencies within California. Originally established by Proposition 4 in 1979, the appropriations
limit places a maximum limit on the appropriations of tax proceeds by the State, school districts,
and local governments in California.
The City’s FY 2025-26 appropriations limit is $141,134,546 an increase of $8,592,161, or 6.5%, from
the prior year. Please refer to Attachment E for the calculation of the appropriations limit, and
Attachment F for the corresponding price and population factors utilized in the calculation of the
appropriations limit.
Budget Study Session
On May 15, 2025, City Council conducted a study session to review the FY 2025-26 Operating and
Capital Improvement Project Budgets. During the session, City staff presented General Fund
revenues, expenditures, and forecasts. City Council offered input, sought clarifications, and
provided recommendations.
During the study session, City Council requested staff follow-up on several items. The responses
to Council’s questions are included in Attachment G.
Changes to the Budget Document
Changes to the Budget and Policies
Budget Format and Performance Measures Report and Implementation Action Plan
In Fall 2024, the City engaged Baker Tilly US, LLP to conduct a comprehensive review of its
Budget Document and Performance Measures. The primary objective of this engagement was to
enhance clarity, accessibility, and to align the City's annual budget document and to improve the
effectiveness of performance measures in tracking progress toward key citywide goals. The draft
Budget Format Implementation Action Plan (IAP) was presented to the City Council in March
2025. This plan included 32 recommendations that were prioritized 1-3, with 1 being the highest
priority. One additional recommendation was added by City Council for a total of 33. For further
details on this IAP, please see City Council staff report dated March 4, 2025. The updated IAP
was approved by City Council for on May 6, 2025.
The FY 2025-26 budget document accomplished 17 of the 33 recommendations which also
includes a request for funding to assist in completing the Strategic Plan. It is also expected the
Capital Improvement Plan will print with the budget this year, this would bring total
recommendations accomplished between the two documents to 17 recommendations
implemented or 50% implementation rate for the first year of the IAP.
171
CC 06-03-2025
171 of 1012
20
Special Projects Policy
As part of the Implementation Action Plan outlined above, the creation of a Special Projects Policy
was identified as a top priority. Accordingly, City Council adopted the Special Projects Policy in
March 2025 and is included in the financial policies on the City's website. This accomplishment
is included in the total above.
Revised Fees
Matrix Consulting Group recently conducted a comprehensive fee study that was presented to
City Council in February 2024. City Council will consider the FY 2025-26 fee schedule in May
2025 with the newly adopted fees going into effect 60 days after adoption in mid-July 2025.
Increased fee revenue has not been included in this budget.
Investment Policy
The City Council annually updates and adopts a City Investment Policy that is in compliance
with State statutes on allowable investments. By policy, the Audit Committee reviews the policy
and acts as an oversight committee on investments. The policy directs that an external auditor
performs agreed-upon procedures to review City compliance with the policy. The Audit
Committee reviewed and accepted the current Investment Policy on April 28, 2025. The City
Council adopted the City's Investment Policy on May 20, 2025.
Citywide Conference and Training Budget Add-backs
As part of a budget reduction strategy, citywide training was significantly reduced across all
budget units as part of budget reductions in the last two fiscal years. Staff is requesting the
restoration of 50% of the previously reduced training funds. This amount was calculated by
comparing the training budgets in materials and contracts from FY 2022–23 to those in FY 2024–
25, determining the difference, and then adding back 50% of that difference.
Contingencies
Contingency dollars have been calculated from the department’s FY 2025-26 base budget
materials and contracts and have been consolidated into materials budgets. The City Manager
Contingency is the only remaining budget with contingencies as an expense category.
Reorganizations
The City Manager's Office underwent a reorganization in April 2025, transferring Economic
Development to the Community Development Department and Office of Emergency
Management to Parks and Recreation from Administration. Since the printing of the proposed
budget, the City Manager’s Office has reviewed these organizational changes and determined
that the Economic Development program will be more effective as part of the City Manager’s
Office. The current staff recommendation reflects this change. The City Manager’s Office will
continue to evaluate whether the Office of Emergency Management is appropriately housed in
the Parks and Recreation Department.
172
CC 06-03-2025
172 of 1012
21
General Plan Consistency and Environmental Compliance of the Capital Improvement Plan
State law and the Cupertino Municipal Code (Section 2.32.070(C)) require the Planning
Commission to review the CIP for consistency with the City's General Plan (General Plan:
Community Vision 2015 - 2040). The Planning Commission reviewed the FY 2025-26 Proposed
CIP Budget on April 22, 2025, and found that the FY 2025-26 Proposed CIP is consistent with the
City's General Plan and that this consistency determination is exempt from CEQA (see resolution
Attachment H).
Special Projects
In April of 2025 the City Council passed a Special Project Policy (Attachment X) that defined
special projects as “one-time, staff-initiated projects that require City Council approval due to the
need for budget appropriations that exceed a department’s base budget. Base budget items are
the baseline appropriations to continue operations at the current level. In instances where there
are sufficient budget appropriations the City Manager must request City Council authority in the
form of a consent agenda item to reappropriate the funds as a special project. As discussed in the
Special Project Reporting section below, these projects will continue to be reported in the Special
Project reports.
Special Projects are not meant to track ongoing operational costs like street pavement
maintenance, minor repairs, development projects which may span multiple fiscal years, or the
purchase of equipment, unless the department needs to track these expenses because of the use
of restricted funds to pay for the equipment or materials. Ongoing operational costs will be
included in the department’s base budget or added as an ongoing budget appropriation request
to the City Council”.
As part of the FY 2024-25 Third Quarter Financial Presentation, Council requested that an item
be brought back as part of the final budget adoption, to discuss the defunding of specials projects,
using the broader term for a special project prior to policy adoption. This includes City Work
Program, ongoing costs, development items, and minor maintenance repairs and/or purchases.
A total of 74 projects were listed for a total budgeted cost of $41,598,688. This includes the
following major projects:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
Vallco Town Center (VTC) $21,963,179 $23,780 $3,767,988
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Software
$2,500,000 $0 $0
Special projects CDD/IT (New Community
Hall Control Room and AV and lighting
upgrade)
$1,242,675 $20,427 $1,102,479
Annual Asphalt Project $2,776,484 $607,033 $981,535
Annual Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Project $7,472,764 $2,278,856 $538,594
173
CC 06-03-2025
173 of 1012
22
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
All other Special Projects $5,643,586 $968,798 $1,053,451
TOTAL ALL PROJECTS $41,598,688 $3,898,894 $7,444,047*
*Totals vary due to rounding
Staff has reviewed and updated the special projects (Attachment Y) list provided as part of the
Third Quarter Financial Report. The updates are marked in red and staff recommendations are
summarized by categories listed in the narrative above.
City Work Program (Attachment Z & AA)
The second year of the FY 23-25 City Work Program (CWP) includes 22 projects. Of these, the
current CWP includes 14 projects that have budget associated with them that were previously
considered Special Projects in Attachment Z, with Budget, Actuals and Encumbrances shown in
the table below:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrance
s as of
3/31/2025
CWP $2,261,844 $179,736 $708,667
When reviewing the 22 projects in total regardless of funding, 16 have either been completed or
will be carried into the FY 25-27 CWP. Of the remaining six, four are ongoing and two can be
defunded at year end, Block Leader Enhancements and The Rise Community Engagement,
resulting in savings of $109,700. Status updates for all 22 projects, including the reason for
defunding these projects, are included in Attachment AA.
Ongoing Costs (Attachment AB)
Ongoing Cost projects include 11 projects, with Budget, Actuals and Encumbrances shown in the
table below. All these projects will be moved to the base budget. There is no recommendation to
defund any ongoing projects:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
Ongoing Costs $10,887,456 $3,064,343 $1,611,624
Maintenance purchases/projects (Attachment AC)
Maintenance projects include 16 total projects; however, five projects were completed at or under
budget and any under budget projects were defunded in the third quarter, leaving eleven projects
remaining. All but one remaining project, the HVAC kitchen replacement at the Senior Center
are in progress and expected to be completed by June 30, 2025. The department is not requesting
174
CC 06-03-2025
174 of 1012
23
to defund any additional maintenance projects. Budget, Actuals and Encumbrances for the
remaining eleven special projects are shown in the table below:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
Maintenance purchases/projects $576,491 $288,902 $0
Development Projects (AD)
Development projects include 7 projects, with Budget, Actuals and Encumbrances shown in the
table below. These projects are either active or have an entitlement period that requires us to
leave the budget active. There is no recommendation to defund any development projects:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
Development Projects $22,268,964 $26,250 $3,801,182
All Remaining Special Projects per new Policy (Attachment AE)
For projects meeting the new definition of a special project (there are 26 projects), nine of those
projects have been completed and three were defunded as part of the third quarter financial
report. Of the remaining 15, 12 are in progress and the remaining three projects, PR & Strategic
Comm Strategy, Economic Development Strategy, and ERP Phase II are recommended to be
defunded for a savings of $216,566. Budget, Actuals and Encumbrances shown in the table below
for all projects:
Project FY25
Amended
Budget
FY25
Actuals as
of
3/31/2025
Encumbrances
as of 3/31/2025
All Remaining Special Projects $5,603,933 $339,663 $1,322,575
Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.
Fiscal Impact
City staff recommends establishing an Operating Budget of $131,855,412 and a Capital
Improvement Program Budget of $4,225,000 for FY 2025-26.
For special projects, staff is recommending to defund three current special projects and two
current CWP items for a total of four items for a savings of $326,266.
City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
175
CC 06-03-2025
175 of 1012
24
None
Council Goal
Public Engagement and Transparency
Fiscal Strategy
California Environmental Quality Act
The adoption of the budget is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
under CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), Each proposed project will be evaluated to
determine if CEQA applies. As applicable, each project will conduct the appropriate level of
environmental analysis.
Prepared by: Toni Oasay-Anderson, Acting Budget Manager
Reviewed by: Kristina Alfaro, Director of Administrative Services
Department Heads
Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Acting City Manager
Attachments for FY 2025-26 Final Budget:
A – Draft Resolution – Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26
B – Draft Resolution – Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26
C – Draft Resolution – Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26
D – Budget Adjustments Summary and Detail
E – Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26
F – Appropriation Limit Price and Population Factors for Fiscal Year 2025-26
G – Proposed Budget Study Session Supplemental Report
H – Planning Commission Adopted Resolution
I – Adopted FY 2025-26 City Work Program Budget Details
J – Code Enforcement Supervisor Position Description
K – Senior Business Systems Analyst Position Description
L – Assistant Housing Coordinator Position Description
M– Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program (Redline)
N – Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program (Clean)
O – UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)
P– UNREP Salary Schedule (Clean)
Q – UNREP Salary Effective 7.01.2023
R– Draft Resolution Amending the Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Program
S – CEA Local 21 Employees’ Compensation Program (Redline)
T – CEA Local 21 Employees’ Compensation Program (Clean)
U – CEA Local 21 Salary Effective 7.01.2023
V – Draft Resolution Amending the CEA Local 21 Employees’ Memorandum of Understanding
W – All Other Department Requests
Attachments for FY 2024-25 Special Projects:
176
CC 06-03-2025
176 of 1012
25
X - City Council Special Project Policy
Y – All Special Projects from FY25 Q3
Z – CWP Status Updates from FY25 Q3
AA – Current CWP Status Updates for FY23-25
AB – Ongoing Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AC– Maintenance and Equipment Purchase Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AD – Development Special Projects from FY25 Q3
AE – Special Projects as Defined in City Council Special Projects Policy
AF – Draft Resolution to Defund Special Projects
177
CC 06-03-2025
177 of 1012
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ADOPTING AN OPERATING BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BY RATIFYING THE ADEQUACY OF ESTIMATED
REVENUES AND FUND BALANCES IN EACH FUND TO COVER
APPROPRIATED MONIES, APPROPRIATING MONIES THEREFROM FOR
SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES AND ACCOUNTS, AND SETTING FORTH
CONDITIONS OF ADMINISTERING SAID BUDGET
WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government is dependent on
the establishment of a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ratio of expenditures
within anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, the extent of any project or program and the degree of its
accomplishment, as well as the efficiency of performing assigned duties and
responsibilities, is likewise dependent on the monies made available for that purpose;
and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has submitted her estimates of anticipated revenues
and fund balances, has determined that estimated revenues and fund balances are
adequate to cover appropriations, and has recommended the allocation of monies for
specified program activities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt
the following sections as a part of its fiscal policy:
Section 1. The estimates of available fund balances and anticipated resources
to be received in each of the several funds during Fiscal Year 2025-26, as submitted by the
City Manager in her proposed budget and amended during the budget study sessions,
are sufficient to cover appropriations.
Section 2. There is appropriated from each of the several funds the sum of
money set forth as expenditures for the funds named in the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Proposed
Budget Financial Overview by Fund (Exhibit A), as amended during the budget sessions,
and stated for the purposes as expressed and estimated for each department.
Section 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to administer and transfer
appropriations between Budget Accounts within the Operating Budget when in her
opinion such transfers become necessary for administrative purposes.
178
CC 06-03-2025
178 of 1012
Section 4. The Director of Administrative Services shall prepare and submit to
City Council quarterly a revised estimate of Operating Revenues.
Section 5. The Director of Administrative Services is hereby authorized to
continue appropriations for operating expenditures that are encumbered or scheduled to
be encumbered at year end.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
179
CC 06-03-2025
179 of 1012
Exhibit A
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 FINAL OPERATING BUDGET
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW BY FUND
Revenue Categories General Fund Special Revenue
Fund
Debt Service
Fund
Capital Project
Funds
Enterprise
Funds
Internal Service
Funds All Funds
Sales Tax 11,983,958 - - - - - 11,983,958
Property Tax 35,413,310 - - - - - 35,413,310
Transient Occupancy 7,500,000 - - - - - 7,500,000
Utility Tax 4,206,907 - - - - - 4,206,907
Franchise Fees 4,394,563 - - - - - 4,394,563
Other Taxes 1,736,718 4,637,703 - - - - 6,374,421
Licenses & Permits 4,261,859 - - - - - 4,261,859
Use of Money & Property 6,538,880 1,190,398 - - 531,450 99,701 8,360,429
Intergovernmental 3,569,332 5,335,717 - - 14,812 - 8,919,861
Charges for Services 15,162,032 1,504,373 - - 5,044,822 5,331,124 27,042,351
Fines & Forfeitures 410,760 10,000 - - - - 420,760
Miscellaneous 1,668,815 1,519 - - - - 1,670,334
Other Financing Sources 367,000 - - - - 553,531 920,531
Transfers In 15,000 2,067,000 2,676,600 - 1,235,000 2,616,053 8,609,653
TOTAL REVENUES 97,229,134$ 14,746,710$ 2,676,600$ -$ 6,826,084$ 8,600,409$ 130,078,937$
Appropriation Categories General Fund
Special
Revenue Fund
Debt Service
Fund
Capital Project
Funds
Enterprise
Funds
Internal Service
Funds All Funds
Employee Compensation 24,200,418 1,602,256 - - 2,010,726 1,720,661 29,534,061
Employee Benefits 10,643,927 797,878 - - 746,937 2,347,371 14,536,113
Materials 6,174,481 1,013,894 - - 758,663 1,297,849 9,244,887
Contract Services 31,496,502 692,575 - - 3,578,026 1,730,697 37,497,800
Cost Allocation 11,993,327 2,197,032 - - 1,676,251 949,737 16,816,347
Capital Outlays 274,433 1,583,075 - - - - 1,857,508
Special Projects 2,694,000 2,908,412 - - 160,000 1,039,000 6,801,412
Contingencies 50,000 - - - - - 50,000
Debt Service - - 2,676,600 - - - 2,676,600
Transfers Out 10,594,653 15,000 - - - - 10,609,653
Other Financing Uses 1,065,000 - - - 222,567 926,453 2,214,020
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 99,186,741$ 10,810,122$ 2,676,600$ -$ 9,153,170$ 10,011,768$ 131,838,401$
CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE/
NET POSITION (1,957,607)$ 3,936,588$ -$ -$ (2,327,086)$ (1,411,359)$ (1,759,464)$
2025-26 Final Budget
2025-26 Final Budget
180
CC 06-03-2025
180 of 1012
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ADOPTING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BY RATIFYING THE ADEQUACY OF ESTIMATED
REVENUES AND FUND BALANCES IN EACH FUND TO COVER
APPROPRIATED MONIES, APPROPRIATING MONIES THEREFROM FOR
SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES AND ACCOUNTS, AND SETTING FORTH
CONDITIONS OF ADMINISTERING SAID BUDGET
WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government is dependent on
the establishment of a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ratio of expenditures
within anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, the extent of any project or program and the degree of its
accomplishment, as well as the efficiency of performing assigned duties and
responsibilities, is likewise dependent on the monies made available for that purpose;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt
the following sections as a part of its fiscal policy:
Section 1. The estimates of available fund balances and anticipated resources
to be received in each of the several funds during Fiscal Year 2025-26, as submitted by the
City Manager in the proposed budget and amended during the budget study sessions,
are sufficient to cover appropriations.
Section 2. The Director of Public Works shall prepare and submit to City
Council quarterly a revised estimate of Capital Improvement Program projects.
Section 3. The Director of Administrative Services is hereby authorized to
continue appropriations for operating expenditures that are encumbered or scheduled to
be encumbered at year end.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
181
CC 06-03-2025
181 of 1012
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
182
CC 06-03-2025
182 of 1012
Exhibit A
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 FINAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW BY FUND
183
CC 06-03-2025
183 of 1012
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING THE APPROPRIATION
LIMIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $141,134,546 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
WHEREAS, the State of California has adopted legislation requiring local
jurisdictions to calculate their appropriation limits in complying with Article XIII B of the
State Constitution; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Proposition 111, passed by the voters of California on
June 5, 1990, said limits are determined by an adjustment formula based upon change in
population, combined with either the change in inflation (California per capita income)
or the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction; and
WHEREAS, the local governing body is required to set an appropriation limit each
year by adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the County of Santa Clara’s population percentage change over the
prior year is 0.02%, and the California per capita personal income change is 3.62%; and
WHEREAS, in computing the 2025-26 limit based upon the adjustment factors
provided pursuant to Proposition 111, the City Council has elected to use the county
population percentage change along with the California per capita income change, but
the Council expressly reserves the right to use the non-residential assessed valuation
percentage change when the figure is available.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves a 2025-26 fiscal appropriation limit of $141,134,546, based on
Proposition 111 guidelines allowing for use of the county population percentage change
along with the California Per Capita Personal Income change to adjust base year
appropriations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby
reserves the right to use the non-residential assessed valuation percentage change when
the figure is available.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
184
CC 06-03-2025
184 of 1012
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
185
CC 06-03-2025
185 of 1012
FY 2025-2026 Budget Adjustments Since May 15
Operating Budget Summary
ATTACHMENT D
Fund Revenue Expenditure
Change in Fund
Balance Description
GENERAL FUND
100 General Fund ‐ (63,733) 63,733 Eliminate PT Economic Development Analyst
100 General Fund ‐ 146,710 (146,710) Administrative Assistant (Hybrid Commission Meeting Support)
100 General Fund ‐ ‐ ‐ Econ Development moved back to City Managerʹs Office from
Community Development
100 General Fund ‐ (17,011) 17,011 Eliminate Assistant Director of Administrative Services
TOTAL GENERAL FUND ‐ 65,966 (65,966)
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
580 Recreation Program (500,000) ‐ (500,000) Removing Transfers In
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS (500,000) ‐ (500,000)
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
610 Innovation & Technology (1,000,000) ‐ (1,000,000) Removing Transfers In
TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS (1,000,000) ‐ (1,000,000)
TOTAL ALL FUNDS (1,500,000)$ 65,966$ (1,565,966)$
18
6
CC 06-03-2025
186 of 1012
ATTACHMENT E
In 1979, California voters approved Proposition 4, the Gann Initiative, and added Article XIIIB to
the California State Constitution. Article XIIIB mandates a limit on the amount of proceeds of
taxes that state and local governments can receive and appropriate (authorize to spend) each year.
The purpose of this law is to limit government spending by putting a cap on the total proceeds
of taxes that may be appropriated each year. Proposition 111 and Senate Bill 88, approved by
California voters in June of 1990, offered cities more flexibility in choosing inflation and
population factors to calculate the limit. 1 The following chart and table show the appropriations
limit and actual expenditures subject to the appropriations limit.
The limit is different for each agency and changes annually. It is calculated by taking the
amount of tax proceeds that were authorized to be spent in FY 1978-79 and adjusting for
changes in inflation and population each subsequent year.
187
CC 06-03-2025
187 of 1012
ATTACHMENT E
Proposition 111 changed the way the limit is calculated and allowed a City to increase its limit
annually in two ways:
• By the percent change in per capita personal income in California or the percent change
in the assessment roll the preceding year due to the addition of local non-residential new
construction; or
• By the percent change in county or city population.
The City used the following factors from the California Department of Finance.
Price Factor
• (A) Percent Change in California Per Capita Personal Income: 6.44%
Population Factor
• (B) Percent Change in County Population: 0.04%
• (C) Percent Change in City Population: -0.09%
The City multiplied the FY 2024-25 appropriations limit by Price Factor (A) and Population
Factor (B) to calculate the FY 2025-26 appropriations limit, as shown below:
FY 2024-25 Appropriations Limit $132,542,385
Price Factor (A) 1.0644
Population Factor (B) 1.0004
188
CC 06-03-2025
188 of 1012
ATTACHMENT E
FY 2025-26 Appropriations Limit $141,134,546
The City's FY 2025-26 appropriations limit is $141.1 million, an increase of $8.6 million, or 6.5%
from the prior year.
189
CC 06-03-2025
189 of 1012
May 2025
Dear Fiscal Officer:
Subject: Price Factor and Population Information
Appropriations Limit
California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 2227 requires the Department of Finance to
transmit an estimate of the percentage change in population to local governments. Each local
jurisdiction must use their percentage change in population factor for January 1, 2025, in
conjunction with a change in the cost of living, or price factor, to calculate their appropriations
limit for fiscal year 2025-26. Attachment A provides the change in California’s per capita personal
income and an example for utilizing the price factor and population percentage change factor
to calculate the 2025-26 appropriations limit. Attachment B provides the city and unincorporated
county population percentage change along with the population percentage change for
counties and their summed incorporated areas. The population percentage change data
excludes federal and state institutionalized populations and military populations.
Population Percent Change for Special Districts
Some special districts must establish an annual appropriations limit. California Revenue and
Taxation Code Section 2228 provides additional information regarding the appropriations limit.
Article XIII B, Section 9(C) of the California Constitution exempts certain special districts from the
appropriations limit calculation mandate. The code section and the California Constitution can
be accessed at the following website: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes.xhtml.
Special districts required by law to calculate their appropriations limit must present the calculation
as part of their annual audit. Any questions special districts have on this requirement should be
directed to their county, district legal counsel, or the law itself. No state agency reviews the local
appropriations limits.
Population Certification
The population certification program applies only to cities and counties. California Revenue and
Taxation Code Section 11005.6 mandates Finance to automatically certify any population
estimate that exceeds the current certified population with the State Controller’s Office. Finance
will certify the higher estimate to the State Controller by June 1, 2025.
Please Note: The prior year’s city population estimates may be revised. The per capita personal
income change is based on historical data.
If you have any questions regarding this data, please contact the Demographic Research Unit at
(916) 323-4086.
JOE STEPHENSHAW
Director
By:
ERIKA LI
Chief Deputy Director
Attachment
190
CC 06-03-2025
190 of 1012
May 2025
Attachment A
A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost of living
factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. The
cost of living factor provided here is per capita personal income. If the percentage
change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage change to be
used in setting the fiscal year 2025-26 appropriation limit is:
Per Capita Personal Income
Fiscal Year Percentage change
(FY) over prior year
2025-26 6.44
B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in
California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2025-26
appropriation limit.
2025-26:
Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 6.44 percent
Population Change = 0.28 percent
Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 6.44 + 100 = 1.0644
100
Population converted to a ratio: 0.28 + 100 = 1.0028
100
Calculation of factor for FY 2025-26: 1.0644 x 1.0028 = 1.0674
191
CC 06-03-2025
191 of 1012
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
Attachment B
Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions*
January 1, 2024 to January 1, 2025 and Total Population January 1, 2025
City County Percent Change 24-25
Population Minus
Exclusions 1-1-24
Population Minus
Exclusions 1-1-25 Total Population 1-1-25
Alameda City Alameda -0.22 78,406 78,236 79,020
Albany City Alameda 0.28 20,520 20,578 20,578
Berkeley City Alameda 1.32 126,676 128,348 128,348
Dublin City Alameda 2.17 72,462 74,031 74,691
Emeryville City Alameda -0.28 13,509 13,471 13,471
Fremont City Alameda 0.16 232,241 232,619 232,619
Hayward City Alameda 0.24 161,977 162,359 162,359
Livermore City Alameda -0.23 86,094 85,899 85,899
Newark City Alameda 1.04 48,382 48,886 48,886
Oakland City Alameda 0.52 424,015 426,237 426,457
Piedmont City Alameda -0.28 10,836 10,806 10,806
Pleasanton City Alameda -0.38 77,526 77,232 77,232
San Leandro City Alameda -0.35 88,124 87,813 87,813
Union City Alameda -0.36 66,898 66,657 66,657
Balance of County Alameda -0.27 147,978 147,579 147,646
Incorporated Alameda 0.37 1,507,666 1,513,172 1,514,836
County Total Alameda 0.31 1,655,644 1,660,751 1,662,482
Balance of County Alpine -0.42 1,181 1,176 1,177
County Total Alpine -0.42 1,181 1,176 1,177
Amador City Amador -0.51 197 196 196
Ione City Amador -0.19 5,173 5,163 9,037
Jackson City Amador -1.69 4,905 4,822 4,822
Plymouth City Amador 1.17 1,109 1,122 1,122
Sutter Creek City Amador -1.63 2,580 2,538 2,538
Balance of County Amador -1.63 22,167 21,805 21,848
Incorporated Amador -0.88 13,964 13,841 17,715
County Total Amador -1.34 36,131 35,646 39,563
Biggs City Butte -1.25 1,998 1,973 1,973
Chico City Butte 2.59 110,971 113,847 113,847
Gridley City Butte -1.10 7,383 7,302 7,302
Oroville City Butte 2.25 19,221 19,653 19,653
Paradise Town Butte 7.83 10,283 11,088 11,088
Balance of County Butte -7.51 58,017 53,662 53,662
Incorporated Butte 2.67 149,856 153,863 153,863
County Total Butte -0.17 207,873 207,525 207,525
Angels City Calaveras -0.42 3,585 3,570 3,570
Balance of County Calaveras -0.21 41,183 41,096 41,152
19
2
CC 06-03-2025
192 of 1012
Incorporated Calaveras -0.42 3,585 3,570 3,570
County Total Calaveras -0.23 44,768 44,666 44,722
Colusa City Colusa -0.18 6,548 6,536 6,536
Williams City Colusa -0.48 5,616 5,589 5,589
Balance of County Colusa -0.28 9,929 9,901 9,901
Incorporated Colusa -0.32 12,164 12,125 12,125
County Total Colusa -0.30 22,093 22,026 22,026
Antioch City Contra Costa 0.52 116,177 116,781 116,781
Brentwood City Contra Costa 0.60 65,353 65,747 65,747
Clayton City Contra Costa -0.46 10,793 10,743 10,743
Concord City Contra Costa -0.34 123,074 122,650 122,650
Danville Town Contra Costa -0.16 43,030 42,960 42,960
El Cerrito City Contra Costa -0.31 25,943 25,862 25,862
Hercules City Contra Costa -0.50 26,357 26,225 26,225
Lafayette City Contra Costa -0.08 25,073 25,054 25,054
Martinez City Contra Costa -0.15 36,871 36,817 36,817
Moraga City Contra Costa -1.98 16,973 16,637 16,637
Oakley City Contra Costa 1.32 46,218 46,826 46,826
Orinda City Contra Costa -0.23 19,395 19,351 19,351
Pinole City Contra Costa -0.45 18,344 18,261 18,261
Pittsburg City Contra Costa 0.64 75,887 76,374 76,374
Pleasant Hill City Contra Costa -0.28 33,694 33,601 33,601
Richmond City Contra Costa -0.24 113,872 113,594 113,594
San Pablo City Contra Costa 0.18 31,450 31,507 31,507
San Ramon City Contra Costa 0.18 83,245 83,391 83,391
Walnut Creek City Contra Costa -0.44 70,238 69,927 69,927
Balance of County Contra Costa -0.20 176,178 175,833 175,917
Incorporated Contra Costa 0.03 981,987 982,308 982,308
County Total Contra Costa 0.00 1,158,165 1,158,141 1,158,225
Crescent City Del Norte -0.69 4,064 4,036 6,056
Balance of County Del Norte -1.44 20,738 20,439 20,488
Incorporated Del Norte -0.69 4,064 4,036 6,056
County Total Del Norte -1.32 24,802 24,475 26,544
Placerville City El Dorado 0.14 10,617 10,632 10,642
South Lake Tahoe City El Dorado -0.05 21,033 21,022 21,022
Balance of County El Dorado 0.09 158,862 159,009 159,106
Incorporated El Dorado 0.01 31,650 31,654 31,664
County Total El Dorado 0.08 190,512 190,663 190,770
Clovis City Fresno 1.13 127,674 129,121 129,121
Coalinga City Fresno 0.00 13,419 13,419 17,608
Firebaugh City Fresno 2.40 8,510 8,714 8,714
Fowler City Fresno 3.11 7,436 7,667 7,667
Fresno City Fresno 0.77 552,416 556,690 557,032
Huron City Fresno 7.96 6,421 6,932 6,932
19
3
CC 06-03-2025
193 of 1012
Kerman City Fresno 0.76 17,403 17,535 17,535
Kingsburg City Fresno 0.90 13,167 13,285 13,285
Mendota City Fresno 0.89 12,598 12,710 12,710
Orange Cove City Fresno 0.99 9,622 9,717 9,717
Parlier City Fresno 0.78 14,535 14,649 14,649
Reedley City Fresno 2.52 25,950 26,603 26,603
Sanger City Fresno 1.44 26,652 27,037 27,037
San Joaquin City Fresno 0.03 3,653 3,654 3,654
Selma City Fresno 0.40 24,487 24,585 24,585
Balance of County Fresno 0.17 158,883 159,148 160,204
Incorporated Fresno 0.97 863,943 872,318 876,849
County Total Fresno 0.84 1,022,826 1,031,466 1,037,053
Orland City Glenn 1.17 8,603 8,704 8,704
Willows City Glenn 1.62 6,372 6,475 6,475
Balance of County Glenn 1.33 14,004 14,190 14,190
Incorporated Glenn 1.36 14,975 15,179 15,179
County Total Glenn 1.35 28,979 29,369 29,369
Arcata City Humboldt 1.66 18,691 19,001 19,001
Blue Lake City Humboldt -0.70 1,144 1,136 1,136
Eureka City Humboldt 0.00 25,966 25,967 26,122
Ferndale City Humboldt -0.44 1,367 1,361 1,361
Fortuna City Humboldt -0.38 12,245 12,198 12,198
Rio Dell City Humboldt -0.71 3,255 3,232 3,232
Trinidad City Humboldt -0.67 298 296 296
Balance of County Humboldt -0.73 70,625 70,107 70,471
Incorporated Humboldt 0.36 62,966 63,191 63,346
County Total Humboldt -0.22 133,591 133,298 133,817
Brawley City Imperial 0.84 28,710 28,952 28,952
Calexico City Imperial 0.78 39,762 40,073 40,073
Calipatria City Imperial 0.69 3,646 3,671 6,061
El Centro City Imperial 1.12 45,456 45,966 46,007
Holtville City Imperial 0.57 5,653 5,685 5,685
Imperial City Imperial 1.98 22,422 22,866 22,866
Westmorland City Imperial 0.39 2,076 2,084 2,084
Balance of County Imperial 0.59 31,371 31,557 34,771
Incorporated Imperial 1.06 147,725 149,297 151,728
County Total Imperial 0.98 179,096 180,854 186,499
Bishop City Inyo -0.10 3,854 3,850 3,850
Balance of County Inyo -0.31 14,938 14,892 14,950
Incorporated Inyo -0.10 3,854 3,850 3,850
County Total Inyo -0.27 18,792 18,742 18,800
Arvin City Kern 0.99 19,796 19,991 19,991
Bakersfield City Kern 1.16 414,451 419,238 419,238
California City Kern 0.97 13,189 13,317 13,317
19
4
CC 06-03-2025
194 of 1012
Delano City Kern 1.15 46,036 46,566 52,831
Maricopa City Kern 0.59 1,018 1,024 1,024
McFarland City Kern 2.24 13,902 14,213 14,213
Ridgecrest City Kern 0.25 27,664 27,732 28,386
Shafter City Kern 4.72 22,356 23,412 23,455
Taft City Kern -0.03 7,089 7,087 7,087
Tehachapi City Kern 0.64 9,372 9,432 11,476
Wasco City Kern -2.55 23,447 22,850 26,235
Balance of County Kern 0.05 304,188 304,351 306,708
Incorporated Kern 1.09 598,320 604,862 617,253
County Total Kern 0.74 902,508 909,213 923,961
Avenal City Kings 1.07 9,431 9,532 13,315
Corcoran City Kings 0.88 13,547 13,666 21,612
Hanford City Kings 2.31 59,856 61,238 61,238
Lemoore City Kings 2.10 27,122 27,692 27,692
Balance of County Kings 1.45 25,135 25,500 30,158
Incorporated Kings 1.98 109,956 112,128 123,857
County Total Kings 1.88 135,091 137,628 154,015
Clearlake City Lake 1.01 16,367 16,533 16,533
Lakeport City Lake -0.85 5,069 5,026 5,026
Balance of County Lake -0.61 45,889 45,607 45,695
Incorporated Lake 0.57 21,436 21,559 21,559
County Total Lake -0.24 67,325 67,166 67,254
Susanville City Lassen 1.90 9,199 9,374 12,270
Balance of County Lassen 1.77 14,802 15,064 16,446
Incorporated Lassen 1.90 9,199 9,374 12,270
County Total Lassen 1.82 24,001 24,438 28,716
Agoura Hills City Los Angeles -0.18 19,940 19,904 19,904
Alhambra City Los Angeles 0.22 82,176 82,353 82,374
Arcadia City Los Angeles 0.13 56,044 56,116 56,116
Artesia City Los Angeles 1.33 16,060 16,273 16,359
Avalon City Los Angeles -0.12 3,387 3,383 3,383
Azusa City Los Angeles -1.50 49,736 48,988 48,988
Baldwin Park City Los Angeles 0.23 70,685 70,848 70,848
Bell City Los Angeles -0.15 33,366 33,315 33,315
Bellflower City Los Angeles -0.32 76,902 76,656 76,656
Bell Gardens City Los Angeles 0.09 38,438 38,471 38,471
Beverly Hills City Los Angeles -0.12 31,984 31,945 31,945
Bradbury City Los Angeles 0.78 895 902 902
Burbank City Los Angeles 0.29 105,842 106,146 106,146
Calabasas City Los Angeles -0.26 22,856 22,797 22,797
Carson City Los Angeles 0.07 91,745 91,808 91,812
Cerritos City Los Angeles -0.28 48,005 47,871 47,871
Claremont City Los Angeles -0.02 37,305 37,299 37,299
19
5
CC 06-03-2025
195 of 1012
Commerce City Los Angeles -0.32 12,185 12,146 12,146
Compton City Los Angeles -0.01 93,699 93,692 93,692
Covina City Los Angeles 0.92 50,625 51,090 51,090
Cudahy City Los Angeles -0.34 22,208 22,132 22,132
Culver City Los Angeles 0.16 40,340 40,403 40,403
Diamond Bar City Los Angeles -0.07 53,577 53,539 53,539
Downey City Los Angeles -0.02 111,891 111,871 111,871
Duarte City Los Angeles -0.22 23,798 23,746 23,746
El Monte City Los Angeles 0.82 107,056 107,938 107,986
El Segundo City Los Angeles -0.11 16,976 16,958 16,983
Gardena City Los Angeles 0.14 60,176 60,263 60,263
Glendale City Los Angeles 0.26 191,706 192,212 192,212
Glendora City Los Angeles -0.07 51,289 51,254 51,254
Hawaiian Gardens City Los Angeles 0.07 13,552 13,561 13,561
Hawthorne City Los Angeles -0.25 85,868 85,653 85,653
Hermosa Beach City Los Angeles -0.22 19,055 19,014 19,014
Hidden Hills City Los Angeles 0.23 1,742 1,746 1,746
Huntington Park City Los Angeles -0.32 53,213 53,041 53,051
Industry City Los Angeles -0.23 432 431 431
Inglewood City Los Angeles -0.29 106,617 106,305 106,305
Irwindale City Los Angeles -0.07 1,510 1,509 1,509
La Canada Flintridge City Los Angeles 0.05 20,149 20,160 20,160
La Habra Heights City Los Angeles -0.13 5,510 5,503 5,503
Lakewood City Los Angeles 0.10 80,517 80,596 80,596
La Mirada City Los Angeles -0.17 48,315 48,233 48,233
Lancaster City Los Angeles 1.62 170,661 173,424 177,768
La Puente City Los Angeles 0.10 37,508 37,546 37,546
La Verne City Los Angeles 0.59 32,111 32,300 32,300
Lawndale City Los Angeles -0.20 30,921 30,860 30,860
Lomita City Los Angeles 0.04 20,398 20,407 20,407
Long Beach City Los Angeles 0.44 460,230 462,246 462,561
Los Angeles City Los Angeles 0.44 3,813,575 3,830,479 3,835,263
Lynwood City Los Angeles 0.45 66,360 66,660 66,660
Malibu City Los Angeles -0.18 10,623 10,604 10,604
Manhattan Beach City Los Angeles -0.18 34,111 34,051 34,051
Maywood City Los Angeles -0.25 24,557 24,496 24,496
Monrovia City Los Angeles 1.94 38,181 38,920 38,920
Montebello City Los Angeles 0.79 62,243 62,732 62,732
Monterey Park City Los Angeles -0.13 59,342 59,262 59,269
Norwalk City Los Angeles -0.32 100,585 100,265 101,075
Palmdale City Los Angeles 0.31 166,580 167,097 167,097
Palos Verdes Estates City Los Angeles -0.12 13,014 12,999 12,999
Paramount City Los Angeles -0.08 52,415 52,371 52,371
Pasadena City Los Angeles 0.41 140,054 140,631 140,631
19
6
CC 06-03-2025
196 of 1012
Pico Rivera City Los Angeles 0.00 60,859 60,858 60,858
Pomona City Los Angeles 0.68 152,005 153,042 153,042
Rancho Palos Verdes City Los Angeles -0.25 40,831 40,727 40,727
Redondo Beach City Los Angeles -0.33 68,319 68,091 68,091
Rolling Hills City Los Angeles 0.24 1,673 1,677 1,677
Rolling Hills Estates City Los Angeles -0.14 8,557 8,545 8,545
Rosemead City Los Angeles 0.41 50,296 50,501 50,501
San Dimas City Los Angeles -0.05 34,226 34,209 34,209
San Fernando City Los Angeles 0.62 23,546 23,692 23,692
San Gabriel City Los Angeles 1.00 38,569 38,953 38,953
San Marino City Los Angeles -0.09 12,341 12,330 12,330
Santa Clarita City Los Angeles 0.35 231,573 232,377 232,377
Santa Fe Springs City Los Angeles 0.90 18,341 18,506 18,680
Santa Monica City Los Angeles 0.19 93,034 93,212 93,212
Sierra Madre City Los Angeles -0.30 10,903 10,870 10,870
Signal Hill City Los Angeles -0.31 11,457 11,421 11,421
South El Monte City Los Angeles -0.02 19,538 19,535 19,535
South Gate City Los Angeles 0.08 92,883 92,955 92,955
South Pasadena City Los Angeles 0.06 26,272 26,287 26,287
Temple City Los Angeles 0.70 36,069 36,322 36,322
Torrance City Los Angeles -0.10 143,410 143,261 143,261
Vernon City Los Angeles -0.48 208 207 207
Walnut City Los Angeles 0.74 28,008 28,214 28,214
West Covina City Los Angeles -0.21 109,657 109,428 109,428
West Hollywood City Los Angeles 0.10 35,250 35,284 35,284
Westlake Village City Los Angeles -0.31 7,943 7,918 7,918
Whittier City Los Angeles 0.03 87,820 87,850 87,850
Balance of County Los Angeles 0.18 1,001,862 1,003,674 1,004,490
Incorporated Los Angeles 0.31 8,834,429 8,861,693 8,872,321
County Total Los Angeles 0.30 9,836,291 9,865,367 9,876,811
Chowchilla City Madera -1.64 13,729 13,504 18,742
Madera City Madera -0.85 67,013 66,443 66,443
Balance of County Madera 2.24 75,718 77,414 77,414
Incorporated Madera -0.98 80,742 79,947 85,185
County Total Madera 0.58 156,460 157,361 162,599
Belvedere City Marin 0.29 2,052 2,058 2,058
Corte Madera City Marin 0.09 9,947 9,956 9,966
Fairfax City Marin 0.09 7,400 7,407 7,407
Larkspur City Marin -0.15 12,750 12,731 12,731
Mill Valley City Marin 0.07 13,679 13,688 13,688
Novato City Marin 0.22 51,372 51,486 51,690
Ross City Marin 0.83 2,290 2,309 2,309
San Anselmo City Marin 0.26 12,519 12,551 12,551
San Rafael City Marin -0.05 59,917 59,885 59,885
19
7
CC 06-03-2025
197 of 1012
Sausalito City Marin 0.07 6,936 6,941 6,941
Tiburon Town Marin 0.18 8,894 8,910 8,910
Balance of County Marin 0.29 63,257 63,441 66,414
Incorporated Marin 0.09 187,756 187,922 188,136
County Total Marin 0.14 251,013 251,363 254,550
Balance of County Mariposa -0.21 16,897 16,861 16,917
County Total Mariposa -0.21 16,897 16,861 16,917
Fort Bragg City Mendocino -0.10 7,194 7,187 7,187
Point Arena City Mendocino 1.57 445 452 452
Ukiah City Mendocino 0.60 16,227 16,325 16,325
Willits City Mendocino -0.31 4,853 4,838 4,838
Balance of County Mendocino -0.09 61,031 60,975 61,025
Incorporated Mendocino 0.29 28,719 28,802 28,802
County Total Mendocino 0.03 89,750 89,777 89,827
Atwater City Merced -0.18 31,921 31,862 31,862
Dos Palos City Merced -0.28 5,728 5,712 5,712
Gustine City Merced -0.23 6,035 6,021 6,021
Livingston City Merced -0.07 14,451 14,441 14,441
Los Banos City Merced 1.42 48,213 48,896 48,896
Merced City Merced 5.26 93,138 98,039 98,039
Balance of County Merced -4.65 91,101 86,861 88,109
Incorporated Merced 2.75 199,486 204,971 204,971
County Total Merced 0.43 290,587 291,832 293,080
Alturas City Modoc -0.19 2,662 2,657 2,657
Balance of County Modoc -0.22 5,847 5,834 5,834
Incorporated Modoc -0.19 2,662 2,657 2,657
County Total Modoc -0.21 8,509 8,491 8,491
Mammoth Lakes Town Mono -1.47 7,145 7,040 7,040
Balance of County Mono -1.75 5,647 5,548 5,644
Incorporated Mono -1.47 7,145 7,040 7,040
County Total Mono -1.59 12,792 12,588 12,684
Carmel-by-the-Sea City Monterey -0.23 3,056 3,049 3,049
Del Rey Oaks City Monterey -0.32 1,551 1,546 1,546
Gonzales City Monterey -0.30 8,459 8,434 8,434
Greenfield City Monterey 1.18 20,543 20,785 20,785
King City Monterey 1.09 14,189 14,344 14,344
Marina City Monterey 1.12 22,831 23,086 23,086
Monterey City Monterey -0.33 24,282 24,202 27,273
Pacific Grove City Monterey -0.43 14,935 14,871 14,871
Salinas City Monterey -0.24 161,039 160,645 160,645
Sand City Monterey -0.27 374 373 373
Seaside City Monterey 1.35 26,367 26,724 32,019
Soledad City Monterey 1.80 20,005 20,366 27,310
Balance of County Monterey -0.14 105,111 104,962 105,096
19
8
CC 06-03-2025
198 of 1012
Incorporated Monterey 0.25 317,631 318,425 333,735
County Total Monterey 0.15 422,742 423,387 438,831
American Canyon City Napa 2.94 21,757 22,396 22,396
Calistoga City Napa -0.41 5,181 5,160 5,160
Napa City Napa 0.28 77,520 77,736 77,736
St Helena City Napa -0.13 5,356 5,349 5,349
Yountville City Napa -0.54 2,056 2,045 2,638
Balance of County Napa -0.30 21,840 21,775 22,845
Incorporated Napa 0.73 111,870 112,686 113,279
County Total Napa 0.56 133,710 134,461 136,124
Grass Valley City Nevada -0.72 13,461 13,364 13,364
Nevada City Nevada -0.86 3,365 3,336 3,336
Truckee Town Nevada 0.03 16,923 16,928 16,928
Balance of County Nevada -0.63 67,092 66,667 66,726
Incorporated Nevada -0.36 33,749 33,628 33,628
County Total Nevada -0.54 100,841 100,295 100,354
Aliso Viejo City Orange -0.45 50,442 50,213 50,213
Anaheim City Orange -0.08 341,967 341,686 341,773
Brea City Orange -0.42 48,101 47,900 47,900
Buena Park City Orange -0.13 82,772 82,667 82,667
Costa Mesa City Orange 0.25 110,048 110,321 110,321
Cypress City Orange -0.13 49,563 49,499 49,499
Dana Point City Orange -0.37 32,850 32,730 32,730
Fountain Valley City Orange -0.09 56,612 56,560 56,560
Fullerton City Orange -0.31 141,909 141,469 141,469
Garden Grove City Orange 0.12 171,260 171,470 171,492
Huntington Beach City Orange -0.19 193,510 193,134 193,134
Irvine City Orange 0.79 316,119 318,629 318,629
Laguna Beach City Orange 0.02 22,759 22,763 22,763
Laguna Hills City Orange -0.41 30,435 30,309 30,309
Laguna Niguel City Orange 0.65 64,834 65,257 65,257
Laguna Woods City Orange -0.46 17,262 17,183 17,183
La Habra City Orange -0.06 61,236 61,202 61,202
Lake Forest City Orange 0.10 87,553 87,639 87,639
La Palma City Orange -0.44 15,177 15,110 15,110
Los Alamitos City Orange -0.32 12,044 12,006 12,006
Mission Viejo City Orange -0.28 91,993 91,740 91,740
Newport Beach City Orange -0.41 82,995 82,654 82,654
Orange City Orange 0.95 138,403 139,724 139,724
Placentia City Orange 2.52 52,653 53,982 53,982
Rancho Santa Margarita City Orange -0.46 46,553 46,341 46,341
San Clemente City Orange -0.35 63,085 62,865 62,865
San Juan Capistrano City Orange 0.23 35,247 35,329 35,329
Santa Ana City Orange 0.68 313,210 315,325 315,325
19
9
CC 06-03-2025
199 of 1012
Seal Beach City Orange -0.47 24,439 24,325 24,400
Stanton City Orange -0.06 40,576 40,552 40,552
Tustin City Orange -0.15 79,449 79,326 79,326
Villa Park City Orange -0.21 5,750 5,738 5,738
Westminster City Orange 0.13 90,181 90,295 90,295
Yorba Linda City Orange -0.46 66,573 66,267 66,267
Balance of County Orange 0.54 132,313 133,023 133,033
Incorporated Orange 0.15 3,037,560 3,042,210 3,042,394
County Total Orange 0.17 3,169,873 3,175,233 3,175,427
Auburn City Placer -1.27 13,457 13,286 13,286
Colfax City Placer -1.48 2,026 1,996 1,996
Lincoln City Placer 0.65 54,167 54,520 54,520
Loomis Town Placer -0.59 6,729 6,689 6,689
Rocklin City Placer 0.28 72,967 73,172 73,172
Roseville City Placer 0.76 157,304 158,494 158,494
Balance of County Placer -0.44 113,786 113,289 113,289
Incorporated Placer 0.49 306,650 308,157 308,157
County Total Placer 0.24 420,436 421,446 421,446
Portola City Plumas -0.94 2,118 2,098 2,098
Balance of County Plumas 0.62 16,684 16,787 16,787
Incorporated Plumas -0.94 2,118 2,098 2,098
County Total Plumas 0.44 18,802 18,885 18,885
Banning City Riverside -0.37 32,068 31,949 31,949
Beaumont City Riverside 1.78 58,665 59,708 59,708
Blythe City Riverside -0.95 12,593 12,473 15,400
Calimesa City Riverside -0.79 11,082 10,994 10,994
Canyon Lake City Riverside -0.74 11,086 11,004 11,004
Cathedral City Riverside -0.67 51,962 51,615 51,651
Coachella City Riverside 0.76 44,050 44,384 44,384
Corona City Riverside -0.32 159,667 159,157 159,157
Desert Hot Springs City Riverside 0.02 33,255 33,262 33,262
Eastvale City Riverside -0.68 70,274 69,799 69,799
Hemet City Riverside 0.20 91,751 91,934 91,934
Indian Wells City Riverside 0.06 4,859 4,862 4,862
Indio City Riverside -0.17 92,693 92,539 92,539
Jurupa Valley City Riverside -0.90 106,830 105,870 105,928
Lake Elsinore City Riverside 0.97 72,934 73,638 73,783
La Quinta City Riverside -0.90 39,148 38,796 38,796
Menifee City Riverside 1.30 113,837 115,316 115,316
Moreno Valley City Riverside -0.27 211,389 210,823 210,823
Murrieta City Riverside 0.44 111,299 111,789 111,789
Norco City Riverside -0.63 22,563 22,421 25,221
Palm Desert City Riverside 0.04 51,961 51,980 51,980
Palm Springs City Riverside -0.63 44,760 44,476 44,476
20
0
CC 06-03-2025
200 of 1012
Perris City Riverside 0.36 80,947 81,240 81,240
Rancho Mirage City Riverside -0.62 17,227 17,120 17,120
Riverside City Riverside -0.37 321,479 320,278 320,337
San Jacinto City Riverside 0.10 54,936 54,990 54,990
Temecula City Riverside 1.19 110,898 112,220 112,220
Wildomar City Riverside 0.05 37,060 37,077 37,077
Balance of County Riverside 1.53 411,338 417,646 417,901
Incorporated Riverside 0.02 2,071,273 2,071,714 2,077,739
County Total Riverside 0.27 2,482,611 2,489,360 2,495,640
Citrus Heights City Sacramento -0.43 86,655 86,280 86,280
Elk Grove City Sacramento 1.24 180,599 182,842 182,842
Folsom City Sacramento 3.69 84,416 87,532 92,577
Galt City Sacramento 1.38 25,738 26,092 26,092
Isleton City Sacramento -0.65 769 764 764
Rancho Cordova City Sacramento 3.16 82,837 85,451 85,451
Sacramento City Sacramento 0.31 526,327 527,979 527,979
Balance of County Sacramento -0.26 604,360 602,760 602,760
Incorporated Sacramento 0.97 987,341 996,940 1,001,985
County Total Sacramento 0.50 1,591,701 1,599,700 1,604,745
Hollister City San Benito 0.51 43,272 43,492 43,492
San Juan Bautista City San Benito -0.81 2,095 2,078 2,078
Balance of County San Benito 0.50 21,147 21,252 21,252
Incorporated San Benito 0.45 45,367 45,570 45,570
County Total San Benito 0.46 66,514 66,822 66,822
Adelanto City San Bernardino 1.42 36,629 37,150 37,150
Apple Valley Town San Bernardino -0.11 75,339 75,255 75,262
Barstow City San Bernardino -0.55 24,634 24,498 24,811
Big Bear Lake City San Bernardino -0.48 4,977 4,953 4,953
Chino City San Bernardino 1.76 90,123 91,712 95,206
Chino Hills City San Bernardino -0.18 77,452 77,314 77,314
Colton City San Bernardino -0.42 53,505 53,278 53,278
Fontana City San Bernardino 0.96 217,084 219,172 219,172
Grand Terrace City San Bernardino -0.51 12,868 12,803 12,803
Hesperia City San Bernardino 0.54 101,248 101,792 101,792
Highland City San Bernardino 1.16 56,436 57,088 57,088
Loma Linda City San Bernardino -0.19 25,323 25,276 25,322
Montclair City San Bernardino -0.38 37,670 37,526 37,526
Needles City San Bernardino -0.54 4,817 4,791 4,791
Ontario City San Bernardino 0.84 182,875 184,404 184,404
Rancho Cucamonga City San Bernardino 0.44 175,227 175,992 175,992
Redlands City San Bernardino 0.10 73,416 73,488 73,488
Rialto City San Bernardino 1.09 104,426 105,565 105,565
San Bernardino City San Bernardino 0.08 221,218 221,387 222,727
Twentynine Palms City San Bernardino 7.84 14,775 15,934 24,257
20
1
CC 06-03-2025
201 of 1012
Upland City San Bernardino -0.23 79,326 79,140 79,140
Victorville City San Bernardino 0.49 135,981 136,652 141,013
Yucaipa City San Bernardino 0.51 54,561 54,838 54,838
Yucca Valley Town San Bernardino 0.03 22,021 22,027 22,027
Balance of County San Bernardino -0.22 290,454 289,811 297,505
Incorporated San Bernardino 0.54 1,881,931 1,892,035 1,909,919
County Total San Bernardino 0.44 2,172,385 2,181,846 2,207,424
Carlsbad City San Diego -0.24 116,652 116,368 116,368
Chula Vista City San Diego 0.19 280,590 281,137 281,401
Coronado City San Diego -0.41 17,471 17,400 22,610
Del Mar City San Diego 0.05 3,948 3,950 3,950
El Cajon City San Diego -0.47 105,429 104,932 104,932
Encinitas City San Diego 0.17 61,851 61,956 61,956
Escondido City San Diego -0.63 151,386 150,425 150,425
Imperial Beach City San Diego -0.35 26,462 26,369 26,369
La Mesa City San Diego -0.27 61,072 60,908 60,908
Lemon Grove City San Diego 0.93 27,903 28,163 28,163
National City San Diego 0.07 56,900 56,941 58,965
Oceanside City San Diego 0.44 173,569 174,340 174,340
Poway City San Diego 0.86 49,948 50,379 50,379
San Diego City San Diego 1.15 1,378,448 1,394,234 1,408,937
San Marcos City San Diego -0.14 97,261 97,123 97,123
Santee City San Diego -0.60 59,928 59,568 59,568
Solana Beach City San Diego -0.52 13,054 12,986 12,986
Vista City San Diego -0.14 101,740 101,599 101,599
Balance of County San Diego -0.19 470,041 469,135 509,160
Incorporated San Diego 0.54 2,783,612 2,798,778 2,820,979
County Total San Diego 0.44 3,253,653 3,267,913 3,330,139
San Francisco City San Francisco -0.39 844,789 841,467 842,027
Incorporated San Francisco -0.39 844,789 841,467 842,027
County Total San Francisco -0.39 844,789 841,467 842,027
Escalon City San Joaquin -1.43 7,337 7,232 7,232
Lathrop City San Joaquin 4.03 37,102 38,596 38,596
Lodi City San Joaquin -0.25 67,262 67,093 67,093
Manteca City San Joaquin 1.76 92,116 93,733 93,733
Mountain House City San Joaquin 0.00 28,795 28,795
Ripon City San Joaquin -1.33 15,966 15,753 15,753
Stockton City San Joaquin -0.77 323,325 320,847 320,877
Tracy City San Joaquin 0.73 97,501 98,215 98,215
Balance of County San Joaquin -16.29 159,392 133,422 135,562
Incorporated San Joaquin 4.63 640,609 670,264 670,294
County Total San Joaquin 0.46 800,001 803,686 805,856
Arroyo Grande City San Luis Obispo -0.64 18,025 17,910 17,910
Atascadero City San Luis Obispo -0.72 29,305 29,093 30,134
20
2
CC 06-03-2025
202 of 1012
El Paso de Robles City San Luis Obispo 0.24 30,988 31,061 31,061
Grover Beach City San Luis Obispo -0.35 12,455 12,411 12,411
Morro Bay City San Luis Obispo 0.00 10,404 10,404 10,404
Pismo Beach City San Luis Obispo -0.69 7,858 7,804 7,804
San Luis Obispo City San Luis Obispo 1.52 48,791 49,534 49,534
Balance of County San Luis Obispo -0.61 118,580 117,852 120,079
Incorporated San Luis Obispo 0.25 157,826 158,217 159,258
County Total San Luis Obispo -0.12 276,406 276,069 279,337
Atherton Town San Mateo -0.33 7,030 7,007 7,007
Belmont City San Mateo 3.90 27,146 28,206 28,206
Brisbane City San Mateo -0.51 4,700 4,676 4,676
Burlingame City San Mateo 2.55 30,768 31,552 31,552
Colma Town San Mateo -0.70 1,421 1,411 1,411
Daly City San Mateo -0.16 102,315 102,155 102,155
East Palo Alto City San Mateo -0.65 29,325 29,133 29,133
Foster City San Mateo -0.60 32,856 32,658 32,658
Half Moon Bay City San Mateo -0.26 11,333 11,303 11,303
Hillsborough Town San Mateo 0.38 11,211 11,254 11,254
Menlo Park City San Mateo -0.35 33,291 33,175 33,311
Millbrae City San Mateo -0.53 23,288 23,164 23,164
Pacifica City San Mateo -0.41 37,365 37,212 37,217
Portola Valley Town San Mateo -0.02 4,286 4,285 4,285
Redwood City San Mateo -0.57 82,546 82,073 82,073
San Bruno City San Mateo 0.29 42,507 42,631 42,631
San Carlos City San Mateo -0.45 29,669 29,535 29,535
San Mateo City San Mateo 0.09 104,221 104,315 104,315
South San Francisco City San Mateo 0.39 65,146 65,397 65,397
Woodside Town San Mateo 0.58 5,176 5,206 5,206
Balance of County San Mateo -0.32 62,047 61,848 61,848
Incorporated San Mateo 0.11 685,600 686,348 686,489
County Total San Mateo 0.07 747,647 748,196 748,337
Buellton City Santa Barbara 2.23 4,980 5,091 5,091
Carpinteria City Santa Barbara 0.09 12,723 12,735 12,735
Goleta City Santa Barbara 0.45 32,601 32,747 32,747
Guadalupe City Santa Barbara 1.81 8,694 8,851 8,851
Lompoc City Santa Barbara 0.05 40,518 40,538 43,424
Santa Barbara City Santa Barbara 0.31 86,159 86,422 86,451
Santa Maria City Santa Barbara 1.19 110,885 112,208 112,208
Solvang City Santa Barbara 0.47 5,728 5,755 5,755
Balance of County Santa Barbara 0.52 136,287 136,992 139,870
Incorporated Santa Barbara 0.68 302,288 304,347 307,262
County Total Santa Barbara 0.63 438,575 441,339 447,132
Campbell City Santa Clara -0.22 43,377 43,281 43,281
Cupertino City Santa Clara -0.09 59,887 59,831 59,831
20
3
CC 06-03-2025
203 of 1012
Gilroy City Santa Clara 1.10 61,402 62,076 62,205
Los Altos City Santa Clara 0.62 31,523 31,720 31,720
Los Altos Hills Town Santa Clara 0.33 8,520 8,548 8,548
Los Gatos Town Santa Clara -0.43 33,500 33,355 33,355
Milpitas City Santa Clara -0.59 82,401 81,915 81,915
Monte Sereno City Santa Clara 0.66 3,613 3,637 3,637
Morgan Hill City Santa Clara 0.06 46,573 46,599 46,599
Mountain View City Santa Clara -0.19 86,674 86,513 86,513
Palo Alto City Santa Clara 0.31 68,550 68,763 68,794
San Jose City Santa Clara -0.08 980,174 979,415 979,415
Santa Clara City Santa Clara 0.57 133,829 134,587 134,587
Saratoga City Santa Clara 0.29 31,020 31,110 31,110
Sunnyvale City Santa Clara 0.46 158,948 159,673 159,673
Balance of County Santa Clara -0.21 90,602 90,412 91,076
Incorporated Santa Clara 0.06 1,829,991 1,831,023 1,831,183
County Total Santa Clara 0.04 1,920,593 1,921,435 1,922,259
Capitola City Santa Cruz -0.35 9,704 9,670 9,670
Santa Cruz City Santa Cruz 0.18 62,861 62,972 62,972
Scotts Valley City Santa Cruz -0.04 11,836 11,831 11,831
Watsonville City Santa Cruz 0.47 50,860 51,101 51,101
Balance of County Santa Cruz -0.04 128,130 128,079 128,136
Incorporated Santa Cruz 0.23 135,261 135,574 135,574
County Total Santa Cruz 0.10 263,391 263,653 263,710
Anderson City Shasta -0.73 11,048 10,967 10,967
Redding City Shasta 0.09 93,330 93,413 93,534
Shasta Lake City Shasta -0.74 10,209 10,133 10,133
Balance of County Shasta -0.49 65,836 65,514 65,567
Incorporated Shasta -0.06 114,587 114,513 114,634
County Total Shasta -0.22 180,423 180,027 180,201
Loyalton City Sierra -0.27 732 730 730
Balance of County Sierra -0.20 2,445 2,440 2,440
Incorporated Sierra -0.27 732 730 730
County Total Sierra -0.22 3,177 3,170 3,170
Dorris City Siskiyou -0.84 837 830 830
Dunsmuir City Siskiyou -0.91 1,643 1,628 1,628
Etna City Siskiyou -0.75 667 662 662
Fort Jones City Siskiyou -0.75 668 663 663
Montague City Siskiyou -0.42 1,200 1,195 1,195
Mount Shasta City Siskiyou -0.72 3,202 3,179 3,179
Tulelake City Siskiyou -0.82 858 851 851
Weed City Siskiyou 0.30 2,708 2,716 2,716
Yreka City Siskiyou 0.64 7,829 7,879 7,879
Balance of County Siskiyou -0.49 23,772 23,656 23,708
Incorporated Siskiyou -0.05 19,612 19,603 19,603
20
4
CC 06-03-2025
204 of 1012
County Total Siskiyou -0.29 43,384 43,259 43,311
Benicia City Solano -0.58 26,347 26,195 26,195
Dixon City Solano 2.89 19,608 20,174 20,174
Fairfield City Solano -0.07 116,199 116,112 120,720
Rio Vista City Solano 1.78 10,157 10,338 10,338
Suisun City Solano -0.13 29,074 29,036 29,036
Vacaville City Solano 0.04 97,347 97,382 103,181
Vallejo City Solano -0.48 122,791 122,207 122,207
Balance of County Solano -0.27 17,285 17,238 17,988
Incorporated Solano -0.02 421,523 421,444 431,851
County Total Solano -0.03 438,808 438,682 449,839
Cloverdale City Sonoma -0.97 8,763 8,678 8,678
Cotati City Sonoma -0.86 7,353 7,290 7,290
Healdsburg City Sonoma -0.35 11,010 10,972 10,972
Petaluma City Sonoma 0.40 58,858 59,094 59,094
Rohnert Park City Sonoma -0.06 44,089 44,062 44,062
Santa Rosa City Sonoma 0.80 177,043 178,452 178,452
Sebastopol City Sonoma 0.40 7,338 7,367 7,367
Sonoma City Sonoma -0.83 10,595 10,507 10,507
Windsor Town Sonoma -0.17 25,669 25,625 25,625
Balance of County Sonoma -0.46 130,591 129,985 130,801
Incorporated Sonoma 0.38 350,718 352,047 352,047
County Total Sonoma 0.15 481,309 482,032 482,848
Ceres City Stanislaus -0.35 49,480 49,305 49,305
Hughson City Stanislaus 2.26 7,801 7,977 7,977
Modesto City Stanislaus 0.03 219,705 219,765 219,765
Newman City Stanislaus 1.05 12,260 12,389 12,389
Oakdale City Stanislaus 0.28 23,167 23,231 23,231
Patterson City Stanislaus 3.57 24,977 25,868 25,868
Riverbank City Stanislaus 3.16 25,290 26,090 26,090
Turlock City Stanislaus 0.31 71,997 72,219 72,219
Waterford City Stanislaus 0.09 9,161 9,169 9,169
Balance of County Stanislaus -0.02 109,776 109,752 109,752
Incorporated Stanislaus 0.49 443,838 446,013 446,013
County Total Stanislaus 0.39 553,614 555,765 555,765
Live Oak City Sutter 0.58 9,602 9,658 9,658
Yuba City Sutter 0.96 69,781 70,453 70,453
Balance of County Sutter 0.49 20,048 20,146 20,146
Incorporated Sutter 0.92 79,383 80,111 80,111
County Total Sutter 0.83 99,431 100,257 100,257
Corning City Tehama 1.30 8,162 8,268 8,268
Red Bluff City Tehama 0.11 14,450 14,466 14,466
Tehama City Tehama 0.23 427 428 428
Balance of County Tehama -0.41 41,702 41,532 41,665
20
5
CC 06-03-2025
205 of 1012
Incorporated Tehama 0.53 23,039 23,162 23,162
County Total Tehama -0.07 64,741 64,694 64,827
Balance of County Trinity -0.16 15,850 15,825 15,884
County Total Trinity -0.16 15,850 15,825 15,884
Dinuba City Tulare 0.67 25,852 26,025 26,025
Exeter City Tulare -0.19 10,252 10,233 10,233
Farmersville City Tulare -0.29 10,422 10,392 10,392
Lindsay City Tulare -0.07 12,734 12,725 12,725
Porterville City Tulare 0.04 63,427 63,455 63,622
Tulare City Tulare 2.02 71,557 73,002 73,002
Visalia City Tulare 0.69 145,714 146,722 146,978
Woodlake City Tulare 2.72 7,793 8,005 8,005
Balance of County Tulare 0.54 135,452 136,180 136,227
Incorporated Tulare 0.81 347,751 350,559 350,982
County Total Tulare 0.73 483,203 486,739 487,209
Sonora City Tuolumne -0.74 5,154 5,116 5,116
Balance of County Tuolumne -0.27 46,963 46,836 49,241
Incorporated Tuolumne -0.74 5,154 5,116 5,116
County Total Tuolumne -0.32 52,117 51,952 54,357
Camarillo City Ventura -0.78 69,467 68,927 68,927
Fillmore City Ventura -0.35 17,095 17,035 17,035
Moorpark City Ventura -0.77 35,023 34,754 34,754
Ojai City Ventura 0.04 7,556 7,559 7,559
Oxnard City Ventura 0.18 198,384 198,733 198,733
Port Hueneme City Ventura -0.81 19,024 18,870 20,838
San Buenaventura (Ventura) City Ventura 0.58 108,304 108,930 108,985
Santa Paula City Ventura 0.47 31,511 31,658 31,658
Simi Valley City Ventura 0.00 124,640 124,645 124,815
Thousand Oaks City Ventura -0.73 123,372 122,468 122,468
Balance of County Ventura 1.49 90,070 91,416 93,233
Incorporated Ventura -0.11 734,376 733,579 735,772
County Total Ventura 0.07 824,446 824,995 829,005
Davis City Yolo -0.43 65,708 65,423 65,423
West Sacramento City Yolo 0.85 54,938 55,403 55,403
Winters City Yolo 4.14 7,702 8,021 8,021
Woodland City Yolo 0.35 61,406 61,623 61,623
Balance of County Yolo 1.83 34,334 34,963 34,963
Incorporated Yolo 0.38 189,754 190,470 190,470
County Total Yolo 0.60 224,088 225,433 225,433
Marysville City Yuba -0.84 12,825 12,717 12,717
Wheatland City Yuba 2.29 3,922 4,012 4,012
Balance of County Yuba 0.57 65,454 65,828 68,294
Incorporated Yuba -0.11 16,747 16,729 16,729
County Total Yuba 0.43 82,201 82,557 85,023
20
6
CC 06-03-2025
206 of 1012
*Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental institutions, state and federal correctional institutions and
veteran homes.
20
7
CC 06-03-2025
207 of 1012
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
Attachment C
Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions*
January 1, 2024 to January 1, 2025 and Total Population January 1, 2025
City County
Percent Change
24-25
Population Minus
Exclusions 1-1-24
Population Minus
Exclusions 1-1-25
Total Population
1-1-25
Incorporated Alameda 0.37 1,507,666 1,513,172 1,514,836
County Total Alameda 0.31 1,655,644 1,660,751 1,662,482
County Total Alpine -0.42 1,181 1,176 1,177
Incorporated Amador -0.88 13,964 13,841 17,715
County Total Amador -1.34 36,131 35,646 39,563
Incorporated Butte 2.67 149,856 153,863 153,863
County Total Butte -0.17 207,873 207,525 207,525
Incorporated Calaveras -0.42 3,585 3,570 3,570
County Total Calaveras -0.23 44,768 44,666 44,722
Incorporated Colusa -0.32 12,164 12,125 12,125
County Total Colusa -0.30 22,093 22,026 22,026
Incorporated Contra Costa 0.03 981,987 982,308 982,308
County Total Contra Costa 0.00 1,158,165 1,158,141 1,158,225
Incorporated Del Norte -0.69 4,064 4,036 6,056
County Total Del Norte -1.32 24,802 24,475 26,544
Incorporated El Dorado 0.01 31,650 31,654 31,664
County Total El Dorado 0.08 190,512 190,663 190,770
Incorporated Fresno 0.97 863,943 872,318 876,849
County Total Fresno 0.84 1,022,826 1,031,466 1,037,053
Incorporated Glenn 1.36 14,975 15,179 15,179
County Total Glenn 1.35 28,979 29,369 29,369
Incorporated Humboldt 0.36 62,966 63,191 63,346
County Total Humboldt -0.22 133,591 133,298 133,817
Incorporated Imperial 1.06 147,725 149,297 151,728
County Total Imperial 0.98 179,096 180,854 186,499
Incorporated Inyo -0.10 3,854 3,850 3,850
County Total Inyo -0.27 18,792 18,742 18,800
Incorporated Kern 1.09 598,320 604,862 617,253
County Total Kern 0.74 902,508 909,213 923,961
Incorporated Kings 1.98 109,956 112,128 123,857
County Total Kings 1.88 135,091 137,628 154,015
Incorporated Lake 0.57 21,436 21,559 21,559
County Total Lake -0.24 67,325 67,166 67,254
Incorporated Lassen 1.90 9,199 9,374 12,270
County Total Lassen 1.82 24,001 24,438 28,716
Incorporated Los Angeles 0.31 8,834,429 8,861,693 8,872,321
County Total Los Angeles 0.30 9,836,291 9,865,367 9,876,811
Incorporated Madera -0.98 80,742 79,947 85,185
County Total Madera 0.58 156,460 157,361 162,599
Incorporated Marin 0.09 187,756 187,922 188,136
County Total Marin 0.14 251,013 251,363 254,550
208
CC 06-03-2025
208 of 1012
County Total Mariposa -0.21 16,897 16,861 16,917
Incorporated Mendocino 0.29 28,719 28,802 28,802
County Total Mendocino 0.03 89,750 89,777 89,827
Incorporated Merced 2.75 199,486 204,971 204,971
County Total Merced 0.43 290,587 291,832 293,080
Incorporated Modoc -0.19 2,662 2,657 2,657
County Total Modoc -0.21 8,509 8,491 8,491
Incorporated Mono -1.47 7,145 7,040 7,040
County Total Mono -1.59 12,792 12,588 12,684
Incorporated Monterey 0.25 317,631 318,425 333,735
County Total Monterey 0.15 422,742 423,387 438,831
Incorporated Napa 0.73 111,870 112,686 113,279
County Total Napa 0.56 133,710 134,461 136,124
Incorporated Nevada -0.36 33,749 33,628 33,628
County Total Nevada -0.54 100,841 100,295 100,354
Incorporated Orange 0.15 3,037,560 3,042,210 3,042,394
County Total Orange 0.17 3,169,873 3,175,233 3,175,427
Incorporated Placer 0.49 306,650 308,157 308,157
County Total Placer 0.24 420,436 421,446 421,446
Incorporated Plumas -0.94 2,118 2,098 2,098
County Total Plumas 0.44 18,802 18,885 18,885
Incorporated Riverside 0.02 2,071,273 2,071,714 2,077,739
County Total Riverside 0.27 2,482,611 2,489,360 2,495,640
Incorporated Sacramento 0.97 987,341 996,940 1,001,985
County Total Sacramento 0.50 1,591,701 1,599,700 1,604,745
Incorporated San Benito 0.45 45,367 45,570 45,570
County Total San Benito 0.46 66,514 66,822 66,822
Incorporated San Bernardino 0.54 1,881,931 1,892,035 1,909,919
County Total San Bernardino 0.44 2,172,385 2,181,846 2,207,424
Incorporated San Diego 0.54 2,783,612 2,798,778 2,820,979
County Total San Diego 0.44 3,253,653 3,267,913 3,330,139
Incorporated San Francisco -0.39 844,789 841,467 842,027
County Total San Francisco -0.39 844,789 841,467 842,027
Incorporated San Joaquin 4.63 640,609 670,264 670,294
County Total San Joaquin 0.46 800,001 803,686 805,856
Incorporated San Luis Obispo 0.25 157,826 158,217 159,258
County Total San Luis Obispo -0.12 276,406 276,069 279,337
Incorporated San Mateo 0.11 685,600 686,348 686,489
County Total San Mateo 0.07 747,647 748,196 748,337
Incorporated Santa Barbara 0.68 302,288 304,347 307,262
County Total Santa Barbara 0.63 438,575 441,339 447,132
Incorporated Santa Clara 0.06 1,829,991 1,831,023 1,831,183
County Total Santa Clara 0.04 1,920,593 1,921,435 1,922,259
Incorporated Santa Cruz 0.23 135,261 135,574 135,574
County Total Santa Cruz 0.10 263,391 263,653 263,710
Incorporated Shasta -0.06 114,587 114,513 114,634
County Total Shasta -0.22 180,423 180,027 180,201
209
CC 06-03-2025
209 of 1012
Incorporated Sierra -0.27 732 730 730
County Total Sierra -0.22 3,177 3,170 3,170
Incorporated Siskiyou -0.05 19,612 19,603 19,603
County Total Siskiyou -0.29 43,384 43,259 43,311
Incorporated Solano -0.02 421,523 421,444 431,851
County Total Solano -0.03 438,808 438,682 449,839
Incorporated Sonoma 0.38 350,718 352,047 352,047
County Total Sonoma 0.15 481,309 482,032 482,848
Incorporated Stanislaus 0.49 443,838 446,013 446,013
County Total Stanislaus 0.39 553,614 555,765 555,765
Incorporated Sutter 0.92 79,383 80,111 80,111
County Total Sutter 0.83 99,431 100,257 100,257
Incorporated Tehama 0.53 23,039 23,162 23,162
County Total Tehama -0.07 64,741 64,694 64,827
County Total Trinity -0.16 15,850 15,825 15,884
Incorporated Tulare 0.81 347,751 350,559 350,982
County Total Tulare 0.73 483,203 486,739 487,209
Incorporated Tuolumne -0.74 5,154 5,116 5,116
County Total Tuolumne -0.32 52,117 51,952 54,357
Incorporated Ventura -0.11 734,376 733,579 735,772
County Total Ventura 0.07 824,446 824,995 829,005
Incorporated Yolo 0.38 189,754 190,470 190,470
County Total Yolo 0.60 224,088 225,433 225,433
Incorporated Yuba -0.11 16,747 16,729 16,729
County Total Yuba 0.43 82,201 82,557 85,023
210
CC 06-03-2025
210 of 1012
1
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 3, 2025
Subject
Staff responses to questions received from Councilmembers during Proposed Budget Study
Session.
Recommended Action
Receive staff responses to questions received from Councilmembers during Proposed Budget
Study Session.
Background:
Staff’s responses to questions received from councilmembers are shown in italics.
Q1. As mentioned, Transfers in does not match transfers out
Staff response: Transfers In and Transfers Out in the Financial Overview by Fund (page 58) should net
to zero, as they represent internal movements of funds. However, Transfers In total $14,109,653 while
Transfers Out total $12,609,653, resulting in a $1,500,000 variance.
This discrepancy is due to two incorrect entries:
- $500,000 in Fund 580 – Recreation Program (Enterprise Fund)
- $1,000,000 in Fund 610 – Innovation & Technology (Internal Service Fund)
Both funds had sufficient fund balance and should not have received transfers In.
The corrected Financial Overview by Fund reduces Transfers In for the Enterprise Funds(A) by $500,000
and for the Internal Service Funds(B) . This increases the use of fund balance for these two fund types
and raises the total use of fund balance across all funds from $843,062 to $2,343,062. With these
adjustments, Transfers In and Out now balance(C).
There is no impact to the General Fund as a result of this correction.
211
CC 06-03-2025
211 of 1012
2
Q2. General Fund Transfers out is exactly $1M higher than the total shown on p. 93 – which is
correct? The correct number $10,594,653.
Staff response: The discrepancy on page 93 is due to two errors in the table. First, the list omits a $2
million transfer to Fund 429 – CIP Reserve, which represents the annual General Fund contribution
reinstated as part of the Mid-Year Financial Report. Second, the table incorrectly lists the transfer to
Fund 270 – Transportation Fund as $2.5 million instead of the correct amount of $1.5 million.
Q3. Both amounts were correctly updated in the budget system but were inadvertently not
reflected in the published table. The $1.5 million transfer satisfies the City's Maintenance of
Effort (MOE) requirement for street and sidewalk maintenance. In prior years, this program
was funded at $2.5 million, but the amount was reduced to MOE minimum as a budget
balancing measure.
Enterprise Funds “Other Financing Uses” is shown as “Transfers Out” on p. 64 – should it be
moved up to the Transfers Out line on p 58? This is $222,567 and appears to have been
copied to the wrong category line.
Revenue Categories General Fund Special
Revenue Fund
Debt Service
Fund
Capital Project
Funds
Enterprise
Funds
Internal Service
Funds All Funds
Sales Tax 11,983,958 - - - - - 11,983,958
Property Tax 35,413,310 - - - - - 35,413,310
Transient Occupancy 7,500,000 - - - - - 7,500,000
Utility Tax 4,206,907 - - - - - 4,206,907
Franchise Fees 4,394,563 - - - - - 4,394,563
Other Taxes 1,736,718 4,637,703 - - - - 6,374,421
Licenses & Permits 4,261,859 - - - - - 4,261,859
Use of Money & Property 6,538,880 749,830 - - 531,450 99,701 7,919,861
Intergovernmental 3,569,332 5,351,721 - - 14,812 - 8,935,865
Charges for Services 15,162,032 1,504,373 - - 5,044,822 5,331,124 27,042,351
Fines & Forfeitures 410,760 10,000 - - - - 420,760
Miscellaneous 1,668,815 1,519 - - - - 1,670,334
Other Financing Sources 367,000 - - - - 553,531 920,531
Transfers In 15,000 2,067,000 2,676,600 4,000,000 1,235,000 2,616,053 12,609,653
TOTAL REVENUES 97,229,134$ 14,322,146$ 2,676,600$ 4,000,000$ 6,826,084$ 8,600,409$ 133,654,373$
Appropriation Categories General Fund Special
Revenue Fund
Debt Service
Fund
Capital Project
Funds
Enterprise
Funds
Internal Service
Funds All Funds
Employee Compensation 24,182,741 1,602,256 - - 2,010,726 1,720,661 29,516,384
Employee Benefits 10,595,638 797,878 - - 746,937 2,347,371 14,487,824
Materials 6,174,481 1,013,894 - - 758,663 1,297,849 9,244,887
Contract Services 31,496,502 692,575 - 225,000 3,578,026 1,730,697 37,722,800
Cost Allocation 11,993,327 2,197,032 - - 1,676,251 949,737 16,816,347
Capital Outlays 274,433 1,583,075 - 2,000,000 - - 3,857,508
Special Projects 2,694,000 2,908,412 - - 160,000 1,039,000 6,801,412
Contingencies 50,000 - - - - - 50,000
Debt Service - - 2,676,600 - - - 2,676,600
Transfers Out 10,594,653 15,000 - 2,000,000 - - 12,609,653
Other Financing Uses 1,065,000 - - - 222,567 926,453 2,214,020
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 99,120,775$ 10,810,122$ 2,676,600$ 4,225,000$ 9,153,170$ 10,011,768$ 135,997,435$
CHANGE IN FUND
BALANCE/(1,891,641)$ 3,512,024$ -$ (225,000)$ (2,327,086)$ (1,411,359)$ (2,343,062)$
2025-26 Proposed Budget
2025-26 Proposed Budget
A B
C
C
212
CC 06-03-2025
212 of 1012
3
Staff Response: That is correct. The amounts should have been in Other Financing Uses. The table has
been updated to reflect the change. In addition, we added the Other Financing Uses and broken out
prior year transfers out and other financing uses separately. See table below.
Q4: Exploring a citywide traffic study; requested an informational memorandum evaluating
process to collect data such as traffic counts, flow, and speed surveys, along with proposed
scope and cost.
Staff response: Information memorandum will be provided by Public Works staff in June.
Q5: Requested historical data on the City's vacancy rates.
Staff response: Over the last 10 years, the City’s vacancy rate has averaged 11% including years when
the City had added positions at Mid-Year or had been in a soft hiring freeze, when removing these
anomalies the City’s salary savings has average 6%. The City’s long-term financial forecast has been
updated to increase the vacancy rate to 6% in the first two years of the forecast but has kept 4% vacancy
savings in the remaining years. The table below shows historical salary savings.
EXPENDITURE USES 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26
Actual Actual Adopted Proposed
Employee Compensation 1,612,325 1,742,135 1,922,348 2,010,726
Employee Benefits (54,532) 1,020,726 839,347 746,937
Materials 412,827 363,986 691,338 758,663
Contract Services 4,736,292 3,870,517 3,661,846 3,578,026
Contingencies - - 54,339 -
Cost Allocation 789,939 939,358 1,577,430 1,676,251
Special Projects 297,015 286,326 362,733 160,000
Transfers Out 103,119 20,000 - -
Other Financing Uses 161,840 185,989 161,841 222,567
Total Expenditure Uses $ 8,058,825 $ 8,429,036 $ 9,271,222 $ 9,153,170
213
CC 06-03-2025
213 of 1012
4
The following table shows historical vacancy rates.
2014-15
Amended
Budget Q4
2014-15
Actual
2015-16
Amended
Budget Q4
2015-16
Actual
2016-17
Amended
Budget Q4
2016-17
Actual
2017-18
Amended
Budget Q4
2017-18
Actual
2018-19
Amended
Budget Q4
2018-19
Actual
Employee
Compensation 16,649,412 16,084,209 18,898,886 17,046,311 20,906,746 12,950,812 22,349,844 21,125,390 23,326,442 21,439,003
Employee
Benefits 7,962,846 7,641,603 8,830,262 7,750,646 9,412,024 9,579,239 10,168,849 10,015,266 10,708,420 9,744,962
Total 24,612,258 23,725,812 27,729,148 24,796,956 30,318,770 22,530,051 32,518,693 31,140,656 34,034,862 31,183,966
Budget vs
Actuals 886,446 2,932,192 7,788,719 1,378,037 2,850,896
Salary Savings 4%11%26%4%8%
2019-20
Amended
Budget Q4
2019-20
Actual
2020-21
Amended
Budget Q4
2020-21
Actual
2021-22
Amended
Budget Q4
2021-22
Actual
2022-23
Amended
Budget Q4
2022-23
Actual
2023-24
Amended
Budget Q4
2023-24
Actual
Employee
Compensation 24,713,544 22,794,896 25,264,213 23,003,729 27,694,272 24,412,868 31,681,411 27,087,509 30,293,262 26,716,216
Employee
Benefits 10,922,818 11,191,891 12,156,039 11,412,966 13,923,946 12,023,510 15,437,830 11,561,176 14,884,120 13,795,206
Total 35,636,362 33,986,787 37,420,252 34,416,694 41,618,218 36,436,378 47,119,241 38,648,685 45,177,382 40,511,422
Budget vs
Actuals 1,649,575 3,003,558 5,181,840 8,470,556 4,665,960
Salary Savings 5%8%12%18%10%
Average 11%
Source: OpenGov
214
CC 06-03-2025
214 of 1012
5
Q6: Requested information about staffing trends, historical vs. current staffing levels.
Staff response: See ten-year staffing chart below.
Q7: Look into discontinuing the remaining $100k in funding for Rise engagement project
Work Program item.
Staff response: Will be discussed as part of the special projects item at the June 3rd City Council meeting.
Q8: Requested clearer accounting on Sister City Program, facility use, and free use of City
facilities; also requested review of agreements governing use of City property.
Staff response: Staff will provide an informational memo on all of these items.
Q9: Requested consideration of adding a "Nonprofit Support" section in the budget to show
the actual costs associated with each supported nonprofit.
Staff response: Nonprofit support details can be added to the budget, as follows:
Community Fee Waivers Fiscal Year 2025-2026
Community Funding
Community Funding information can be found here
215
CC 06-03-2025
215 of 1012
6
Applicant Award
Amount
No Time to Waste $5,000
ElderAid $5,000
Active Circle $2,000
Special Olympics Northern California $5,000
AINAK $4,000
Cupertino Symphonic Band $3,000
Remember the ToothFairy $1,000
Friends of Deer Hollow Farm $2,000
iTalented $900
Via Rehabilitation Services $1,000
Rotary Club of Cupertino $1,600
West Valley Community Services $2,000
$32,500
Sister Cities
A Sister City relationship is a long-term, formal agreement that may include cultural,
educational, business, and technical exchanges. Cupertino has four established Sister City
relationships:
• Copertino, Italy, formalized in 1963
• Toyokawa, Japan, formalized in 1978
• Hsinchu, Taiwan, formalized in 2007
• Bhubaneswar, India, formalized in 2012
The support the City of Cupertino gives Sister Cities is as follows:
City of Cupertino Responsibilities (With regard to City supported Sister City Committees):
Coordinated through the City Manager’s Office, the City will serve as a support for programs
and activities by:
• Providing for set-up and complimentary access to a large City facility for three community
events per Sister City per fiscal year. All cost of food, drinks, and materials are the
responsibility of the Sister City Committee.
216
CC 06-03-2025
216 of 1012
7
• The City shall accept gifts from the Sister City, which will be considered the property of
the City and may be displayed at a City facility or offered to the Sister City Committee at
City’s discretion.
• The City will establish and maintain a written record of said gifts, regardless of actual or
perceived monetary value. The written gift log will include: donation City, gift date, gift
occasion (if applicable), and whether they are being offered to the Sister City Committee.
• Providing up to $2,500 per year for a Sister City with a student exchange program of 4 to
9 student delegates and up to $5,000 per year for a Sister City with a student exchange
program of 10 or more student delegates.
Coordinated through the City Manager's Office, the City will serve as a support for Sister City
programs and activities by:
• Providing access to postage, fax, copying and printing equipment to Sister City
Committee members for support of Sister City events in which the City is participating. City
staff is not responsible for preparing mailings or printed materials.
• Providing the use of meeting room space (up to 18 per calendar year) at no cost to the
Sister City Committee for related activities. Meeting room space does not include Cupertino
Community Hall or the Quinlan Community Center’s Cupertino Room.
• Providing City promotional gift items, when budget allows, typically given at community
events to government representatives and student delegations from visiting countries. These
include but are not limited to: branded t-shirts, pens, reusable bags, and lapel pins. The cost
of each promotional gift or gift bag shall not exceed $25. Additional gifts presented to
members of a Sister City delegation are the responsibility of the Sister City Committee.
• Facilitating participation of City officials.
City of Cupertino Responsibilities (With regard to non-City supported Sister City
Committees):
• The City shall maintain registration with the Sister Cities International organization.
• Provide the use of meeting room space (up to 4 per calendar year) at no cost to the Sister
City Committee for related activities. For additional meeting room uses, non-City supported
Sister City Committees shall be charged the facility use resident rate on the rental of any City
facility. Meeting room space does not include Cupertino Community Hall or the Quinlan
Community Center’s Cupertino Room
The full agreement for Sister Cities and Friendship Cities can be found here
Fees for facility rentals can be found here.
217
CC 06-03-2025
217 of 1012
8
Sister City Festival Fee Waivers
Festival Date Organizati
on
Waived
Fees
City Paid
Expenses
Totals
Bhubanes
war Sister
City
City
Initiative
(CBSCI)
Saturda
y,
Septemb
er 20,
2025
Cupertino
Bhubanes
war Sister
City
$12,200 $3,720 $15,920
Cherry
Blossom
Sat.-
Sun.,
April
25-26,
2026
Toyokawa
Sister City
$39,282 $11,780 $51,06
TOTAL $66,982
Friendship Cities
All proposed Friendship City relationships must have Councilmember or community
sponsorship and be approved by the City Council. The Friendship City will submit a
Friendship City application to the City of Cupertino, which requires sponsorship from a
Council Member and a citizen's committee to ensure the new affiliation is successful. If
approved, the City will issue a signed Letter of Intent establishing the Friendship City
relationship. A Friendship City affiliation will be effective for two years and may be renewed
administratively every two years.
Friendship City Committee Responsibilities:
• Identify, manage, coordinate, and implement all activities related to the Friendship City
program.
• Maintain communication with the affiliate Friendship City, ensuring the counterpart is
equally committed.
• Work with City staff at least one month in advance in arranging official promotional gifts
and meetings for foreign delegations. For local groups traveling abroad and bringing city
gifts, similar notice is required, unless waived by the City Manager.
City of Cupertino Responsibilities:
Coordinated through the City Manager’s Office, the City will:
• Issue a signed Letter of Intent establishing a new Friendship City relationship in an effort
to assist international delegation visits from the Friendship City.
• Provide City promotional items typically given at community events to government
representatives from visiting countries as the budget allows. These may include, but are not
218
CC 06-03-2025
218 of 1012
9
limited to: City t-shirts, pens, reusable bags, and lapel pins, to the extent there remains a
budgeted amount to purchase such gifts and promotional items.
• Facilitate meetings with City officials.
• Conduct tours of city facilities.
Chamber of Commerce
Services Include, but not limited to, the following:
1. Technical Assistance
2. Marketing & Promotion/Information Dissemination
3. Events/Meetings
4. Other Provisions
Payment of up to $52,000 a year for work designated in the agreement.
Full agreement can be found here
Chamber Festival Fee Waivers
Festival Date Organizati
on
Waived
Fees
City Paid
Expenses
Totals
Diwali
Festival
Saturday,
October
11, 2025
Cupertino
Chamber
of
Commerce
$10,946 $4,805 $15,751
Holi Date TBD
for 25/26
Cupertino
Chamber
of
Commerce
$6,081 $3,410 $9,491
TOTAL $25,242
Cupertino Historical Society
City Council approved a license agreement and $40,000 a year grant for the Cupertino
Historical Society on October 4, 2022.
• License agreement is for the Museum space at Quinlan Community Center
Full agreement can be found here
219
CC 06-03-2025
219 of 1012
10
Rotary Club of Cupertino
Funding of $1,600 through the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Community Funding program.
Rotary Club Festival Fee Waiver
Festival Date Organizat
ion
Waived
Fees
City Paid
Expenses
Totals
Day N
Night Fun
Fest
Saturday,
Septembe
r 13, 2025
Rotary
Club of
Cupertino
$15,942 $4,495 $20,437
TOTAL $20,437
Friends of the Cupertino Library
Three weekend book sales per year. Funding Approximately $5,880. This is an ongoing
permanent fee waiver.
Approved at City Council Meeting Monday, July 8, 2019
Pacific Coast Farmer’s Market Association
License agreement to use the Creekside Park North Parking Lot for the Friday Farmer’s
Market, for most Fridays from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., unless otherwise notified by the City.
Full agreement and amendments can be found here
Regents of the University of California - Rolling Hills 4-H Club
Lease agreement for space at the McClellan Ranch Preserve, including but not limited to a
four-pen pole barn with corrals, a three-pen pole barn with corrals, a three-run chicken coop,
and a tack room. Also includes space for monthly club meetings at either the Environmental
Education Center and Monta Vista Recreation Center at no additional charge. In exchange, 4-
H will leave tours for school youth groups and community groups/classes, as discussed and
agreed to by Recreation Staff.
Approved at City Council Meeting Tuesday, May 21, 2024
Full agreement can be found here
Regents of the University of California – UCCE Master Gardener
Program
Five garden beds, including water, receptables for trash, recyclables, and compostable waste,
and community space for gardening classes, workshops, or meetings up to 12 times per
calendar year. In exchange, UCCE will offer no fewer than four gardening classes or
workshops annually, including a Cupertino Community Garden 101 orientation and no fewer
than four hours per week, thirty-two weeks per year of Master Gardener office hours to
answer questions from participants and Cupertino residents.
Full agreement can be found here
220
CC 06-03-2025
220 of 1012
11
Other organization Festival Fee Waivers
Festival application process can be found here
Festival Date Organization Waived
Fees
City Paid
Expenses
Totals
Kids N Fun
Festival
Saturday,
August23,
2025
Taiwanese Cultural and
Sports Association
$10,485 $4,495 $14,980
Ikebana Sat. October
18 and Sun.
October 19
WAFU Ikebana Society $28,475 $28,475
Veteran’s
Day
November 11,
2025
Veteran’s Memorial $1,312 $1,500
$2,812
Dilli Haat Saturday,
June 6, 2026
Empower Uplift Inc. $9,200 $4,030 $13,230
TOTAL $59,497
Q10: Requested clearer distinctions between resident and non-resident benefits in the fee
schedule; requested a report/informational memo on the fee schedule’s history and structure,
with comparisons.
Staff response: In general, resident fees are about 20% lower than non-resident fees. Staff will provide
an informational memo on the fee schedule’s history and structure, with comparisons at a future date.
Q11: Requested information on Blackberry Farm Pool summer staffing for potential
reopening for July 4 and impacts of decreased part-time staffing; and whether the staffing
shortage is due to reduced summer programs.
Staff response: The City previously had multiple staff run camps and two pools with lifeguards (one at
a high school and one at Blackberry Farm), we now have 3 staff run camps and one pool with lifeguards.
Fewer staff run camps and one less pool means we are hiring less part-time staff each summer. The staff
run camps were seeing low enrollment, so they were changed to more specialized contractor run camps
that are more popular with our customers.
The staffing shortage is due to a reduction in staff run programs due to enrollment. Programs were
replaced in summer offerings, but they were replaced with more specialized contractor run programs.
Q12: Requested an update on Active Transportation Plan (ATP) progress and expenditures;
provide spending data and bring back to Council for an update.
Staff response: Staff anticipates providing City Council an update on the ATP in September.
221
CC 06-03-2025
221 of 1012
12
Q13: Requested information on how to discontinue outdated work program items; review
policies, including carryover policy, to evaluate ongoing project funding.
Staff response: Staff surveyed Santa Clara County agencies and received direct responses, or online
research was conducted by staff. Staff surveyed 11 comparable cities, with most cities ‘carrying over
encumbrances to the next fiscal year with out City Council approval and unencumbered carryovers
requiring Council approval. The following cities did not provide a response, Saratoga, Campbell, and
Los Altos and no information was available online. Staff may consider a change in policy as part of
broader policy work. Direction from Council is needed.
222
CC 06-03-2025
222 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO.2025-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO FINDING THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2025 - 2026 CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino's Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
guides the funding and scheduling of infrastructure improvement projects over
the coming Fiscal Year. The current CIP recommendations have been updated for
the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 time period for City Council review and
consideration; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65401 requires that City's
Planning Commission make a determination that the annual CIP is in conformance
with the City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on April 22, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence
presented by the City, city staff, and other interested parties.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of
the City of Cupertino does hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The Planning Commission has duly considered the full record before it,
including the staff report and presentation, facts, exhibits, public testimony and
other evidence and materials submitted or provided to the Commission.
Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are
incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2: The Planning Commission hereby exercises its independent judgment
and determines that the action is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) states that a
project is exempt from CEQA if "it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the
environment." The action is a determination of consistency with the General Plan
and therefore it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the action
may have a significant effect on the environment.
223
CC 06-03-2025
223 of 1012
Resolution No. 2025-07
Page 2
Section 3: The Planning Commission finds in accordance with the Cupertino
Municipal Code (CMC) section 2.32.070 (C) and state law based on the evidence
in the public record that the City's CIP (FY 2025-2026) conforms to the City's
General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040.)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution is not a project under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, together with related
State CEQA Guidelines (collectively, "CEQA") because it has no potential for
resulting in physical change in the environment. In the event that this Resolution
is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption
contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with
certainty to have no possibility that the action approved may have a significant
effect on the environment. CEQA applies only to actions which have the potential
for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a
significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. In this
circumstance, the proposed action "Adopt a Resolution finding that the Fiscal Year
2025 - 2026 Capital Improvement Program proposal is consistent with the City's
General Plan" would have no or only a de minimis effect on the environment
because it is an administrative action. The foregoing determination is made by the
City of Cupertino Planning Commission in its independent judgment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
City of Cupertino this 22nd day of April 2025, by the following vote:
Members of the Planning Commission
AYES: Rao, Kosolcharoen, Scharf, Fung, Lindskog
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
224
CC 06-03-2025
224 of 1012
Resolution No. 2025-07
Page 3
APAShid 2--
San Date
Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
f
2 O Z Sr
Piu Ghosh, Planning Manager Date
225
CC 06-03-2025
225 of 1012
ATTACHMENT I
#Project Title Project Description Council Goal Est budget (Not including
staff costs)Project Size Lead Department(s)Estimated
Timeline
1
Economic Development for
Retail and Small Businesses
1.1 Streamline permitting process for small businesses
1.2 Retention and recruitment of retail and small businesses: Explore options
to support small businesses/startups, fill empty storefronts, and encourage
entry of new forms of retail to promote revitalization
• Explore more themed events like restaurant week, and other festivals to
bring vitality to Cupertino businesses
• Improve placemaking in the city and the city's revenue stream
1.3 Create a small business council, provide regulatory support.
1.4 Restore the EDC
1.5 Explore a Grants Analyst Position
Quality of Life,
Fiscal Strategy
0.5 FTE will be requested
during proposed budget
1.1: $100,000
1.2: $100,000
1.3: $0
1.4: $0
1.5: $0
100-71-705 750-260
Large Community
Development
Year 1 start
2
Permit Streamlining and
Simplification for Small Home
Upgrades
Develop a suite of improvements to (1) improve access to, and (2) speed the
processing of permits for small home upgrades so as to enhance compliance
and improve overall efficiency. Improve turnaround times. Set SLA' s for staff
and outsourced reviewers, customer service KPI' s, templates to reduce back
and forth, internal staff expertise to reduce consulting expenses.
Quality of Life $250,000
100-71-701 750-261
Medium Community
Development
Year 1 start
Year 2 end
3
Financial, Investment, and
Cashflow Policy Review
Review and assess the City’s investment policy and best practices with an
analysis of quarterly treasurers report.
Establish a cashflow management policy with the goal to reduce the total
percentage in cash from 20% to 2% and to reduce the total percentage in cash
and cash-equivalent to at most 10%, on par with other cities.
Fiscal Strategy $25,000
100-40-400 700-702
Small Administrative
Services
Year 1
4
Defensible Impact Fee Nexus
Study for Traffic Impact Fee,
Retail Impact Fee, BMR Impact
Fee, and Parkland Impact Fee
Conduct nexus studies to review a range of impact fees, such as Traffic Impact
Fee, Retail Impact Fee, BMR Impact Fee, and Parkland Impact Fee, and other
means of offsetting conversion of commercial land uses to residential to
ensure the impact fees are defensible against legal challenges.
Fiscal Strategy $1 Million
100-71-705 750-263
265-72-711 750-263
100-80-800 750-263
100-88-844 750-263
Large City Attorney's
Office
Year 2 Start
5
Water Conservation Policies Reduce irrigation while increasing pollinator supporting vegetation (turf
conversion). Optimize irrigation systems including CUSD use agreement sites.
Environmental
Sustainability
$250,000
100-84-813 750-264
Medium Public Works Year 1 start
Year 2 end
Final FY 2025-2027 City Work Program
226
CC 06-03-2025
226 of 1012
ATTACHMENT I
6
Enhance Senior Services 6.1 Due to the high cost of senior centers, many seniors have to "age in
place", but do still need services typically provided in senior centers, in
addition to common home maintenance.
6.2 Utilizing the survey results conducted in 2022 and 2023 to meet the needs
of Cupertino seniors
6.3 Consider consultant services similar to Palo Alto or Saratoga Senior Center
to enhance services, while reducing cost to the city.
NOTE: Cupertino Age-Friendly could make a presentation on the result of
2023 survey, in collaboration with the city staff.
NOTE: Successful Aging Solutions & Community Consulting (SASCC), who runs
the Saratoga Senior Center could provide a free gap analysis and feasibility
analysis
Quality of Life $65,000
100-60-601 750-265
Large Parks & Recreation Year 1 start
Year 2 end
7
City Properties: Planning for
Optimal Use
Future planning strategies for Stocklmeir house/garages, Blech House, Blue
Pheasant. Goal of judicial use of city-owned properties. Investigate potential
purchase of CUSD Finch/Phil property. Include the McClellan Barn and the
house at the entrance of Blackberry Farm.
Quality of Life $200,000
100-80-800 750-266
Medium Public Works Year 1 start
Year 2 end
8
5G Ordinance Prepare an ordinance that regulates small cellular facilities in the public right
of way.
Quality of Life $0 Small Public Works Year 1
9
Emergency Operations
Readiness
Review fire, earthquake tornado, active shooter, Tsunami, hazardous
transport accident policies; and ensure EOC is active and functioning with a
permanent position not consultant running the program.
Quality of Life $40,000
100-60-601 750-267
Medium Parks & Recreation Year 1 start
Beyond for
completion.
10
Urban Forest
Program
Create an Urban Forest Master Plan that includes an updated and expanded
tree list which will increase the number of trees, enhance the City's tree
canopy, and promote landscaping throughout the City.
Environmental
Sustainability
$250,000
($110,000 is already
allocated for the tree list
item under the current
CWP.)
100-86-825 750-235
Medium Public Works Year 1 start
Year 2 end
11
Add notifications for SB 330 and
other projects during the
application and approval process
11.1 Consider a community meeting requirement for any major project
application, especially those requiring a general plan amendment, as some
other cities have adopted.
11.2 Consider increasing notification radius from 300 feet to 500 feet (or
even1000 feet for major projects) for any project application, especially those
requiring a general plan amendment.
11.3 Improve notification methods for SB 330 preliminary applications,
streamlined projects, not requiring planning/council approval and other
projects
Public
Engagement
and
Transparency,
Housing
$10,000
100-71-701 750-268
Small Community
Development/CMO
Year 1 start
227
CC 06-03-2025
227 of 1012
ATTACHMENT I
12
Unhoused Policies Determine best practices for limited budget smaller cities to manage the
unhoused. Review RV practices in surrounding cities for impacts and potential
adoption. Review transitional housing outcomes in surrounding cities. Policies
to include nimble contingency plans.
Quality of Life $100,000
100-72-720 750-269
Large Community
Development
Year 1 start
Year 2 end
13
City Hall Retrofit and City Hall
Annex Renovation including the
EOC
Implement the previously approved 2022 Council plan with EOC migration Quality of Life $0 Small Public Works Year 1
$2,280,000
#Project Title Project Description Council Goal Est budget (Not including
staff costs)Project Size Lead Department(s)Estimated
Timeline
14
Preserve existing and develop
new BMR/ELI Housing
Ongoing CWP Item
Housing $250,000
(Already Allocated, no new
funding needed)
100-71-702 750-235
N/A CDD Year 1 start
Year 2 end
15
Residential and Mixed Use
Residential Design Standards
Ongoing CWP Item
Housing, Quality
of Life
$240,000
(Already Allocated, no new
funding needed)
100-71-702 750-090
N/A CDD Year 1
16
Speed Limit Lowering (AB 43)
Ongoing CWP Item
Transportation $0 N/A Public Works Year 1
17
Sign Ordinance
Ongoing CWP Item
Quality of Life $200,000
(Already Allocated, no new
funding needed)
100-71-702 750-102
N/A CDD Year 1 Start, Year 2
end
18
Active Transportation Plan
Ongoing CWP Item
Transportation $330,000
(Already Allocated, no new
funding needed)
100-88-844 750-243
N/A Public Works Year 1
Ongoing CWP Items
Explore opportunities to preserve existing expiring BMR housing.
Develop ELI (Extremely Low Income) and BMR housing units for
Developmentally Disabled individuals (IDD) on City-owned property as well as
the County-owned sites.
Create objective design standards for residential projects, including ensuring
adequate buffers from neighborhood low-density residential development
Lower speed limits where feasible pursuant to state adopted Assembly Bill 43
Update Sign Ordinance
This item is a consolidation of existing and new transportation efforts aiming
to further goals outlined in the City's Vision Zero Initiative, including:
18.1 Review and update the bike plan
18.2 Review and update the pedestrian plan
18.3 Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose adjustments to
create a better interface between all modes of transportation
Total Funding Needed for New Projects
228
CC 06-03-2025
228 of 1012
ATTACHMENT I
19
Bicycle Facilities
Ongoing CWP Item
Transportation $50,000
(Already Allocated, no new
funding needed)
100-88-844 750-219
N/A Public Works Year 1
1,070,000
3,350,000
Increase the inventory of bicycle facilities and amenities, such as bike racks,
citywide.
Total Funding Already Allocated
Total Combined
229
CC 06-03-2025
229 of 1012
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Definition
The Code Enforcement Supervisor plans, organizes, directs, and coordinates the activities of the Code
Enforcement Division within the Community Development Department, including enforcing City codes
and ordinances related to the use, maintenance, and safety of land and structures, coordinating code
enforcement activities with other divisions, departments, and public agencies; and providing guidance
and assistance to the Community Development Director and/or Building Official on Code Enforcement
matters. The incumbent in this position will manage all day-to-day program activities and will be
responsible for the daily supervision of the Code Enforcement Division staff. This working manager will
also spend time in the field to successfully implement the City’s Code Enforcement-related objectives.
Class Characteristics
This classification supervises Code Enforcement Officers under general supervision of the Building
Official or the Community Development Director. This classification coordinates activities in the receipt,
investigation, and enforcement of the municipal code and other California State codes related to zoning,
building and fire life safety. This classification also evaluates existing policies and procedures and
recommends necessary modifications to ensure the City’s current informational handouts are up to date
and consistent with State regulations. This classification is also distinguished from the Senior Code
Enforcement Officer classification by the responsibility assumed as a working supervisor in supervising
and coordinating assignment and personnel and providing technical guidance to other Code
Enforcement staff.
Supervision Received and Exercised
Receives direction from the Community Development Director and/or Building Official. This
classification exercises direct supervision over professional and technical Code Enforcement staff.
Typical Job Functions
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the
essential functions of the job.
Oversees and participates in the development of the code enforcement work plan; assigns work
activities, projects and programs; monitors workflow; reviews and evaluates work products, methods
and procedures; prepares progress reports.
Conducts field inspections to determine compliance and manages more complex, controversial and time
sensitive enforcement cases.
Receives, records, responds to, and investigates complaints from the public and staff regarding
violations of municipal, building, and zoning codes and ordinances such as noise, graffiti abatement,
property maintenance, animal nuisance, parking enforcement, sign enforcement, and traffic control;
230
CC 06-03-2025
230 of 1012
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Page 2 of 5
documents violations; researches ownership records, prior complaints, municipal codes and ordinances,
and state regulations to establish whether a violation has occurred.
Performs field inspections and investigations of residential, industrial, and/or commercial properties to
determine compliance with applicable codes, laws, specifications, and conditions of approval. Perform
inspections during special events and/or special target enforcement areas.
Operates and maintains a variety of tools, equipment, and vehicles in the enforcement of State and City
codes.
Reviews planning entitlement conditions of approval, conduct annuals reviews, ensures compliance with
environmental mitigation measures researches and prepares technical and administrative reports;
prepares written correspondence.
Develops and implements code enforcement division goals, objectives, policies, and procedures.
Plans, organizes and oversees code enforcement activities including field investigations, citation issuance,
and case closure or resolution for commercial, industrial, and residential properties.
May also be required to assist the Sheriff’s Office with various non-enforcement type of duties including,
but not limited to, traffic control, animal complaints, massage parlor inspections, lost and found property,
and other duties as requested.
Supervise and report on performances metrics for program activities such as volume, case closure rates,
response times, etc.
Supervise appropriate abatement actions and coordinates with the City Attorney’s Office to prepare
cases for legal action and court testimony.
Participates in the investigation, preparation, and presentation of cases for legal action, and hearings and
court activities related to case prosecution.
Participates in activities related to substandard housing investigation, inspections, citation, and
compliance.
Provides information and serve as liaison to representatives from state, federal and other local agencies.
Meets with representatives of the community to explain functions, policies, and operations, and to
mediate or resolve conflicts and/or respond to questions.
Attends occasional evening meetings and present to City Council and other boards and commissions as
needed, and Administrative Hearings.
Prepares public education outreach informational materials related to code enforcement functions
utilizing computer and graphic programs.
Supervises, trains, mentors, and evaluates assigned personnel, and provides training to code enforcement
staff to ensure uniform application of policies and procedures, and governing codes, rules, and
regulations.
231
CC 06-03-2025
231 of 1012
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Page 3 of 5
Represents the division and department to outside agencies and organizations; participates in outside
community and professional groups and committees; provides technical assistance as necessary.
Builds and maintains positive working relationships with colleagues, other City employees and the public
using principles of good customer service.
Knowledge of:
Legal procedures involved in the enforcement of building codes and ordinances.
Principles of supervision and training.
English usage, grammar, spelling, vocabulary, and punctuation.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, standards, and procedures
relevant to code enforcement.
Principles, practices, methods, and techniques of code violation research, investigation, and compliance.
Methods and procedures used in code compliance including citation issuance procedures.
Safe and efficient work practices related to field inspection and enforcement duties.
Practices for documenting inspections, correcting violations, and carrying through on compliance
procedures.
Basic requirements of zoning and building related codes, ordinances, and regulations.
Legal descriptions and boundary maps of real property and legal terminology as used in code
compliance.
Occupational hazards and standard safety practices necessary in the area of code compliance.
Research and report writing methods, techniques, and procedures.
Principles and procedures of record-keeping and preparation of correspondence and presentations.
Windows, Outlook, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint software applications.
Permitting/Inspection/Code Enforcement software and other job-related computer programs.
Modern office practices, methods, and radio and computer equipment and applications related to the
work.
Techniques for effectively representing the City in contacts with governmental agencies, community
groups, various business, professional, and regulatory organizations, and with property owners,
developers, contractors, and the public.
232
CC 06-03-2025
232 of 1012
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Page 4 of 5
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service by effectively dealing with the public, vendors,
contractors, and City staff.
Ability to:
Work independently and schedule and coordinate own workload, set priorities, and meet critical time
deadlines; on a continuous basis, sit at a desk for short periods of time.
Read, explain, and enforce codes, ordinances, policies and regulations, identify and respond to issues
and concerns of the public, City staff, and other stakeholders.
Investigate and document violations, enforce codes and ordinances, determine and implement an
appropriate course of action including, but not limited to issuing warnings and/or citations.
Apply, explain, and ensure compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local codes, ordinances,
policies and regulations.
Respond to inquiries, complaints, and requests for service in a fair, tactful, and timely manner.
Effectively represent the City in meetings with governmental agencies, community groups, and various
businesses, professional, and regulatory organizations and in meetings with individuals.
Prepare and present clear, concise and comprehensive verbal and written reports, correspondences,
and other written materials.
Maintain accurate logs, records, and written records of work performed.
Analyze complex situations, problems and data, and use sound judgment in making decisions.
Safely and effectively use and operate tools, equipment, and vehicles required for the work.
Operate modern office equipment and permitting, inspection, code enforcement software applications
programs.
Intermittently stand, walk, bend, kneel and squat while conducting inspections, use telephone, and
write or use a keyboard to communicate through written means.
Lift or carry weight of 30 pounds or less.
Build and maintain positive working relationships with co-workers, other City employees and the public
using principles of quality customer service.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone, and in writing.
Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy and legal guidelines in
politically sensitive situations.
Interpret and train code enforcement staff on Federal, State, and local codes, ordinances, policies and
regulations.
233
CC 06-03-2025
233 of 1012
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Page 5 of 5
Education and Experience
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in
public administration, planning, public policy, urban studies, land development or a related field; and,
Five years of increasingly responsible experience in related municipal code enforcement dealing with
the public. Minimum of one year of supervisory or lead responsibility.
Licenses and Certifications
Possession of a valid California Driver’s License and certification through the California Association of
Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO). When assigned to positions working directly with the Sheriff’s
Office, Livescan and Department of Justice (DOJ) training will be required and provided.
Physical Demands
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including
a computer; and to inspect various City sites, including traversing uneven terrain, climbing ladders,
stairs, and other temporary or construction access points. Must operate a motor vehicle. Vision to read
printed materials and a computer screen, and make inspections. Hearing and speech to communicate in
person, before groups, and over the telephone or radio. This is partially an office and partially a field
operations classification. Standing for prolonged periods of time and frequent walking between work
areas is required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a computer
keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification bend,
stoop, kneel, reach, and climb to perform work. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push,
and pull materials and objects weighing up to 30 pounds, or heavier weights with the use of proper
equipment.
Environmental Elements
Employees work partially in an office environment with moderate noise levels and controlled
temperature conditions, and partially in the field and are occasionally exposed to loud noise levels, cold
and hot temperatures, inclement weather conditions, road hazards, vibration, and hazardous physical
substances and fumes. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or public and private
representatives and contractors in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
Working Conditions
May be required to work various shifts during emergencies or special occasions on evenings, weekends,
and holidays.
FLSA: Exempt
Est. 11/2024
234
CC 06-03-2025
234 of 1012
Senior Business Systems Analyst
Definition
Under General supervision, performs advanced systems maintenance, operational duties, and
modification of application systems. Serving as a key liaison between system users, information
technology staff, vendors, and service providers, the role requires a high level of expertise in providing
technical and analytical support while delivering comprehensive training to system users. Responsible for
complex system administration functions, ensuring security and optimizing the effective operation of
diverse automated files, records, and databases. Additionally, this position serves in a key role,
managing, leading, planning, executing, and completing information technology services projects both
interdepartmental and citywide. initiatives.
Class Characteristics
This is a highly specialized position that combines deep technical expertise with strategic business
acumen. The incumbent will possess a comprehensive understanding of business systems architecture,
data analysis, and project management. This position is responsible for the conceptual and operational
facets of adapting information systems to business needs and effectively communicating those needs to
information system professionals. This position performs in-depth review and analysis of various
information technology strategies to automate operational processes and resolve organizational issues.
Incumbents take a key leadership role in strategic decision-making processes, with a significant impact
on the business’s technological direction. They are expected to provide leadership and guidance to other
analysts and work closely with senior management. Additionally, the incumbent guides teams of analysts
and collaborates with stakeholders across the organization to ensure alignment with business strategies.
This classification is distinguished from Innovation Technology Manager, as the latter assumes full
management responsibility
The Senior Business Systems Analyst differs from the Business Systems Analyst by applying specialized
expertise to tackle complex, often undefined assignments involving multiple teams or departments. This
role leads or supports concurrent projects across diverse applications and business domains, managing
multi-stakeholder work streams in various technical environments.
Supervision Received and Exercised
Works under the general direction of I&T Manager or department head.
Exercised: Provides leadership and guidance to a team of business analysts and technical staff. May
directly supervise junior analysts, offering mentorship and professional development support.
Essential Duties
235
CC 06-03-2025
235 of 1012
Management retains the right to add, modify, change, or rescind work assignments and make reasonable
accommodations for qualified employees to perform job functions.
• Conducts various system user and work groups, identifying complex user needs and addressing
operational, programmatic, and/or regulatory changes affecting application requirements and
related issues.
• Leads the modification of existing systems or implements new systems, developing, writing, and
disseminating procedures that leverage new or modified system applications. Evaluates system
modifications in response to operational, program, and/or regulatory changes.
• Develops internal procedures used with business systems and team enterprise standards.
Maintains ongoing documentation of the appropriate business solutions for various reporting or
data extract needs.
• Responds to requests for assistance related to department and/or program systems and
software applications. Determines the severity of problems, resolving them or referring to
appropriate personnel or vendors for resolution.
• Directs the work of software vendors to identify and resolve intricate programming and
operational problems. Coordinates the scheduling of corrective patches and upgrades between
vendors and staff, interacting with vendors, external agencies, auditors, or other staff to obtain
requested data or special reports.
• Undertakes advanced software application research, development, conversion, installation, and
maintenance projects through the entire project life cycle. This includes conception and
initiation, definition and planning, launch and execution, monitoring and controlling, and close-
out.
• Facilitates and conducts advanced business process redesign or technical design sessions and/or
focus groups for the design and implementation of new processes or systems.
• Develops consultant requests for proposals and qualifications for professional services. Evaluates
proposals and recommends project awards. Develops and reviews contract terms and
amendments, ensuring contractor compliance with City and department standards and
specifications, as well as time and budget estimates.
• Creates analytical applications and reports based on detailed user specifications.
• Provides analytical and technical support/coaching for requests, projects, or initiatives.
• Stays abreast of new trends and innovations in technology related to information technology
operations. Researches, recommends, and evaluates vendor solutions and technologies.
Implements improvements and collaborates with staff to maintain, revise, or enhance
operations and systems.
• Authors and maintains user and technical operating instructions and documentation. Prepares
training materials and conducts formal and informal training programs on the use and operation
of applications, advising on best practices.
• Provides continuous training and mentoring to lower-level staff in areas of responsibility.
• Performs other duties as assigned.
Knowledge of:
• Principles and practices of excellent customer service.
236
CC 06-03-2025
236 of 1012
• Principles and practices of project management, identifying technology needs and issues,
researching, and evaluating technology, applications, and the most effective courses of action,
and implementing solutions.
• Principles and practices of relational database management and systems integration analysis and
programming.
• Advanced principles and practices of information technology applications, systems, and
infrastructure analysis, design, and management.
• Principles and practices of programmatic analysis and report preparation.
• Principles and practices of vendor relationship management.
• Department policies, programs, and practices.
• Complex citywide and interdepartmental information technology services projects.
• The organization, operation, and functions of the department as necessary to assume assigned
responsibilities and to determine the appropriate point of escalation.
• Advanced principles and practices of Business Intelligence (BI), reporting, data warehousing and
scripting.
• Applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulatory codes, ordinances, and procedures relevant
to the assigned area of responsibility.
Education and Experience
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Possession of a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university in Computer Science,
Information Technology, Science, Business, or a related field and six (6) years of experience with report
writing tools and systems, including three (3) years at a level comparable to the City's Business Systems
Analyst classification. Alternatively, relevant analytical, administrative, lead, supervisory, or management
experience that includes interpreting rules and regulations, gathering data, formulating
recommendations, and report writing may substitute for education on a year-for-year basis, combined
with eight (8) years of experience with business intelligence tools creating analytical applications, scripts,
and reports.
Licenses and Certifications
Possession of a valid California Class C Driver’s License is required at time of hiring and for duration of
employment.
Working Conditions
May be required to attend Commission/Committee/Council or community events meetings outside of
regular work hours.
Physical Demands
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer. Vision to read printed materials and a computer screen, and hearing and speech to
communicate in person and over the telephone. Standing in and walking between work areas is
frequently required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a computer
keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification
frequently bend, stoop, kneel, and reach to perform assigned duties, as well as push and pull drawers
open and closed to retrieve and file information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push,
and pull materials and objects up to 25 pounds with the use of proper equipment.
237
CC 06-03-2025
237 of 1012
Environmental Elements
Employees work in an office environment with moderate levels, controlled temperature conditions, and
no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances.
FLSA: Exempt
Est. 5/2025
238
CC 06-03-2025
238 of 1012
Assistant Housing Coordinator
Definition
Under general supervision and reporting to the Director of Community Development or Assistant Director
of Community Development, this position assists and supports the Senior Housing Coordinator and
performs work in the analysis and assistance of housing and grant programs; participates in the
implementation of the City’s Housing Element programs; provides support of the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG), Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), and Plan Bay Area 2050 process;
assist and support the City’s Below Market Mate (BMR) Affordable Housing Program; assists with housing
strategies, including preservation of the City’s housing portfolio; assist with the City’s homelessness
prevention efforts; support, through coordination and provision of direction, the implementation of all
activities within assigned projects, and the City’s Housing and Human Services Grants Program and the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program.
This specialized professional position will effectively coordinate with City staff, non-profits, developers,
regional agencies, and consultants to achieve high quality housing projects and programs in a timely and
efficient manner that is responsive to the public.
Distinguishing Characteristics
This entry-level class is responsible for performing work assigned to the Housing Division and assists and
supports the Senior Housing Coordinator. Under general supervision, incumbents learn to apply concepts
and work procedures and perform professional housing and planning work.
The Assistance Housing Coordinator coordinates and provides services and activities pertaining to the
City’s housing and service programs, including, but not limited to, implementation of tenant protection
policies, assistance to low income renters, conducting workshops for persons experiencing
homelessness or at-risk of homelessness, public services to assist low-income households,
implementation of the below market rate housing program, and housing rehabilitation assistance.
Coordination involves collaborating with consultants administering the housing programs, working with
external agencies to provide supportive services, and ensuring communication with the public via social
media, workshops, etc.
Essential Duties
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the
essential functions of the job.
Plan, develop, and implement housing projects and programs as assigned; work with appropriate
departments and staff in assuring that housing development projects meet applicable standards of
239
CC 06-03-2025
239 of 1012
affordable housing funding requirements; determine the scope of the project and develop strategies
and policies; and coordinate staff and other resources.
Coordinate project planning and project delivery activities with City departments and other
governmental, public, and private agencies; participate in assessment and prioritization of affordable
housing projects under consideration; analyze, implement, and monitor goals and objectives to achieve
assigned priorities; and perform project evaluations and assessments and report out results.
Assist and prepare contracts, loans, and other agreements for the City with a variety of consultants and
housing developers.
Collaborate with developers, investors, business organizations and other community stakeholders to
promote affordable housing development in the City; and work with neighborhoods and development
groups to identify housing needs and explain projects and programs.
Prepare and administer grants; assemble grant agreements and prepare related files and reports; review
quarterly and annual expenditure reports; review reports and process invoices and payments for related
expenses; and monitor and collect loan payments.
Monitor and report on status of programs and projects for subrecipients of low-income service and
housing funding for eligibility compliance with applicable regulations and guidelines. Assist in generating
and reviewing reports regarding proper environmental and labor compliance.
Monitor proposed legislation and regulations applicable to projects and program areas and coordinate
compliance; research and analyze recommendations supported by qualitative and quantitative data on
policy matters related to housing and the applicability to City needs; assist and support the preparation
of technical and complex reports; and prepare graphic presentations.
Support programs led by other division staff as needed.
Make presentations in community and professional meetings; and make presentations on assigned
projects and programs to the City Council, Council committees, and/or advisory boards.
Collaborate with administrators of the Below Market Rate program to ensure client eligibility for
placement, coordinate resale execution and waitlist procedures.
Work with outside government agencies, educational institutions, business organizations, investors, and
other partners/sectors with whom the City partners in implementing Federally funded and privately
funded housing.
Attend and participate in professional group meetings; and stay abreast of current trends and
innovations in housing.
Assist in implementation and research for services to prevent and address homelessness, to assist the
unhoused, and to increase opportunities for shelter.
Perform other related duties as assigned.
240
CC 06-03-2025
240 of 1012
Qualifications
Knowledge of:
Affordable housing financing; principles of budget administration; real estate practices; public review
and entitlement process for affordable projects and the roles of City departments and outside agencies;
principles and practices of project management and evaluation and policy/program development,
implementation, and evaluation; effective public participation strategies; loan documents and the legal
implications related to affordable housing and funding sources; presentation methods and tools;
contract administration; applicable Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations affecting
assigned area of responsibility; rent stabilization and/or tenant-landlord programs, including policies
related to and administration/implementation of such programs; techniques for providing a high level of
customer service by effectively dealing with the public, vendors, contractors, and City staff; the
structure and content of the English language, including the meaning and spelling of words, rules of
composition, and grammar; and modern equipment and communication tools used for business
functions and program, project, and task coordination, including computers and software programs
relevant to work performed.
Ability to:
support efforts to evaluate and develop improvements in operations, procedures, policies, or methods;,
organize and coordinate the various components of projects; direct and maintain multiple projects and
programs simultaneously; understand, interpret, and apply all pertinent laws, codes, regulations,
policies and procedures, and standards relevant to work performed; provide project-related support to
a variety of technical/professional staff; analyze and compile technical and statistical information; make
concise and informative presentations; organize and run meetings that result in useful public
participation; coordinate and collaborate with consultants; identify existing or potential problems and
apply effective solutions; organize, track, and implement the project entitlement process with attention
to detail; prepare, review, and analyze loan documents and other legal contracts; independently
organize work, set priorities, meet critical deadlines, and follow up on assignments; effectively use
computer systems, software applications, and modern business equipment to perform a variety of work
tasks; communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing, using appropriate English grammar
and syntax; use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural,
and legal guidelines; and establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with
those contacted in the course of work.
Education and Experience
Any combination of experience and training that would provide the required knowledge and abilities is
qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to graduation from an accredited four-year college or university with major coursework in
urban planning, public policy, public or business administration, finance, community development or a
related field and one (1) year of professional experience in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program or HOME Investment Partnerships Program, affordable housing project management, housing
public policy/administration, urban planning, rent stabilization or tenant-landlord programs.
241
CC 06-03-2025
241 of 1012
Licenses and Certifications
Possession of, or ability to obtain, a valid California Driver’s License by time of appointment.
FLSA: Non-Exempt
Est. 5/2025
242
CC 06-03-2025
242 of 1012
1
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 1
PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS FOR ELIGIBILITY
It is City of Cupertino policy that those certain persons holding positions hereinafter
defined and designated either as management or confidential positions shall be eligible for
participation under the Unrepresented Employees Compensation Program as hereby adopted by
action of the City Council and as same may be amended or as otherwise modified from time to
time.
It is the stated purpose of this Compensation Program to give recognition to and to
differentiate those eligible employees from represented employees who achieve economic gain
and other conditions of employment through negotiation. It is the intent that through this policy
and those which are adopted or as may be modified or rescinded from time to time such
recognition may be given.
Eligibility for inclusion with this Compensation program is limited to persons holding
positions as management or confidential employees as defined under section 2.52.290 of the
Cupertino Municipal Code. These are as designated by the Appointing Authority and may be
modified as circumstances warrant.
Although subject to change in accordance with provision of the Personnel Code, the
positions in the following classifications have been designated as unrepresented.
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS:
Classification Title
Accountant I
Accountant II
Accounting Technician
Administrative Assistant
Assistant City Attorney
Assistant City Manager
Assistant Director of Administrative Services
Assistant Director of Community Development
Assistant Director of Public Works
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation
Assistant to the City Manager
Budget Manager
Building Official
Business Systems Analyst/Program Manager
Capital Improvement Program Manager
Chief Technology Officer/Director of Information Services (Department Head)
City Clerk
243
CC 06-03-2025
243 of 1012
2
City Engineer
Community Relations Coordinator
Deputy Building Official
Deputy City Attorney
Deputy City Clerk
Deputy City Manager
Director of Administrative Services (Department Head)
Director of Community Development (Department Head)
Director of Parks and Recreation (Department Head)
Director of Public Works
Economic Development Manager
Emergency Services Coordinator
Environmental Programs Manager
Executive Assistant to the City Attorney
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
Finance Manager
GIS Coordinator
GIS Program Manager
Human Resources Analyst I
Human Resources Analyst II
Human Resources Assistant
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Technician
Information Technology Assistant
Innovation and Technology Manager – Applications
Innovation and Technology Manager ‐ Infrastructure
Legal Services Manager
Management Analyst
Network Specialist
Park Restoration and Improvement Manager
Permit Center Manager
Planning Manager
Public Information Officer
Public Affairs Manager
Public Works Projects Manager
Public Works Supervisor
Purchasing Manager
Recreation Manager
Recreation Supervisor
Senior Accountant
Senior Assistant City Attorney
Senior Business Systems Analyst
Senior Civil Engineer
Senior Management Analyst
Senior Public Works Project Manager
244
CC 06-03-2025
244 of 1012
3
Service Center Superintendent
Special Project Executive
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Transportation Manager
Web Specialist
In the event of any inconsistency between the Compensation Program and any Employment
Contracts, the provisions of the Employment Contract and any amendments thereto control.
Adopted by Action of the
City Council, April 1, 1974
Revised 10/74, 3/78, 6/81, 6/82, 7/85, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90, 4/91, 5/91,
7/92, 6/95, 6/96, 7/99, 6/02, 7/04, 6/05, 04/07, 7/10, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13,11/13,12/13,3/14, 7/14, 11/15,
6/16, 10/16, 11/16, 6/17, 10/17, 7/19, 6/22, 8/22, 3/23, 11/23, 6/25
245
CC 06-03-2025
245 of 1012
4
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 2
SALARY SCHEDULE
AND OTHER SALARY RATES
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated for services rendered to and on behalf of the City on the basis of equity of pay
for duties and responsibilities assigned, meritorious service and comparability with similar work
in other public and private employment in the same labor market; all of which is contingent upon
the City’s ability to pay consistent with its fiscal policies.
Retroactive to the first full pay period after July 1, 2023, a 3.5% salary increase will be added to
the salary range of each classification in this unit. There shall be no further salary increase for
FY24/25.
See Attachment A for a list of paygrades.
Adopted by Action
of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 7/92, 6/95, 10/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19, 8/22, 11/23
246
CC 06-03-2025
246 of 1012
5
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 3
TRAINING AND CONFERENCES
I. POLICY
A. Management Personnel
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall be
reimbursed or receive advances in accordance with the schedules, terms and conditions as set
forth herein for attendance at conferences, meetings and training sessions as defined below
for each. It is the intent of this policy to encourage the continuing education and awareness
of said persons in the technical improvements and innovations in their fields of endeavor as
they apply to the City or to implement a City approved strategy for attracting and retaining
businesses in the City. One means of implementing this encouragement is through a formal
reimbursement and advance schedule for authorized attendance at such conferences,
meetings and training sessions.
B. Non‐Management Personnel
When authorized by their supervisor, a non‐management person may attend a conference,
meeting or training session subject to the stated terms and conditions included herein for each
with payment toward or reimbursement of certain expenses incurred as defined below for
each.
II DEFINITIONS
A. Conferences
A conference is an annual meeting of a work related organization the membership of which
may be held in the name of the City or the individual.
B. Local Area
The local area is defined to be within Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties and within a 40‐
mile distance from Cupertino when traveling to Alameda County.
C. Meetings
A “meeting” shall mean a convention, conference, seminar, workshop, meal, or like assembly
having to do with municipal government operations. An employee serving on a panel for
interviews of job applicants shall not come under this definition.
247
CC 06-03-2025
247 of 1012
6
D. Training Session
A training session is any type of seminar or workshop the attendance at which is for the
purpose of obtaining information of a work related nature to benefit the City’s operations or
to enhance the attendee’s capabilities in the discharge of assigned duties and responsibilities.
III REIMBURSEMENT AND ADVANCE PAYMENT SCHEDULE
A. Intent
This schedule is written with the intent that the employee will make every effort to find the
lowest possible cost to the City for traveling on City business. For example, if paying for
parking at the airport is less expensive that paying for a taxi or airport shuttle, then the
employee should drive their car and park at the airport; or if renting a car is lower than taking
taxis at the out‐of‐town location, then a car should be rented; or air reservations should be
booked in advance to obtain discounted fares. The following procedures apply whether the
expense is being paid through a reimbursement or a direct advance.
B. Registration
Registration fees for authorized attendance at a meeting or training session will be paid by
the City.
C. Transportation
The City will pay transportation costs on the basis of the lowest cost intent stated in paragraph
A. Eligible transportation costs include airfare (with coach fare being the maximum), van or
taxi service to and from the attendee’s home and airport, destination or airport parking
charges, taxi and shuttle services at the out‐of‐town location, trains, tolls, or rental cars. Use
of a personal automobile for City business shall be reimbursed or advanced at the rate per
mile in effect for such use, except in no case shall it exceed air coach fare if the vehicle is being
used for getting to the destination. Government or group rates offered by a provider of
transportation must be used when available.
Reimbursement or advances for use of a personal automobile on City business within a local
area will not be made so as to supplement that already being paid to those persons receiving
a monthly mileage allowance.
D. Lodging
Hotel or lodging expenses of the employee resulting from the authorized event or activity
defined in this policy will be reimbursed or advanced if the lodging and event occurs outside
of the local area. Not covered will be lodging expenses related to person(s) who are
accompanying the City member, but who themselves are not on City business. In this
248
CC 06-03-2025
248 of 1012
7
instance, for example, the difference between single and multiple occupancy rates for a room
will not be reimbursed.
Where the lodging is in connection with a conference or other organized educational activity,
City‐paid lodging costs shall not exceed the maximum group rate published by the conference
or activity sponsor, providing that lodging at the group rate is available at the time of booking.
If the group rate at the conference hotel is not available, then the non‐conference lodging
policy described in the next paragraph should be followed to find another comparable hotel.
Where lodging is necessary for an activity that is not related to a conference or other organized
educational activity, reimbursement or advances shall be limited to the actual cost of the room
at a group or government rate. In the event that a group or government rate is not available,
lodging rates that do not exceed the median price for lodging for that area and time period
listed on travel websites like www.hotels.com, www.expedia.com or an equivalent service
shall be eligible for reimbursement or advancement.
E. Meals
1. With No Conference
Payments toward or reimbursement of meals related to authorized activities or events
shall be at the Internal Revenue Service per diem rate for meals and incidental expenses
for a given location, as stated by IRS publications 463 and 1542 and by the U.S. General
Services Administration. The per diem shall be split among meals as reasonably desired
and reduced accordingly for less than full travel days. If per diem is claimed, no receipts
are necessary. Alternatively, the actual cost of a meal can be claimed, within a standard of
reasonableness, but receipts must be kept and submitted for the expense incurred.
2. As Part of a Conference
When City personnel are attending a conference or other organized educational activity,
they shall be reimbursed or advanced for meals not provided by the activity, on a per
diem or actual cost basis. The per diem and actual cost rate shall follow the rules described
in the meals with no conference paragraph.
F. Other Expenses
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses at such functions shall be limited to the
actual costs consistent with the application of reasonable standards.
Other reasonable expenses related to business purposes shall be paid consistent with this
policy.
No payments shall be made unless, where available, receipts are kept and submitted for all
expenses incurred. When receipts are not available, qualifying expenditures shall be
reimbursed upon signing of an affidavit of expenditure.
249
CC 06-03-2025
249 of 1012
8
No payment shall be made for any expenses incurred which are of a personal nature or not
within a standard of reasonableness for the situation as may be defined by the Finance
Department.
G. Non‐Reimbursable Expenses
The City will not reimburse or advance payment toward expenses including, but not limited
to:
1. The personal portion of any trip;
2. Political or charitable contributions or events;
3. Family expenses, including those of a partner when accompanying the employee on City‐
related business, as well as child or pet‐related expenses;
4. Entertainment expenses, including theatre, shows, movies, sporting events, golf, spa
treatments, etc.
5. Gifts of any kind for any purpose;
6. Service club meals; of those besides economic development staff;
7. Alcoholic beverages;
8. Non‐mileage personal automobile expenses including repairs, insurance, gasoline, traffic
citations; and
9. Personal losses incurred while on City business.
IV ATTENDANCE AUTHORIZATION
A. Budgetary Limitations
Notwithstanding any attendance authorization contained herein, reimbursement or advances
for expenses relative to conferences, meeting or training sessions shall not exceed the
budgetary limitations.
B. Conference Attendance
Attendance at conferences or seminars by employees must be approved by their supervisor.
C. Meetings
Any employee, management or non‐management, may attend a meeting when authorized by
their supervisor.
D. Training Sessions
250
CC 06-03-2025
250 of 1012
9
Any employee, management or non‐management, may attend a training session when
authorized by their supervisor.
V. FUNDING
A. Appropriation Policy
It shall be the policy of the City to appropriate funds subject to availability of resources.
B. Training Sessions
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses incurred in attendance at training sessions,
will be appropriated annually through the budget process.
VI. DIRECT CASH ADVANCE POLICY
From time to time, it may be necessary for a City employee to request a direct cash advance
to cover anticipated expenses while traveling or doing business on the City’s behalf. Such
request for an advance should be submitted to their supervisor no less than seven days prior
to the need for the advance with the following information: 1) Purpose of the expenditure; 2)
The anticipated amount of the expenditure (for example, hotel rates, meal costs, and
transportation expenses); and 3) The dates of the expenditure. An accounting of expenses
and return of any unused advance must be reported to the City within 30 calendar days of
the employee’s return on the expense report described in Section VII.
VII. EXPENSE REPORT REQUIREMENTS
All expense reimbursement requests or final accounting of advances received must be
approved by their supervisor, on forms determined by the Finance Department, within 30
calendar days of an expense incurred, and accompanied by a business purpose for all
expenditures and a receipt for each non‐ per diem item.
Revised 7/83, 7/85, 7/87, 7/88, 7/91, 7/92, 12/07,7/10
251
CC 06-03-2025
251 of 1012
10
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 4
AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES AND
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated fairly for the use of personal automotive vehicles on City business. In many
instances the use of personal vehicles is a condition of employment due to the absence of sufficient
City owned vehicles for general transportation purposes. It is not intended, however, that such
a condition of employment should work an undue hardship. For this reason, the following
policies shall apply for mileage reimbursements.
Those persons who occasionally are required to use their personal automobiles for City
business shall be reimbursed for such use at an appropriate rate established by the City Council.
Submission of reimbursement requests must be approved by the Department Head.
Employees in the following classifications shall be paid on a monthly basis the following
automobile allowance:
Classification Allowance
Director of Administrative Services 300.00
Director of Community Development 300.00
Assistant City Manager 300.00
Director of Parks and Recreation 300.00
Director of Public Works 300.00
Chief Technology Officer/ 300.00
Director of Information Services
Special Project Executive 300.00
City Clerk 250.00
Senior Civil Engineer 250.00
Assistant Director of Public Works 250.00
City Engineer 250.00
Transportation Manager 250.00
Assistant Director of Administrative Services 200.00
Assistant Director of Community Development 200.00
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation 200.00
Public Affairs Manager 200.00
Deputy City Manager 200.00
Recreation Supervisor 200.00
Recreation Manager 200.00
252
CC 06-03-2025
252 of 1012
11
Employees receiving automobile allowance shall be eligible for reimbursement for travel
that exceeds two hundred miles round trip.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised 7/74, 5/79, 6/80, 7/81, 8/84, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90,7/92, 6/96, 8/99, 6/00, 9/01, 1/02, 6/02, 10/07,
7/10, 7/11, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13, 11/15, 10/16, 11/16, 6/17, 7/19, 8/22, 3/23, 6/25
253
CC 06-03-2025
253 of 1012
12
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 5
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIPS AND
PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be entitled to City sponsored association memberships as well as receiving subscriptions to
professional and technical publications. Such sponsorship, however, shall be conditioned upon
the several factors as set forth below.
Each association for which membership is claimed must be directly related to the field of
endeavor of the person to be benefited. Each claim for City sponsored membership shall be
submitted by or through the Department Head with their concurrence to the City Manager for
approval.
Subscriptions to or purchase of professional and technical publications may be provided
at City expense when such have been authorized by the Department Head providing the subject
matter and material generally contained therein are related to municipal governmental
operations.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
7/92
254
CC 06-03-2025
254 of 1012
13
255
CC 06-03-2025
255 of 1012
14
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 6
OVERTIME WORKED
EXEMPT POSITIONS:
Management and non‐represented professional employees are ineligible for overtime
payments for time worked in excess of what otherwise would be considered as a normal work
day or work week for other employees. However, no deduction from leave balances are made
when such an employee is absent for less than a regular work day as long as the employee has
his/her supervisor’s approval. Nothing in this policy precludes the alternative work schedule,
which may include an absence of a full eight hour day, when forty hours have been worked in
the same seven day work period.
NON‐EXEMPT POSITIONS:
Confidential employees are eligible for overtime or compensation time, at their discretion, for
the time worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Nothing in this policy precludes the alternative
work schedule, which may include an absence of a full eight hour day, where forty hours have
been worked in the same seven day period.
COMPENSATORY TIME OFF
At the employee’s discretion, compensatory time (CTO) may be granted for overtime
worked at the rate of time and one‐half for each hour worked in lieu of compensation in cash.
Employees, who have previously earned CTO, shall be allowed to schedule CTO at the
employee’s discretion provided (1) that prior supervisory approval has been obtained and (2) the
request is made in writing.
CTO may be accrued for up to 80 hours per calendar year. Any CTO earned exceeding 80
hours will be paid at the rate of time and one‐half. An employee may carry over the unused
balance into the next calendar year. Any unused carryover balance will be automatically paid out
at the end of the calendar year.
An employee may exercise his/her option twice each calendar year to convert any/or all
accumulated compensatory time to cash.
256
CC 06-03-2025
256 of 1012
15
STANDBY COMPENSATION
Employees in the classification of Information and Technology Assistant who are required to be
available during their off‐shift hours for possible recall for emergency service shall be
compensated $300.00 per 128 hours. Minimum staffing and skill qualifications for standby
assignment shall be determined by the City.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
6/80, 7/91, 7/92, 6/96, 7/97, 4/07, 7/13, 10/16, 8/22
257
CC 06-03-2025
257 of 1012
16
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 7
HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN ‐ EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide group hospital and medical insurance
under which employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may
be covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees and
their families through comprehensive health plans available only through employer sponsorship.
Although the premium cost for the insurance provided remains the ultimate
responsibility of the employee in these positions, the City shall contribute the amounts listed
below towards the premium or pay the full cost of the premium if less than the stated amounts.
If the premium amounts for any employee covered by this policy are less than the amounts listed
below per month, the difference between the premium amount and the stated amounts will be
included in the employee’s gross pay.
Effective January 1, 2024, for each participating employee, the City shall contribute the
maximum toward premium cost per month for health and dental during the term of this
agreement as follows:
January 1, 2024 City Max
Health
Contribution
City Max
Dental
Contribution
City Total Max Contribution
Employee $1,021.41 $126.78 $1,148.19
Employee + 1 $2,042.82 $126.78 $2,169.6
Employee + 2 $2,655.67 $126.78 $2,782.45
Required contribution amounts exceeding the premium contribution of the City are the
responsibility of the employee.
With regards to any change in the monthly medical plan premium charged by CalPERS in the
plan year 2025 compared to the plan year 2024, the City’s maximum contributions shall be
capped at no more than 6%. Any required contribution amounts exceeding the premium
contribution of the City are the responsibility of the employee.
Health In‐Lieu Payments
City agrees to pay a monthly amount of three hundred seventy‐five ($375.00) per month to the
employee who can demonstrate that they have equivalent health coverage through their
258
CC 06-03-2025
258 of 1012
17
spouse, parent, or other group coverage and who request this cash payment in lieu of health
insurance coverage.
*Dental Coverage: Effective the first month after Council adoption of MOU, dental coverage is
capped at $2,500.00 per dependent per annual plan year for the term of this contract.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
September 16, 1974
Revised
7/75, 7/76, 7/77, 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 6/81, 7/81, 6/82, 7/83, 7/84, 7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/97,
7/99, 6/00, 6/02, 7/04, 6/05, 4/07,12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19, 12/19, 8/22
259
CC 06-03-2025
259 of 1012
18
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 8
FIXED HOLIDAYS
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to recognize days of historical and national
significance as holidays of the City without loss of pay or benefits. Recognizing the desirable
times throughout the year, it is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide days off in lieu of
holidays for management and confidential employees at such times as are convenient for each
employee and supervisor, when such policy is compatible with the workload and schedule of the
City.
The City provides the following fixed paid holidays for eligible employees covered by this
agreement:
1. New Year’s Day
2. Martin Luther King Day
3. Lunar New Year
4. Presidents’ Day
5. Cesar Chavez Day
6. Memorial Day
7. Juneteenth
8. Independence Day
9. Labor Day
10. Veteran’s Day
11. Thanksgiving Day
12. Day Following Thanksgiving
13. Christmas Eve
14. Christmas Day
15. New Year’s Eve
For Calendar Year 2023, Unrepresented and Appointed employees will receive one (1) floating
holiday in lieu of Lunar New Year holiday. Said floating holiday is “use it or lose it” and must be
used by December 31, 2023. If said floating holiday is not used by the last full pay period in
December 2023, it shall be automatically cashed out in the first full pay period in January 2024.
When a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be observed as the non‐work day.
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the previous Friday shall be observed as the non‐work day.
FLOATING HOLIDAY
In addition to the paid holidays, employees occupying these positions shall be provided 20
floating hours per calendar year as non‐work time with full pay and benefits. Employees may
accumulate floating holiday hours up to two times their annual accrual.
260
CC 06-03-2025
260 of 1012
19
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 6/89, 7/92, 7/99, 7/13, 8/22, 11/23
261
CC 06-03-2025
261 of 1012
20
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 9
LIFE, LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE, AND SHORT TERM DISABILITY
INSURANCE
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to make available group insurance for Management
and Confidential employees that will mitigate the personal and family financial hardships
resulting from continuing disability that prevents an employee from performing gainfully in his
or her occupation. It is further the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide life insurance
benefits in an amount of two and one half times the employee’s annual salary to a maximum of
$250,000.00.
Employees occupying unrepresented positions may enroll in the disability income
program and the life insurance program offered if eligible under the contract provisions of the
policy and the personnel rules of the City. The full cost of premiums for these programs shall be
paid by the City for such employees.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
September 16, 1976
Revised 7/76, 6/80, 6/81, 6/82, 6/92, 10/16
262
CC 06-03-2025
262 of 1012
21
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 10
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide equitable current compensation and
reasonable retirement security for management and confidential employees for services
performed for the City. The City participates in the California Public Employees’ Retirement
System (PERS) and deferred compensation plans have been established. Both the employee and
employer may make contributions from current earnings to these plans. The purpose of this
policy is to promote means by which compensation may be provided in such manner and form
to best meet the requirements of the City and the needs of individual employees, thereby
increasing the ability, to attract and retain competent management and confidential employees.
The City shall maintain and administer means by which employees in these positions may
defer portions of their current earnings for future utilization. Usage of such plans shall be subject
to such agreements, rules and procedures as are necessary to properly administer each plan.
Employee contributions to such plans may be made in such amounts as felt proper and necessary
to the employee. Employer contributions shall be as determined by the City Council.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 7/87, 7/92, 7/99
263
CC 06-03-2025
263 of 1012
22
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 11
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM CONTRIBUTION
A. Employees hired on or before December 29, 2012 Only:
For employees hired on or before December 29, 2012, the City has contracted with CalPERS
for a 2.7% @55 formula.
Effective in the first full pay period in July 2017, each employee shall pay the full 8.0% of
applicable salary of the employee’s contribution towards CalPERS.
B. For Employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or December 31, 2012
or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS
Regulations Only:
For Employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or December 31, 2012
or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS Regulations
only the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.0% @ 60 retirement formula, three year
average compensation.
Effective October 1, 2016, the City shall not pay the employee’s contribution rate to the
California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and each employee shall pay the full
7% of applicable salary of the employee’s contribution towards CalPERS.
C. For new employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 and do not
qualify as Classic members Only:
For new employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 and do not
qualify as classic members as defined by CalPERS, CalPERS has by statute implemented a 2% @
62 formula, three year average and employees in this category shall pay 50% of the normal cost
rate as determined by CalPERS.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
June, 1981
Revised 6/87, 6/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/03, 7/04, 4/07, 7/10, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19
264
CC 06-03-2025
264 of 1012
23
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 12
DENTAL INSURANCE ‐ EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide dental insurance under which
employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may be covered. The
purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $126.78* per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with Personnel Rules of the City and the provisions of the contract for such
insurance between the City and carrier or carriers.
*Dental Coverage: Effective the first month after Council adoption of agreement, dental
coverage is capped at $2,500.00 per dependent per annual plan year for the term of this contract.
Adopted by Action of
City Council
July 1, 1983
Revised 7/87, 7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/99, 4/07, 10/12, 10/16, 7/19
265
CC 06-03-2025
265 of 1012
24
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 13
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
The department heads and executive level staff shall receive eighty (80) hours of
administrative leave with pay per year. Unrepresented employees exempt from the provisions
of the Fair Labor Standards Act shall receive forty (40) hours of administrative leave with pay per
year.
Employees may accumulate administrative leave hours up to two times their annual
accrual.
Employees shall be eligible to convert up to 80 hours of administrative leave to pay one
time each calendar year.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July, 1988
Revised
7/92, 7/97, 7/99, 7/10, 12/12, 10/16, 8/22, 3/23
266
CC 06-03-2025
266 of 1012
25
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 14
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide an Employee Assistance Program for
the benefit of Management and Confidential employees and their eligible dependents. The
purpose of this program is to provide professional assistance and counseling concerning
financial, legal, pre‐retirement, and other matters of a personal nature.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
June 17, 1996
267
CC 06-03-2025
267 of 1012
26
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 15
VACATION ACCUMULATION
The department heads and executive level staff shall earn vacation hours under the same
vacation accumulation schedule as all other employees. Credit shall be provided for previous
public sector service time on a year‐for‐year basis as to annual vacation accumulation. Credit
shall only be given for completed years of service. Public service credit shall not apply to any
other supplemental benefit. Employee(s) affected by this policy will have the responsibility of
providing certification as to previous public sector service.
Benefited full‐time employees accrue vacation in accordance with the following schedule.
Benefited employees who work less than a full‐time work schedule accrue vacation in
accordance with the following schedule on a pro‐rated basis.
Service Time Annual Accruals Maximum Accrual
0 ‐ 3 Years 80 Hours 160 Hours
4 ‐ 9 Years 120 Hours 240 Hours
10 – 14 Years 160 Hours 272 Hours
15 – 19 Years 176 Hours 320 Hours
20 + Years 192 Hours 352 Hours
An employee may accrue no more vacation credit than what is listed above.
VACATION CREDITS
The hiring manager, with the approval of the department head and the City Manager, may
offer a vacation bank of up to 120 hours of vacation to a prospective candidate in the
Unrepresented group. These hours do not vest for payoff purposes if the employee leaves service.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 6/99, 7/10, 12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 3/23
268
CC 06-03-2025
268 of 1012
27
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 16
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Housing assistance may be offered to the department heads pursuant to Resolution No.
15‐092.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 7/99, 7/10, 8/12, 10/15
269
CC 06-03-2025
269 of 1012
28
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 17
VISION INSURANCE – EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide vision insurance under which
employees and their dependents may be covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and
preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $14.94 per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with the provisions of the contract between the City and carrier or carriers
providing vision insurance coverage,
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 1997
Revised 7/99, 6/02, 6/03, 7/10, 10/12
270
CC 06-03-2025
270 of 1012
29
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 18
WORK OUT OF CLASSIFICATION/WORK IN DUAL CLASSIFICATION
Work Out of Classification – Temporary assignment, approved in advance by the department
head, to a classification in a higher pay grade shall be compensated at the Step 1 rate of the higher
classification or at a rate five (5) percent greater than that of the regular position, whichever is
greater, for the number of hours assigned. In order to qualify for out‐of‐classification pay, an
employee shall work a minimum of four (4) hours per day in the temporary assignment.
An employee may be assigned to work out of class in a higher classification when there is a
vacant position for which a recruitment is being, or will be, conducted. Out of class
assignments may not exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year. Compensation for work performed in an
out‐of‐class capacity is included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation, however,
this is at the discretion of CalPERS and future changes to CalPERS regulations would supersede
the language of this section.
An employee may receive acting pay for working in a higher classification where a vacancy
does not exist, in the case of an incumbent being on vacation or leave of absence, or due to the
employee being asked to perform higher level work on any other temporary basis. Acting pay is
not included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation.
The higher rate of pay shall be used in computing overtime when authorized overtime is
worked in a non‐exempt, out of class or acting work assignment. When a non‐exempt
employee is working out of class or acting in an exempt position for 20 hours or more in a work
week, the employee will be ineligible to receive overtime pay for any and all hours worked in
the exempt classification during that work week.
All requests for out of class pay or acting pay must be approved by the Director of
Administrative Services or his/her designee.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
October 2016
Revised 7/19
271
CC 06-03-2025
271 of 1012
30
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 19
EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
It is the intent of the City to recognize the value of continuing education and professional
development of its employees; and to adopt an Education Reimbursement Program which will
encourage employees to avail themselves of City job related educational opportunities that will
advance their knowledge and interests in the direction of their career path. Courses should
either: a) maintain or improve job skills in the employee’s current position; b) be expressly
required by the City or by law; or c) prepare the employee to become a competitive applicant
for a different position with the City.
The Education Reimbursement Program is a benefit to all full time benefited employees who
have completed the required probationary period and provides education reimbursement of up
to two thousand dollars($2,000) per calendar year for the cost of registration, required textbooks
and/or materials and parking. Employees who wish to seek reimbursement from the City for
educational program costs shall provide a written request for reimbursement in advance of
enrollment to the Human Resources Division. The form provided shall include the type of
training, sponsoring organization or institution, meeting times and costs. Human Resources and
the employee’s department head will make the determination if the chosen education program
is eligible for reimbursement.
No employee shall receive any reimbursement until they have provided satisfactory proof of
successful completion of the coursework with a grade of “C” or above, or “Pass” in the case of a
Pass/Fail course. Such proof of completion shall be provided within 30 days of the conclusion of
the course.
Education reimbursement is a taxable benefit under IRS Code. Education reimbursement will
be applied to the calendar year in which the course is passed and satisfactory proof of
completion is submitted.
Mandatory or annual coursework, attendance at conferences and training required to maintain
job specific certifications or proficiencies are not included in the Education Reimbursement
Program.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 2019
272
CC 06-03-2025
272 of 1012
31
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 20
CITY SPONSORED RECREATION AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS
Unrepresented employees shall have the privilege of enrollment in City sponsored recreation
programs at the City residents’ fee structure and in preference to non‐residents wishing to
enroll. Each calendar year, employees and family members on the employee’s dental plan are
eligible to be reimbursed up to $500 per employee in Rec Bucks. Employees shall be reimbursed
for approved recreation services in accordance with the City’s Recreation Buck Policies.
Programs allowing for preregistration will be reimbursed after completion of the program,
including those allowing for or requiring preregistration in the calendar year prior to
reimbursement. Reimbursements shall be applied to the year in which they are received.
Benefited employees will also receive a free employee‐only annual Cupertino Sports Center
membership. Part‐time benefited employees will have the annual amount of Recreation Bucks
prorated based on number of hours worked. Recreation Bucks are a taxable benefit under IRS
Code, and must be used by the employee within the calendar year and are non‐transferrable.
City employees are eligible to participate in the City’s wellness program as provided for in the
City’s Administrative Rules and Regulations.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 2019
273
CC 06-03-2025
273 of 1012
32
Listing of Unrepresented Classifications by
Salary Rate or Pay Grades
Effective July 1, 2013 (Res. No. 13‐061)
Amended 11/19/ 13 (Res. No. 13‐099)
Amended 12/17/13 (Res. No. 13‐108)
Amended 3/18/14 (Res. No. 14‐130)
Amended 11/3/14 (Res. No. 14‐209)
Amended 11/3/2015 (Res. No. 15‐099)
Amended 6/21/16 (Res. No. 16‐064)
Amended 10/4/16 (Res. No. 16‐104 – Not adopted)
Amended 10/18/16 (Res. No. 16‐108)
Amended 11/15/16 (Res. No. 16‐128)
Amended 6/20/17 (Res. No. 17‐056)
Amended 10/17/17 (Res. No. 17‐101)
Amended 7/16/19 (Res. No. 19‐086)
Amended 11/19/19 (Res. No. 19‐140)
Amended 6/7/22 (Res. No. 22‐067 on 6/9/22)
Amended 8/16/22 (Res. No. 22‐103)
Amended 3/7/23 (Res. No.23‐028 )
Amended 6/3/25 ( Res. No. )
274
CC 06-03-2025
274 of 1012
33
ATTACHMENT A
SALARY SCHEDULE
Salary Effective First Full Pay Period of July, 2023June, 2025
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
ACCOUNTANT I $46.60 $48.93 $51.38 $53.95 $56.65
ACCOUNTANT II $51.37 $53.94 $56.64 $59.47 $62.44
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT $40.65 $42.68 $44.82 $47.06 $49.41
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $92.83 $97.48 $102.35 $107.47 $112.84
ASSISTANT CITY MGR $126.92 $133.27 $139.93 $146.93 $154.27
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ADMIN SERVICES $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR COMM DEV $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER $74.68 $78.41 $82.33 $86.45 $90.77
ASST DIR PUBLIC WORKS ENG $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
ASST DIR RECREATION COMM SVCS $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
BUDGET MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
BUILDING OFFICIAL $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $65.89 $69.18 $72.64 $76.28 $80.09
CAPITAL IMPV PROGRAM MGR $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CITY CLERK $75.73 $79.51 $83.49 $87.66 $92.05
CITY ENGINEER $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR $46.86 $49.21 $51.67 $54.25 $56.96
DEPARTMENT HEAD $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY $66.80 $70.14 $73.64 $77.33 $81.19
DEPUTY CITY CLERK $54.04 $56.74 $59.58 $62.55 $65.68
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
DIRECTOR OF ADMIN SERVICES $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF COMM DEVELOPMENT $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS $115.38 $121.15 $127.21 $133.57 $140.25
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER $81.52 $85.59 $89.87 $94.37 $99.08
EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR $66.26 $69.57 $73.05 $76.71 $80.54
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
275
CC 06-03-2025
275 of 1012
34
EXEC ASST TO CITY MANAGER $47.77 $50.15 $52.66 $55.30 $58.06
EXEC ASST TO THE CITY ATTNY $46.59 $48.93 $51.38 $53.94 $56.64
FINANCE MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
GIS COORDINATOR $48.71 $51.15 $53.71 $56.39 $59.21
GIS PROGRAM MANAGER $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
HUMAN RESOURCE ANALYST I $56.06 $58.86 $61.80 $64.90 $68.14
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.12
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT $33.76 $35.45 $37.22 $39.08 $41.03
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
I.T. ASSISTANT $45.46 $47.73 $50.12 $52.62 $55.25
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MGR $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
LEGAL SERVICES MANAGER $48.12 $50.53 $53.05 $55.71 $58.49
MANAGEMENT ANALYST $56.54 $59.37 $62.34 $65.45 $68.72
NETWORK SPECIALIST $58.16 $61.06 $64.12 $67.32 $70.69
PARK RESTORATION IMPV MGR $79.33 $83.29 $87.46 $91.83 $96.42
PERMIT CENTER MANAGER $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
PLANNING MANAGER $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER $72.94 $76.58 $80.41 $84.43 $88.66
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER $72.86 $76.50 $80.33 $84.34 $88.56
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER $69.73 $73.22 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR $58.78 $61.71 $64.80 $68.04 $71.44
PURCHASING MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
RECREATION MANAGER $60.01 $63.01 $66.16 $69.46 $72.94
RECREATION SUPERVISOR $54.43 $57.15 $60.01 $63.01 $66.16
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT $59.48 $62.45 $65.57 $68.85 $72.30
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $102.13 $107.24 $112.60 $118.23 $124.14
SENIOR BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $70.50 $74.03 $77.73 $81.61 $85.69
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER $79.66 $83.64 $87.82 $92.22 $96.83
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.13
SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MGR $73.21 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76 $88.99
SERVICE CENTER SUPERINTENDENT $75.15 $78.91 $82.86 $87.00 $91.35
SPECIAL PROJECT EXECUTIVE $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
WEB SPECIALIST $51.42 $53.99 $56.69 $59.53 $62.50
276
CC 06-03-2025
276 of 1012
1
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 1
PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS FOR ELIGIBILITY
It is City of Cupertino policy that those certain persons holding positions hereinafter
defined and designated either as management or confidential positions shall be eligible for
participation under the Unrepresented Employees Compensation Program as hereby adopted by
action of the City Council and as same may be amended or as otherwise modified from time to
time.
It is the stated purpose of this Compensation Program to give recognition to and to
differentiate those eligible employees from represented employees who achieve economic gain
and other conditions of employment through negotiation. It is the intent that through this policy
and those which are adopted or as may be modified or rescinded from time to time such
recognition may be given.
Eligibility for inclusion with this Compensation program is limited to persons holding
positions as management or confidential employees as defined under section 2.52.290 of the
Cupertino Municipal Code. These are as designated by the Appointing Authority and may be
modified as circumstances warrant.
Although subject to change in accordance with provision of the Personnel Code, the
positions in the following classifications have been designated as unrepresented.
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS:
Classification Title
Accountant I
Accountant II
Accounting Technician
Administrative Assistant
Assistant City Attorney
Assistant City Manager
Assistant Director of Community Development
Assistant Director of Public Works
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation
Assistant to the City Manager
Budget Manager
Building Official
Business Systems Analyst/Program Manager
Capital Improvement Program Manager
Chief Technology Officer/Director of Information Services (Department Head)
City Clerk
City Engineer
277
CC 06-03-2025
277 of 1012
2
Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Relations Coordinator
Deputy Building Official
Deputy City Attorney
Deputy City Clerk
Deputy City Manager
Director of Administrative Services (Department Head)
Director of Community Development (Department Head)
Director of Parks and Recreation (Department Head)
Director of Public Works
Economic Development Manager
Emergency Services Coordinator
Environmental Programs Manager
Executive Assistant to the City Attorney
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
Finance Manager
GIS Coordinator
GIS Program Manager
Human Resources Analyst I
Human Resources Analyst II
Human Resources Assistant
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Technician
Information Technology Assistant
Innovation and Technology Manager – Applications
Innovation and Technology Manager - Infrastructure
Legal Services Manager
Management Analyst
Network Specialist
Park Restoration and Improvement Manager
Permit Center Manager
Planning Manager
Public Information Officer
Public Affairs Manager
Public Works Projects Manager
Public Works Supervisor
Purchasing Manager
Recreation Manager
Recreation Supervisor
Senior Accountant
Senior Assistant City Attorney
Senior Business Systems Analyst
Senior Civil Engineer
Senior Management Analyst
Senior Public Works Project Manager
278
CC 06-03-2025
278 of 1012
3
Service Center Superintendent
Special Project Executive
Transportation Manager
Web Specialist
In the event of any inconsistency between the Compensation Program and any Employment
Contracts, the provisions of the Employment Contract and any amendments thereto control.
Adopted by Action of the
City Council, April 1, 1974
Revised 10/74, 3/78, 6/81, 6/82, 7/85, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90, 4/91, 5/91,
7/92, 6/95, 6/96, 7/99, 6/02, 7/04, 6/05, 04/07, 7/10, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13,11/13,12/13,3/14, 7/14, 11/15,
6/16, 10/16, 11/16, 6/17, 10/17, 7/19, 6/22, 8/22, 3/23, 11/23, 6/25
279
CC 06-03-2025
279 of 1012
4
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 2
SALARY SCHEDULE
AND OTHER SALARY RATES
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated for services rendered to and on behalf of the City on the basis of equity of pay
for duties and responsibilities assigned, meritorious service and comparability with similar work
in other public and private employment in the same labor market; all of which is contingent upon
the City’s ability to pay consistent with its fiscal policies.
Retroactive to the first full pay period after July 1, 2023, a 3.5% salary increase will be added to
the salary range of each classification in this unit. There shall be no further salary increase for
FY24/25.
See Attachment A for a list of paygrades.
Adopted by Action
of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 7/92, 6/95, 10/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19, 8/22, 11/23
280
CC 06-03-2025
280 of 1012
5
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 3
TRAINING AND CONFERENCES
I. POLICY
A. Management Personnel
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall be
reimbursed or receive advances in accordance with the schedules, terms and conditions as set
forth herein for attendance at conferences, meetings and training sessions as defined below
for each. It is the intent of this policy to encourage the continuing education and awareness
of said persons in the technical improvements and innovations in their fields of endeavor as
they apply to the City or to implement a City approved strategy for attracting and retaining
businesses in the City. One means of implementing this encouragement is through a formal
reimbursement and advance schedule for authorized attendance at such conferences,
meetings and training sessions.
B. Non-Management Personnel
When authorized by their supervisor, a non-management person may attend a conference,
meeting or training session subject to the stated terms and conditions included herein for each
with payment toward or reimbursement of certain expenses incurred as defined below for
each.
II DEFINITIONS
A. Conferences
A conference is an annual meeting of a work related organization the membership of which
may be held in the name of the City or the individual.
B. Local Area
The local area is defined to be within Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties and within a 40-
mile distance from Cupertino when traveling to Alameda County.
C. Meetings
A “meeting” shall mean a convention, conference, seminar, workshop, meal, or like assembly
having to do with municipal government operations. An employee serving on a panel for
interviews of job applicants shall not come under this definition.
281
CC 06-03-2025
281 of 1012
6
D. Training Session
A training session is any type of seminar or workshop the attendance at which is for the
purpose of obtaining information of a work related nature to benefit the City’s operations or
to enhance the attendee’s capabilities in the discharge of assigned duties and responsibilities.
III REIMBURSEMENT AND ADVANCE PAYMENT SCHEDULE
A. Intent
This schedule is written with the intent that the employee will make every effort to find the
lowest possible cost to the City for traveling on City business. For example, if paying for
parking at the airport is less expensive that paying for a taxi or airport shuttle, then the
employee should drive their car and park at the airport; or if renting a car is lower than taking
taxis at the out-of-town location, then a car should be rented; or air reservations should be
booked in advance to obtain discounted fares. The following procedures apply whether the
expense is being paid through a reimbursement or a direct advance.
B. Registration
Registration fees for authorized attendance at a meeting or training session will be paid by
the City.
C. Transportation
The City will pay transportation costs on the basis of the lowest cost intent stated in paragraph
A. Eligible transportation costs include airfare (with coach fare being the maximum), van or
taxi service to and from the attendee’s home and airport, destination or airport parking
charges, taxi and shuttle services at the out-of-town location, trains, tolls, or rental cars. Use
of a personal automobile for City business shall be reimbursed or advanced at the rate per
mile in effect for such use, except in no case shall it exceed air coach fare if the vehicle is being
used for getting to the destination. Government or group rates offered by a provider of
transportation must be used when available.
Reimbursement or advances for use of a personal automobile on City business within a local
area will not be made so as to supplement that already being paid to those persons receiving
a monthly mileage allowance.
D. Lodging
Hotel or lodging expenses of the employee resulting from the authorized event or activity
defined in this policy will be reimbursed or advanced if the lodging and event occurs outside
of the local area. Not covered will be lodging expenses related to person(s) who are
accompanying the City member, but who themselves are not on City business. In this
282
CC 06-03-2025
282 of 1012
7
instance, for example, the difference between single and multiple occupancy rates for a room
will not be reimbursed.
Where the lodging is in connection with a conference or other organized educational activity,
City-paid lodging costs shall not exceed the maximum group rate published by the conference
or activity sponsor, providing that lodging at the group rate is available at the time of booking.
If the group rate at the conference hotel is not available, then the non-conference lodging
policy described in the next paragraph should be followed to find another comparable hotel.
Where lodging is necessary for an activity that is not related to a conference or other organized
educational activity, reimbursement or advances shall be limited to the actual cost of the room
at a group or government rate. In the event that a group or government rate is not available,
lodging rates that do not exceed the median price for lodging for that area and time period
listed on travel websites like www.hotels.com, www.expedia.com or an equivalent service
shall be eligible for reimbursement or advancement.
E. Meals
1. With No Conference
Payments toward or reimbursement of meals related to authorized activities or events
shall be at the Internal Revenue Service per diem rate for meals and incidental expenses
for a given location, as stated by IRS publications 463 and 1542 and by the U.S. General
Services Administration. The per diem shall be split among meals as reasonably desired
and reduced accordingly for less than full travel days. If per diem is claimed, no receipts
are necessary. Alternatively, the actual cost of a meal can be claimed, within a standard of
reasonableness, but receipts must be kept and submitted for the expense incurred.
2. As Part of a Conference
When City personnel are attending a conference or other organized educational activity,
they shall be reimbursed or advanced for meals not provided by the activity, on a per
diem or actual cost basis. The per diem and actual cost rate shall follow the rules described
in the meals with no conference paragraph.
F. Other Expenses
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses at such functions shall be limited to the
actual costs consistent with the application of reasonable standards.
Other reasonable expenses related to business purposes shall be paid consistent with this
policy.
No payments shall be made unless, where available, receipts are kept and submitted for all
expenses incurred. When receipts are not available, qualifying expenditures shall be
reimbursed upon signing of an affidavit of expenditure.
283
CC 06-03-2025
283 of 1012
8
No payment shall be made for any expenses incurred which are of a personal nature or not
within a standard of reasonableness for the situation as may be defined by the Finance
Department.
G. Non-Reimbursable Expenses
The City will not reimburse or advance payment toward expenses including, but not limited
to:
1. The personal portion of any trip;
2. Political or charitable contributions or events;
3. Family expenses, including those of a partner when accompanying the employee on City-
related business, as well as child or pet-related expenses;
4. Entertainment expenses, including theatre, shows, movies, sporting events, golf, spa
treatments, etc.
5. Gifts of any kind for any purpose;
6. Service club meals; of those besides economic development staff;
7. Alcoholic beverages;
8. Non-mileage personal automobile expenses including repairs, insurance, gasoline, traffic
citations; and
9. Personal losses incurred while on City business.
IV ATTENDANCE AUTHORIZATION
A. Budgetary Limitations
Notwithstanding any attendance authorization contained herein, reimbursement or advances
for expenses relative to conferences, meeting or training sessions shall not exceed the
budgetary limitations.
B. Conference Attendance
Attendance at conferences or seminars by employees must be approved by their supervisor.
C. Meetings
Any employee, management or non-management, may attend a meeting when authorized by
their supervisor.
D. Training Sessions
284
CC 06-03-2025
284 of 1012
9
Any employee, management or non-management, may attend a training session when
authorized by their supervisor.
V. FUNDING
A. Appropriation Policy
It shall be the policy of the City to appropriate funds subject to availability of resources.
B. Training Sessions
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses incurred in attendance at training sessions,
will be appropriated annually through the budget process.
VI. DIRECT CASH ADVANCE POLICY
From time to time, it may be necessary for a City employee to request a direct cash advance
to cover anticipated expenses while traveling or doing business on the City’s behalf. Such
request for an advance should be submitted to their supervisor no less than seven days prior
to the need for the advance with the following information: 1) Purpose of the expenditure; 2)
The anticipated amount of the expenditure (for example, hotel rates, meal costs, and
transportation expenses); and 3) The dates of the expenditure. An accounting of expenses
and return of any unused advance must be reported to the City within 30 calendar days of
the employee’s return on the expense report described in Section VII.
VII. EXPENSE REPORT REQUIREMENTS
All expense reimbursement requests or final accounting of advances received must be
approved by their supervisor, on forms determined by the Finance Department, within 30
calendar days of an expense incurred, and accompanied by a business purpose for all
expenditures and a receipt for each non- per diem item.
Revised 7/83, 7/85, 7/87, 7/88, 7/91, 7/92, 12/07,7/10
285
CC 06-03-2025
285 of 1012
10
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 4
AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES AND
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated fairly for the use of personal automotive vehicles on City business. In many
instances the use of personal vehicles is a condition of employment due to the absence of sufficient
City owned vehicles for general transportation purposes. It is not intended, however, that such
a condition of employment should work an undue hardship. For this reason, the following
policies shall apply for mileage reimbursements.
Those persons who occasionally are required to use their personal automobiles for City
business shall be reimbursed for such use at an appropriate rate established by the City Council.
Submission of reimbursement requests must be approved by the Department Head.
Employees in the following classifications shall be paid on a monthly basis the following
automobile allowance:
Classification Allowance
Director of Administrative Services 300.00
Director of Community Development 300.00
Assistant City Manager 300.00
Director of Parks and Recreation 300.00
Director of Public Works 300.00
Chief Technology Officer/ 300.00
Director of Information Services
Special Project Executive 300.00
City Clerk 250.00
Senior Civil Engineer 250.00
Assistant Director of Public Works 250.00
City Engineer 250.00
Transportation Manager 250.00
Assistant Director of Community Development 200.00
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation 200.00
Public Affairs Manager 200.00
Deputy City Manager 200.00
Recreation Supervisor 200.00
Recreation Manager 200.00
Employees receiving automobile allowance shall be eligible for reimbursement for travel
that exceeds two hundred miles round trip.
286
CC 06-03-2025
286 of 1012
11
Adopted by Action of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised 7/74, 5/79, 6/80, 7/81, 8/84, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90,7/92, 6/96, 8/99, 6/00, 9/01, 1/02, 6/02, 10/07,
7/10, 7/11, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13, 11/15, 10/16, 11/16, 6/17, 7/19, 8/22, 3/23, 6/25
287
CC 06-03-2025
287 of 1012
12
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 5
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIPS AND
PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be entitled to City sponsored association memberships as well as receiving subscriptions to
professional and technical publications. Such sponsorship, however, shall be conditioned upon
the several factors as set forth below.
Each association for which membership is claimed must be directly related to the field of
endeavor of the person to be benefited. Each claim for City sponsored membership shall be
submitted by or through the Department Head with their concurrence to the City Manager for
approval.
Subscriptions to or purchase of professional and technical publications may be provided
at City expense when such have been authorized by the Department Head providing the subject
matter and material generally contained therein are related to municipal governmental
operations.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
7/92
288
CC 06-03-2025
288 of 1012
13
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 6
OVERTIME WORKED
EXEMPT POSITIONS:
Management and non-represented professional employees are ineligible for overtime
payments for time worked in excess of what otherwise would be considered as a normal work
day or work week for other employees. However, no deduction from leave balances are made
when such an employee is absent for less than a regular work day as long as the employee has
his/her supervisor’s approval. Nothing in this policy precludes the alternative work schedule,
which may include an absence of a full eight hour day, when forty hours have been worked in
the same seven day work period.
NON-EXEMPT POSITIONS:
Confidential employees are eligible for overtime or compensation time, at their discretion, for
the time worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Nothing in this policy precludes the alternative
work schedule, which may include an absence of a full eight hour day, where forty hours have
been worked in the same seven day period.
COMPENSATORY TIME OFF
At the employee’s discretion, compensatory time (CTO) may be granted for overtime
worked at the rate of time and one-half for each hour worked in lieu of compensation in cash.
Employees, who have previously earned CTO, shall be allowed to schedule CTO at the
employee’s discretion provided (1) that prior supervisory approval has been obtained and (2) the
request is made in writing.
CTO may be accrued for up to 80 hours per calendar year. Any CTO earned exceeding 80
hours will be paid at the rate of time and one-half. An employee may carry over the unused
balance into the next calendar year. Any unused carryover balance will be automatically paid out
at the end of the calendar year.
An employee may exercise his/her option twice each calendar year to convert any/or all
accumulated compensatory time to cash.
289
CC 06-03-2025
289 of 1012
14
STANDBY COMPENSATION
Employees in the classification of Information and Technology Assistant who are required to be
available during their off-shift hours for possible recall for emergency service shall be
compensated $300.00 per 128 hours. Minimum staffing and skill qualifications for standby
assignment shall be determined by the City.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
6/80, 7/91, 7/92, 6/96, 7/97, 4/07, 7/13, 10/16, 8/22
290
CC 06-03-2025
290 of 1012
15
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 7
HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide group hospital and medical insurance
under which employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may
be covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees and
their families through comprehensive health plans available only through employer sponsorship.
Although the premium cost for the insurance provided remains the ultimate
responsibility of the employee in these positions, the City shall contribute the amounts listed
below towards the premium or pay the full cost of the premium if less than the stated amounts.
If the premium amounts for any employee covered by this policy are less than the amounts listed
below per month, the difference between the premium amount and the stated amounts will be
included in the employee’s gross pay.
Effective January 1, 2024, for each participating employee, the City shall contribute the
maximum toward premium cost per month for health and dental during the term of this
agreement as follows:
January 1, 2024 City Max
Health
Contribution
City Max
Dental
Contribution
City Total Max Contribution
Employee $1,021.41 $126.78 $1,148.19
Employee + 1 $2,042.82 $126.78 $2,169.6
Employee + 2 $2,655.67 $126.78 $2,782.45
Required contribution amounts exceeding the premium contribution of the City are the
responsibility of the employee.
With regards to any change in the monthly medical plan premium charged by CalPERS in the
plan year 2025 compared to the plan year 2024, the City’s maximum contributions shall be
capped at no more than 6%. Any required contribution amounts exceeding the premium
contribution of the City are the responsibility of the employee.
Health In-Lieu Payments
City agrees to pay a monthly amount of three hundred seventy-five ($375.00) per month to the
employee who can demonstrate that they have equivalent health coverage through their
291
CC 06-03-2025
291 of 1012
16
spouse, parent, or other group coverage and who request this cash payment in lieu of health
insurance coverage.
*Dental Coverage: Effective the first month after Council adoption of MOU, dental coverage is
capped at $2,500.00 per dependent per annual plan year for the term of this contract.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
September 16, 1974
Revised
7/75, 7/76, 7/77, 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 6/81, 7/81, 6/82, 7/83, 7/84, 7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/97,
7/99, 6/00, 6/02, 7/04, 6/05, 4/07,12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19, 12/19, 8/22
292
CC 06-03-2025
292 of 1012
17
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 8
FIXED HOLIDAYS
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to recognize days of historical and national
significance as holidays of the City without loss of pay or benefits. Recognizing the desirable
times throughout the year, it is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide days off in lieu of
holidays for management and confidential employees at such times as are convenient for each
employee and supervisor, when such policy is compatible with the workload and schedule of the
City.
The City provides the following fixed paid holidays for eligible employees covered by this
agreement:
1. New Year’s Day
2. Martin Luther King Day
3. Lunar New Year
4. Presidents’ Day
5. Cesar Chavez Day
6. Memorial Day
7. Juneteenth
8. Independence Day
9. Labor Day
10. Veteran’s Day
11. Thanksgiving Day
12. Day Following Thanksgiving
13. Christmas Eve
14. Christmas Day
15. New Year’s Eve
For Calendar Year 2023, Unrepresented and Appointed employees will receive one (1) floating
holiday in lieu of Lunar New Year holiday. Said floating holiday is “use it or lose it” and must be
used by December 31, 2023. If said floating holiday is not used by the last full pay period in
December 2023, it shall be automatically cashed out in the first full pay period in January 2024.
When a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be observed as the non-work day.
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the previous Friday shall be observed as the non-work day.
FLOATING HOLIDAY
In addition to the paid holidays, employees occupying these positions shall be provided 20
floating hours per calendar year as non-work time with full pay and benefits. Employees may
accumulate floating holiday hours up to two times their annual accrual.
293
CC 06-03-2025
293 of 1012
18
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 6/89, 7/92, 7/99, 7/13, 8/22, 11/23
294
CC 06-03-2025
294 of 1012
19
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 9
LIFE, LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE, AND SHORT TERM DISABILITY
INSURANCE
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to make available group insurance for Management
and Confidential employees that will mitigate the personal and family financial hardships
resulting from continuing disability that prevents an employee from performing gainfully in his
or her occupation. It is further the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide life insurance
benefits in an amount of two and one half times the employee’s annual salary to a maximum of
$250,000.00.
Employees occupying unrepresented positions may enroll in the disability income
program and the life insurance program offered if eligible under the contract provisions of the
policy and the personnel rules of the City. The full cost of premiums for these programs shall be
paid by the City for such employees.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
September 16, 1976
Revised 7/76, 6/80, 6/81, 6/82, 6/92, 10/16
295
CC 06-03-2025
295 of 1012
20
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 10
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide equitable current compensation and
reasonable retirement security for management and confidential employees for services
performed for the City. The City participates in the California Public Employees’ Retirement
System (PERS) and deferred compensation plans have been established. Both the employee and
employer may make contributions from current earnings to these plans. The purpose of this
policy is to promote means by which compensation may be provided in such manner and form
to best meet the requirements of the City and the needs of individual employees, thereby
increasing the ability, to attract and retain competent management and confidential employees.
The City shall maintain and administer means by which employees in these positions may
defer portions of their current earnings for future utilization. Usage of such plans shall be subject
to such agreements, rules and procedures as are necessary to properly administer each plan.
Employee contributions to such plans may be made in such amounts as felt proper and necessary
to the employee. Employer contributions shall be as determined by the City Council.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 7/87, 7/92, 7/99
296
CC 06-03-2025
296 of 1012
21
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 11
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM CONTRIBUTION
A. Employees hired on or before December 29, 2012 Only:
For employees hired on or before December 29, 2012, the City has contracted with CalPERS
for a 2.7% @55 formula.
Effective in the first full pay period in July 2017, each employee shall pay the full 8.0% of
applicable salary of the employee’s contribution towards CalPERS.
B. For Employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or December 31, 2012
or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS
Regulations Only:
For Employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or December 31, 2012
or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS Regulations
only the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.0% @ 60 retirement formula, three year
average compensation.
Effective October 1, 2016, the City shall not pay the employee’s contribution rate to the
California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and each employee shall pay the full
7% of applicable salary of the employee’s contribution towards CalPERS.
C. For new employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 and do not
qualify as Classic members Only:
For new employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 and do not
qualify as classic members as defined by CalPERS, CalPERS has by statute implemented a 2% @
62 formula, three year average and employees in this category shall pay 50% of the normal cost
rate as determined by CalPERS.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
June, 1981
Revised 6/87, 6/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/03, 7/04, 4/07, 7/10, 10/12, 12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 7/19
297
CC 06-03-2025
297 of 1012
22
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 12
DENTAL INSURANCE - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide dental insurance under which
employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may be covered. The
purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $126.78* per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with Personnel Rules of the City and the provisions of the contract for such
insurance between the City and carrier or carriers.
*Dental Coverage: Effective the first month after Council adoption of agreement, dental
coverage is capped at $2,500.00 per dependent per annual plan year for the term of this contract.
Adopted by Action of
City Council
July 1, 1983
Revised 7/87, 7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/99, 4/07, 10/12, 10/16, 7/19
298
CC 06-03-2025
298 of 1012
23
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 13
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
The department heads and executive level staff shall receive eighty (80) hours of
administrative leave with pay per year. Unrepresented employees exempt from the provisions
of the Fair Labor Standards Act shall receive forty (40) hours of administrative leave with pay per
year.
Employees may accumulate administrative leave hours up to two times their annual
accrual.
Employees shall be eligible to convert up to 80 hours of administrative leave to pay one
time each calendar year.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July, 1988
Revised
7/92, 7/97, 7/99, 7/10, 12/12, 10/16, 8/22, 3/23
299
CC 06-03-2025
299 of 1012
24
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 14
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide an Employee Assistance Program for
the benefit of Management and Confidential employees and their eligible dependents. The
purpose of this program is to provide professional assistance and counseling concerning
financial, legal, pre-retirement, and other matters of a personal nature.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
June 17, 1996
300
CC 06-03-2025
300 of 1012
25
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 15
VACATION ACCUMULATION
The department heads and executive level staff shall earn vacation hours under the same
vacation accumulation schedule as all other employees. Credit shall be provided for previous
public sector service time on a year-for-year basis as to annual vacation accumulation. Credit
shall only be given for completed years of service. Public service credit shall not apply to any
other supplemental benefit. Employee(s) affected by this policy will have the responsibility of
providing certification as to previous public sector service.
Benefited full-time employees accrue vacation in accordance with the following schedule.
Benefited employees who work less than a full-time work schedule accrue vacation in
accordance with the following schedule on a pro-rated basis.
Service Time Annual Accruals Maximum Accrual
0 - 3 Years 80 Hours 160 Hours
4 - 9 Years 120 Hours 240 Hours
10 – 14 Years 160 Hours 272 Hours
15 – 19 Years 176 Hours 320 Hours
20 + Years 192 Hours 352 Hours
An employee may accrue no more vacation credit than what is listed above.
VACATION CREDITS
The hiring manager, with the approval of the department head and the City Manager, may
offer a vacation bank of up to 120 hours of vacation to a prospective candidate in the
Unrepresented group. These hours do not vest for payoff purposes if the employee leaves service.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 6/99, 7/10, 12/12, 7/13, 10/16, 3/23
301
CC 06-03-2025
301 of 1012
26
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 16
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Housing assistance may be offered to the department heads pursuant to Resolution No.
15-092.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 7/99, 7/10, 8/12, 10/15
302
CC 06-03-2025
302 of 1012
27
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 17
VISION INSURANCE – EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide vision insurance under which
employees and their dependents may be covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and
preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $14.94 per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with the provisions of the contract between the City and carrier or carriers
providing vision insurance coverage,
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 1997
Revised 7/99, 6/02, 6/03, 7/10, 10/12
303
CC 06-03-2025
303 of 1012
28
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 18
WORK OUT OF CLASSIFICATION/WORK IN DUAL CLASSIFICATION
Work Out of Classification – Temporary assignment, approved in advance by the department
head, to a classification in a higher pay grade shall be compensated at the Step 1 rate of the higher
classification or at a rate five (5) percent greater than that of the regular position, whichever is
greater, for the number of hours assigned. In order to qualify for out-of-classification pay, an
employee shall work a minimum of four (4) hours per day in the temporary assignment.
An employee may be assigned to work out of class in a higher classification when there is a
vacant position for which a recruitment is being, or will be, conducted. Out of class
assignments may not exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year. Compensation for work performed in an
out-of-class capacity is included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation, however,
this is at the discretion of CalPERS and future changes to CalPERS regulations would supersede
the language of this section.
An employee may receive acting pay for working in a higher classification where a vacancy
does not exist, in the case of an incumbent being on vacation or leave of absence, or due to the
employee being asked to perform higher level work on any other temporary basis. Acting pay is
not included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation.
The higher rate of pay shall be used in computing overtime when authorized overtime is
worked in a non-exempt, out of class or acting work assignment. When a non-exempt
employee is working out of class or acting in an exempt position for 20 hours or more in a work
week, the employee will be ineligible to receive overtime pay for any and all hours worked in
the exempt classification during that work week.
All requests for out of class pay or acting pay must be approved by the Director of
Administrative Services or his/her designee.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
October 2016
Revised 7/19
304
CC 06-03-2025
304 of 1012
29
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 19
EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
It is the intent of the City to recognize the value of continuing education and professional
development of its employees; and to adopt an Education Reimbursement Program which will
encourage employees to avail themselves of City job related educational opportunities that will
advance their knowledge and interests in the direction of their career path. Courses should
either: a) maintain or improve job skills in the employee’s current position; b) be expressly
required by the City or by law; or c) prepare the employee to become a competitive applicant
for a different position with the City.
The Education Reimbursement Program is a benefit to all full time benefited employees who
have completed the required probationary period and provides education reimbursement of up
to two thousand dollars($2,000) per calendar year for the cost of registration, required textbooks
and/or materials and parking. Employees who wish to seek reimbursement from the City for
educational program costs shall provide a written request for reimbursement in advance of
enrollment to the Human Resources Division. The form provided shall include the type of
training, sponsoring organization or institution, meeting times and costs. Human Resources and
the employee’s department head will make the determination if the chosen education program
is eligible for reimbursement.
No employee shall receive any reimbursement until they have provided satisfactory proof of
successful completion of the coursework with a grade of “C” or above, or “Pass” in the case of a
Pass/Fail course. Such proof of completion shall be provided within 30 days of the conclusion of
the course.
Education reimbursement is a taxable benefit under IRS Code. Education reimbursement will
be applied to the calendar year in which the course is passed and satisfactory proof of
completion is submitted.
Mandatory or annual coursework, attendance at conferences and training required to maintain
job specific certifications or proficiencies are not included in the Education Reimbursement
Program.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 2019
305
CC 06-03-2025
305 of 1012
30
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 20
CITY SPONSORED RECREATION AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS
Unrepresented employees shall have the privilege of enrollment in City sponsored recreation
programs at the City residents’ fee structure and in preference to non-residents wishing to
enroll. Each calendar year, employees and family members on the employee’s dental plan are
eligible to be reimbursed up to $500 per employee in Rec Bucks. Employees shall be reimbursed
for approved recreation services in accordance with the City’s Recreation Buck Policies.
Programs allowing for preregistration will be reimbursed after completion of the program,
including those allowing for or requiring preregistration in the calendar year prior to
reimbursement. Reimbursements shall be applied to the year in which they are received.
Benefited employees will also receive a free employee-only annual Cupertino Sports Center
membership. Part-time benefited employees will have the annual amount of Recreation Bucks
prorated based on number of hours worked. Recreation Bucks are a taxable benefit under IRS
Code, and must be used by the employee within the calendar year and are non-transferrable.
City employees are eligible to participate in the City’s wellness program as provided for in the
City’s Administrative Rules and Regulations.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 2019
306
CC 06-03-2025
306 of 1012
31
Listing of Unrepresented Classifications by
Salary Rate or Pay Grades
Effective July 1, 2013 (Res. No. 13-061)
Amended 11/19/ 13 (Res. No. 13-099)
Amended 12/17/13 (Res. No. 13-108)
Amended 3/18/14 (Res. No. 14-130)
Amended 11/3/14 (Res. No. 14-209)
Amended 11/3/2015 (Res. No. 15-099)
Amended 6/21/16 (Res. No. 16-064)
Amended 10/4/16 (Res. No. 16-104 – Not adopted)
Amended 10/18/16 (Res. No. 16-108)
Amended 11/15/16 (Res. No. 16-128)
Amended 6/20/17 (Res. No. 17-056)
Amended 10/17/17 (Res. No. 17-101)
Amended 7/16/19 (Res. No. 19-086)
Amended 11/19/19 (Res. No. 19-140)
Amended 6/7/22 (Res. No. 22-067 on 6/9/22)
Amended 8/16/22 (Res. No. 22-103)
Amended 3/7/23 (Res. No.23-028 )
Amended 6/3/25 ( Res. No. )
307
CC 06-03-2025
307 of 1012
32
ATTACHMENT A
SALARY SCHEDULE
Salary Effective June 3, 2025
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
ACCOUNTANT I $46.60 $48.93 $51.38 $53.95 $56.65
ACCOUNTANT II $51.37 $53.94 $56.64 $59.47 $62.44
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT $40.65 $42.68 $44.82 $47.06 $49.41
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $92.83 $97.48 $102.35 $107.47 $112.84
ASSISTANT CITY MGR $126.92 $133.27 $139.93 $146.93 $154.27
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR COMM DEV $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER $74.68 $78.41 $82.33 $86.45 $90.77
ASST DIR PUBLIC WORKS ENG $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
ASST DIR RECREATION COMM SVCS $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
BUDGET MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
BUILDING OFFICIAL $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $65.89 $69.18 $72.64 $76.28 $80.09
CAPITAL IMPV PROGRAM MGR $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CITY CLERK $75.73 $79.51 $83.49 $87.66 $92.05
CITY ENGINEER $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR $46.86 $49.21 $51.67 $54.25 $56.96
DEPARTMENT HEAD $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY $66.80 $70.14 $73.64 $77.33 $81.19
DEPUTY CITY CLERK $54.04 $56.74 $59.58 $62.55 $65.68
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
DIRECTOR OF ADMIN SERVICES $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF COMM DEVELOPMENT $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS $115.38 $121.15 $127.21 $133.57 $140.25
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER $81.52 $85.59 $89.87 $94.37 $99.08
EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR $66.26 $69.57 $73.05 $76.71 $80.54
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
308
CC 06-03-2025
308 of 1012
33
EXEC ASST TO CITY MANAGER $47.77 $50.15 $52.66 $55.30 $58.06
EXEC ASST TO THE CITY ATTNY $46.59 $48.93 $51.38 $53.94 $56.64
FINANCE MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
GIS COORDINATOR $48.71 $51.15 $53.71 $56.39 $59.21
GIS PROGRAM MANAGER $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
HUMAN RESOURCE ANALYST I $56.06 $58.86 $61.80 $64.90 $68.14
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.12
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT $33.76 $35.45 $37.22 $39.08 $41.03
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
I.T. ASSISTANT $45.46 $47.73 $50.12 $52.62 $55.25
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MGR $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
LEGAL SERVICES MANAGER $48.12 $50.53 $53.05 $55.71 $58.49
MANAGEMENT ANALYST $56.54 $59.37 $62.34 $65.45 $68.72
NETWORK SPECIALIST $58.16 $61.06 $64.12 $67.32 $70.69
PARK RESTORATION IMPV MGR $79.33 $83.29 $87.46 $91.83 $96.42
PERMIT CENTER MANAGER $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
PLANNING MANAGER $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER $72.94 $76.58 $80.41 $84.43 $88.66
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER $72.86 $76.50 $80.33 $84.34 $88.56
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER $69.73 $73.22 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR $58.78 $61.71 $64.80 $68.04 $71.44
PURCHASING MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
RECREATION MANAGER $60.01 $63.01 $66.16 $69.46 $72.94
RECREATION SUPERVISOR $54.43 $57.15 $60.01 $63.01 $66.16
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT $59.48 $62.45 $65.57 $68.85 $72.30
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $102.13 $107.24 $112.60 $118.23 $124.14
SENIOR BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $70.50 $74.03 $77.73 $81.61 $85.69
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER $79.66 $83.64 $87.82 $92.22 $96.83
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.13
SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MGR $73.21 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76 $88.99
SERVICE CENTER SUPERINTENDENT $75.15 $78.91 $82.86 $87.00 $91.35
SPECIAL PROJECT EXECUTIVE $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
WEB SPECIALIST $51.42 $53.99 $56.69 $59.53 $62.50
309
CC 06-03-2025
309 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)Attachment O
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
ACCOUNTANT I $46.60 $48.93 $51.38 $53.95 $56.65
ACCOUNTANT II $51.37 $53.94 $56.64 $59.47 $62.44
ACCOUNTING
TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANT $40.65 $42.68 $44.82 $47.06 $49.41
ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEY $92.83 $97.48 $102.35 $107.47 $112.84
ASSISTANT CITY MGR $126.92 $133.27 $139.93 $146.93 $154.27
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
OF ADMIN SERVICES $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
COMM DEV $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY
MANAGER $74.68 $78.41 $82.33 $86.45 $90.77
ASST DIR PUBLIC
WORKS ENG $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
ASST DIR RECREATION
COMM SVCS $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
BUDGET MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
BUILDING OFFICIAL $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
BUSINESS SYSTEMS
ANALYST $65.89 $69.18 $72.64 $76.28 $80.09
CAPITAL IMPV
PROGRAM MGR $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY
OFFICER $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CITY CLERK $75.73 $79.51 $83.49 $87.66 $92.05
CITY ENGINEER $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
COMMUNITY
RELATIONS
COORDINATOR
$46.86 $49.21 $51.67 $54.25 $56.96
DEPARTMENT HEAD $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DEPUTY BUILDING
OFFICIAL $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
DEPUTY CITY
ATTORNEY $66.80 $70.14 $73.64 $77.33 $81.19
DEPUTY CITY CLERK $54.04 $56.74 $59.58 $62.55 $65.68
310
CC 06-03-2025
310 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)Attachment O
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
DEPUTY CITY
MANAGER $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
DIRECTOR OF ADMIN
SERVICES $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF COMM
DEVELOPMENT $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PARKS
AND RECREATION $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
WORKS $115.38 $121.15 $127.21 $133.57 $140.25
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
MANAGER
$81.52 $85.59 $89.87 $94.37 $99.08
EMERGENCY SERVICES
COORDINATOR $66.26 $69.57 $73.05 $76.71 $80.54
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAMS MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
EXEC ASST TO CITY
MANAGER $47.77 $50.15 $52.66 $55.30 $58.06
EXEC ASST TO THE CITY
ATTNY $46.59 $48.93 $51.38 $53.94 $56.64
FINANCE MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
GIS COORDINATOR $48.71 $51.15 $53.71 $56.39 $59.21
GIS PROGRAM
MANAGER $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
HUMAN RESOURCES
ANALYST I $56.06 $58.86 $61.80 $64.90 $68.14
HUMAN RESOURCES
ANALYST II $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.12
HUMAN RESOURCES
ASSISTANT $33.76 $35.45 $37.22 $39.08 $41.03
HUMAN RESOURCES
MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
HUMAN RESOURCES
TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
I.T. ASSISTANT $45.46 $47.73 $50.12 $52.62 $55.25
INNOVATION AND
TECHNOLOGY MGR $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
LEGAL SERVICES
MANAGER $48.12 $50.53 $53.05 $55.71 $58.49
311
CC 06-03-2025
311 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)Attachment O
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
MANAGEMENT
ANALYST $56.54 $59.37 $62.34 $65.45 $68.72
NETWORK SPECIALIST $58.16 $61.06 $64.12 $67.32 $70.69
PARK RESTORATION
IMPV MGR $79.33 $83.29 $87.46 $91.83 $96.42
PERMIT CENTER
MANAGER $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
PLANNING MANAGER $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
MANAGER $72.94 $76.58 $80.41 $84.43 $88.66
PUBLIC INFORMATION
OFFICER $72.86 $76.50 $80.33 $84.34 $88.56
PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT MANAGER $69.73 $73.22 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76
PUBLIC WORKS
SUPERVISOR $58.78 $61.71 $64.80 $68.04 $71.44
PURCHASING
MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
RECREATION
MANAGER $60.01 $63.01 $66.16 $69.46 $72.94
RECREATION
SUPERVISOR $54.43 $57.15 $60.01 $63.01 $66.16
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT $59.48 $62.45 $65.57 $68.85 $72.30
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEY $102.13 $107.24 $112.60 $118.23 $124.14
SENIOR BUSINESS
SYSTEMS ANALYST $70.50 $74.03 $77.73 $81.61 $85.69
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER $79.66 $83.64 $87.82 $92.22 $96.83
SENIOR MANAGEMENT
ANALYST $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.13
SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT MGR $73.21 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76 $88.99
SERVICE CENTER
SUPERINTENDENT $75.15 $78.91 $82.86 $87.00 $91.35
312
CC 06-03-2025
312 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Redline)Attachment O
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
SPECIAL PROJECT
EXECUTIVE $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CODE ENFORCEMENT
SUPERVISOR $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
TRANSPORTATION
MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
WEB SPECIALIST $51.42 $53.99 $56.69 $59.53 $62.50
313
CC 06-03-2025
313 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Clean)Attachment P
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
ACCOUNTANT I $46.60 $48.93 $51.38 $53.95 $56.65
ACCOUNTANT II $51.37 $53.94 $56.64 $59.47 $62.44
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT $40.65 $42.68 $44.82 $47.06 $49.41
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $92.83 $97.48 $102.35 $107.47 $112.84
ASSISTANT CITY MGR $126.92 $133.27 $139.93 $146.93 $154.27
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR COMM DEV $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER $74.68 $78.41 $82.33 $86.45 $90.77
ASST DIR PUBLIC WORKS ENG $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
ASST DIR RECREATION COMM SVCS $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
BUDGET MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
BUILDING OFFICIAL $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $65.89 $69.18 $72.64 $76.28 $80.09
CAPITAL IMPV PROGRAM MGR $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CITY CLERK $75.73 $79.51 $83.49 $87.66 $92.05
CITY ENGINEER $94.47 $99.19 $104.15 $109.36 $114.82
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR $46.86 $49.21 $51.67 $54.25 $56.96
DEPARTMENT HEAD $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY $66.80 $70.14 $73.64 $77.33 $81.19
DEPUTY CITY CLERK $54.04 $56.74 $59.58 $62.55 $65.68
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER $90.80 $95.34 $100.11 $105.12 $110.37
DIRECTOR OF ADMIN SERVICES $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF COMM DEVELOPMENT $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS $115.38 $121.15 $127.21 $133.57 $140.25
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER $81.52 $85.59 $89.87 $94.37 $99.08
EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR $66.26 $69.57 $73.05 $76.71 $80.54
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
EXEC ASST TO CITY MANAGER $47.77 $50.15 $52.66 $55.30 $58.06
EXEC ASST TO THE CITY ATTNY $46.59 $48.93 $51.38 $53.94 $56.64
FINANCE MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
GIS COORDINATOR $48.71 $51.15 $53.71 $56.39 $59.21
GIS PROGRAM MANAGER $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
HUMAN RESOURCE ANALYST I $56.06 $58.86 $61.80 $64.90 $68.14
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.12
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT $33.76 $35.45 $37.22 $39.08 $41.03
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN $46.22 $48.53 $50.96 $53.51 $56.18
I.T. ASSISTANT $45.46 $47.73 $50.12 $52.62 $55.25
314
CC 06-03-2025
314 of 1012
UNREP Salary Schedule (Clean)Attachment P
Classification Step1 Step2 Step3 Step4 Step5
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MGR $83.91 $88.11 $92.52 $97.14 $102.00
LEGAL SERVICES MANAGER $48.12 $50.53 $53.05 $55.71 $58.49
MANAGEMENT ANALYST $56.54 $59.37 $62.34 $65.45 $68.72
NETWORK SPECIALIST $58.16 $61.06 $64.12 $67.32 $70.69
PARK RESTORATION IMPV MGR $79.33 $83.29 $87.46 $91.83 $96.42
PERMIT CENTER MANAGER $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
PLANNING MANAGER $85.34 $89.60 $94.08 $98.79 $103.73
PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER $72.94 $76.58 $80.41 $84.43 $88.66
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER $72.86 $76.50 $80.33 $84.34 $88.56
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER $69.73 $73.22 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR $58.78 $61.71 $64.80 $68.04 $71.44
PURCHASING MANAGER $84.91 $89.15 $93.61 $98.29 $103.20
RECREATION MANAGER $60.01 $63.01 $66.16 $69.46 $72.94
RECREATION SUPERVISOR $54.43 $57.15 $60.01 $63.01 $66.16
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT $59.48 $62.45 $65.57 $68.85 $72.30
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY $102.13 $107.24 $112.60 $118.23 $124.14
SENIOR BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST $70.50 $74.03 $77.73 $81.61 $85.69
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER $79.66 $83.64 $87.82 $92.22 $96.83
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST $61.81 $64.90 $68.14 $71.55 $75.13
SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MGR $73.21 $76.88 $80.72 $84.76 $88.99
SERVICE CENTER SUPERINTENDENT $75.15 $78.91 $82.86 $87.00 $91.35
SPECIAL PROJECT EXECUTIVE $112.10 $117.71 $123.60 $129.78 $136.26
CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR $73.82 $77.51 $81.39 $85.46 $89.73
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER $84.81 $89.05 $93.51 $98.18 $103.09
WEB SPECIALIST $51.42 $53.99 $56.69 $59.53 $62.50
315
CC 06-03-2025
315 of 1012
UNREP Salary Effective 7.01.2023 Attachment Q
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Unit
ACCOUNTANT I 46.60$ 48.93$ 51.38$ 53.95$ 56.65$ Unrep
ACCOUNTANT II 51.37$ 53.94$ 56.64$ 59.47$ 62.44$ Unrep
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 46.22$ 48.53$ 50.96$ 53.51$ 56.18$ Unrep
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 40.65$ 42.68$ 44.82$ 47.06$ 49.41$ Unrep
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY 92.83$ 97.48$ 102.35$ 107.47$ 112.84$ Unrep
ASSISTANT CITY MGR 126.92$ 133.27$ 139.93$ 146.93$ 154.27$ Unrep
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER 74.68$ 78.41$ 82.33$ 86.45$ 90.77$ Unrep
ASST DIR COMM DEV 90.80$ 95.34$ 100.11$ 105.12$ 110.37$ Unrep
ASST DIR PARKS AND RECREATION 90.80$ 95.34$ 100.11$ 105.12$ 110.37$ Unrep
ASST DIR PUBLIC WORKS 94.47$ 99.19$ 104.15$ 109.36$ 114.82$ Unrep
BUDGET MANAGER 84.91$ 89.15$ 93.61$ 98.29$ 103.20$ Unrep
BUILDING OFFICIAL 85.34$ 89.60$ 94.08$ 98.79$ 103.73$ Unrep
BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST 65.89$ 69.18$ 72.64$ 76.28$ 80.09$ Unrep
CAPITAL IMPV PROGRAM MGR 84.81$ 89.05$ 93.51$ 98.18$ 103.09$ Unrep
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER 112.10$ 117.71$ 123.60$ 129.78$ 136.26$ Unrep
CITY CLERK 75.73$ 79.51$ 83.49$ 87.66$ 92.05$ Unrep
CITY ENGINEER 94.47$ 99.19$ 104.15$ 109.36$ 114.82$ Unrep
COMMS AND MARKETING COORDINATOR 61.81$ 64.90$ 68.14$ 71.55$ 75.13$ Unrep
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR 46.86$ 49.21$ 51.67$ 54.25$ 56.96$ Unrep
DEPARTMENT HEAD 112.10$ 117.71$ 123.60$ 129.78$ 136.26$ Unrep
DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL 73.82$ 77.51$ 81.39$ 85.46$ 89.73$ Unrep
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 66.80$ 70.14$ 73.64$ 77.33$ 81.19$ Unrep
DEPUTY CITY CLERK 54.04$ 56.74$ 59.58$ 62.55$ 65.68$ Unrep
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER 90.80$ 95.34$ 100.11$ 105.12$ 110.37$ Unrep
DIRECTOR OF ADMIN SERVICES 112.10$ 117.71$ 123.60$ 129.78$ 136.26$ Unrep
DIRECTOR OF COMM DEVELOPMENT 112.10$ 117.71$ 123.60$ 129.78$ 136.26$ Unrep
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION 112.10$ 117.71$ 123.60$ 129.78$ 136.26$ Unrep
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 115.38$ 121.15$ 127.21$ 133.57$ 140.25$ Unrep
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 81.52$ 85.59$ 89.87$ 94.37$ 99.08$ Unrep
EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR 66.26$ 69.57$ 73.05$ 76.71$ 80.54$ Unrep
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER 84.81$ 89.05$ 93.51$ 98.18$ 103.09$ Unrep
EXEC ASST TO CITY MANAGER 47.77$ 50.15$ 52.66$ 55.30$ 58.06$ Unrep
EXEC ASST TO THE CITY ATTORNEY 46.59$ 48.93$ 51.38$ 53.94$ 56.64$ Unrep
FINANCE MANAGER 84.91$ 89.15$ 93.61$ 98.29$ 103.20$ Unrep
GIS COORDINATOR 48.71$ 51.15$ 53.71$ 56.39$ 59.21$ Unrep
GIS PROGRAM MANAGER 83.91$ 88.11$ 92.52$ 97.14$ 102.00$ Unrep
HUMAN RESOURCE ANALYST I 56.06$ 58.86$ 61.80$ 64.90$ 68.14$ Unrep
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II 61.81$ 64.90$ 68.14$ 71.55$ 75.12$ Unrep
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT 33.76$ 35.45$ 37.22$ 39.08$ 41.03$ Unrep
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER 84.91$ 89.15$ 93.61$ 98.29$ 103.20$ Unrep
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN 46.22$ 48.53$ 50.96$ 53.51$ 56.18$ Unrep
I.T. ASSISTANT 45.46$ 47.73$ 50.12$ 52.62$ 55.25$ Unrep
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MGR - APPLICATIONS 83.91$ 88.11$ 92.52$ 97.14$ 102.00$ Unrep
INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MGR - INFRASTRUCTURE 83.91$ 88.11$ 92.52$ 97.14$ 102.00$ Unrep
LEGAL SERVICES MANAGER 48.12$ 50.53$ 53.05$ 55.71$ 58.49$ Unrep
MANAGEMENT ANALYST 56.54$ 59.37$ 62.34$ 65.45$ 68.72$ Unrep
NETWORK SPECIALIST 58.16$ 61.06$ 64.12$ 67.32$ 70.69$ Unrep
PARK RESTORATION IMPV MGR 79.33$ 83.29$ 87.46$ 91.83$ 96.42$ Unrep
PERMIT CENTER MANAGER 73.82$ 77.51$ 81.39$ 85.46$ 89.73$ Unrep
PLANNING MANAGER 85.34$ 89.60$ 94.08$ 98.79$ 103.73$ Unrep
PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER 72.94$ 76.58$ 80.41$ 84.43$ 88.66$ Unrep
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER 72.86$ 76.50$ 80.33$ 84.34$ 88.56$ Unrep
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER 69.73$ 73.22$ 76.88$ 80.72$ 84.76$ Unrep
316
CC 06-03-2025
316 of 1012
UNREP Salary Effective 7.01.2023 Attachment Q
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Unit
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR 58.78$ 61.71$ 64.80$ 68.04$ 71.44$ Unrep
PURCHASING MANAGER 84.91$ 89.15$ 93.61$ 98.29$ 103.20$ Unrep
RECREATION MANAGER 60.01$ 63.01$ 66.16$ 69.46$ 72.94$ Unrep
RECREATION SUPERVISOR 54.43$ 57.15$ 60.01$ 63.01$ 66.16$ Unrep
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT 59.48$ 62.45$ 65.57$ 68.85$ 72.30$ Unrep
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY 102.13$ 107.24$ 112.60$ 118.23$ 124.14$ Unrep
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER 79.66$ 83.64$ 87.82$ 92.22$ 96.83$ Unrep
SENIOR HOUSING COORDINATOR 60.84$ 63.88$ 67.07$ 70.43$ 73.95$ Unrep
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 61.81$ 64.90$ 68.14$ 71.55$ 75.13$ Unrep
SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MANAGER 73.21$ 76.88$ 80.72$ 84.76$ 88.99$ Unrep
SERVICE CENTER SUPERINTENDENT 75.15$ 78.91$ 82.86$ 87.00$ 91.35$ Unrep
SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER 76.07$ 79.87$ 83.87$ 88.06$ 92.46$ Unrep
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER 84.81$ 89.05$ 93.51$ 98.18$ 103.09$ Unrep
WEB SPECIALIST 51.42$ 53.99$ 56.69$ 59.53$ 62.50$ Unrep
317
CC 06-03-2025
317 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO. 25-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
REVISED UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM
AND SALARY SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to revise the classification plan and
salary schedule in the Unrepresented Employees’ Compensation Programs adopted
by City Council Resolution No. ____.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that
1. The City Council hereby adopts the revised classification plan and
salary schedule for unrepresented employees, as shown in Attachment P.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to update the Unrepresented
Employees’ Compensation Programs to incorporate the revised classification plan
and salary schedule.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this 3rd day of June 2025 by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
318
CC 06-03-2025
318 of 1012
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
City of Cupertino
And
IFPTE Local 21,
Cupertino Employees’ Association (CEA)
July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2025
319
CC 06-03-2025
319 of 1012
Table of Contents
Category Section Page Number
No Discrimination 1
Association Rights 2
Management Rights 3
Salary Schedule 4
Out of Classification & Acting Pay 5
Bilingual Pay Differential 6
Hours of Work – Overtime 7
Call Back Pay
Stretch Assignments
8
9
Contracting Out
Facilities Closure
10
11
PERS Contribution 12
Insurance Coverage 13
Safety Footwear
Holidays
14
15
Workers Compensation Benefits 16
Vacation 17
Sick Leave 18
Sick Leave Verification 19
Bereavement Leave 20
Military Leave 21
Pregnancy Disability Leave 22
Adoption Leave 23
Catastrophic Leave 24
320
CC 06-03-2025
320 of 1012
Absence Notification 25
Family Medical Leave Act 26
Education Reimbursement Program 27
City Sponsored Recreation Programs 28
Due Process
Grievance Procedure
29
30
Layoff Procedure 31
Reinstatement 32
Continuation of Benefits 33
Telecommuting / Remote Work 34
Separability 35
Ratification 36
Reopener 37
Term 38
Total Compensation Surveys 39
Salary Schedule
Exhibit A
321
CC 06-03-2025
321 of 1012
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AND
IFPTE LOCAL 21, CUPERTINO CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION
This is a three (3) year agreement, entered into the first full pay period after Association
ratification and adoption by the City Council of this successor MOU and ending on June 30,
2025 between the City of Cupertino, hereinafter referred to as "City", and representatives of
IFPTE Local 21 Cupertino City Employees’ Association, hereinafter referred to as
"Association", pursuant to California Government Code 3500 et seq., and the City Employer -
Employee Relations Policy (Cupertino Municipal Code 2.52.280 et seq.). The Association is
the recognized sole and exclusive representative. This agreement represents the full and
integrated agreement reached between the parties.
The Association may select not more than five (5) employees of which no more than two (2)
may be from the same City department to be members of the CEA bargaining team for the
purpose of negotiating a successor memorandum of understanding (MOU). The Association
shall provide the City with the names of the selected successor MOU bargaining team within
thirty (30) days of the first day of negotiations.
Classifications in the Association:
Account Clerk I
Account Clerk II
Assistant Engineer
Assistant Housing Coordinator
Assistant Planner
Associate Civil Engineer
Associate Planner
Building Inspector
Case Manager
Code Enforcement Officer
Community Outreach Specialist
Engineering Technician
Environmental Compliance Technician
Environmental Programs Assistant
Environmental Programs Specialist
Facility Attendant
GIS Technician
Multimedia Communication Specialist
Office Assistant
Permit Technician
Plan Check Engineer
Public Works Inspector
Receptionist/Clerk
Recreation Assistant
Recreation Coordinator
Senior Building Inspector
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
Senior Engineering Technician
Senior Office Assistant
322
CC 06-03-2025
322 of 1012
Senior Planner
Senior Traffic Technician
Special Programs Coordinator
Traffic Signal Tech-Apprentice
Traffic Signal Technician
Traffic Technician
SECTION 1: NO DISCRIMINATION
In accordance with the City of Cupertino Equal Employment Opportunity policy, the
City will afford equal opportunity to all qualified employees, applicants and unpaid interns as
to all terms and conditions of employment, including compensation, hiring, training, promotion,
transfer, discipline, and termination, without regard to race, color, religion, political affiliation,
national origin, sex (including gender, gender identity, gender expression, transgender,
pregnancy and breastfeeding), disability, sexual orientation (including heterosexuality,
homosexuality and bisexuality), age, ancestry, citizenship status, uniformed service member
status, marital status, medical condition, genetic information or characteristics, or for
Association activity or any other basis protected by law.
SECTION 2: ASSOCIATION RIGHTS
The City and the CEA recognize the right of employees to form, join, and participate in lawful
activities of employee organizations and the equal, alternative right of employees to refuse to
form, join, and participate in employee organizations. Neither party shall discriminate against
an employee in the exercise of these alternative rights. Accordingly, membership in the CEA
shall not be compulsory.
2.1 Automatic Payroll Deduction and Remittance
Upon certification by CEA that an employee has signed a deduction authorization, the City
will deduct the appropriate dues from the employee's pay, as established and as may be
changed from time to time by CEA, and remit such dues to CEA. Employee requests to cancel
or change deductions must be directed to CEA rather than to the City. An employee wishing
to cancel or change deductions must mail a written revocation to CEA in accordance with
the terms of the authorization form, or absent any such terms, by mailing a written revocation
to CEA that is postmarked during the thirty {30) day period immediately prior to the annual
anniversary date on which the employee signed the original authorization form. Deductions
will continue unless and until the City is notified by CEA of any requested changes.
2.2 Access to New Employees
The Employer shall provide CEA written notice of, and access to, new employee orientation
as set forth below.
A. Notice: The Employer shall provide at least 10 days’ written notice by email, to
addresses that CEA shall provide, of any new employee orientation for positions in a
CEA-represented classification, where information regarding employment status,
rights, benefits, duties, responsibilities, or any other employment-related matter is
provided. Less than ten (10) days’ written notice may be provided where there is an
urgent need critical to the City’s operations that was not reasonably foreseeable.
323
CC 06-03-2025
323 of 1012
B. Access: CEA shall notify the new employee and labor relations of a proposed thirty
minute time slot, during normal working hours, for a maximum of two representatives,
which may be either CEA members or IFPTE Local 21 affiliate representatives, to
meet privately with the new employee. The purpose of the meeting shall be to provide
information and communicate to its member the rights and obligations created by the
contract and the role of the representative, and to answer questions, without
management personnel or any other persons present. One representative may be a
bargaining unit member, and any such bargaining unit member shall be on without-
loss-of-pay status provided the member gives his/her supervisor sufficient advance
notice.
1. For reasons of operational necessity only, the Employer may notify CEA that the
proposed time is unworkable and that CEA must propose an alternate time.
C. Information Exchange: Within thirty (30) days of hiring a new employee, or by the
first pay period of the month following hire, the employer will provide IFPTE Local
21 with the below listed information in a digital or other usable data format:
1) Name
2) Job Title
3) Department
4) Work Location
5) Telephone number(s) [work, home and personal cellular]
6) Personal email address on file with employer
7) Home address of the new hire
Similarly, the City of Cupertino will also provide CEA with the above detailed
information for all employees within the bargaining unit at least every ninety (90)
calendar days in a digital or other usable data format.
The above information shall not be provided to CEA if the new hire or current
employee within the bargaining unit makes a written request to opt out of such
disclosure. Upon written request of the employee, the City will not disclose the
employee’s home address, home telephone number, personal cellular telephone
number, or personal email address to CEA, in accordance with Cal. Gov. Code Section
6254.3(c).
D. The ability to have a CEA representative present as part of orientation/onboarding
shall not result in a delay of an employee’s start date.
E. Resolution of the above language satisfies the City’s bargaining obligations under AB
119, Government Code Section 3555-3559.
2.3 Hold Harmless
CEA shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, suits, or
any other action arising from the maintenance of dues deductions or from complying with
any demand for termination hereunder, provided that the City promptly provide notice to
CEA of any claim, demand, suit, or other action for which it is seeking indemnification.
324
CC 06-03-2025
324 of 1012
CEA shall certify to the City of Cupertino that the Association has received and will
maintain an authorization, signed by each individual employee from whose salary or wages
a deduction or reduction is to be made. CEA will maintain individual employee
authorizations, and shall not be required to provide a copy of an individual authorization
to the City unless a dispute arises about the existence or terms of the authorization. CEA
shall indemnify the City for any claims made by an employee for deductions made in
reliance on that certification.
2.4 Administrative Processing of CEA Dues
CEA shall provide the City with a thirty day advance written notice of any changes in the annual
dues deduction amounts. CEA, which has affiliated with IFPTE Local 21, AFL-CIO shall
provide the City with instructions regarding dues deductions to be remitted to IFPTE Local 21.
2.5 Reasonable Time Off to Meet and Confer
As a representative of a recognized employee organization, CEA Board members may be
selected to attend scheduled meetings with City representatives on subjects within the scope of
representation during regular work hours without loss of compensation. For contract
negotiations, CEA may select not more than six employee members to attend bargaining
sessions. Where circumstances warrant, Human Resources may approve the attendance of
additional employee representatives without loss of compensation, at either labor negotiations
or Labor Management Committee, or other meet and confer meetings.
2.6 Stewards
CEA may designate a reasonable number of employees to represent other employees in
disciplinary or grievance matters and to investigate matters within the scope of
representation. CEA shall provide written notice to the City of the designated stewards and
shall notify the City of any changes to the list. Stewards shall conduct their representation
activities on their own time and on the employee’s own time unless it is an emergency
situation, which would still require approval from the appropriate supervisor or manager in
order to leave the job site. Time off without loss of compensation shall be allowed for
management approved meetings. Unless authorized, only one steward shall be released on
work time to attend such meetings for any one grievance, discipline, or representation matter.
2.7 Activities on City premises
Representatives of CEA shall be granted reasonable access to employee work locations to
investigate matters relating to employer-employee relations, unless such access to given
work locations would constitute a safety hazard or would interfere with the operations of the
City. CEA/IFPTE Local 21 field representatives shall not enter a work location without first
advising the department head or Human Resources office.
SECTION 3: MANAGEMENT RIGHTS
Consistent with the MMBA, it is the exclusive right of the City of Cupertino to direct its
employees; take disciplinary action for proper cause; relieve its employees from duty because
of lack of work or for other legitimate reason; classify and reclassify positions; and determine
the methods, means, and personnel by which the City’s operations are to be conducted. Any
of the rights, powers and authority the City had prior to entering into this Agreement are
325
CC 06-03-2025
325 of 1012
retained by the City except as expressly provided in this section.
While exercising its rights pursuant to the section, the City agrees to meet and confer with
CEA representatives over matters within the statutory scope of bargaining.
SECTION 4: SALARY SCHEDULE
Monthly salary ranges as listed on Exhibit A will apply for each classification effective
at the beginning of the pay period in which July 1 occurs unless otherwise noted below.
Effective the first full pay period after July 1, 2022, a 5.0% salary increase will be added to the
salary range of each classification in this bargaining unit.
The parties further agree to reopen wage negotiations for FY23-24 and FY24-25 upon the
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration’s (CDTFA) completion of the sales tax
review, but in no event later than March 1, 2023. The union may propose changes to salary
steps, call back pay and bilingual pay as part of the wage reopener discussion.
SECTION 5: OUT-OF-CLASSIFICATION AND ACTING PAY
Temporary assignment, approved in advance by the department head, to a classification in a
higher pay grade shall be compensated at the Step 1 rate of the higher classification, or at a
rate five percent greater than that of the regular position, but not more than the maximum step
of the higher class, whichever is greater, for the number of hours so assigned. In order to
qualify for Out-Of-Classification pay, an employee shall work a minimum of 4 hours per day
in the temporary assignment. An employee may be assigned to work out of class in a higher
classification when there is a vacant position for which a recruitment is being, or will be,
conducted. Out of class assignments may not exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year.
Compensation for work performed in an out-of-class capacity is included for purposes of
calculating CalPERS compensation, however, this is at the discretion of CalPERS and future
changes to CalPERS regulations would supersede the language of this section.
An employee may receive acting pay for working in a higher classification where a vacancy
does not exist, in the case of an incumbent being on vacation or leave of absence, or due to the
employee being asked to perform higher level work on any other temporary basis. Acting pay
is not included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation.
The higher rate of pay shall be used in computing overtime when authorized overtime is
worked in a non-exempt, out of class or acting work assignment. When a non-exempt
employee is working out of class or acting in an exempt position for 20 hours or more in a
work week, the employee will be ineligible to receive overtime pay for any and all hours
worked in the exempt classification during that work week.
All requests for out of class pay or acting pay must be approved by the Director of
Administrative Services or his/her designee.
SECTION 6: BILINGUAL PAY DIFFERENTIAL
An employee must have taken and passed the required language proficiency test(s) prior
to being asked to use bilingual skills for City work. An employee who performs bilingual work
326
CC 06-03-2025
326 of 1012
as approved by their supervisor is eligible to receive a 7.5% bilingual pay differential only for
the work time during which the employee uses bilingual skills. For payroll reporting purposes,
the 7.5% bilingual pay differential will be recorded with a 15 minute minimum. Bilingual pay
is not available retroactively to passing the exam.
SECTION 7: HOURS OF WORK: OVERTIME
7.1 Hours of Work Defined
Hours worked shall include all time assigned by employer whether such hours are
worked in the City’s work place, or in some other place where the employee is carrying out the
duties of the City.
The normal work week shall be 40 hours in seven days with two consecutive days off.
Alternate Work Schedules (AWS) may be considered, including 9/80 and 4/10, but must be
approved in advance by the Department Head. The City reserves the right to re-evaluate such
approvals if the Alternate Work Schedule results in an undue burden to the City.
7.2 Overtime
Overtime shall be defined as any work in excess of 40 hours in a seven day work period.
Holidays and paid time off shall count toward the accumulation of the work week.
Overtime work for the City by an employee shall be authorized in advance by the
department head or their designee. In the event of unforeseen circumstances, overtime shall be
approved after the work is completed.
7.3 Schedules
It will be a management responsibility to schedule the hours of work for each employee
covered by this agreement. Except in unforeseen circumstances, changes in employee’s hours
of work will be made after ten days prior notice.
7.4 Rest Periods and Meal Breaks
Each employee shall be granted a rest period of fifteen minutes during each work period
of more than three hours duration. No wage deduction shall be made nor time off charged
against employees taking authorized rest periods, nor shall any rights or overtime be accrued
for rest periods not taken.
All employees shall be required to take an uninterrupted, unpaid meal period of a minimum of
30 minutes and a maximum of 60 minutes at or about the midpoint of their work day. The
length of the meal period and the time the meal period is taken shall be agreed to between the
employee and their supervisor or department head, based on operational necessities.
Employees are entirely relieved of responsibilities and restrictions during their meal period,
unless they are assigned, in writing, to work an on-duty meal period, which will be treated as
paid time. Employees may not use the meal break to reduce their regular daily work
schedule, unless previously approved by their supervisor.
7.5 Payment of Overtime
All approved overtime work performed by employees shall be paid at the rate of one
327
CC 06-03-2025
327 of 1012
and one-half (1 1/2) times the normal rate of pay. Work performed on regularly scheduled days
off, City Holidays or during an employee’s scheduled vacation shall be considered to be
overtime and paid accordingly.
7.6 Compensatory Time Off (CTO)
At the employee’s discretion, compensatory time off may be granted for overtime
worked at the rate of time and one-half for each hour worked in lieu of compensation in cash.
Employees, who have previously earned compensatory time, shall be allowed to schedule
compensatory time off at dates of the employee’s selection provided that prior supervisory
approval has been obtained.
CTO time may be accrued for up to 80 hours per calendar year. Any CTO earned
exceeding 80 hours will be paid at the rate of time and one-half. An employee may carry over
the unused balance into the next calendar year. Any unused carryover balance will be
automatically paid out at the end of the calendar year.
An employee may exercise his/her option two times each calendar year to convert any/or
all accumulated compensatory time to cash.
7.7 Leave Accruals
An employee shall not accrue leave credits (vacation, sick leave) during a pay period if
off without pay for more than 40 hours during said pay period.
SECTION 8: CALL BACK PAY
If an employee is required to report for emergency or other duties during the employee’s off-
duty hours, the employee will be compensated at a rate of time and one half their base hourly
rate for all hours worked, including necessary travel time.
SECTION 9: STRETCH ASSIGNMENTS
As part of the City’s Succession Development program, association members may be eligible
for voluntary “stretch assignments”. Stretch Assignments differ from work out of class or
acting assignments, and serve to prepare employees for future promotional opportunities
within the City. Examples of stretch assignments include shadowing management staff;
assisting with special projects or tasks; and cross-departmental training opportunities. Stretch
assignments are voluntary and receive no additional compensation. Stretch assignments may
be requested by employees, or offered by department management staff; however, such
assignments should not impact the employee’s regular workload or position and should not
result in overtime hours. Stretch assignments are offered solely at the discretion of
management and are not grievable. Stretch assignments shall not be utilized to cover the
work of an unfilled position or to cover work assignments of an employee on leave.
SECTION 10: CONTRACTING OUT
If contracting out bargaining unit work to outside contractors would result in layoff of
bargaining unit members, the elimination of a bargaining unit position, or a permanent
reduction in the hours worked by current bargaining unit employees, then the City shall meet
328
CC 06-03-2025
328 of 1012
the following requirements:
1) The City will give CEA notice of at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of
the outside contract.
2) Within such sixty (60) day period, CEA will have the opportunity to meet and confer
on the impact of the contracting out on bargaining unit employees, and an opportunity
to propose alternative ways in which such services could continue to be provided by
the City workforce or alternate possibilities for cost savings. Nothing in this section
shall be construed to limit the rights of the City to contract out work under the terms
and conditions of this section.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the rights of the City to enter into temporary
contracts (less than one year) or contracts to fill an immediate need (such as a vacant
position).
SECTION 11: FACILITIES CLOSURE
City facilities* will be closed from December 24 through January 1, of each year during the
term of the contract only. Employees may use vacation, CTO, floating holiday, administrative
leave, or leave without pay for work time missed during the closure week. With Supervisor and
Department Head prior approval, an employee may opt to work during the facility closure.
*The Sports Center and Blackberry Farm Golf Course may remain open on facilities
closure days staffed by part-time employees
SECTION 12: PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT (PERS) CONTRIBUTION
A. For Employees hired on or before December 29, 2012 Only
For City of Cupertino employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or before December 29,
2012, the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.7% @55 retirement formula.
Effective in the first full pay period in July 2017, each employee in the 2.7% at 55 Classic
formula shall pay the full eight percent (8.0%) of applicable PERSable salary towards the full
employee share of CalPERS pension contribution.
B. For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or on
December 31, 2012 or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic
member under CalPERS Regulations Only.
For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or on December 31,
2012 or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS
Regulations only the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.0% @ 60 retirement formula
based on a three year average compensation.
Effective October, 2016, the City shall not pay the employee’s contribution share to the
California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and each employee shall pay the
full seven percent (7.0%) of applicable PERSable salary towards the employee’s contribution
share of CalPERS pension under this formula.
C. For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on of after January 1, 2013, or
former CalPERS employees that do not qualify as Classic employees hired by the
City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 Only
329
CC 06-03-2025
329 of 1012
For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013, CalPERS has by
statute implemented a 2% @ 62 formula based on a three year average compensation.
Employees in this category shall pay 50% of the normal cost rate as determined by CalPERS.
SECTION 13: INSURANCE COVERAGE
13.1. Health - Medical and Dental Insurance
City agrees to pay an amount as set forth herein for medical coverage for employee and
dependents through the Meyers-Geddes State Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act. For
each participating employee, the City shall contribute the maximum toward premium cost per
month for health and dental during the term of this agreement as follows:
January 1, 2022 City Max Health
Contribution
City Max Dental
Contribution
City Total Max
Contribution
Employee 935.88 126.78 1062.660
Employee +1 1,591.01 126.78 1,717.79
Employee +2 2,068.31 126.78 2,195.09
Required contribution amounts exceeding the premium contribution of the City are the
responsibility of the employee. The City no longer pays medical insurance cash back (excess
of the monthly premium less the cost of the medical coverage) for any employees.
Effective July 1, 2010, employees that retire or resign from service with the City of
Cupertino and who are not eligible for retiree medical benefits as defined in the Summary of
Benefits can continue on the Cupertino medical and dental plans provided that they pay the
premiums in full.
The City reserves the right of selection and administration as to deferred compensation
plan(s).
If during the term of this agreement, modifications are made to the Federal tax code
which would result in any of the medical insurance provided be subject to taxation, the contract
will be re-opened for the purposes of adjusting the salary and medical benefits so long as it does
not result in an increase or decrease in the total compensation.
If during the term of this agreement, new medical plans are identified that will be
beneficial to the City and CEA, the contract will be reopened to discuss these plan options.
Health deductions for employee payments towards PEMHCA premiums shall occur on
a bi-monthly basis consistent with CalPERS required PEMHCA payment schedule.
13.2 Health In-Lieu Payments
City agrees to pay a monthly amount of three hundred seventy-five ($375.00) per month to
bargaining unit employee who can demonstrate that they have equivalent health coverage
through their spouse, parent, or other group coverage and who request this cash payment in
lieu of health insurance coverage.
330
CC 06-03-2025
330 of 1012
13.3 Life Insurance
City shall provide life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment coverage for
each employee in the amount of two and one half times annual salary to a maximum benefit of
$250,000. Employees may be eligible to purchase additional life insurance subject to the
provisions of the insurance policy.
13.4 Short Term and Long Term Disability Insurance
CEA employees will participate in California State Disability Insurance (SDI). SDI
weekly benefits are determined by the State of California and information is available on the
State of California Employment Development Department website. Employees may use leave
banks to supplement lost salary during the 7 day elimination period. Bargaining unit members
shall pay the 1% cost of CA SDI, which will be deducted from their biweekly paychecks. Until
full enrollment in CA SDI becomes effective, bargaining unit members will continue to be
covered by the current Short Term Disability plan during the transition. Integration of SDI with
the City’s current Short Term Disability plan will be in accordance with SDI rules and
regulations.
The City shall provide Long Term Disability (LTD) insurance for employees. LTD
income protection coverage shall be up to $7,000 of covered monthly salary. Employees may
use sick leave and/or vacation leave to supplement lost salary during the 90 day elimination
period.
13.5 Vision Care Insurance
The City shall provide Vision Care Insurance for employees and their dependents at a
cost of $14.94 monthly.
SECTION 14: SAFETY FOOTWEAR
The City shall provide safety footwear at a cost not to exceed $400 annually, for the
bargaining unit classifications of Building Inspector and Public Works Inspector. The City will
provide employees with a list of approved vendors and footwear, and will be billed directly by
the vendor for payment. Any cost exceeding $400 will be borne by the employee.
SECTION 15: HOLIDAYS
15.1 Fixed Holidays
The City shall provide the following fixed paid (8 Hour) holidays for eligible employees
covered by this agreement:
1. New Year’s Day 8. Veteran’s Day
2. Martin Luther King Day 9. Thanksgiving Day
3. President’s Day 10. Day following Thanksgiving
4. Memorial Day
5. Juneteenth
11. Christmas Eve
12. Christmas Day
6. Independence Day 13. New Year’s Eve
7. Labor Day
331
CC 06-03-2025
331 of 1012
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be observed as the non-
work day. When a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be observed as the
non-work day.
Nothing contained herein shall preclude the right of the department head with the
approval of the Appointing Authority to reschedule work assignments or hours of work to meet
emergency situations and other administrative necessities caused by the observance of a holiday
or non-work day or period; provided, however, that all such affected employees are duly
compensated for said rescheduled work assignments.
15.2 Floating Holidays
In addition to the foregoing paid holidays, eligible employees shall earn 20 hours of
holiday leave per year that may be used in increments of no less than one quarter of an hour.
Floating holiday leave shall be earned at a rate of .77 hours per pay period. Floating holiday
leave may be accumulated up to 40 hours. Floating holiday leave shall be taken at the discretion
of the employee subject to prior supervisory approval.
15.3 Holiday Pay
In order for an employee to receive his/her regular pay for a holiday or designated non-
work day, work must be performed on the regular scheduled day before and the regular
scheduled day after the holiday or designated non-work day. Employees on vacation, injury
leave, approved short term leave of absence, with or without pay, or who submit satisfactory
evidence of personal illness shall be considered as working their regular schedule for pay
purposes.
SECTION 16: WORKERS COMPENSATION BENEFITS
Any employee sustaining an injury arising out of or in the course of the performance of
his/her job and who cannot work at the duties and responsibilities normally assigned to that job
is entitled to receive Workers’ Compensation as prescribed by State law.
16.1 Use of Sick Leave to Supplement Workers’ Compensation Payments
Any employee entitled to receive Workers’ Compensation payments may elect to
supplement such payments with an amount not to exceed that which is the employee’s weekly
earnings or weekly earning capacity by use of sick leave payments to the extent that such sick
leave has been accrued to the employee’s account.
16.2 Use of Sick Leave for Industrial Injury Medical Appointments
An employee who is required to see a physician regarding a work-related injury during
regularly scheduled work hours may use sick leave credits for appointment(s). If the medical
appointment is scheduled during the last hour of the regularly scheduled work day an employee
will not be required to use sick leave credits for said appointment. The last hour provision shall
be limited to one time during any Monday through Friday work period.
SECTION 17: VACATION
All bargaining unit employees shall accrue vacation credit. Accrued vacation credits
may be taken with prior supervisory approval.
332
CC 06-03-2025
332 of 1012
Benefited full-time employees accrue vacation in accordance with the following
schedule. Benefited employees who work less than a full-time work schedule accrue vacation
in accordance with the following schedule on a pro-rated basis.
Service Time Annual Accruals Maximum Accrual
0 - 3 Years 80 Hours 160 Hours
4 - 9 Years 120 Hours 240 Hours
10 – 14 Years 160Hours 272 Hours
15 – 19 Years 176Hours 320 Hours
20 + Years 192Hours 352 Hours
An employee may accrue no more vacation credit than what is listed above.
Upon termination of employment, unused vacation may not be used to extend the final
employment date beyond the annual accrual rate being earned. Any request to use accrued
vacation hours beyond the last day of work must be submitted in writing, approved by the
employee’s supervisor like all other vacation requests, and is irrevocable.
Represented employees may convert, up to two times per calendar year, unused vacation
time for payment subject to the following conditions:
1. The employee must have a minimum of 120 hours of accrued vacation immediately prior
to a conversion.
2. Any payment for accrued vacation hours will be subject to taxes as determined by law.
3. Minimum exchange will be one day. Maximum exchange will be ten days.
4. All exchanges are irrevocable.
5. A maximum of 80 hours of accrued vacation may be converted for pay during a calendar
year.
SECTION 18: SICK LEAVE
All full time employees hired before October 17, 2012 (other than those holding
temporary status), shall earn eight (8) hours per month sick leave time without limit on
accumulation. All employees hired on or after October 17, 2012 shall earn eight (8) hours per
month of sick leave time, but may accrue no more than 240 hours of sick leave time.
Those regular employees working less than full time (at least 20 hours per week) shall
earn a pro-rated amount of sick leave based on their regular hours worked in relation to 40
hours. Sick leave may be utilized due to the employee’s personal illness, injury, pregnancy
disability or sickness or injury to the immediate family.
The employee’s immediate family consists of the following: children, stepchildren,
spouse/domestic partner, parents, mother-in-law, father-in-law, siblings, grandchildren and
grandparents who because of illness cannot care for themselves, and for medical emergencies.
Employees shall, whenever possible, make appointments for medical, dental and similar
purposes during non-work hours. If this is not possible, sick leave may be used for these
purposes.
With proper notification, sick leave shall be taken in periods of no less than one-half
hour increments.
18.1 Sick Leave Conversion. Any employee hired before October 17, 2012, who is
333
CC 06-03-2025
333 of 1012
retiring, will have the option of applying any remaining sick leave to service credit. If an
employee is resigning, he/she will not have the option of applying sick leave hours to service
credit.
18.2 Sick leave is not vested under California statutory law.
18.3 Employees hired before October 17, 2012 shall have the option of cashing out sick
leave in accordance with Section 18.4 and 18.5.
18.4 If upon retirement the qualifying employee has a minimum of 320 non-vested
hours, payment shall be made for up to eighty-five percent (85%) of the value of the bank at
the employee’s discretion.
18.5 If upon resignation the qualifying employee has a minimum of 320 non-vested
hours, payment shall be made for up to seventy percent (70%) of the value of the bank at the
employee’s discretion.
18.6 Represented employees will have the option, subject to approval of the department
head, of converting sick leave to vacation leave on a two-to-one basis only if the employee’s
remaining sick leave balance is 40 hours or more. The maximum allowable exchange will be
96 hours of sick time for 48 hours of vacation leave per calendar year. The minimum exchange
will be 8 hours sick leave for 4 hours of vacation.
An employee may convert sick leave in excess of 320 hours to vacation leave on a one-
to-one basis with a maximum of 48 hours and a minimum of 4 hours and may convert up to an
additional 32 hours on the basis of one hour of sick leave to 0.7 hour of vacation leave. The
conversion of sick leave in excess of 320 hours to vacation leave as described herein is limited
to no more than a total of 80 hours per calendar year.
As a condition of converting sick leave to vacation, all employees will be required to
use at least one-half of the vacation accrued during the previous twelve months.
Such conversion either to exchange sick leave for vacation or vice versa shall be subject
to the following conditions:
a. All requests to exchange sick leave for vacation time shall be submitted in writing
to the department head at least fourteen (14) calendar days in advance of
intended vacation utilization.
b. If twelve (12) months have elapsed since approval of the exchange of sick leave for
vacation, and the employee has not been permitted the use of the converted
vacation time, (after submitting at least one written request for utilization) the
employee will have the right to re-convert the vacation time to sick leave in
reverse ratio to the original exchange. This exchange will be allowed only for
previously converted sick time to vacation and will not be permitted for regularly
accrued vacation time.
NOTE: As used in this document, "reverse ratio" is intended to mean that the ratio of sick leave
to vacation will revert to the original ratio at the time the initial exchange was implemented.
SECTION 19: SICK LEAVE VERIFICATION
334
CC 06-03-2025
334 of 1012
A Department Head or supervisor may at their discretion require employees to furnish
reasonable acceptable evidence, including a doctor’s certificate, to substantiate a request for
sick leave if the sick leave exceeds three (3) consecutive workdays. A supervisor may also
require a doctor’s certificate or other form of verification where leave abuse is suspected. If it
appears that an employee is abusing sick leave or is using sick leave excessively, the employee
will be counseled that the continued use of sick leave may result in a requirement to furnish a
medical certificate for each such subsequent absence for sick leave regardless of duration.
Continued abuse of leave or excessive use of sick leave may constitute grounds for discipline
up to and including dismissal.
SECTION 20: BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
Employees shall be granted paid bereavement leave of up to 24 hours upon the death of
a close relative. Close relatives are defined as mother, father, sister, brother, wife, husband,
domestic partner, child, step-child, grandparent, grandchildren, mother-in-law and father-in-
law. Additional bereavement leave of up to 16 hours will be granted for travel out of state or
over 200 miles. An employee may request bereavement leave for the death of an individual not
listed above and whom they have a close and significant relation with and/or hours greater than
24, but not more than 40, which Human Resources can grant at their discretion. A denial under
this section shall not be subject to the grievance procedure.
SECTION 21: MILITARY LEAVE
Military leave shall be granted in accordance with the provision of State and Federal
law. All employees entitled to military leave shall give their supervisor an opportunity within
the limits of military requirements, to determine when such leave shall be taken.
SECTION 22: PREGNANCY DISABILITY LEAVE
An employee disabled by pregnancy is eligible for up to four months of unpaid pregnancy
disability leave (PDL) as defined by law. This leave is to be used when the employee is disabled
due to pregnancy or child birth or related medical condition, including but not limited to,
morning sickness, pregnancy complications and prenatal appointments. Accrued sick leave
may be used during the leave, and the employee has the option to use accrued vacation, floating
holidays and/or compensatory time in order to receive pay during the leave. If the employee is
also eligible for leave under the Federal Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), (employee must
be employed by the City for at least one year and have worked at least 1250 hours during the
year preceding the leave) the leave the employee takes for pregnancy disability will be run
concurrently with the employee’s entitlement to up to 12 weeks of FMLA leave. Employees
otherwise eligible for health insurance benefits (medical, dental and vision) will continue to
receive such benefits during the period of the PDL leave up to four months as defined by law
per 12 month period.
After PDL and FMLA leave, if applicable, expires and if the employee is on unpaid status or
the employee has less than 20 hours per week on their timesheet, the employee may elect to
continue and enroll in COBRA benefits at employee’s expense.
The employee will be accruing sick leave, floating holiday and vacation leave during the period
of time, if any, the employee is in paid status. Any time the employee’s hours adjust to less
than 40 hours per week, however of paid status, the employee’s accrual rates (sick leave,
vacation leave, floating holiday) will be prorated and be adjusted accordingly. Sick leave,
335
CC 06-03-2025
335 of 1012
floating holiday and vacation leave do not continue to accrue during any period the employee
is on unpaid status.
Under the California Family rights Act (CFRA) eligible employees are entitled up to 12
additional weeks of leave to bond with the baby. To be eligible for the CFRA bonding leave,
employee must be employed by the City for at least one year and have worked at least 1250
hours during the year preceding the leave. The leave is unpaid, but the employee may use
floating holiday, compensatory time and vacation leave in order to receive pay during the leave.
The employee may use sick leave for a baby’s illness or doctor’s appointment when applicable
to receive pay during the leave. Bonding leave must be used within one year of the birth of the
baby.
An employee who plans to take PDL must give reasonable notice (not less than 4 weeks if
anticipated or as soon as possible if the leave is unforeseen) before the date employee expects
to take the leave. As with all other employees returning from medical leave, employees
returning from PDL leave of at least 3 days are required to provide a doctor’s note clearing
them to return to work. If an employee requires reasonable accommodations as a result of
pregnancy, employee should consult with Human Resources. Employees disabled by
pregnancy and employees on leave to bond with a baby may be eligible for benefits under State
Disability Insurance. Additional information is available at www.edd.ca.gov/Disabililty and
from Human Resources.
SECTION 23: ADOPTION LEAVE
Upon request, a leave of absence without pay for up to four (4) work weeks will be granted to
adoptive parents. Such leave must be used within one year of the adoption. The city will pay
health and welfare benefits for the duration of the leave as the same rate as prior to the leave
consistent with the contributions as provided for under the existing MOU.
If the employee is eligible for FMLA/CFRA (employed by the city for at least one year and
worked at least 1250 hours during the year preceding the leave), employee may be eligible for
up to 12 work weeks total (the above four (4) work weeks plus an additional eight (8) work
weeks) for bonding with the adopted child during the first year after adoption. The employee
may be eligible for health benefits during the twelve (12) work week period at the same rate as
prior to the leave as provided for under the existing MOU.
During adoption leave, accrued vacation may be used by the employee at his or her option in
order to receive pay during the leave. Sick leave may only be used during the leave in the event
of illness or medical appointments of the adoptive child during the leave.
SECTION 24: CATASTROPHIC LEAVE
a. The City’s Catastrophic Leave Committee will evaluate each individual case when it is
submitted to qualify to receive funds. The only limitation is that the employee must be
the one facing the illness. The committee has the right to establish standards for the
granting of leave hours, and ask the applicant to submit further documentation from the
treating physician, and to determine the applicant’s eligibility for catastrophic leave
hours.
b. All benefited employees will be eligible to receive assistance. An employee does not
have to be a contributor to be eligible.
c. A recipient must have used all of their available leave hours before he/she is eligible.
d. The maximum amount is seven (7) days (State Disability Insurance becomes available
336
CC 06-03-2025
336 of 1012
at this time).
e. Vacation hours and compensating time off (CTO) hours are the only leave of absence
credits which may be donated. An employee may not donate leave of absence credits
which would reduce his/her total accrued leave balances to less than 120 hours. Leave
credits may be donated in any pay period. All leave donations are irrevocable.
f. A leave of absence transfer drive will be held whenever necessary to provide for a
minimum catastrophic leave bank balance which is the equivalent of 40 hours.
g. Active employees wishing to donate sick leave hours to the Catastrophic Leave bank
will need to convert sick leave hours (maintaining a minimum of 320 hours after
donation) to vacation leave hours.
h. Upon retirement or resignation, an employee can contribute up to 10 hours of sick leave
provided that the employee has a minimum of 320 hours of sick leave, which
has previously become vested.
Transfers may be in increments of one hour or more. All donations will be confidential. There
will be no selling or coercion of employees to donate.
Donated leave hours will be converted to cash and deposited in a time-bank where it will be
available for distribution. Checks will be issued to the recipient with the regular payroll, which
will keep them in an active employment mode with the City. This procedure prevents
overpayments or corrections since it comes after the actual leave has been taken. (Conversion
allows for adjustments for different rates of pay.) No employee shall receive payment for more
than 100% of his or her regular pay.
An employee or their representative must complete a prescribed application form together with
supporting medical documentation to the Human Resources Division when applying for funds.
SECTION 25: ABSENCE NOTIFICATION
An employee is expected not to be absent from work for any reason other than personal
illness without making prior arrangements with their supervisor. Unless prior arrangements
are made, an employee who, for any reason, fails to report for work must notify their
supervisor of the reason for being absent by no later than 15 minutes prior to their scheduled
start time. If the absence, whether for personal illness or otherwise, is to continue beyond the
first day, the employee must notify the supervisor on a daily basis unless otherwise arranged
with his/her supervisor. In proper cases, exceptions will be made.
Any unauthorized absence of an employee from duty shall be deemed to be an absence
without pay and will be grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal by the
department head. In the absence of such disciplinary action any employee who absents
himself/herself for three days or more without authorized leave shall be deemed to have
resigned. Such absence may be covered, however, by the department head by a following
grant of leave with or without pay when extenuating circumstances are found to have existed.
SECTION 26: FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE /CALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHTS ACTS
The City of Cupertino shall comply with the leave provisions of the Family Medical Leave
Act and the California Family Rights Act for employees who qualify for leave under these
laws.
337
CC 06-03-2025
337 of 1012
SECTION 27: EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
It is the intent of the City to recognize the value of continuing education and professional
development of its employees; and to adopt an Education Reimbursement Program which will
encourage employees to avail themselves of City job related educational opportunities that
will advance their knowledge and interests in the direction of their career path. Courses
should either: a) maintain or improve job skills in the employee’s current position; b) be
expressly required by the City or by law; or c) prepare the employee to become a competitive
applicant for a different position with the City.
The Education Reimbursement Program is a benefit to all full time benefited employees who
have completed the required probationary period and provides education reimbursement of up
to two thousand ($2,000) per calendar year for the cost of registration, required textbooks
and/or materials and parking. Employees who wish to seek reimbursement from the City for
educational program costs shall provide a written request for reimbursement in advance of
enrollment to the Human Resources Division. The form provided shall include the type of
training, sponsoring organization or institution, meeting times and costs. Human Resources
and the employee’s department head will make the determination if the chosen education
program is eligible for reimbursement.
No employee shall receive any reimbursement until they have provided satisfactory proof of
successful completion of the coursework with a grade of “C” or above, or “Pass” in the case
of a Pass/Fail course. Such proof of completion shall be provided within 30 days of the
conclusion of the course.
Education reimbursement is a taxable benefit under IRS Code. Education reimbursement will
be applied to the calendar year in which the course is passed and satisfactory proof of
completion is submitted.
Mandatory or annual coursework, attendance at conferences and training required to maintain
job specific certifications or proficiencies are not included in the Education Reimbursement
Program.
SECTION 28: CITY SPONSORED RECREATION AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS
CEA bargaining unit members shall have the privilege of enrollment in City sponsored
recreation programs at the City residents’ fee structure and in preference to non-residents
wishing to enroll. Each calendar year, employees and family members on the employee’s
dental plan are eligible to be reimbursed up to $500 per employee in Rec Bucks. Employees
shall be reimbursed for approved recreation services in accordance with the City’s Recreation
Buck Policies. Programs allowing for preregistration will be reimbursed after completion of
the program, including those allowing for or requiring preregistration in the calendar year
prior to reimbursement. Reimbursements shall be applied to the year in which they are
received. Benefited employees will also receive a free employee only annual Cupertino Sports
Center membership. Part-time benefited employees will have the annual amount of
Recreation Bucks prorated based on number of hours worked. Recreation Bucks are a taxable
benefit under IRS Code, and must be used by the employee within the calendar year and are
non-transferrable.
City employees are eligible to participate in the City’s wellness program as provided for in the
City’s Administrative Rules and Regulations.
338
CC 06-03-2025
338 of 1012
SECTION 29: DUE PROCESS
For demotions, suspensions of more than five days and terminations of employment, the City
will provide written notice of the intended actions including the reasons therefore; a copy of
any documents upon which the City relied in taking its action and an opportunity to respond,
either orally or in writing, prior to the effective date of the disciplinary action.
Said opportunity shall be as soon as is practical after having been served the written notice and
shall not constitute any limitation otherwise available through the grievance or appeal
procedures. Any written warning in an employee’s file will be removed from the file after three
years, if requested in writing by the employee.
SECTION 30: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
30.1 Definition: a grievance is a good faith dispute or difference of opinion of an
employee involving the meaning, interpretation or application of the express provisions of the
Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Cupertino and CEA.
30.2 Step 1: An employee (grievant) who has a grievance shall bring it to the attention
of the employee's immediate supervisor within ten (10) calendar days of the occurrence of
knowledge of the act that is the basis for the dispute. If the grievant and the immediate
supervisor are unable to resolve the matter within ten (10) calendar days of the date it is raised,
the grievant has the right to submit a formal grievance to their next higher supervisor.
30.3 Step 2: If the grievance is not settled at Step 1 the grievant may submit a written
grievance to the next higher supervisor within ten (10) calendar days after the supervisor’s oral
answer in Step 1. The written grievance shall contain the following information:
a. The name, job classification and department of the grievant.
b. The name of the grievant’s immediate supervisor.
c. A statement of the nature of the grievance including date and place of
occurrence.
d. The specific provision alleged to have been violated.
e. The remedy sought by the grievant.
f. If the grievant is not self-represented, the name of the individual or recognized
employee organization designated to represent the grievant.
g. Signature of grievant and date.
h. If the grievance is being submitted on behalf of the grievant by the recognized
employee organization, it shall be signed and dated by the representative of the
employee organization.
The supervisor or designee shall discuss the grievance within ten (10) calendar
days with the grievant and/or designated representative at a time mutually
agreeable to the parties. If a settlement is not reached, a written answer to the
grievance shall be provided within ten (10) calendar days of the meeting.
339
CC 06-03-2025
339 of 1012
30.4 Step 3: If the grievance is not settled at Step 2 the grievant may submit the
grievance in writing to the grievant's Department Head, or, alternatively, if the Department
Head responded at Step 2, to the City Manager within ten (10) calendar days after the Step 2
written answer. The Department Head/City Manager shall discuss the grievance within ten (10)
calendar days with the grievant and/or designated representative at a time mutually agreeable
to the parties. If no settlement is reached, a written answer shall be provided within ten (10)
calendar days of the meeting.
30.5 Step 4: If the grievance is not settled at Step 3, the grievant may submit the
grievance to advisory arbitration within 14 calendar days after receipt of the decision at Step 2.
30.6 Advisory Arbitration:
a. The parties shall attempt to agree upon an advisory arbitrator within seven (7) calendar
days after receipt of the notice of referral. In the event that parties are unable to agree upon an
advisory arbitrator within said seven (7) day period, the parties shall jointly request the State
Mediation and Conciliation Service to submit a panel of five (5) advisory arbitrators. Each party
retains the right to reject one panel in its entirety and request that a new panel be submitted.
Both the grievant/designated representative and the City shall have the right to strike two (2)
names from the panel. The parties shall alternatively strike names until one remains. The person
remaining shall be the advisory arbitrator.
b. The advisory arbitrator shall be notified of his/her selection and shall be requested to
set a time and place for the hearing, subject to the availability of the grievant/designated
representative and City representatives.
c. The City or the grievant/designated representative shall have the right to request the
arbitrator to require the presence of witnesses or documents. The City and the grievant retain
the right to employ legal counsel.
d. The advisory arbitrator shall submit his/her recommendation in writing within thirty
(30) days following the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever
is later.
e. More than one grievance may be submitted to the same advisory arbitrator if both
parties mutually agree in writing.
f. The fees and expenses of the advisory arbitrator and the cost of a written transcript
shall be divided equally between the City and the grievant, or CEA/IFPTE Local 21, as
appropriate; provided, however, that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own
representatives and witnesses.
30.7 Limitations on Authority of Advisory Arbitrator: The advisory arbitrator shall have
no right to amend, modify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the provisions of the Memorandum
of Understanding. The advisory arbitrator shall consider and decide only the question of fact as
to whether there has been a violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of the specific
provisions of the MOU section or sections supporting the grievance. The advisory arbitrator
shall be empowered to determine the issue raised by the grievance as submitted in writing at
the second step. The advisory arbitrator shall have no authority to make a recommendation on
any issue not so submitted or raised. The advisory arbitrator shall be without power to make
recommendations contrary to or inconsistent with, in any way, applicable laws or rules and
regulations of administrative bodies that have the force and effect of law. The advisory
arbitrator shall not in any way limit or interfere with the powers, duties and responsibilities of
the City under law and applicable court decisions. The recommendation shall be advisory only
to the City Manager. The City Manager will make the final decision.
340
CC 06-03-2025
340 of 1012
SECTION 31: LAYOFF PROCEDURE
The appointing authority may lay off employees for lack of funds, lack of work or for other
similar and just cause. The appointing authority will identify the classification(s) subject to
layoff. All classifications and all departments citywide are subject to layoff considerations.
Employees in a classification(s) identified for layoff shall be laid off in reverse order of
seniority, based on the date of the appointment to the classification. If an employee separates
from City employment for a period of more than 30 days, the time off from City employment
shall be deducted from an employee’s length of service for the purpose of determining seniority.
Employees being laid off shall be entitled to placement in a lower classification; provided (a)
the employee was previously employed with regular status having completed the probationary
period in that lower classification and (b) the employee has more total seniority with the City
than an individual in the lower classification. Any employee being displaced by an employee
opting to be placed in a lower classification shall be entitled to placement in the lower
classification, subject to conditions (a) and (b) listed in this section.
The City will provide a 30 day notice to any employees identified for layoff and layoff pay in
the amount of $2,500 at the time of layoff. Such notice will include the employee’s rights to
placement in a lower classification pursuant to this section. Medical, dental, vision, and life
insurance continue through the end of the month in which the layoff is effective. In addition,
the employee will be provided with an opportunity to elect to enroll in COBRA medical, dental,
and/or vision coverage at the time of layoff and at employee expense.
The names of the employees affected by layoff shall be placed on a recall list for a period of
two years in the reverse order of layoff and shall have the first opportunity for reinstatement.
Failure to respond within ten (10) business days to a written notice of such opportunity for
reinstatement shall cause that name to be removed from the recall list. Such notice shall be sent
by certified or registered mail to the address of the employee on file with the City. The affected
employees shall be responsible for updating the City of any change in address during the time
they are on the recall list.
SECTION 32: REINSTATEMENT
With the approval of the Appointing Authority, a regular or probationary employee who has
resigned with a good record may be reinstated within twenty-four months of the effective date
of resignation to a vacant position in the same or comparable class he/she previously
occupied. Upon reinstatement, the employee for all purposes shall be considered as though
they had received an original appointment.
SECTION 33: CONTINUATION OF BENEFITS
All terms and conditions of employment not otherwise contained herein shall be maintained at
the standards in effect at the time of execution. However, the parties agree that any automatic
economic triggers, formulas or escalators shall become inoperable and void upon expiration
of this contract.
SECTION 34: TELECOMMUTING / REMOTE WORK
CEA bargaining unit employees will be considered for telework and adhere to the policy of
341
CC 06-03-2025
341 of 1012
the City of Cupertino’s expanded telecommuting policy.
SECTION 35: SEPARABILITY
In the event any provision of this agreement is finally held to be illegal by a court of
competent jurisdiction or void as being in contravention of any law, rule or regulation of any
government agency having jurisdiction over the subject set forth, then the remainder of the
agreement shall continue in full force and effect unless the parts so found to be void are held
inseparable from the remaining portion of the agreement.
SECTION 36: RATIFICATION
Nothing contained in this memorandum shall be binding upon either the City or the
Association until it has been ratified by the Association’s membership and presented and
approved by the City Council of the City.
SECTION 37: REOPENER
During the term of this Agreement, upon request by the City or CEA, the City and
Association will meet and confer over proposed revisions to the City’s Administrative Rules
and Regulations to the extent that the proposed revisions fall within the statutory scope of
bargaining.
SECTION 38: TERM
This agreement shall be effective commencing the first full pay period after Association
ratification and adoption by the City Council and ending at 11:59 p.m. June 30, 2025.
SECTION 39: TOTAL COMPENSATION SURVEYS
Management and CEA agree to a compensation survey database structure which
identifies specific benchmark classifications for job families, classifications within the job
families of each benchmark classification, survey agencies, and survey classification matches.
Survey cities include:
1. Campbell
2. Los Altos
3. Los Gatos
4. Menlo Park
5. Milpitas
6. Morgan Hill
7. Mountain View
8. Palo Alto
9. San Mateo
10. Santa Clara
11. Saratoga
12. Sunnyvale
The survey data is intended to provide a source of information concerning how the
compensation paid to employees in bargaining unit job classifications compares to that paid by
other public employers. The City will update the survey database and send a copy to CEA six
weeks before expiration of this agreement. This survey data will be considered in successor
agreement negotiations.
342
CC 06-03-2025
342 of 1012
CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION CITY OF CUPERTINO
_____________________________ _____________________________
Alex Corbalis Kristina Alfaro
_____________________________ _____________________________
Gian Paolo Martire Vanessa Guerra
_____________________________ _____________________________
Alex Wykoff Laura Miyakawa
_____________________________
Nicole Lee
______________________________ ______________________________
Monica Diaz Dianne Thompson
______________________________ ______________________________
Stanley Young, IFPTE Local 21 Christopher Boucher, Boucher Law
______________________________
City Attorney, Approved as to form
Date: Date:
343
CC 06-03-2025
343 of 1012
EXHIBIT A
SECTION 2: SALARY SCHEDULE
Salaries Effective the First Full Pay Period of July, 2022
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
ACCOUNT CLERK I $33.40 $35.07 $36.82 $38.66 $40.59
ACCOUNT CLERK II $36.82 $38.66 $40.59 $42.62 $44.75
ASSISTANT ENGINEER $56.49 $59.31 $62.27 $65.39 $68.66
ASSISTANT PLANNER $50.87 $53.41 $56.08 $58.88 $61.83
ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER $60.88 $63.92 $67.11 $70.47 $73.99
ASSOCIATE PLANNER $54.82 $57.56 $60.44 $63.46 $66.63
BUILDING INSPECTOR $53.81 $56.51 $59.33 $62.30 $65.41
CASE MANAGER $41.13 $43.19 $45.35 $47.62 $50.00
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $46.08 $48.38 $50.80 $53.34 $56.01
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST $42.60 $44.73 $46.97 $49.32 $51.78
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $44.39 $46.61 $48.94 $51.39 $53.96
ENV. PROG. COMPLIANCE TECHNICIAN $40.00 $42.00 $44.10 $46.31 $48.62
ENV. PROGRAMS SPECIALIST $51.57 $54.15 $56.86 $59.70 $62.68
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
ASSISTANT $44.70 $46.94 $49.29 $51.75 $54.34
FACILITY ATTENDANT $31.26 $32.82 $34.47 $36.19 $38.00
GIS TECHNICIAN $44.39 $46.61 $48.94 $51.39 $53.96
MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS SPEC $56.18 $58.99 $61.94 $65.04 $68.29
OFFICE ASSISTANT $31.41 $32.98 $34.63 $36.37 $38.18
PERMIT TECHNICIAN $41.34 $43.41 $45.58 $47.86 $50.25
PLAN CHECK ENGINEER $62.27 $65.38 $68.64 $72.08 $75.68
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR $53.81 $56.51 $59.33 $62.30 $65.41
RECEPTIONIST/CLERK $28.29 $29.70 $31.19 $32.75 $34.39
RECREATION ASSISTANT $20.24 $21.25 $22.31 $23.42 $24.60
RECREATION COORDINATOR $40.90 $42.95 $45.09 $47.35 $49.72
SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR $57.50 $60.38 $63.39 $66.56 $69.89
SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $48.43 $50.85 $53.39 $56.06 $58.86
SENIOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $47.84 $50.23 $52.74 $55.38 $58.15
SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT $34.88 $36.62 $38.45 $40.38 $42.40
SENIOR PLANNER $58.78 $61.72 $64.81 $68.05 $71.45
SENIOR TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $47.84 $50.23 $52.74 $55.38 $58.15
SPECIAL PROGRAMS COORDINATOR $33.77 $35.46 $37.23 $39.09 $41.05
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECH APPRENTICE $43.01 $45.16 $47.42 $49.79 $52.28
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECHNICIAN $49.79 $52.28 $54.89 $57.64 $60.52
TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $44.39 $46.61 $48.94 $51.39 $53.96
344
CC 06-03-2025
344 of 1012
Salaries Effective June 3,
2025
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
ACCOUNT CLERK I $34.56 $36.29 $38.11 $40.01 $42.01
ACCOUNT CLERK II $38.11 $40.01 $42.01 $44.11 $46.32
ASSISTANT ENGINEER $58.47 $61.38 $64.45 $67.68 $71.06
ASSISTANT HOUSING COORDINATOR $52.65 $55.28 $58.04 $60.94 $63.99
ASSISTANT PLANNER $52.65 $55.28 $58.04 $60.94 $63.99
ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER $63.01 $66.15 $69.46 $72.94 $76.58
ASSOCIATE PLANNER $56.74 $59.57 $62.55 $65.68 $68.96
BUILDING INSPECTOR $55.70 $58.48 $61.41 $64.48 $67.70
CASE MANAGER $42.57 $44.70 $46.94 $49.28 $51.75
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $47.69 $50.07 $52.58 $55.21 $57.97
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST $44.09 $46.30 $48.61 $51.04 $53.59
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
ENV. PROG. COMPLIANCE TECHNICIAN $41.40 $43.47 $45.65 $47.93 $50.33
ENV. PROGRAMS SPECIALIST $53.37 $56.04 $58.85 $61.79 $64.88
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
ASSISTANT $46.27 $48.58 $51.01 $53.56 $56.24
FACILITY ATTENDANT $32.36 $33.97 $35.67 $37.46 $39.33
GIS TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS SPEC $58.15 $61.06 $64.11 $67.32 $70.68
OFFICE ASSISTANT $32.51 $34.14 $35.85 $37.64 $39.52
PERMIT TECHNICIAN $42.79 $44.93 $47.18 $49.53 $52.01
PLAN CHECK ENGINEER $64.45 $67.66 $71.05 $74.60 $78.33
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR $55.70 $58.48 $61.41 $64.48 $67.70
RECEPTIONIST/CLERK $29.28 $30.74 $32.28 $33.90 $35.59
RECREATION ASSISTANT $20.94 $21.99 $23.09 $24.24 $25.46
RECREATION COORDINATOR $42.33 $44.45 $46.67 $49.01 $51.46
SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR $59.51 $62.49 $65.61 $68.89 $72.34
SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $50.12 $52.63 $55.26 $58.02 $60.93
SENIOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $49.52 $51.99 $54.59 $57.32 $60.19
SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT $36.10 $37.91 $39.80 $41.79 $43.88
SENIOR PLANNER $60.84 $63.88 $67.07 $70.43 $73.95
SENIOR TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $49.52 $51.99 $54.59 $57.32 $60.19
SPECIAL PROGRAMS COORDINATOR $34.95 $36.70 $38.53 $40.46 $42.48
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECH APPRENTICE $44.51 $46.74 $49.08 $51.53 $54.11
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECHNICIAN $51.53 $54.11 $56.81 $59.65 $62.64
TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
345
CC 06-03-2025
345 of 1012
346
CC 06-03-2025
346 of 1012
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
City of Cupertino
And
IFPTE Local 21,
Cupertino Employees’ Association (CEA)
July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2025
347
CC 06-03-2025
347 of 1012
Table of Contents
Category Section Page Number
No Discrimination 1
Association Rights 2
Management Rights 3
Salary Schedule 4
Out of Classification & Acting Pay 5
Bilingual Pay Differential 6
Hours of Work – Overtime 7
Call Back Pay
Stretch Assignments
8
9
Contracting Out
Facilities Closure
10
11
PERS Contribution 12
Insurance Coverage 13
Safety Footwear
Holidays
14
15
Workers Compensation Benefits 16
Vacation 17
Sick Leave 18
Sick Leave Verification 19
Bereavement Leave 20
Military Leave 21
Pregnancy Disability Leave 22
Adoption Leave 23
Catastrophic Leave 24
348
CC 06-03-2025
348 of 1012
Absence Notification 25
Family Medical Leave Act 26
Education Reimbursement Program 27
City Sponsored Recreation Programs 28
Due Process
Grievance Procedure
29
30
Layoff Procedure 31
Reinstatement 32
Continuation of Benefits 33
Telecommuting / Remote Work 34
Separability 35
Ratification 36
Reopener 37
Term 38
Total Compensation Surveys 39
Salary Schedule
Exhibit A
349
CC 06-03-2025
349 of 1012
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AND
IFPTE LOCAL 21, CUPERTINO CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION
This is a three (3) year agreement, entered into the first full pay period after Association
ratification and adoption by the City Council of this successor MOU and ending on June 30,
2025 between the City of Cupertino, hereinafter referred to as "City", and representatives of
IFPTE Local 21 Cupertino City Employees’ Association, hereinafter referred to as
"Association", pursuant to California Government Code 3500 et seq., and the City Employer -
Employee Relations Policy (Cupertino Municipal Code 2.52.280 et seq.). The Association is
the recognized sole and exclusive representative. This agreement represents the full and
integrated agreement reached between the parties.
The Association may select not more than five (5) employees of which no more than two (2)
may be from the same City department to be members of the CEA bargaining team for the
purpose of negotiating a successor memorandum of understanding (MOU). The Association
shall provide the City with the names of the selected successor MOU bargaining team within
thirty (30) days of the first day of negotiations.
Classifications in the Association:
Account Clerk I
Account Clerk II
Assistant Engineer
Assistant Housing Coordinator
Assistant Planner
Associate Civil Engineer
Associate Planner
Building Inspector
Case Manager
Code Enforcement Officer
Community Outreach Specialist
Engineering Technician
Environmental Compliance Technician
Environmental Programs Assistant
Environmental Programs Specialist
Facility Attendant
GIS Technician
Multimedia Communication Specialist
Office Assistant
Permit Technician
Plan Check Engineer
Public Works Inspector
Receptionist/Clerk
Recreation Assistant
Recreation Coordinator
Senior Building Inspector
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
Senior Engineering Technician
Senior Office Assistant
350
CC 06-03-2025
350 of 1012
Senior Planner
Senior Traffic Technician
Special Programs Coordinator
Traffic Signal Tech-Apprentice
Traffic Signal Technician
Traffic Technician
SECTION 1: NO DISCRIMINATION
In accordance with the City of Cupertino Equal Employment Opportunity policy, the
City will afford equal opportunity to all qualified employees, applicants and unpaid interns as
to all terms and conditions of employment, including compensation, hiring, training, promotion,
transfer, discipline, and termination, without regard to race, color, religion, political affiliation,
national origin, sex (including gender, gender identity, gender expression, transgender,
pregnancy and breastfeeding), disability, sexual orientation (including heterosexuality,
homosexuality and bisexuality), age, ancestry, citizenship status, uniformed service member
status, marital status, medical condition, genetic information or characteristics, or for
Association activity or any other basis protected by law.
SECTION 2: ASSOCIATION RIGHTS
The City and the CEA recognize the right of employees to form, join, and participate in lawful
activities of employee organizations and the equal, alternative right of employees to refuse to
form, join, and participate in employee organizations. Neither party shall discriminate against
an employee in the exercise of these alternative rights. Accordingly, membership in the CEA
shall not be compulsory.
2.1 Automatic Payroll Deduction and Remittance
Upon certification by CEA that an employee has signed a deduction authorization, the City
will deduct the appropriate dues from the employee's pay, as established and as may be
changed from time to time by CEA, and remit such dues to CEA. Employee requests to cancel
or change deductions must be directed to CEA rather than to the City. An employee wishing
to cancel or change deductions must mail a written revocation to CEA in accordance with
the terms of the authorization form, or absent any such terms, by mailing a written revocation
to CEA that is postmarked during the thirty {30) day period immediately prior to the annual
anniversary date on which the employee signed the original authorization form. Deductions
will continue unless and until the City is notified by CEA of any requested changes.
2.2 Access to New Employees
The Employer shall provide CEA written notice of, and access to, new employee orientation
as set forth below.
A. Notice: The Employer shall provide at least 10 days’ written notice by email, to
addresses that CEA shall provide, of any new employee orientation for positions in a
CEA-represented classification, where information regarding employment status,
rights, benefits, duties, responsibilities, or any other employment-related matter is
provided. Less than ten (10) days’ written notice may be provided where there is an
urgent need critical to the City’s operations that was not reasonably foreseeable.
351
CC 06-03-2025
351 of 1012
B. Access: CEA shall notify the new employee and labor relations of a proposed thirty
minute time slot, during normal working hours, for a maximum of two representatives,
which may be either CEA members or IFPTE Local 21 affiliate representatives, to
meet privately with the new employee. The purpose of the meeting shall be to provide
information and communicate to its member the rights and obligations created by the
contract and the role of the representative, and to answer questions, without
management personnel or any other persons present. One representative may be a
bargaining unit member, and any such bargaining unit member shall be on without-
loss-of-pay status provided the member gives his/her supervisor sufficient advance
notice.
1. For reasons of operational necessity only, the Employer may notify CEA that the
proposed time is unworkable and that CEA must propose an alternate time.
C. Information Exchange: Within thirty (30) days of hiring a new employee, or by the
first pay period of the month following hire, the employer will provide IFPTE Local
21 with the below listed information in a digital or other usable data format:
1) Name
2) Job Title
3) Department
4) Work Location
5) Telephone number(s) [work, home and personal cellular]
6) Personal email address on file with employer
7) Home address of the new hire
Similarly, the City of Cupertino will also provide CEA with the above detailed
information for all employees within the bargaining unit at least every ninety (90)
calendar days in a digital or other usable data format.
The above information shall not be provided to CEA if the new hire or current
employee within the bargaining unit makes a written request to opt out of such
disclosure. Upon written request of the employee, the City will not disclose the
employee’s home address, home telephone number, personal cellular telephone
number, or personal email address to CEA, in accordance with Cal. Gov. Code Section
6254.3(c).
D. The ability to have a CEA representative present as part of orientation/onboarding
shall not result in a delay of an employee’s start date.
E. Resolution of the above language satisfies the City’s bargaining obligations under AB
119, Government Code Section 3555-3559.
2.3 Hold Harmless
CEA shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, suits, or
any other action arising from the maintenance of dues deductions or from complying with
any demand for termination hereunder, provided that the City promptly provide notice to
CEA of any claim, demand, suit, or other action for which it is seeking indemnification.
352
CC 06-03-2025
352 of 1012
CEA shall certify to the City of Cupertino that the Association has received and will
maintain an authorization, signed by each individual employee from whose salary or wages
a deduction or reduction is to be made. CEA will maintain individual employee
authorizations, and shall not be required to provide a copy of an individual authorization
to the City unless a dispute arises about the existence or terms of the authorization. CEA
shall indemnify the City for any claims made by an employee for deductions made in
reliance on that certification.
2.4 Administrative Processing of CEA Dues
CEA shall provide the City with a thirty day advance written notice of any changes in the annual
dues deduction amounts. CEA, which has affiliated with IFPTE Local 21, AFL-CIO shall
provide the City with instructions regarding dues deductions to be remitted to IFPTE Local 21.
2.5 Reasonable Time Off to Meet and Confer
As a representative of a recognized employee organization, CEA Board members may be
selected to attend scheduled meetings with City representatives on subjects within the scope of
representation during regular work hours without loss of compensation. For contract
negotiations, CEA may select not more than six employee members to attend bargaining
sessions. Where circumstances warrant, Human Resources may approve the attendance of
additional employee representatives without loss of compensation, at either labor negotiations
or Labor Management Committee, or other meet and confer meetings.
2.6 Stewards
CEA may designate a reasonable number of employees to represent other employees in
disciplinary or grievance matters and to investigate matters within the scope of
representation. CEA shall provide written notice to the City of the designated stewards and
shall notify the City of any changes to the list. Stewards shall conduct their representation
activities on their own time and on the employee’s own time unless it is an emergency
situation, which would still require approval from the appropriate supervisor or manager in
order to leave the job site. Time off without loss of compensation shall be allowed for
management approved meetings. Unless authorized, only one steward shall be released on
work time to attend such meetings for any one grievance, discipline, or representation matter.
2.7 Activities on City premises
Representatives of CEA shall be granted reasonable access to employee work locations to
investigate matters relating to employer-employee relations, unless such access to given
work locations would constitute a safety hazard or would interfere with the operations of the
City. CEA/IFPTE Local 21 field representatives shall not enter a work location without first
advising the department head or Human Resources office.
SECTION 3: MANAGEMENT RIGHTS
Consistent with the MMBA, it is the exclusive right of the City of Cupertino to direct its
employees; take disciplinary action for proper cause; relieve its employees from duty because
of lack of work or for other legitimate reason; classify and reclassify positions; and determine
the methods, means, and personnel by which the City’s operations are to be conducted. Any
of the rights, powers and authority the City had prior to entering into this Agreement are
353
CC 06-03-2025
353 of 1012
retained by the City except as expressly provided in this section.
While exercising its rights pursuant to the section, the City agrees to meet and confer with
CEA representatives over matters within the statutory scope of bargaining.
SECTION 4: SALARY SCHEDULE
Monthly salary ranges as listed on Exhibit A will apply for each classification effective
at the beginning of the pay period in which July 1 occurs unless otherwise noted below.
Effective the first full pay period after July 1, 2022, a 5.0% salary increase will be added to the
salary range of each classification in this bargaining unit.
The parties further agree to reopen wage negotiations for FY23-24 and FY24-25 upon the
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration’s (CDTFA) completion of the sales tax
review, but in no event later than March 1, 2023. The union may propose changes to salary
steps, call back pay and bilingual pay as part of the wage reopener discussion.
SECTION 5: OUT-OF-CLASSIFICATION AND ACTING PAY
Temporary assignment, approved in advance by the department head, to a classification in a
higher pay grade shall be compensated at the Step 1 rate of the higher classification, or at a
rate five percent greater than that of the regular position, but not more than the maximum step
of the higher class, whichever is greater, for the number of hours so assigned. In order to
qualify for Out-Of-Classification pay, an employee shall work a minimum of 4 hours per day
in the temporary assignment. An employee may be assigned to work out of class in a higher
classification when there is a vacant position for which a recruitment is being, or will be,
conducted. Out of class assignments may not exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year.
Compensation for work performed in an out-of-class capacity is included for purposes of
calculating CalPERS compensation, however, this is at the discretion of CalPERS and future
changes to CalPERS regulations would supersede the language of this section.
An employee may receive acting pay for working in a higher classification where a vacancy
does not exist, in the case of an incumbent being on vacation or leave of absence, or due to the
employee being asked to perform higher level work on any other temporary basis. Acting pay
is not included for purposes of calculating CalPERS compensation.
The higher rate of pay shall be used in computing overtime when authorized overtime is
worked in a non-exempt, out of class or acting work assignment. When a non-exempt
employee is working out of class or acting in an exempt position for 20 hours or more in a
work week, the employee will be ineligible to receive overtime pay for any and all hours
worked in the exempt classification during that work week.
All requests for out of class pay or acting pay must be approved by the Director of
Administrative Services or his/her designee.
SECTION 6: BILINGUAL PAY DIFFERENTIAL
An employee must have taken and passed the required language proficiency test(s) prior
to being asked to use bilingual skills for City work. An employee who performs bilingual work
354
CC 06-03-2025
354 of 1012
as approved by their supervisor is eligible to receive a 7.5% bilingual pay differential only for
the work time during which the employee uses bilingual skills. For payroll reporting purposes,
the 7.5% bilingual pay differential will be recorded with a 15 minute minimum. Bilingual pay
is not available retroactively to passing the exam.
SECTION 7: HOURS OF WORK: OVERTIME
7.1 Hours of Work Defined
Hours worked shall include all time assigned by employer whether such hours are
worked in the City’s work place, or in some other place where the employee is carrying out the
duties of the City.
The normal work week shall be 40 hours in seven days with two consecutive days off.
Alternate Work Schedules (AWS) may be considered, including 9/80 and 4/10, but must be
approved in advance by the Department Head. The City reserves the right to re-evaluate such
approvals if the Alternate Work Schedule results in an undue burden to the City.
7.2 Overtime
Overtime shall be defined as any work in excess of 40 hours in a seven day work period.
Holidays and paid time off shall count toward the accumulation of the work week.
Overtime work for the City by an employee shall be authorized in advance by the
department head or their designee. In the event of unforeseen circumstances, overtime shall be
approved after the work is completed.
7.3 Schedules
It will be a management responsibility to schedule the hours of work for each employee
covered by this agreement. Except in unforeseen circumstances, changes in employee’s hours
of work will be made after ten days prior notice.
7.4 Rest Periods and Meal Breaks
Each employee shall be granted a rest period of fifteen minutes during each work period
of more than three hours duration. No wage deduction shall be made nor time off charged
against employees taking authorized rest periods, nor shall any rights or overtime be accrued
for rest periods not taken.
All employees shall be required to take an uninterrupted, unpaid meal period of a minimum of
30 minutes and a maximum of 60 minutes at or about the midpoint of their work day. The
length of the meal period and the time the meal period is taken shall be agreed to between the
employee and their supervisor or department head, based on operational necessities.
Employees are entirely relieved of responsibilities and restrictions during their meal period,
unless they are assigned, in writing, to work an on-duty meal period, which will be treated as
paid time. Employees may not use the meal break to reduce their regular daily work
schedule, unless previously approved by their supervisor.
7.5 Payment of Overtime
All approved overtime work performed by employees shall be paid at the rate of one
355
CC 06-03-2025
355 of 1012
and one-half (1 1/2) times the normal rate of pay. Work performed on regularly scheduled days
off, City Holidays or during an employee’s scheduled vacation shall be considered to be
overtime and paid accordingly.
7.6 Compensatory Time Off (CTO)
At the employee’s discretion, compensatory time off may be granted for overtime
worked at the rate of time and one-half for each hour worked in lieu of compensation in cash.
Employees, who have previously earned compensatory time, shall be allowed to schedule
compensatory time off at dates of the employee’s selection provided that prior supervisory
approval has been obtained.
CTO time may be accrued for up to 80 hours per calendar year. Any CTO earned
exceeding 80 hours will be paid at the rate of time and one-half. An employee may carry over
the unused balance into the next calendar year. Any unused carryover balance will be
automatically paid out at the end of the calendar year.
An employee may exercise his/her option two times each calendar year to convert any/or
all accumulated compensatory time to cash.
7.7 Leave Accruals
An employee shall not accrue leave credits (vacation, sick leave) during a pay period if
off without pay for more than 40 hours during said pay period.
SECTION 8: CALL BACK PAY
If an employee is required to report for emergency or other duties during the employee’s off-
duty hours, the employee will be compensated at a rate of time and one half their base hourly
rate for all hours worked, including necessary travel time.
SECTION 9: STRETCH ASSIGNMENTS
As part of the City’s Succession Development program, association members may be eligible
for voluntary “stretch assignments”. Stretch Assignments differ from work out of class or
acting assignments, and serve to prepare employees for future promotional opportunities
within the City. Examples of stretch assignments include shadowing management staff;
assisting with special projects or tasks; and cross-departmental training opportunities. Stretch
assignments are voluntary and receive no additional compensation. Stretch assignments may
be requested by employees, or offered by department management staff; however, such
assignments should not impact the employee’s regular workload or position and should not
result in overtime hours. Stretch assignments are offered solely at the discretion of
management and are not grievable. Stretch assignments shall not be utilized to cover the
work of an unfilled position or to cover work assignments of an employee on leave.
SECTION 10: CONTRACTING OUT
If contracting out bargaining unit work to outside contractors would result in layoff of
bargaining unit members, the elimination of a bargaining unit position, or a permanent
reduction in the hours worked by current bargaining unit employees, then the City shall meet
356
CC 06-03-2025
356 of 1012
the following requirements:
1) The City will give CEA notice of at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of
the outside contract.
2) Within such sixty (60) day period, CEA will have the opportunity to meet and confer
on the impact of the contracting out on bargaining unit employees, and an opportunity
to propose alternative ways in which such services could continue to be provided by
the City workforce or alternate possibilities for cost savings. Nothing in this section
shall be construed to limit the rights of the City to contract out work under the terms
and conditions of this section.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the rights of the City to enter into temporary
contracts (less than one year) or contracts to fill an immediate need (such as a vacant
position).
SECTION 11: FACILITIES CLOSURE
City facilities* will be closed from December 24 through January 1, of each year during the
term of the contract only. Employees may use vacation, CTO, floating holiday, administrative
leave, or leave without pay for work time missed during the closure week. With Supervisor and
Department Head prior approval, an employee may opt to work during the facility closure.
*The Sports Center and Blackberry Farm Golf Course may remain open on facilities
closure days staffed by part-time employees
SECTION 12: PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT (PERS) CONTRIBUTION
A. For Employees hired on or before December 29, 2012 Only
For City of Cupertino employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or before December 29,
2012, the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.7% @55 retirement formula.
Effective in the first full pay period in July 2017, each employee in the 2.7% at 55 Classic
formula shall pay the full eight percent (8.0%) of applicable PERSable salary towards the full
employee share of CalPERS pension contribution.
B. For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or on
December 31, 2012 or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic
member under CalPERS Regulations Only.
For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on December 30, 2012 or on December 31,
2012 or a current CalPERS employee who qualifies as a classic member under CalPERS
Regulations only the City has contracted with CalPERS for a 2.0% @ 60 retirement formula
based on a three year average compensation.
Effective October, 2016, the City shall not pay the employee’s contribution share to the
California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and each employee shall pay the
full seven percent (7.0%) of applicable PERSable salary towards the employee’s contribution
share of CalPERS pension under this formula.
C. For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on of after January 1, 2013, or
former CalPERS employees that do not qualify as Classic employees hired by the
City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013 Only
357
CC 06-03-2025
357 of 1012
For employees hired by the City of Cupertino on or after January 1, 2013, CalPERS has by
statute implemented a 2% @ 62 formula based on a three year average compensation.
Employees in this category shall pay 50% of the normal cost rate as determined by CalPERS.
SECTION 13: INSURANCE COVERAGE
13.1. Health - Medical and Dental Insurance
City agrees to pay an amount as set forth herein for medical coverage for employee and
dependents through the Meyers-Geddes State Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act. For
each participating employee, the City shall contribute the maximum toward premium cost per
month for health and dental during the term of this agreement as follows:
January 1, 2022 City Max Health
Contribution
City Max Dental
Contribution
City Total Max
Contribution
Employee 935.88 126.78 1062.660
Employee +1 1,591.01 126.78 1,717.79
Employee +2 2,068.31 126.78 2,195.09
Required contribution amounts exceeding the premium contribution of the City are the
responsibility of the employee. The City no longer pays medical insurance cash back (excess
of the monthly premium less the cost of the medical coverage) for any employees.
Effective July 1, 2010, employees that retire or resign from service with the City of
Cupertino and who are not eligible for retiree medical benefits as defined in the Summary of
Benefits can continue on the Cupertino medical and dental plans provided that they pay the
premiums in full.
The City reserves the right of selection and administration as to deferred compensation
plan(s).
If during the term of this agreement, modifications are made to the Federal tax code
which would result in any of the medical insurance provided be subject to taxation, the contract
will be re-opened for the purposes of adjusting the salary and medical benefits so long as it does
not result in an increase or decrease in the total compensation.
If during the term of this agreement, new medical plans are identified that will be
beneficial to the City and CEA, the contract will be reopened to discuss these plan options.
Health deductions for employee payments towards PEMHCA premiums shall occur on
a bi-monthly basis consistent with CalPERS required PEMHCA payment schedule.
13.2 Health In-Lieu Payments
City agrees to pay a monthly amount of three hundred seventy-five ($375.00) per month to
bargaining unit employee who can demonstrate that they have equivalent health coverage
through their spouse, parent, or other group coverage and who request this cash payment in
lieu of health insurance coverage.
358
CC 06-03-2025
358 of 1012
13.3 Life Insurance
City shall provide life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment coverage for
each employee in the amount of two and one half times annual salary to a maximum benefit of
$250,000. Employees may be eligible to purchase additional life insurance subject to the
provisions of the insurance policy.
13.4 Short Term and Long Term Disability Insurance
CEA employees will participate in California State Disability Insurance (SDI). SDI
weekly benefits are determined by the State of California and information is available on the
State of California Employment Development Department website. Employees may use leave
banks to supplement lost salary during the 7 day elimination period. Bargaining unit members
shall pay the 1% cost of CA SDI, which will be deducted from their biweekly paychecks. Until
full enrollment in CA SDI becomes effective, bargaining unit members will continue to be
covered by the current Short Term Disability plan during the transition. Integration of SDI with
the City’s current Short Term Disability plan will be in accordance with SDI rules and
regulations.
The City shall provide Long Term Disability (LTD) insurance for employees. LTD
income protection coverage shall be up to $7,000 of covered monthly salary. Employees may
use sick leave and/or vacation leave to supplement lost salary during the 90 day elimination
period.
13.5 Vision Care Insurance
The City shall provide Vision Care Insurance for employees and their dependents at a
cost of $14.94 monthly.
SECTION 14: SAFETY FOOTWEAR
The City shall provide safety footwear at a cost not to exceed $400 annually, for the
bargaining unit classifications of Building Inspector and Public Works Inspector. The City will
provide employees with a list of approved vendors and footwear, and will be billed directly by
the vendor for payment. Any cost exceeding $400 will be borne by the employee.
SECTION 15: HOLIDAYS
15.1 Fixed Holidays
The City shall provide the following fixed paid (8 Hour) holidays for eligible employees
covered by this agreement:
1. New Year’s Day 8. Veteran’s Day
2. Martin Luther King Day 9. Thanksgiving Day
3. President’s Day 10. Day following Thanksgiving
4. Memorial Day
5. Juneteenth
11. Christmas Eve
12. Christmas Day
6. Independence Day 13. New Year’s Eve
7. Labor Day
359
CC 06-03-2025
359 of 1012
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be observed as the non-
work day. When a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be observed as the
non-work day.
Nothing contained herein shall preclude the right of the department head with the
approval of the Appointing Authority to reschedule work assignments or hours of work to meet
emergency situations and other administrative necessities caused by the observance of a holiday
or non-work day or period; provided, however, that all such affected employees are duly
compensated for said rescheduled work assignments.
15.2 Floating Holidays
In addition to the foregoing paid holidays, eligible employees shall earn 20 hours of
holiday leave per year that may be used in increments of no less than one quarter of an hour.
Floating holiday leave shall be earned at a rate of .77 hours per pay period. Floating holiday
leave may be accumulated up to 40 hours. Floating holiday leave shall be taken at the discretion
of the employee subject to prior supervisory approval.
15.3 Holiday Pay
In order for an employee to receive his/her regular pay for a holiday or designated non-
work day, work must be performed on the regular scheduled day before and the regular
scheduled day after the holiday or designated non-work day. Employees on vacation, injury
leave, approved short term leave of absence, with or without pay, or who submit satisfactory
evidence of personal illness shall be considered as working their regular schedule for pay
purposes.
SECTION 16: WORKERS COMPENSATION BENEFITS
Any employee sustaining an injury arising out of or in the course of the performance of
his/her job and who cannot work at the duties and responsibilities normally assigned to that job
is entitled to receive Workers’ Compensation as prescribed by State law.
16.1 Use of Sick Leave to Supplement Workers’ Compensation Payments
Any employee entitled to receive Workers’ Compensation payments may elect to
supplement such payments with an amount not to exceed that which is the employee’s weekly
earnings or weekly earning capacity by use of sick leave payments to the extent that such sick
leave has been accrued to the employee’s account.
16.2 Use of Sick Leave for Industrial Injury Medical Appointments
An employee who is required to see a physician regarding a work-related injury during
regularly scheduled work hours may use sick leave credits for appointment(s). If the medical
appointment is scheduled during the last hour of the regularly scheduled work day an employee
will not be required to use sick leave credits for said appointment. The last hour provision shall
be limited to one time during any Monday through Friday work period.
SECTION 17: VACATION
All bargaining unit employees shall accrue vacation credit. Accrued vacation credits
may be taken with prior supervisory approval.
360
CC 06-03-2025
360 of 1012
Benefited full-time employees accrue vacation in accordance with the following
schedule. Benefited employees who work less than a full-time work schedule accrue vacation
in accordance with the following schedule on a pro-rated basis.
Service Time Annual Accruals Maximum Accrual
0 - 3 Years 80 Hours 160 Hours
4 - 9 Years 120 Hours 240 Hours
10 – 14 Years 160Hours 272 Hours
15 – 19 Years 176Hours 320 Hours
20 + Years 192Hours 352 Hours
An employee may accrue no more vacation credit than what is listed above.
Upon termination of employment, unused vacation may not be used to extend the final
employment date beyond the annual accrual rate being earned. Any request to use accrued
vacation hours beyond the last day of work must be submitted in writing, approved by the
employee’s supervisor like all other vacation requests, and is irrevocable.
Represented employees may convert, up to two times per calendar year, unused vacation
time for payment subject to the following conditions:
1. The employee must have a minimum of 120 hours of accrued vacation immediately prior
to a conversion.
2. Any payment for accrued vacation hours will be subject to taxes as determined by law.
3. Minimum exchange will be one day. Maximum exchange will be ten days.
4. All exchanges are irrevocable.
5. A maximum of 80 hours of accrued vacation may be converted for pay during a calendar
year.
SECTION 18: SICK LEAVE
All full time employees hired before October 17, 2012 (other than those holding
temporary status), shall earn eight (8) hours per month sick leave time without limit on
accumulation. All employees hired on or after October 17, 2012 shall earn eight (8) hours per
month of sick leave time, but may accrue no more than 240 hours of sick leave time.
Those regular employees working less than full time (at least 20 hours per week) shall
earn a pro-rated amount of sick leave based on their regular hours worked in relation to 40
hours. Sick leave may be utilized due to the employee’s personal illness, injury, pregnancy
disability or sickness or injury to the immediate family.
The employee’s immediate family consists of the following: children, stepchildren,
spouse/domestic partner, parents, mother-in-law, father-in-law, siblings, grandchildren and
grandparents who because of illness cannot care for themselves, and for medical emergencies.
Employees shall, whenever possible, make appointments for medical, dental and similar
purposes during non-work hours. If this is not possible, sick leave may be used for these
purposes.
With proper notification, sick leave shall be taken in periods of no less than one-half
hour increments.
18.1 Sick Leave Conversion. Any employee hired before October 17, 2012, who is
361
CC 06-03-2025
361 of 1012
retiring, will have the option of applying any remaining sick leave to service credit. If an
employee is resigning, he/she will not have the option of applying sick leave hours to service
credit.
18.2 Sick leave is not vested under California statutory law.
18.3 Employees hired before October 17, 2012 shall have the option of cashing out sick
leave in accordance with Section 18.4 and 18.5.
18.4 If upon retirement the qualifying employee has a minimum of 320 non-vested
hours, payment shall be made for up to eighty-five percent (85%) of the value of the bank at
the employee’s discretion.
18.5 If upon resignation the qualifying employee has a minimum of 320 non-vested
hours, payment shall be made for up to seventy percent (70%) of the value of the bank at the
employee’s discretion.
18.6 Represented employees will have the option, subject to approval of the department
head, of converting sick leave to vacation leave on a two-to-one basis only if the employee’s
remaining sick leave balance is 40 hours or more. The maximum allowable exchange will be
96 hours of sick time for 48 hours of vacation leave per calendar year. The minimum exchange
will be 8 hours sick leave for 4 hours of vacation.
An employee may convert sick leave in excess of 320 hours to vacation leave on a one-
to-one basis with a maximum of 48 hours and a minimum of 4 hours and may convert up to an
additional 32 hours on the basis of one hour of sick leave to 0.7 hour of vacation leave. The
conversion of sick leave in excess of 320 hours to vacation leave as described herein is limited
to no more than a total of 80 hours per calendar year.
As a condition of converting sick leave to vacation, all employees will be required to
use at least one-half of the vacation accrued during the previous twelve months.
Such conversion either to exchange sick leave for vacation or vice versa shall be subject
to the following conditions:
a. All requests to exchange sick leave for vacation time shall be submitted in writing
to the department head at least fourteen (14) calendar days in advance of
intended vacation utilization.
b. If twelve (12) months have elapsed since approval of the exchange of sick leave for
vacation, and the employee has not been permitted the use of the converted
vacation time, (after submitting at least one written request for utilization) the
employee will have the right to re-convert the vacation time to sick leave in
reverse ratio to the original exchange. This exchange will be allowed only for
previously converted sick time to vacation and will not be permitted for regularly
accrued vacation time.
NOTE: As used in this document, "reverse ratio" is intended to mean that the ratio of sick leave
to vacation will revert to the original ratio at the time the initial exchange was implemented.
SECTION 19: SICK LEAVE VERIFICATION
362
CC 06-03-2025
362 of 1012
A Department Head or supervisor may at their discretion require employees to furnish
reasonable acceptable evidence, including a doctor’s certificate, to substantiate a request for
sick leave if the sick leave exceeds three (3) consecutive workdays. A supervisor may also
require a doctor’s certificate or other form of verification where leave abuse is suspected. If it
appears that an employee is abusing sick leave or is using sick leave excessively, the employee
will be counseled that the continued use of sick leave may result in a requirement to furnish a
medical certificate for each such subsequent absence for sick leave regardless of duration.
Continued abuse of leave or excessive use of sick leave may constitute grounds for discipline
up to and including dismissal.
SECTION 20: BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
Employees shall be granted paid bereavement leave of up to 24 hours upon the death of
a close relative. Close relatives are defined as mother, father, sister, brother, wife, husband,
domestic partner, child, step-child, grandparent, grandchildren, mother-in-law and father-in-
law. Additional bereavement leave of up to 16 hours will be granted for travel out of state or
over 200 miles. An employee may request bereavement leave for the death of an individual not
listed above and whom they have a close and significant relation with and/or hours greater than
24, but not more than 40, which Human Resources can grant at their discretion. A denial under
this section shall not be subject to the grievance procedure.
SECTION 21: MILITARY LEAVE
Military leave shall be granted in accordance with the provision of State and Federal
law. All employees entitled to military leave shall give their supervisor an opportunity within
the limits of military requirements, to determine when such leave shall be taken.
SECTION 22: PREGNANCY DISABILITY LEAVE
An employee disabled by pregnancy is eligible for up to four months of unpaid pregnancy
disability leave (PDL) as defined by law. This leave is to be used when the employee is disabled
due to pregnancy or child birth or related medical condition, including but not limited to,
morning sickness, pregnancy complications and prenatal appointments. Accrued sick leave
may be used during the leave, and the employee has the option to use accrued vacation, floating
holidays and/or compensatory time in order to receive pay during the leave. If the employee is
also eligible for leave under the Federal Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), (employee must
be employed by the City for at least one year and have worked at least 1250 hours during the
year preceding the leave) the leave the employee takes for pregnancy disability will be run
concurrently with the employee’s entitlement to up to 12 weeks of FMLA leave. Employees
otherwise eligible for health insurance benefits (medical, dental and vision) will continue to
receive such benefits during the period of the PDL leave up to four months as defined by law
per 12 month period.
After PDL and FMLA leave, if applicable, expires and if the employee is on unpaid status or
the employee has less than 20 hours per week on their timesheet, the employee may elect to
continue and enroll in COBRA benefits at employee’s expense.
The employee will be accruing sick leave, floating holiday and vacation leave during the period
of time, if any, the employee is in paid status. Any time the employee’s hours adjust to less
than 40 hours per week, however of paid status, the employee’s accrual rates (sick leave,
vacation leave, floating holiday) will be prorated and be adjusted accordingly. Sick leave,
363
CC 06-03-2025
363 of 1012
floating holiday and vacation leave do not continue to accrue during any period the employee
is on unpaid status.
Under the California Family rights Act (CFRA) eligible employees are entitled up to 12
additional weeks of leave to bond with the baby. To be eligible for the CFRA bonding leave,
employee must be employed by the City for at least one year and have worked at least 1250
hours during the year preceding the leave. The leave is unpaid, but the employee may use
floating holiday, compensatory time and vacation leave in order to receive pay during the leave.
The employee may use sick leave for a baby’s illness or doctor’s appointment when applicable
to receive pay during the leave. Bonding leave must be used within one year of the birth of the
baby.
An employee who plans to take PDL must give reasonable notice (not less than 4 weeks if
anticipated or as soon as possible if the leave is unforeseen) before the date employee expects
to take the leave. As with all other employees returning from medical leave, employees
returning from PDL leave of at least 3 days are required to provide a doctor’s note clearing
them to return to work. If an employee requires reasonable accommodations as a result of
pregnancy, employee should consult with Human Resources. Employees disabled by
pregnancy and employees on leave to bond with a baby may be eligible for benefits under State
Disability Insurance. Additional information is available at www.edd.ca.gov/Disabililty and
from Human Resources.
SECTION 23: ADOPTION LEAVE
Upon request, a leave of absence without pay for up to four (4) work weeks will be granted to
adoptive parents. Such leave must be used within one year of the adoption. The city will pay
health and welfare benefits for the duration of the leave as the same rate as prior to the leave
consistent with the contributions as provided for under the existing MOU.
If the employee is eligible for FMLA/CFRA (employed by the city for at least one year and
worked at least 1250 hours during the year preceding the leave), employee may be eligible for
up to 12 work weeks total (the above four (4) work weeks plus an additional eight (8) work
weeks) for bonding with the adopted child during the first year after adoption. The employee
may be eligible for health benefits during the twelve (12) work week period at the same rate as
prior to the leave as provided for under the existing MOU.
During adoption leave, accrued vacation may be used by the employee at his or her option in
order to receive pay during the leave. Sick leave may only be used during the leave in the event
of illness or medical appointments of the adoptive child during the leave.
SECTION 24: CATASTROPHIC LEAVE
a. The City’s Catastrophic Leave Committee will evaluate each individual case when it is
submitted to qualify to receive funds. The only limitation is that the employee must be
the one facing the illness. The committee has the right to establish standards for the
granting of leave hours, and ask the applicant to submit further documentation from the
treating physician, and to determine the applicant’s eligibility for catastrophic leave
hours.
b. All benefited employees will be eligible to receive assistance. An employee does not
have to be a contributor to be eligible.
c. A recipient must have used all of their available leave hours before he/she is eligible.
d. The maximum amount is seven (7) days (State Disability Insurance becomes available
364
CC 06-03-2025
364 of 1012
at this time).
e. Vacation hours and compensating time off (CTO) hours are the only leave of absence
credits which may be donated. An employee may not donate leave of absence credits
which would reduce his/her total accrued leave balances to less than 120 hours. Leave
credits may be donated in any pay period. All leave donations are irrevocable.
f. A leave of absence transfer drive will be held whenever necessary to provide for a
minimum catastrophic leave bank balance which is the equivalent of 40 hours.
g. Active employees wishing to donate sick leave hours to the Catastrophic Leave bank
will need to convert sick leave hours (maintaining a minimum of 320 hours after
donation) to vacation leave hours.
h. Upon retirement or resignation, an employee can contribute up to 10 hours of sick leave
provided that the employee has a minimum of 320 hours of sick leave, which
has previously become vested.
Transfers may be in increments of one hour or more. All donations will be confidential. There
will be no selling or coercion of employees to donate.
Donated leave hours will be converted to cash and deposited in a time-bank where it will be
available for distribution. Checks will be issued to the recipient with the regular payroll, which
will keep them in an active employment mode with the City. This procedure prevents
overpayments or corrections since it comes after the actual leave has been taken. (Conversion
allows for adjustments for different rates of pay.) No employee shall receive payment for more
than 100% of his or her regular pay.
An employee or their representative must complete a prescribed application form together with
supporting medical documentation to the Human Resources Division when applying for funds.
SECTION 25: ABSENCE NOTIFICATION
An employee is expected not to be absent from work for any reason other than personal
illness without making prior arrangements with their supervisor. Unless prior arrangements
are made, an employee who, for any reason, fails to report for work must notify their
supervisor of the reason for being absent by no later than 15 minutes prior to their scheduled
start time. If the absence, whether for personal illness or otherwise, is to continue beyond the
first day, the employee must notify the supervisor on a daily basis unless otherwise arranged
with his/her supervisor. In proper cases, exceptions will be made.
Any unauthorized absence of an employee from duty shall be deemed to be an absence
without pay and will be grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal by the
department head. In the absence of such disciplinary action any employee who absents
himself/herself for three days or more without authorized leave shall be deemed to have
resigned. Such absence may be covered, however, by the department head by a following
grant of leave with or without pay when extenuating circumstances are found to have existed.
SECTION 26: FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE /CALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHTS ACTS
The City of Cupertino shall comply with the leave provisions of the Family Medical Leave
Act and the California Family Rights Act for employees who qualify for leave under these
laws.
365
CC 06-03-2025
365 of 1012
SECTION 27: EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
It is the intent of the City to recognize the value of continuing education and professional
development of its employees; and to adopt an Education Reimbursement Program which will
encourage employees to avail themselves of City job related educational opportunities that
will advance their knowledge and interests in the direction of their career path. Courses
should either: a) maintain or improve job skills in the employee’s current position; b) be
expressly required by the City or by law; or c) prepare the employee to become a competitive
applicant for a different position with the City.
The Education Reimbursement Program is a benefit to all full time benefited employees who
have completed the required probationary period and provides education reimbursement of up
to two thousand ($2,000) per calendar year for the cost of registration, required textbooks
and/or materials and parking. Employees who wish to seek reimbursement from the City for
educational program costs shall provide a written request for reimbursement in advance of
enrollment to the Human Resources Division. The form provided shall include the type of
training, sponsoring organization or institution, meeting times and costs. Human Resources
and the employee’s department head will make the determination if the chosen education
program is eligible for reimbursement.
No employee shall receive any reimbursement until they have provided satisfactory proof of
successful completion of the coursework with a grade of “C” or above, or “Pass” in the case
of a Pass/Fail course. Such proof of completion shall be provided within 30 days of the
conclusion of the course.
Education reimbursement is a taxable benefit under IRS Code. Education reimbursement will
be applied to the calendar year in which the course is passed and satisfactory proof of
completion is submitted.
Mandatory or annual coursework, attendance at conferences and training required to maintain
job specific certifications or proficiencies are not included in the Education Reimbursement
Program.
SECTION 28: CITY SPONSORED RECREATION AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS
CEA bargaining unit members shall have the privilege of enrollment in City sponsored
recreation programs at the City residents’ fee structure and in preference to non-residents
wishing to enroll. Each calendar year, employees and family members on the employee’s
dental plan are eligible to be reimbursed up to $500 per employee in Rec Bucks. Employees
shall be reimbursed for approved recreation services in accordance with the City’s Recreation
Buck Policies. Programs allowing for preregistration will be reimbursed after completion of
the program, including those allowing for or requiring preregistration in the calendar year
prior to reimbursement. Reimbursements shall be applied to the year in which they are
received. Benefited employees will also receive a free employee only annual Cupertino Sports
Center membership. Part-time benefited employees will have the annual amount of
Recreation Bucks prorated based on number of hours worked. Recreation Bucks are a taxable
benefit under IRS Code, and must be used by the employee within the calendar year and are
non-transferrable.
City employees are eligible to participate in the City’s wellness program as provided for in the
City’s Administrative Rules and Regulations.
366
CC 06-03-2025
366 of 1012
SECTION 29: DUE PROCESS
For demotions, suspensions of more than five days and terminations of employment, the City
will provide written notice of the intended actions including the reasons therefore; a copy of
any documents upon which the City relied in taking its action and an opportunity to respond,
either orally or in writing, prior to the effective date of the disciplinary action.
Said opportunity shall be as soon as is practical after having been served the written notice and
shall not constitute any limitation otherwise available through the grievance or appeal
procedures. Any written warning in an employee’s file will be removed from the file after three
years, if requested in writing by the employee.
SECTION 30: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
30.1 Definition: a grievance is a good faith dispute or difference of opinion of an
employee involving the meaning, interpretation or application of the express provisions of the
Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Cupertino and CEA.
30.2 Step 1: An employee (grievant) who has a grievance shall bring it to the attention
of the employee's immediate supervisor within ten (10) calendar days of the occurrence of
knowledge of the act that is the basis for the dispute. If the grievant and the immediate
supervisor are unable to resolve the matter within ten (10) calendar days of the date it is raised,
the grievant has the right to submit a formal grievance to their next higher supervisor.
30.3 Step 2: If the grievance is not settled at Step 1 the grievant may submit a written
grievance to the next higher supervisor within ten (10) calendar days after the supervisor’s oral
answer in Step 1. The written grievance shall contain the following information:
a. The name, job classification and department of the grievant.
b. The name of the grievant’s immediate supervisor.
c. A statement of the nature of the grievance including date and place of
occurrence.
d. The specific provision alleged to have been violated.
e. The remedy sought by the grievant.
f. If the grievant is not self-represented, the name of the individual or recognized
employee organization designated to represent the grievant.
g. Signature of grievant and date.
h. If the grievance is being submitted on behalf of the grievant by the recognized
employee organization, it shall be signed and dated by the representative of the
employee organization.
The supervisor or designee shall discuss the grievance within ten (10) calendar
days with the grievant and/or designated representative at a time mutually
agreeable to the parties. If a settlement is not reached, a written answer to the
grievance shall be provided within ten (10) calendar days of the meeting.
367
CC 06-03-2025
367 of 1012
30.4 Step 3: If the grievance is not settled at Step 2 the grievant may submit the
grievance in writing to the grievant's Department Head, or, alternatively, if the Department
Head responded at Step 2, to the City Manager within ten (10) calendar days after the Step 2
written answer. The Department Head/City Manager shall discuss the grievance within ten (10)
calendar days with the grievant and/or designated representative at a time mutually agreeable
to the parties. If no settlement is reached, a written answer shall be provided within ten (10)
calendar days of the meeting.
30.5 Step 4: If the grievance is not settled at Step 3, the grievant may submit the
grievance to advisory arbitration within 14 calendar days after receipt of the decision at Step 2.
30.6 Advisory Arbitration:
a. The parties shall attempt to agree upon an advisory arbitrator within seven (7) calendar
days after receipt of the notice of referral. In the event that parties are unable to agree upon an
advisory arbitrator within said seven (7) day period, the parties shall jointly request the State
Mediation and Conciliation Service to submit a panel of five (5) advisory arbitrators. Each party
retains the right to reject one panel in its entirety and request that a new panel be submitted.
Both the grievant/designated representative and the City shall have the right to strike two (2)
names from the panel. The parties shall alternatively strike names until one remains. The person
remaining shall be the advisory arbitrator.
b. The advisory arbitrator shall be notified of his/her selection and shall be requested to
set a time and place for the hearing, subject to the availability of the grievant/designated
representative and City representatives.
c. The City or the grievant/designated representative shall have the right to request the
arbitrator to require the presence of witnesses or documents. The City and the grievant retain
the right to employ legal counsel.
d. The advisory arbitrator shall submit his/her recommendation in writing within thirty
(30) days following the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever
is later.
e. More than one grievance may be submitted to the same advisory arbitrator if both
parties mutually agree in writing.
f. The fees and expenses of the advisory arbitrator and the cost of a written transcript
shall be divided equally between the City and the grievant, or CEA/IFPTE Local 21, as
appropriate; provided, however, that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own
representatives and witnesses.
30.7 Limitations on Authority of Advisory Arbitrator: The advisory arbitrator shall have
no right to amend, modify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the provisions of the Memorandum
of Understanding. The advisory arbitrator shall consider and decide only the question of fact as
to whether there has been a violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of the specific
provisions of the MOU section or sections supporting the grievance. The advisory arbitrator
shall be empowered to determine the issue raised by the grievance as submitted in writing at
the second step. The advisory arbitrator shall have no authority to make a recommendation on
any issue not so submitted or raised. The advisory arbitrator shall be without power to make
recommendations contrary to or inconsistent with, in any way, applicable laws or rules and
regulations of administrative bodies that have the force and effect of law. The advisory
arbitrator shall not in any way limit or interfere with the powers, duties and responsibilities of
the City under law and applicable court decisions. The recommendation shall be advisory only
to the City Manager. The City Manager will make the final decision.
368
CC 06-03-2025
368 of 1012
SECTION 31: LAYOFF PROCEDURE
The appointing authority may lay off employees for lack of funds, lack of work or for other
similar and just cause. The appointing authority will identify the classification(s) subject to
layoff. All classifications and all departments citywide are subject to layoff considerations.
Employees in a classification(s) identified for layoff shall be laid off in reverse order of
seniority, based on the date of the appointment to the classification. If an employee separates
from City employment for a period of more than 30 days, the time off from City employment
shall be deducted from an employee’s length of service for the purpose of determining seniority.
Employees being laid off shall be entitled to placement in a lower classification; provided (a)
the employee was previously employed with regular status having completed the probationary
period in that lower classification and (b) the employee has more total seniority with the City
than an individual in the lower classification. Any employee being displaced by an employee
opting to be placed in a lower classification shall be entitled to placement in the lower
classification, subject to conditions (a) and (b) listed in this section.
The City will provide a 30 day notice to any employees identified for layoff and layoff pay in
the amount of $2,500 at the time of layoff. Such notice will include the employee’s rights to
placement in a lower classification pursuant to this section. Medical, dental, vision, and life
insurance continue through the end of the month in which the layoff is effective. In addition,
the employee will be provided with an opportunity to elect to enroll in COBRA medical, dental,
and/or vision coverage at the time of layoff and at employee expense.
The names of the employees affected by layoff shall be placed on a recall list for a period of
two years in the reverse order of layoff and shall have the first opportunity for reinstatement.
Failure to respond within ten (10) business days to a written notice of such opportunity for
reinstatement shall cause that name to be removed from the recall list. Such notice shall be sent
by certified or registered mail to the address of the employee on file with the City. The affected
employees shall be responsible for updating the City of any change in address during the time
they are on the recall list.
SECTION 32: REINSTATEMENT
With the approval of the Appointing Authority, a regular or probationary employee who has
resigned with a good record may be reinstated within twenty-four months of the effective date
of resignation to a vacant position in the same or comparable class he/she previously
occupied. Upon reinstatement, the employee for all purposes shall be considered as though
they had received an original appointment.
SECTION 33: CONTINUATION OF BENEFITS
All terms and conditions of employment not otherwise contained herein shall be maintained at
the standards in effect at the time of execution. However, the parties agree that any automatic
economic triggers, formulas or escalators shall become inoperable and void upon expiration
of this contract.
SECTION 34: TELECOMMUTING / REMOTE WORK
CEA bargaining unit employees will be considered for telework and adhere to the policy of
369
CC 06-03-2025
369 of 1012
the City of Cupertino’s expanded telecommuting policy.
SECTION 35: SEPARABILITY
In the event any provision of this agreement is finally held to be illegal by a court of
competent jurisdiction or void as being in contravention of any law, rule or regulation of any
government agency having jurisdiction over the subject set forth, then the remainder of the
agreement shall continue in full force and effect unless the parts so found to be void are held
inseparable from the remaining portion of the agreement.
SECTION 36: RATIFICATION
Nothing contained in this memorandum shall be binding upon either the City or the
Association until it has been ratified by the Association’s membership and presented and
approved by the City Council of the City.
SECTION 37: REOPENER
During the term of this Agreement, upon request by the City or CEA, the City and
Association will meet and confer over proposed revisions to the City’s Administrative Rules
and Regulations to the extent that the proposed revisions fall within the statutory scope of
bargaining.
SECTION 38: TERM
This agreement shall be effective commencing the first full pay period after Association
ratification and adoption by the City Council and ending at 11:59 p.m. June 30, 2025.
SECTION 39: TOTAL COMPENSATION SURVEYS
Management and CEA agree to a compensation survey database structure which
identifies specific benchmark classifications for job families, classifications within the job
families of each benchmark classification, survey agencies, and survey classification matches.
Survey cities include:
1. Campbell
2. Los Altos
3. Los Gatos
4. Menlo Park
5. Milpitas
6. Morgan Hill
7. Mountain View
8. Palo Alto
9. San Mateo
10. Santa Clara
11. Saratoga
12. Sunnyvale
The survey data is intended to provide a source of information concerning how the
compensation paid to employees in bargaining unit job classifications compares to that paid by
other public employers. The City will update the survey database and send a copy to CEA six
weeks before expiration of this agreement. This survey data will be considered in successor
agreement negotiations.
370
CC 06-03-2025
370 of 1012
CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION CITY OF CUPERTINO
_____________________________ _____________________________
Alex Corbalis Kristina Alfaro
_____________________________ _____________________________
Gian Paolo Martire Vanessa Guerra
_____________________________ _____________________________
Alex Wykoff Laura Miyakawa
_____________________________
Nicole Lee
______________________________ ______________________________
Monica Diaz Dianne Thompson
______________________________ ______________________________
Stanley Young, IFPTE Local 21 Christopher Boucher, Boucher Law
______________________________
City Attorney, Approved as to form
Date: Date:
371
CC 06-03-2025
371 of 1012
EXHIBIT A
SECTION 2: SALARY SCHEDULE
Salaries Effective June 3, 2025
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
ACCOUNT CLERK I $34.56 $36.29 $38.11 $40.01 $42.01
ACCOUNT CLERK II $38.11 $40.01 $42.01 $44.11 $46.32
ASSISTANT ENGINEER $58.47 $61.38 $64.45 $67.68 $71.06
ASSISTANT HOUSING COORDINATOR $52.65 $55.28 $58.04 $60.94 $63.99
ASSISTANT PLANNER $52.65 $55.28 $58.04 $60.94 $63.99
ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER $63.01 $66.15 $69.46 $72.94 $76.58
ASSOCIATE PLANNER $56.74 $59.57 $62.55 $65.68 $68.96
BUILDING INSPECTOR $55.70 $58.48 $61.41 $64.48 $67.70
CASE MANAGER $42.57 $44.70 $46.94 $49.28 $51.75
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $47.69 $50.07 $52.58 $55.21 $57.97
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST $44.09 $46.30 $48.61 $51.04 $53.59
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
ENV. PROG. COMPLIANCE TECHNICIAN $41.40 $43.47 $45.65 $47.93 $50.33
ENV. PROGRAMS SPECIALIST $53.37 $56.04 $58.85 $61.79 $64.88
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
ASSISTANT $46.27 $48.58 $51.01 $53.56 $56.24
FACILITY ATTENDANT $32.36 $33.97 $35.67 $37.46 $39.33
GIS TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS SPEC $58.15 $61.06 $64.11 $67.32 $70.68
OFFICE ASSISTANT $32.51 $34.14 $35.85 $37.64 $39.52
PERMIT TECHNICIAN $42.79 $44.93 $47.18 $49.53 $52.01
PLAN CHECK ENGINEER $64.45 $67.66 $71.05 $74.60 $78.33
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR $55.70 $58.48 $61.41 $64.48 $67.70
RECEPTIONIST/CLERK $29.28 $30.74 $32.28 $33.90 $35.59
RECREATION ASSISTANT $20.94 $21.99 $23.09 $24.24 $25.46
RECREATION COORDINATOR $42.33 $44.45 $46.67 $49.01 $51.46
SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR $59.51 $62.49 $65.61 $68.89 $72.34
SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER $50.12 $52.63 $55.26 $58.02 $60.93
SENIOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN $49.52 $51.99 $54.59 $57.32 $60.19
SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT $36.10 $37.91 $39.80 $41.79 $43.88
SENIOR PLANNER $60.84 $63.88 $67.07 $70.43 $73.95
SENIOR TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $49.52 $51.99 $54.59 $57.32 $60.19
SPECIAL PROGRAMS COORDINATOR $34.95 $36.70 $38.53 $40.46 $42.48
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECH APPRENTICE $44.51 $46.74 $49.08 $51.53 $54.11
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECHNICIAN $51.53 $54.11 $56.81 $59.65 $62.64
TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN $45.95 $48.24 $50.66 $53.19 $55.85
372
CC 06-03-2025
372 of 1012
373
CC 06-03-2025
373 of 1012
CEA Local 21 Salary Effcetive 7.01.2023 Attachment U
Classification Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Unit
ACCOUNT CLERK I 34.56$ 36.29$ 38.11$ 40.01$ 42.01$ CEA
ACCOUNT CLERK II 38.11$ 40.01$ 42.01$ 44.11$ 46.32$ CEA
ASSISTANT ENGINEER 58.47$ 61.38$ 64.45$ 67.68$ 71.06$ CEA
ASSISTANT PLANNER 52.65$ 55.28$ 58.04$ 60.94$ 63.99$ CEA
ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER 63.01$ 66.15$ 69.46$ 72.94$ 76.58$ CEA
ASSOCIATE PLANNER 56.74$ 59.57$ 62.55$ 65.68$ 68.96$ CEA
BUILDING INSPECTOR 55.70$ 58.48$ 61.41$ 64.48$ 67.70$ CEA
CASE MANAGER 42.57$ 44.70$ 46.94$ 49.28$ 51.75$ CEA
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 47.69$ 50.07$ 52.58$ 55.21$ 57.97$ CEA
COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST 44.09$ 46.30$ 48.61$ 51.04$ 53.59$ CEA
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 45.95$ 48.24$ 50.66$ 53.19$ 55.85$ CEA
ENV. PROG. COMPLIANCE TECHNICIAN 41.40$ 43.47$ 45.65$ 47.93$ 50.33$ CEA
ENV. PROGRAMS SPECIALIST 53.37$ 56.04$ 58.85$ 61.79$ 64.88$ CEA
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS ASSISTANT 46.27$ 48.58$ 51.01$ 53.56$ 56.24$ CEA
FACILITY ATTENDANT 32.36$ 33.97$ 35.67$ 37.46$ 39.33$ CEA
GIS TECHNICIAN 45.95$ 48.24$ 50.66$ 53.19$ 55.85$ CEA
MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS SPEC 58.15$ 61.06$ 64.11$ 67.32$ 70.68$ CEA
OFFICE ASSISTANT 32.51$ 34.14$ 35.85$ 37.64$ 39.52$ CEA
PERMIT TECHNICIAN 42.79$ 44.93$ 47.18$ 49.53$ 52.01$ CEA
PLAN CHECK ENGINEER 64.45$ 67.66$ 71.05$ 74.60$ 78.33$ CEA
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR 55.70$ 58.48$ 61.41$ 64.48$ 67.70$ CEA
RECEPTIONIST/CLERK 29.28$ 30.74$ 32.28$ 33.90$ 35.59$ CEA
RECREATION ASSISTANT 20.94$ 21.99$ 23.09$ 24.24$ 25.46$ CEA
RECREATION COORDINATOR 42.33$ 44.45$ 46.67$ 49.01$ 51.46$ CEA
SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR 59.51$ 62.49$ 65.61$ 68.89$ 72.34$ CEA
SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 50.12$ 52.63$ 55.26$ 58.02$ 60.93$ CEA
SENIOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 49.52$ 51.99$ 54.59$ 57.32$ 60.19$ CEA
SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT 36.10$ 37.91$ 39.80$ 41.79$ 43.88$ CEA
SENIOR PLANNER 60.84$ 63.88$ 67.07$ 70.43$ 73.95$ CEA
SENIOR TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN 49.52$ 51.99$ 54.59$ 57.32$ 60.19$ CEA
SPECIAL PROGRAMS COORDINATOR 34.95$ 36.70$ 38.53$ 40.46$ 42.48$ CEA
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECH APPRENTICE 44.51$ 46.74$ 49.08$ 51.53$ 54.11$ CEA
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TECHNICIAN 51.53$ 54.11$ 56.81$ 59.65$ 62.64$ CEA
TRAFFIC TECHNICIAN 45.95$ 48.24$ 50.66$ 53.19$ 55.85$ CEA
374
CC 06-03-2025
374 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO. 25-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL REVISING THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO AND IFPTE LOCAL 21 CUPERTINO EMPLOYEES’
ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to revise the City of Cupertino and IFPTE
Local 21 Cupertino Employees’ Association Memorandum Of Understanding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino and IFPTE
Local 21 Cupertino Employees’ Association Memorandum of Understanding be
revised which is incorporated in this resolution by this reference and attached as
Attachment T.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June, 2025 by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
375
CC 06-03-2025
375 of 1012
All Other Department Requests Attachment W
Request Account Expense
Recurring
Expense
1x Total Request
Administration ‐ Assistant ASD (Budget Manager overfill)Multiple 17,011 0 17,011
Purchasing ‐ Citywide Purchasing Training 100‐41‐425 0 20,000 20,000
Admin Services ‐Employee Cultural Events 100‐44‐412 5,000 0 5,000
HR ‐ Citywide Employee Events 100‐44‐412 10,000 0 10,000
Purchasing ‐ Admin Services ‐ Grants Analyst (New position)100‐41‐425 207,883 0 207,883
Budget ‐ Analyze Potential Tax Measures 100‐41‐426 0 20,000 20,000
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 27,399 0 27,399
Admin Services Total 250,282 40,000 290,282
Housing ‐ Assistant Housing Coordinator (Planning Manager
underfill/new classification)260‐72‐707 105,126 0 105,126
Code Enforcement ‐ Sr. Code Enforcement Officer to Division
Manager 100‐74‐202 53,546 0 53,546
Building – Building On call contracts 100‐73‐714 90,000 0 90,000
Building – Building On call contracts 100‐73‐714 50,000 0 50,000
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 47,982 0 47,982
Community Development Department Total 346,654 0 346,654
City Council ‐ Meals Increase 100‐10‐100 3,000 0 3,000
City Council ‐ Restoring Internal Auditor Contract Funding 100‐10‐100 25,000 20,000 45,000
Community Funding Grant Program 100‐10‐101 32,500 0 32,500
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 7,466 0 7,466
City Council Total 67,966 20,000 87,966
Communications ‐70th Anniversary/ Communications ‐ Community
Service Awards Increase 100‐12‐126 0 5,000 5,000
City Manager – Receptionist (new position)100‐12‐120 113,774 0 113,774
City Clerk ‐ Administrative Assistant (new position)100‐13‐130 146710 0 146,710
City Manager – PT Communications and Marketing Coordinator 100‐12‐126 66,351
0 66,351
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 7032 0 7,032
City Manager ‐ Strategic Plan 100‐12‐120 0 200,000 200,000
Administration Total 333,867 205,000 538,867
Applications ‐ Additional Accela Licenses 100‐32‐308 5,500 0 5,500
Infrastructure ‐ Network Glue for Network Diagram and
Management 610‐34‐310 6,000 0 6,000
GIS – Chatbot 610‐35‐986 0 5,000 5,000
Applications – Energy Management System 100‐32‐308 33,500 0 33,500
Applications ‐ Social Media Ret Archiving App 100‐32‐308 0 7,500 7,500
Applications ‐ ZenDesk Licenses for PW 100‐32‐308 4,140 0 4,140
Applications ‐ Logikull 100‐32‐308 33,600 0 33,600
GIS ‐ 811 Integration Software 610‐35‐986 0 15,000 15,000
GIS ‐ AI Solution for CMO Staff Reports or State Bill Tracking 610‐35‐986 0 10,000 10,000
GIS ‐ BSA to Principal BSA 610‐35‐986 14,656 0 14,656
GIS ‐ ESRI Enterprise Licenses 610‐35‐986 3,800 0 3,800
GIS – OmniData 610‐35‐986 23,000 0 23,000
Infrastructure ‐ Adaptive Traffic Signal Expansion 610‐34‐310 0 225,000 225,000
Infrastructure ‐ Endpoint and Patch Management System 610‐34‐310 15,000 0 15,000
Infrastructure ‐ Mitel Packet Fusion Replacement 610‐34‐310 6,000 0 6,000
Infrastructure ‐ Poster Printer replacement 610‐34‐310 0 5,000 5,000
376
CC 06-03-2025
376 of 1012
All Other Department Requests Attachment W
Request Account Expense
Recurring
Expense
1x Total Request
Infrastructure ‐ Sr. Center Tech Lab Projection System 610‐34‐310 0 16,000 16,000
Infrastructure ‐ Switches and Firewall Upgrade 610‐34‐310 0 21,000 21,000
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 48,922 0 48,922
Innovation & Technology Total 194,118 304,500 498,618
Law Enforcement – ALPR 100‐20‐200 60,000 0 60,000
Law Enforcement Total 60,000 0 60,000
Events, Youth, Teen ‐ Funding for Shakespeare in the Park 100‐61‐605 30,000 0 30,000
Events, Youth, Teen ‐ Tree Lights Installation and Removal 100‐61‐605 10,000 0 10,000
Outdoor ‐ BBF Golf Course Hitting Range Equipment & Netting 560‐63‐616 5,820 0 5,820
Outdoor ‐ BBF Golf Course Pull Carts 560‐63‐616 0 5,000 5,000
Sports and Fitness ‐ Interior Gate Access 570‐63‐621 0 28,968 28,968
Sports and Fitness ‐ Small Tools and Equipment 570‐63‐621 12,000 0 12,000
Events, Youth, Teen ‐ Holiday Suits 100‐61‐605 5,000 0 5,000
Festival Costs 100‐61‐605 38,235 0 38,235
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 13,330 0 13,330
Parks and Recreation Total 114,385 33,968 148,353
Facilities ‐ Battery Back‐Up System at the Library 100‐87‐828 0 47,137 47,137
Facilities ‐ Radio Replacement Project 100‐87‐829 0 80,000 80,000
Facilities ‐Service Center Building Fascia Board Replacement&
Painting 100‐87‐829 0 103,000 103,000
Facilities ‐ QCC Activity Room Hardwood Floor Sand/Buffing 100‐87‐830 0 7,000 7,000
Facilities ‐ QCC Dance Room Hardwood Floor Sand/Buffing 100‐87‐830 0 21,000 21,000
Facilities ‐ Quinlan Community Center Door Hardware Upgrade 100‐87‐830 20,000 0 20,000
Facilities ‐ Senior Center Gutter Replacement on Mary Ave 100‐87‐831 0 11,225 11,225
Facilities ‐ EEC sliding door replacement 100‐87‐832 0 35,000 35,000
Facilities ‐ Monta Vista Building Painting 100‐87‐833 0 37,000 37,000
Facilities ‐ Replace Siding, Paint, Repair Dry Rot at Wilson Pottery
and Restroom Facility 100‐87‐834 0 46,000 46,000
Facilities ‐ Replace All Batteries on Battery Back‐Up System at
Community Hall 100‐87‐838 0 7,071 7,071
Grounds ‐ Dugout Roof Replacements Faria & Regnart Schools 100‐84‐812 0 22,000 22,000
Grounds ‐ Irrigation Pump Replacements – Eaton 100‐84‐812 0 43,000 43,000
Grounds Linda Vista Park BBQ Replacement 100‐84‐813 0 10,000 10,000
Grounds (various) ‐ Vegetation Management Multiple 115,000 0 115,000
Maintenance Worker I (New position) Multiple 125,236 0 125,236
SR2S ‐ Bike Ped Education Annual Increase 100‐88‐846 0 25,000 25,000
Sustainability ‐ Greenhouse Gas Inventory Assessment 100‐81‐122 0 40,000 40,000
Trees/ROW ‐ Gopher and Squirrel Control 100‐86‐261 8,000 0 8,000
Trees/ROW ‐ RP & Mainline repair South De Anza 100‐86‐824 0 30,000 30,000
Trees/ROW ‐ SCB at Janice Retaining Wall Installation 100‐86‐824 0 25,000 25,000
Trees/ROW ‐ Sonic Tomography Unit 100‐86‐825 0 25,000 25,000
Streets ‐ Storm Drain Grates Replacement 230‐81‐855 0 40,000 40,000
Facilities BBF Golf Course ‐ Replace Epoxy Flooring 560‐87‐260 0 17,000 17,000
Facilities BBF Golf Course Restroom Project 560‐87‐260 0 20,000 20,000
Facilities ‐ BBF Golf Course ‐ Shed Bathroom Project 560‐87‐260 0 5,000 5,000
Grounds ‐ BBF Golf Course ‐ Vegetation Management 560‐84‐268 10,000 0 10,000
377
CC 06-03-2025
377 of 1012
All Other Department Requests Attachment W
Request Account Expense
Recurring
Expense
1x Total Request
Facilities ‐ Sports Center Energy Management System Upgrade 570‐87‐836 0 160,000 160,000
Facilities ‐ Sports Center Lighting Controls Upgrade 570‐87‐836 0 100,000 100,000
Fleet Air Compressor Replacement 630‐85‐849 0 16,000 16,000
Fleet ‐ Diagnostic scan tool 630‐85‐849 0 18,000 18,000
Fleet ‐ Vehicle Assets 630‐90‐985 0 780,000 780,000
Citywide Conferences and Training Multiple 30,222 0 30,222
Public Works Total 308,458 1,770,433 2,078,891
Grand Total 1,675,730 2,373,901 4,049,631
378
CC 06-03-2025
378 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO.25 022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL PROJECT POLICY
WHEREAS,the Cupertino City Council has identified a need to adopt a
policy governing the creation of,acceptance of,and reporting of special projects;
and
WHEREAS,on April 2,2025,the City Council considered a proposed
policy at a duly noticed special meeting of the City Council.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that:
1.The City Council hereby adopts the Cupertino City Council Special Project
Policy attached hereto as Exhibit A.The Special Project Policy shall be
effective on April 2,2025.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 2nd day of April,2025,by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:Chao,Moore,Fruen,Mohan,Wang
NOES:None
ABSENT:None
ABSTAIN:None
SIGNED:
Liang Chao,Mayor
City of Cupertino
Date
ATTEST:
Kirsten Squarcia,City Clerk Date
4/15/2025
4/15/2025
379
CC 06-03-2025
379 of 1012
CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL PROJECTS
POLICY
Policy Manual
Policy #25-022
Attachments:
N/A
Effective Date:
April 2, 2025 per Resolution 25-022
Responsible Department:
Administrative Services
Related Policies & Notes:
N/A
City Council or Administrative Policy:
City Council
Purpose
To establish City Council authority for the purpose and creation of Special Projects for inclusion and
tracking as part the City’s budget process.
Special Projects are defined as one-time, staff-initiated projects that require City Council approval
due to the need for budget appropriations that exceed a department’s base budget. Base budget
items are the baseline appropriations to continue operations at the current level. In instances where
there are sufficient budget appropriations the City Manager must request City Council authority in
the form of a consent agenda item to reappropriate the funds as a special project. As discussed in
the Special Project Reporting section below, these projects will continue to be reported in the
Special Project reports.
Special Projects are not meant to track ongoing operational costs like street pavement maintenance,
minor repairs, development projects which may span multiple fiscal years, or the purchase of
equipment, unless the department needs to track these expenses because of the use of restricted
funds to pay for the equipment or materials. Ongoing operational costs will be included in the
department’s base budget or added as an ongoing budget appropriation request to the City Council.
Policy
This policy, including any amendments, shall be approved by City Council Resolution and shall be
effective upon the policy’s adoption.
It is the objective of the City to ensure transparent financial reporting that allows Councilmembers,
residents, and staff to track expenditures across multiple fiscal years.
This policy will be reviewed annually as part of the proposed budget process.
City Manager Authorization
As part of the City’s proposed budget process, departments must submit for approval any new one-
time projects or initiatives that require additional funding. If approved by the City Manager, these
Exhibit A
380
CC 06-03-2025
380 of 1012
projects are included in the proposed and final budget for City Council consideration and
approval.
These requests are separate and are apart from the City Work Program (CWP) items, which are
Council initiated and may be one-time and/or result in ongoing costs. Both types of projects require
City Council appropriation approval.
City Council Approval and Questions
All Special Projects approved by the City Manager that require additional appropriations will be
included in the proposed and final budgets for City Council approval. These projects will be
presented and discussed during the budget process, and appropriations added upon approval.
Off cycle Special Project creation using the reappropriation of existing funds will be presented to
City Council as a consent item for approval.
Any questions from City Council regarding Special Projects that are part of the regular Special
Projects reporting process described in the section below will be answered as part of the
supplemental report process. Questions that fall outside of the reporting process will be
responded to in a timely manner based on the scope of the question.
Special Project Reporting
Special Projects will be included in the departmental narratives of the proposed and final budget. A
summary of proposed Special Projects will be included in the summary section of the budget
message and upon budget approval this list will be finalized as part of the final budget.
As part of the quarterly financial reports, staff will report on the following items for all Special
Projects:
Adoption Year
Function - department that has the special project, for example Administration, which
encompasses City Manager and City Attorney.
Program - specific budget unit (e.g., 120 City Manager)
Base and Detail Account with Detail Account description – the expense account where the
special project is budgeted, for example 750-.056 Neighborhood engagement. Special project
account numbers are unique to one project.
Full Org Set Code and Description – Includes full account string (Fund-Div-Program) and
description of the org set. For example, 100-12-632, where the first three digits are the fund,
the next two digits are the division, and the last three digits are the program in which the
special project is budgeted. General Fund-City Manager-Comm Outreach & Neighborhood
Watch.
Amended Budget – This is the total budget in a fiscal year and includes new dollars added
in proposed and any budgeted dollars that have been carried forward from the prior fiscal
year as of a given date, for quarterly report they include Sept-30, Dec-31 and March-31.
Actual Amount – dollars spent as of a given date, see amended section above.
381
CC 06-03-2025
381 of 1012
Encumbrance – dollars encumbered either through a contract or purchase order as of a given
date.
Status – This includes completed, in progress, not started, started, pending and cancelled.
Outside Funding – identifies if outside funding is available like grants to fund the projects.
Estimated Completion – the date and month the Special Project is expected to be completed.
Notes – this includes information that staff would like to make the council and residents
aware of and includes future plans like a project being carried over or defunded, along with
other updates.
This quarterly financial report is meant to be informative, and the City Council is not required to
approve or take any action, other than to receive the attachment as part of the financial report.
382
CC 06-03-2025
382 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
1 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.223 ‐ CWP
Electrification Study
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
96,057.00 29,477.12 6,630.55 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded 50K at Q3. Balance
will be used and project
completed this FY.
2 FY25 Public works 800 Public Works
Admin
750.244 ‐ CWP Recycled
Water Feasibility
100‐80‐800 ‐ General Fund‐PW
Administration‐Public Works Admin
200,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded at Q3.
Completed in‐house.
3 FY24 Administration 120 City Manager 750.245 ‐ CWP Rise Const
Stakeholder Engmt
100‐12‐120 ‐ General Fund‐City
Manager‐City Manager
100,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2026 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Work is being done in‐house.
Project can be defunded.
4 FY22 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.105 ‐ CWP Revisit 5G 100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan Review
250,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Work is being done in‐house.
Project can be defunded.
5FY24Recreation services 632 Comm
Outreach & Neigh
Watch
750.227 ‐ CWP Public
Safety res/com areas
100‐65‐632 ‐ General Fund‐Community
Services‐Comm Outreach & Neigh
Watch
10,000.00 300.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Project was not carried over
into FY 25‐27. This funding
was promoted for about two
years to offer $300 block
party grants to interested
block leaders. To date, only
one $300 grant was awarded,
therefore this project can be
defunded.
6 FY22 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.101 ‐ CWP RHNA and
Gen Plan Update
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
422,564.00 87,426.42 337,063.55 Completed Sep 2024 None N/A Completed in September,
when the City received notice
from HCD that the Housing
Element complies with State
law. Housing Element
implementation policies will
be presented for Commission
and Council input as project
progresses.
7 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.102 ‐ CWP Sign
Ordinance Update
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
200,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started Spring 2025 None N/A This project was carried over
into FY 25‐27. No additional
funding is required.
8 FY24 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.235 ‐ CWP Tree List 100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
50,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress June 2025 None N/A These funds will be moved to
100‐86‐825 750‐235 at year
end as part of the Urban
Forest Program next FY.
38
3
CC 06-03-2025
383 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
9FY24Law enforcement 200 Law
Enforcement SC
Sherif
750.227 ‐ CWP Public
Safety res/com areas
100‐20‐200 ‐ General Fund‐Law
Enforcement‐Law Enforcement SC
Sherif
60,000.00 62,250.00 62,250.00 In Progress 6/30/2027 None N/A This is a current CWP project
that will remain ongoing for
annual maintenance of the
ALPR cameras. P&R will
continue to manage this
project on an ongoing basis.
10 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.219 ‐ CWP Bicycle
Facilities
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
50,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A In progress. Staff will
purchase and install the racks
by the end of the fiscal year.
11 FY24 Public works 825 Street Tree
Maintenance
750.235 ‐ CWP Tree List 100‐86‐825 ‐ General Fund‐Trees and
Right of Way‐Street Tree Maintenance
60,000.00 0.00 0.00 Cancelled June 2025 None N/A This GL for CWP Tree List will
now be used for CWP Urban
Forest Program next FY.
12 FY25 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.243 ‐ CWP Active
Transportation Plan
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
330,000.00 282.50 299,717.50 In Progress 6/30/2025 Grant TDA3 Staff have contracted with a
consutant and are working to
develop this project with
significant outreach and
meetings with the Bike Ped
Commission. City Council
adoption of Plan expected in
June 2026.
13 FY20 Community development 711 BMR
Affordable Housing
Fund
750.052 ‐ Develop ELI
Housing
265‐72‐711 ‐ BMR Housing‐Housing
Services‐BMR Affordable Housing Fund
238,301.00 0.00 3,005.00 In Progress Winter 2025 None N/A Pending development of Mary
Ave, then operational. Project
is under review in compliance
with Exclusive Negotiation
Agreement (ENA). Following
the Negotiation period, staff
will present the Council with a
Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) and Lease
agreement for the project and
the project will also
concurrently go through
entitlement hearings.
14 FY17 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.090 ‐
Residential/Mixed Use
Design
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
194,922.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Summer 2025 None N/A This is the Objective Design
Standards (ODC) in progress.
Invoices should be coming in
from consultant soon.
15 FY20 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.032 ‐ General Plan 100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
239,805.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Carried over for any potential
general plan updates and
related legal review costs.
Prior years bulk of costs were
legal.
38
4
CC 06-03-2025
384 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
16 FY22 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.135 ‐ Laserfiche
planning map scanning
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
726.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Winter 2026 None N/A Ongoing Operational Item
17 FY19 Public works 820 Sidewalk Curb
and Gutter
750.020 ‐ Annual Sidewalk
Curb & Gutter
270‐85‐820 ‐ Transportation Fund‐
Streets‐Sidewalk Curb and Gutter
2,776,484.00 607,032.88 981,535.03 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Annual project. Moved to
base for next FY. Funds must
be carried over.
18 FY24 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.041 ‐ HHW and
PaintCare
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
161,010.00 150,878.37 0.00 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Other In previous years received
funding from landfill fees
which are earmarked for
this supplementation use in
303‐312. No impact to
General Fund.
Completed for this FY. Will
defund balance after all
invoices are paid.
19 FY20 Public works 807 Service Center
Administration
750.043 ‐ Office
Reconfiguration
100‐83‐807 ‐ General Fund‐Service
Center‐Service Center Administration
111,416.00 9,109.11 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Carryover funds for ongoing
citywide projects. In base
under 700‐702 for next FY.
20 FY20 Public works 802 Non Point
Source
750.064 ‐ Low Income
Cost Share
230‐81‐802 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐Non
Point Source
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A New low‐income support for
property assessments for
storm drain fees. Expenses
occur when applications are
received.
21 FY20 Public works 802 Non Point
Source
750.065 ‐ CUSD Joint Use
Cost Share
230‐81‐802 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐Non
Point Source
8,707.00 17,672.77 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Completed.
22 FY20 Public works 854 General Fund
Subsidy
750.065 ‐ CUSD Joint Use
Cost Share
230‐81‐854 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐General
Fund Subsidy
0.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Ongoing. Completed this FY.
23 FY21 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.084 ‐ Single Use
Plastics Ordinance
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
94,544.00 (420.00)91,494.30 In Progress 1/31/2026 None No impact to General Fund. Ordinance implementation
still in progress and on
schedule. In base under 700‐
702 for next FY.
24 FY13 Public works 825 Street Tree
Maintenance
900.911 ‐ Trees and
Badges
100‐86‐825 ‐ General Fund‐Trees and
Right of Way‐Street Tree Maintenance
20,000.00 1,213.73 0.00 In Progress On‐going Ongoing annual tree planting
program. Funds are spent as
applications are submitted.
25 FY13 Public works 821 Street
Pavement
Maintenance
900.921 ‐ Annual Asphalt
Project
270‐85‐821 ‐ Transportation Fund‐
Streets‐Street Pavement Maintenance
7,472,764.00 2,278,855.93 538,594.32 In Progress 6/30/2025 Annual project. Moved to
base for next FY. Funds must
be carried over.
26 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
10,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded Q3
27 FY24 Public works 812 School Site
Maintenance
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐84‐812 ‐ General Fund‐Grounds‐
School Site Maintenance
10,500.00 8,500.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed and defunded Q3.
28 FY24 Public works 814 Sport Fields
Jollyman CRK
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐84‐814 ‐ General Fund‐Grounds‐
Sport Fields Jollyman CRK
10,500.00 8,500.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed and defunded Q3.
38
5
CC 06-03-2025
385 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
29 FY24 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
20,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/25 None This amount comes from
Fund 520 with no impact to
General Fund.
Completed by IT. Defunded
Q3.
30 FY24 Public works 830 Bldg Maint
Quinlan Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐830 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Quinlan Center
79,174.00 9,555.21 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed. Defunded at Q3.
31 FY24 Public works 848 Street Lighting 900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐85‐848 ‐ General Fund‐Streets‐
Street Lighting
175,000.00 171,298.97 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 Will defund at year‐end when
all invoices have been paid.
32 FY24 Public works 829 Bldg Maint
Service Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐829 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Service Center
2,000.00 297.09 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A
33 FY24 Public works 827 Bldg Maint City
Hall
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐827 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint City Hall
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will carryover
next FY.
34 FY24 Public works 832 Bldg Maint
McClellan Ranch
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐832 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint McClellan Ranch
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be
completed by end of this FY.
35 FY24 Public works 833 Bldg Maint
Monta Vista Ct
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐833 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Monta Vista Ct
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be
completed by end of this FY.
36 FY24 Public works 838 Comm Hall
Bldg Maint
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐838 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Comm Hall Bldg Maint
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be
completed by end of this FY.
37 FY24 Public works 828 Bldg Maint
Library
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐828 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Library
45,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be
completed by end of this FY.
38 FY24 Public works 836 Bldg Maint
Sports Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
570‐87‐836 ‐ Sports Center‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Sports Center
45,705.00 20,169.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be
completed by end of this FY.
39 FY24 Public works 831 Bldg Maint
Senior Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐831 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Senior Center
123,675.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started Cannot be
completed this FY
None N/A Project delayed due to
coinciding project which is
impacting the ability to start.
Carryover funds. Estimated
competition FY 25‐26.
40 FY24 Public works 837 Bldg Maint
Creekside
900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐87‐837 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Creekside
0.00 24,490.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
Budget was requested in
10087837900905 but
expensed to this account
10087837900990
41 FY24 Public works 829 Bldg Maint
Service Center
900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐87‐829 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Service Center
46,937.00 46,092.22 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
42 FY17 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.007 ‐ The Hamptons 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
108,640.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Application valid until end of
2026. If permit has not been
submitted for construction,
the item will be removed.
38
6
CC 06-03-2025
386 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
43 FY21 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.009 ‐ Marina Plaza 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
23,317.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Application valid until end of
2026. If permit has not been
submitted for construction,
the item will be removed.
44 FY22 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.029 ‐ Vallco SB35/Rise 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
109,207.00 1,382.50 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Active application and waiting
for building permit. Some
permits for grading and site
preparation work issued.
Carried over in the event that
permits are received.
45 FY22 Community development 714 Construction
Plan Check
750.031 ‐ Westport 100‐73‐714 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Construction Plan Check
64,621.00 1,087.50 33,194.23 In Progress 2026 None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of building permit
for the assisted living
component to be submitted in
2025.
46 FY20 Community development 714 Construction
Plan Check
750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐73‐714 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Construction Plan Check
14,595,179.00 870.00 2,594,309.46 In Progress Ongoing None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of additional
submittal of building permits.
47 FY20 Community development 715 Building
Inspection
750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐73‐715 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Building Inspection
5,406,634.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of additional
submittal of building permits.
48 FY20 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan Review
1,961,366.00 22,910.00 1,173,678.68 In Progress Ongoing None N/A This is an ongoing support for
development project funded
with pass‐through funds.
49 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.176 ‐ Climate AP
Vision Summary Doc
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
10,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded Q3
50 FY24 Administration 120 City Manager 750.239 ‐ PR & Strategic
Comm Strategy
100‐12‐120 ‐ General Fund‐City
Manager‐City Manager
127,400.00 0.00 0.00 Cancelled 6/30/2026 None N/A Defund
This project was canceled in
2024 and was intended to be
defunded in Q3. Staff
recommends defunding at
year end as no work has
continued since 2024.
51 FY23 Community development 705 Economic
Development
750.179 ‐ Econ Dev
Strategy Outreach
100‐71‐705 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Economic Development
20,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Defund
Economic Development
projects are being funded
through the FY 25‐27 CWP.
This project can be defunded.
38
7
CC 06-03-2025
387 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
52 FY24 Community development 705 Economic
Development
750.230 ‐ Business
Continuity Resilience
100‐71‐705 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Economic Development
310,487.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2025 Grant This is the Cal OES grant
that was received in 2022,
which was originally
$1million. This grant does
not appear on the grants
tracking sheet.
Do not defund, these are
grant funds that can still be
used.
About $175k previously used
for sm‐med biz emergency
preparedness (tabletop
exercise series).
53 FY22 Information Services 986 GIS 750.166 ‐ AR McClellan
Ranch
610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation & Technology‐
I&T GIS‐GIS
11,333.00 11,333.32 0.00 Completed 12/30/2024 None N/A
54 Information Services 308 Applications 750.181 ‐ ERP (Phase II) 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
69,166.00 0.00 0.00 Cancelled
55 FY23 Information Services 308 Applications 750.183 ‐ ACA Guide &
Wrapper
100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A
56 FY23 Information Services 308 Applications 750.184 ‐ Accela Roadmap 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
23,000.00 0.00 23,000.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A
57 FY23 Information Services 986 GIS 750.212 ‐ Laserfiche
Scanning
610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation & Technology‐
I&T GIS‐GIS
4,099.00 0.00 4,098.54 Completed 9/30/2024 None N/A
58 FY21 Information Services 308 Applications 750.236 ‐ Project Dox 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
394.00 393.75 0.00 Completed 8/1/2024 None N/A
59 Information Services 308 Applications 750.237 ‐ ERP (Phase III)100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
2,500,000.00 0.00 0.00
60 FY24 Information Services 986 GIS 750.238 ‐ VR Decarb 610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation & Technology‐
I&T GIS‐GIS
112,002.00 45,810.93 67,900.25 In Progress 6/30/2025 Grant Silicon Valley Clean Energy
(fully funded by Grant)
61 FY24 Information Services 305 Video 900.995 ‐ Special Projects ‐
CDD/I&T
100‐31‐305 ‐ General Fund‐I&T Video‐
Video
1,242,675.00 20,427.33 1,102,479.49 In Progress 6/30/2025 0.00 0.00
62 FY19 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.039 ‐ PW Scanning
Project
100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan Review
9,310.00 0.00 9,310.29 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Project in progress. Vendor
will bill in June when scanning
completed this FY.
38
8
CC 06-03-2025
388 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
63 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.040 ‐ Planned
Transportation Project
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
2,788.00 2,565.00 222.50 Completed 6/30/2025
64 FY23 Public works 853 Storm Drain
Fee
750.063 ‐ Rainwater
Capture
230‐81‐853 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐Storm
Drain Fee
28,207.00 6,634.62 9,072.44 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Other Funded by 2019 Clean
Water and Storm
Protection parcel fee.
This will be going away after
this FY due to expiration of
rebate matching agreement
with Valley Water as part of
cost cutting to allow parcel
fee revenues to fund more of
the basic compliance and
infrastructure maintenance
needs.
65 FY21 Public works 800 Public Works
Admin
750.071 ‐ Municipal Water
System
100‐80‐800 ‐ General Fund‐PW
Administration‐Public Works Admin
5,811.00 11,842.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 Project completed.
66 FY22 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.106 ‐ Electric Cooking
Workshop Series
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
6,400.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Project is in progress and
funds will be encumbered by
end of this FY.
67 FY22 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.137 ‐ SB1383
Procurement
Requirements
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
205,653.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Grant CalRecycle grant funds are
paying for compost
brokering to meet the
SB1383 procurement
requirement.
109,151.92 encumbered. No
completion date. Needs to be
in base for FY 25‐26 under
600‐621. Not a Special
Project. Funded by grant
funds.
68 FY22 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.163 ‐ VMT to LOS
Standards
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
30,637.00 30,538.93 (0.00) Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
69 FY22 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.174 ‐ New Lndfill
Agrmnt/Solid Wst con
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
103,542.00 32,629.62 39,296.63 In Progress 8/31/2025 None No impact to General Fund. Project in progress. Will be
completed FY 25‐26. Funds
encumbered. Will carry over.
70 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.231 ‐ SC Corridor
Vision Study
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
154,079.00 151,968.63 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 None N/A Completed
71 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.242 ‐ AC2 Traffic
Monitoring
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
42,975.00 780.00 42,195.00 Completed 6/30/2026 Other Apple Donation Funds encumbered. Waiting
for invoices. Completed for
this FY.
72 FY20 Recreation services 632 Comm
Outreach & Neigh
Watch
750.056 ‐ Neighborhood
Engagement
100‐65‐632 ‐ General Fund‐Community
Services‐Comm Outreach & Neigh
Watch
56,781.00 23,562.29 0.00 Completed 9/30/2024 Grant California Volunteers Local
Governments: Connecting
Neighbors to Neighbors
(This specific GL is only the
materials portion of the
grant)
City secured for block leader
enhancement. ($200K + for
staff cost reimbursement in
2023. We got an extension in
Sep 2024. Tom had a memo
38
9
CC 06-03-2025
389 of 1012
All Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Y
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
73 FY24 Recreation services 633 Disaster
Preparedness
750.230 ‐ Business
Continuity Resilience
100‐65‐633 ‐ General Fund‐Community
Services‐Disaster Preparedness
500,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2024 Grant This is the Cal OES grant
that was received in 2022,
which was originally
$1million. This grant does
not appear on the grants
tracking sheet.
Do not defund, these are
grant funds that can still be
used.
74 FY23 Recreation services 633 Disaster
Preparedness
750.240 ‐ MRC Rise 100‐65‐633 ‐ General Fund‐Community
Services‐Disaster Preparedness
2,194.00 1,176.24 0.00 Completed 9/30/2024 Grant National Association of City
and County Health Officials
(NACCHO) Respond,
Innovate, Sustain, and
Equip (RISE) Awards
Additional supplies purchased
for MRC Rise in July 2024.
Project is now complete.
Total 41,598,688.00 3,898,893.98 7,444,047.76
39
0
CC 06-03-2025
390 of 1012
CWP Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Z
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
1 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.223 ‐ CWP
Electrification Study
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
96,057.00 29,477.12 6,630.55 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded 50K at Q3. Balance
will be used and project
completed this FY.
2 FY25 Public works 800 Public Works
Admin
750.244 ‐ CWP Recycled
Water Feasibility
100‐80‐800 ‐ General Fund‐PW
Administration‐Public Works Admin
200,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded at Q3.
Completed in‐house.
3 FY24 Administration 120 City Manager 750.245 ‐ CWP Rise Const
Stakeholder Engmt
100‐12‐120 ‐ General Fund‐City
Manager‐City Manager
100,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Work is being done in‐house.
Project can be defunded.
4 FY22 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.105 ‐ CWP Revisit 5G 100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan Review
250,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Work is being done in‐house.
Project can be defunded.
5FY24 Recreation services 632 Comm
Outreach & Neigh
Watch
750.227 ‐ CWP Public
Safety res/com areas
100‐65‐632 ‐ General Fund‐Community
Services‐Comm Outreach & Neigh
Watch
10,000.00 300.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Will be defunded at year‐end.
Project was not carried over
into FY 25‐27. This funding
was promoted for about two
years to offer $300 block
party grants to interested
block leaders. To date, only
one $300 grant was awarded,
therefore this project can be
defunded.
6 FY22 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.101 ‐ CWP RHNA and
Gen Plan Update
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
422,564.00 87,426.42 337,063.55 Completed Sep 2024 None N/A Completed in September,
when the City received notice
from HCD that the Housing
Element complies with State
law. Housing Element
implementation policies will
be presented for Commission
and Council input as project
progresses.
7 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.102 ‐ CWP Sign
Ordinance Update
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
200,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started Spring 2025 None N/A This project was carried over
into FY 25‐27. No additional
funding is required.
8 FY24 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.235 ‐ CWP Tree List 100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
50,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress June 2025 None N/A These funds will be moved to
100‐86‐825 750‐235 at year
end as part of the Urban
Forest Program next FY.
9FY24 Law enforcement 200 Law
Enforcement SC
Sherif
750.227 ‐ CWP Public
Safety res/com areas
100‐20‐200 ‐ General Fund‐Law
Enforcement‐Law Enforcement SC
Sherif
60,000.00 62,250.00 62,250.00 In Progress 6/30/2026 None N/A This is a current CWP project
that will remain ongoing for
annual maintenance of the
ALPR cameras. P&R will
continue to manage this
project on an ongoing basis.
10 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.219 ‐ CWP Bicycle
Facilities
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
50,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A In progress. Staff will purchase
and install the racks by the
end of the fiscal year.
39
1
CC 06-03-2025
391 of 1012
CWP Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment Z
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
11 FY24 Public works 825 Street Tree
Maintenance
750.235 ‐ CWP Tree List 100‐86‐825 ‐ General Fund‐Trees and
Right of Way‐Street Tree Maintenance
60,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress June 2025 None N/A This GL for CWP Tree List will
now be used for CWP Urban
Forest Program next FY.
12 FY25 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.243 ‐ CWP Active
Transportation Plan
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic Engineering
330,000.00 282.50 299,717.50 In Progress 6/30/2025 Grant TDA3 Staff have contracted with a
consutant and are working to
develop this project with
significant outreach and
meetings with the Bike Ped
Commission. City Council
adoption of Plan expected in
June 2026.
13 FY20 Community development 711 BMR
Affordable Housing
Fund
750.052 ‐ Develop ELI
Housing
265‐72‐711 ‐ BMR Housing‐Housing
Services‐BMR Affordable Housing Fund
238,301.00 0.00 3,005.00 In Progress Winter 2025 None N/A Pending development of Mary
Ave, then operational. Project
is under review in compliance
with Exclusive Negotiation
Agreement (ENA). Following
the Negotiation period, staff
will present the Council with a
Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) and Lease
agreement for the project and
the project will also
concurrently go through
entitlement hearings.
14 FY17 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.090 ‐
Residential/Mixed Use
Design
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
194,922.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Summer 2025 None N/A This is the Objective Design
Standards (ODC) in progress.
Invoices should be coming in
from consultant soon.
Total 2,261,844.00 179,736.04 708,666.60
39
2
CC 06-03-2025
392 of 1012
ATTACHMENT AA
#Project Description Goal Update Status Update
1 Public Safety (License
Plate Readers)
Deploy city-owned license plate readers and implement
policies to allow neighborhood-owned ones.
Quality of Life City adopted a policy and authorized an MOU with the County.
Camera's will be installed upon County's adoption of MOU and
policy.
OPERATIONAL
Cameras are being installed. Project will continue as operations if
Council approves ongoing appropriation of $60k/yr to maintain the
cameras. If Council does not approve the appropriation, the program
cannot continue.
2 Public Safety (Block
Leader)
Strengthen Block Leader/Neighborhood Watch programs to
ensure the leaders are active and expand the coverage of
active neighborhoods.
Quality of Life Staff developed a framework to engage with block leaders and
provide $300 block party grants. Staff will continue ongoing
promotion until the funds are depleted.
OPERATIONAL, CAN BE DEFUNDED - $9,700
Project was not carried over into FY 25-27. This funding was promoted
for about two years to offer $300 block party grants to interested block
leaders. To date, only one $300 grant was awarded, therefore this
project can be defunded at year end, resulting in $9,700 going back to
the General Fund. Other block leader enhancements are continuing as
part of ongoing operations.
3 Art in Public and Private
Areas
Revisit Municipal Code standards for art in public and private
development, including the standards in the Municipal Code
and developing an Art-in-lieu fee policy.
Quality of Life Planning Commission and City Council to review Arts & Culture
Commission recommendations in Spring 2025.
ALMOST COMPLETE
Arts and Culture Commission considering this item 5/19/25. Will be
taken to Council in Summer for final adoption.
4 Electrification Study Conduct public outreach, policy research, and coordinate with
regional efforts to develop policy options for electrification of
Cupertino's buildings in light of recent legal rulings inhibiting
certain electrification efforts.
Environmental
Sustainability
Council approved a building energy performance policy that
encourages electrification in new buildings in September 2024.
Development of policy for existing buildings is still ongoing.
Expected completion date is June 2025.
ALMOST COMPLETE
Staff have completed outreach and policy work on new buildings.
Policy options for existing buildings will be developed by the end of the
fiscal year.
5 The Rise: Construction
stakeholder engagement
Improve engagement with stakeholders to ensure progress
with construction and reduce barriers.
Quality of Life Staff is continuing engagement with this project on an ongoing
basis.
OPERATIONAL, CAN BE DEFUNDED - $100,000
The City Manager’s Office is continuing to engage with The Rise and
keep the community informed as the project moves forward. This will
continue as part of ongoing operations for the duration of the program,
at no cost to the city. Therefore, this project can be defunded at year
end, resulting in $100,000 going back to the General Fund.
6 Bicycle Facilities Increase the inventory of bicycle facilities and amenities, such
as bike racs, citywide.
Transportation First phase of bike racks estimated to be purchased and installed by
June 2025 upon completion of business outreach being conducted
by Bike Ped Commission Subcommittee and Cupertino Rotary.
ALMOST COMPLETE
Staff in partnership with the BPC subcommitee and the Rotary
finalized the locations for bike racks at parks. Staff will purchase and
install the racks by the end of the fiscal year.
Current City Work Program Updates for Year 2 Projects from Fiscal Years 2023-2025
Projects Not Continued to FY 25-27 CWP
393
CC 06-03-2025
393 of 1012
ATTACHMENT AA
#Project Description Goal Update Status Update
Current City Work Program Updates for Year 2 Projects from Fiscal Years 2023-2025
7 Tree List (CDD)Review and revise development tree list (per Ch. 14.18:
Protected Trees) with an emphasis on appropriate trees and
native species.
Environmental
Sustainability
RFP is complete. Staff received four proposals in December 2024.
Staff recommends this item be part of Urban Forest Master Plan.
Project rolled into FY 25-27 CWP as part of the Urban Forest Plan.
8 Tree List (PW)Project Phases:
1) Review, revise, and communicate street tree list with an
emphasis on appropriate trees and native species.
2) Develop an Urban Forest program scope and cost for future
consideration.
Environmental
Sustainability
RFP is complete. Staff received four proposals in December 2024.
Staff recommends this item be part of Urban Forest Master Plan.
Project rolled into FY 25-27 CWP as part of the Urban Forest Plan.
9 Preserve existing and
develop new BMR/ELI
Housing
Explore opportunities to preserve existing expiring BMR
housing.
Develop ELI (Extremely Low Income) and BMR housing units for
Developmentally Disabled individuals (IDD) on City-owned
property as well as the County-owned sites.
Housing Council selected developer for Mary Ave site in February. Staff
working to finalize Disposition and Development Agreement by
Summer 2025.
Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require additional funding.
10 Support for the unhoused Collaborate and fund jointly with West Valley efforts to address
regional needs and find workable support for the Unhoused.
Housing The City of Cupertino has joined with other West Valley Cities to
study opportunities to address unhoused issues.
Project rolled into FY 25-27 CWP as part of the Unhoused Policies
project.
11 5G Ordinance Update 5G Ordinance Quality of Life This item is in progress. Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require funding.
12 Residential and Mixed Use
Residential Design
Standards
Create objective design standards for residential projects,
including ensuring adequate buffers from neighborhood low-
density residential development
Quality of Life Planning Commission and City Council will review and approve
project by December 2025.
Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require additional funding.
13 Speed Limit Lowering (AB
43)
Lower speed limits where feasible pursuant to state adopted
Assembly Bill 43
Transportation Municipal Code amendments to be adopted by end of calendar year
2025 upon completion of City-wide study.
Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require funding.
14 Sign Ordinance Update Sign Ordinance Quality of Life City Attorney's Office was concerned about potential implications to
the First Amendment rights with the proposed Sign Ordinance
Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require additional funding.
15 Active Transportation Plan This item is a consolidation of existing and new transportation
efforts aiming to further goals outlined in the City's Vision Zero
Initiative, including:
1)Review and update the bike plan
2)Review and update the pedestrian plan
3)Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose
adjustments to create a better interface between all modes of
transportation
Transportation Staff and consultant are working to develop this project with
significant outreach and meetings with the Bike Ped Commission.
City Council adoption of Plan expected in June 2026.
Carried over into FY 25-27 CWP. Does not require additional funding.
Projects Continued to FY 25-27 CWP
394
CC 06-03-2025
394 of 1012
ATTACHMENT AA
#Project Description Goal Update Status Update
Current City Work Program Updates for Year 2 Projects from Fiscal Years 2023-2025
16 Whole City Policy Review Repeat the 2013 process of compiling and reviewing all City
Policies including 1) Administrative and 2) Council policies and
provide recommendations/updates, e.g. Green Purchasing,
Property Acquisition
Public Engagement
and Transparency
Project expected to come to Council on March 18. COMPLETED
Project Completed April 2025.
17 Fiscal Procedures and
Policies Handbook
Develop the handbook to ensure standardization of
accounting, budget, investment, procurement policies,
procedures, rules and regulations.
Fiscal Strategy Fiscal Procedures and Policies Handbook has been completed. COMPLETED
Project Completed April 2024.
18 Municipal Water System To analyze and recommend options for the continued
operation of the system currently and at the end of lease with
San Jose Water Company in September 2024.
Environmental
Sustainability
This project is now complete. City Council approved a new 12-year
lease agreement in July 2024.
COMPLETED
Project Completed July 2024.
19 Homestead Bike Lane
Study & Safe Routes to
School
Support collaboration efforts on multi-jurisdictional projects
along Homestead Road that include upgrading pedestrian and
bicycle infrastructure. (The current project phase is focused on
preliminary design and is funded to 35%. Future phases, when
funded, will focus on 100% plan design construction)
Transportation 35% Design Completed. Further design efforts will be supported by
City when initiated by VTA.
COMPLETED
Project completed January 2025.
20 Poet Laureate Playbook
Update
Update the Cupertino Poet Laureate Playbook to streamline
processes, outline clear expectations, and expand applicant
qualifications. The playbook has not been updated since 2016.
Quality of Life Playbook complete. Library Commission will appoint a Poet
Laureate Sub-Committee to recruit and select the next Poet
Laureate by June 2025.
COMPLETED
Project completed March 2025.
21 Recycled Water Feasibility
Study
Develop Recycled Water Feasibility Study. Include Blackberry
Farm focus and extension of recycled water from SCVWD.
Environmental
Sustainability
This project is completed. Staff released the Study in February as an
informational memo.
COMPLETED
Project completed February 2025.
22 Commission Governance
Reform Package
1)Revised Commissioner's Handbook to align it with Council
Procedures Manual
2)Investigate & report back on incidents of violations of the
Muni Code re: the Commission-Staff relationship
3)Realignment of Commisisoner terms of office
4)Establishment/revision of commissioner qualifications
Public Engagement
and Transparency
This project is now complete. New Commissioner applications were
published for recruitment in January 2025.
COMPLETED
Project completed January 2025.
Completed Projects
395
CC 06-03-2025
395 of 1012
Ongoing Special Projects from FYQ3 Attachment AB
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
15 FY20 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.032 ‐ General Plan 100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
239,805.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Carried over for any potential
general plan updates and
related legal review costs.
Prior years bulk of costs were
legal.
16 FY22 Community development 702 Mid Long Term
Planning
750.135 ‐ Laserfiche
planning map scanning
100‐71‐702 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Mid Long Term Planning
726.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Winter 2026 None N/A Ongoing Operational Item
17 FY19 Public works 820 Sidewalk Curb
and Gutter
750.020 ‐ Annual Sidewalk
Curb & Gutter
270‐85‐820 ‐ Transportation Fund‐
Streets‐Sidewalk Curb and Gutter
2,776,484.00 607,032.88 981,535.03 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Annual project. Moved to
base for next FY. Funds must
be carried over.
18 FY24 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.041 ‐ HHW and
PaintCare
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
161,010.00 150,878.37 0.00 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Other In previous years received
funding from landfill fees
which are earmarked for
this supplementation use in
303‐312. No impact to
General Fund.
Completed for this FY. Will
defund balance after all
invoices are paid.
19 FY20 Public works 807 Service Center
Administration
750.043 ‐ Office
Reconfiguration
100‐83‐807 ‐ General Fund‐Service
Center‐Service Center Administration
111,416.00 9,109.11 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Carryover funds for ongoing
citywide projects. In base
under 700‐702 for next FY.
20 FY20 Public works 802 Non Point
Source
750.064 ‐ Low Income Cost
Share
230‐81‐802 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐Non
Point Source
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A New low‐income support for
property assessments for
storm drain fees. Expenses
occur when applications are
received.
21 FY20 Public works 802 Non Point
Source
750.065 ‐ CUSD Joint Use
Cost Share
230‐81‐802 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐Non
Point Source
8,707.00 17,672.77 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Completed.
22 FY20 Public works 854 General Fund
Subsidy
750.065 ‐ CUSD Joint Use
Cost Share
230‐81‐854 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm
Drain‐Environmental Programs‐General
Fund Subsidy
0.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Ongoing. Completed this FY.
23 FY21 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.084 ‐ Single Use
Plastics Ordinance
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
94,544.00 (420.00)91,494.30 In Progress 1/31/2026 None No impact to General Fund. Ordinance implementation
still in progress and on
schedule. In base under 700‐
702 for next FY.
24 FY13 Public works 825 Street Tree
Maintenance
900.911 ‐ Trees and
Badges
100‐86‐825 ‐ General Fund‐Trees and
Right of Way‐Street Tree Maintenance
20,000.00 1,213.73 0.00 In Progress On‐going Ongoing annual tree planting
program. Funds are spent as
applications are submitted.
39
6
CC 06-03-2025
396 of 1012
Ongoing Special Projects from FYQ3 Attachment AB
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
25 FY13 Public works 821 Street
Pavement
Maintenance
900.921 ‐ Annual Asphalt
Project
270‐85‐821 ‐ Transportation Fund‐
Streets‐Street Pavement Maintenance
7,472,764.00 2,278,855.93 538,594.32 In Progress 6/30/2025 Annual project. Moved to
base for next FY. Funds must
be carried over.
Total 10,887,456.00 3,064,342.79 1,611,623.65
39
7
CC 06-03-2025
397 of 1012
Maintenance and Equipment Purchase Special Projects Attachment AC
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
26 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐Sustainability
Division
10,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded Q3
27 FY24 Public works 812 School Site
Maintenance
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐84‐812 ‐ General Fund‐Grounds‐
School Site Maintenance
10,500.00 8,500.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed and defunded Q3.
28 FY24 Public works 814 Sport Fields
Jollyman CRK
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐84‐814 ‐ General Fund‐Grounds‐
Sport Fields Jollyman CRK
10,500.00 8,500.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed and defunded Q3.
29 FY24 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource Recovery‐
Environmental Programs‐Resources
Recovery
20,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/25 None This amount comes from
Fund 520 with no impact to
General Fund.
Completed by IT. Defunded
Q3.
30 FY24 Public works 830 Bldg Maint
Quinlan Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐830 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Quinlan Center
79,174.00 9,555.21 0.00 Completed 6/30/25 None N/A Completed. Defunded at Q3.
31 FY24 Public works 848 Street Lighting 900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐85‐848 ‐ General Fund‐Streets‐
Street Lighting
175,000.00 171,298.97 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 Will defund at year‐end when
all invoices have been paid.
32 FY24 Public works 829 Bldg Maint
Service Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐829 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Service Center
2,000.00 297.09 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A
33 FY24 Public works 827 Bldg Maint City
Hall
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐827 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint City Hall
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will carryover
next FY.
34 FY24 Public works 832 Bldg Maint
McClellan Ranch
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐832 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint McClellan Ranch
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be completed
by end of this FY.
35 FY24 Public works 833 Bldg Maint
Monta Vista Ct
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐833 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Monta Vista Ct
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be completed
by end of this FY.
36 FY24 Public works 838 Comm Hall
Bldg Maint
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐838 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Comm Hall Bldg Maint
2,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be completed
by end of this FY.
39
8
CC 06-03-2025
398 of 1012
Maintenance and Equipment Purchase Special Projects Attachment AC
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
37 FY24 Public works 828 Bldg Maint
Library
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐828 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Library
45,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be completed
by end of this FY.
38 FY24 Public works 836 Bldg Maint
Sports Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
570‐87‐836 ‐ Sports Center‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Sports Center
45,705.00 20,169.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/25 None N/A In progress. Will be completed
by end of this FY.
39 FY24 Public works 831 Bldg Maint
Senior Center
750.025 ‐ Special
Maintenance
100‐87‐831 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Senior Center
123,675.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started Cannont be
completed this FY
None N/A Project delayed due to
coinciding project which is
impacting the ability to start.
Carryover funds. Estimated
competition FY 25‐26.
40 FY24 Public works 837 Bldg Maint
Creekside
900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐87‐837 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Creekside
0.00 24,490.00 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
Budget was requested in
10087837900905 but
expensed to this account
10087837900990
41 FY24 Public works 829 Bldg Maint
Service Center
900.990 ‐ Special Projects ‐
PW
100‐87‐829 ‐ General Fund‐Facilities
and Fleet‐Bldg Maint Service Center
46,937.00 46,092.22 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
Total 576,491.00 288,902.49 0.00
39
9
CC 06-03-2025
399 of 1012
Development Special Projects from FY25 Q3 Attachment AD
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With
Detail Description
Full Org Set Code And
Description
Amended Budget Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside
Funding
Sources
(Grant,
Other, or
None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried
over to next fiscal
year)
42 FY17 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.007 ‐ The Hamptons 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
108,640.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Application valid until end of
2026. If permit has not been
submitted for construction,
the item will be removed.
43 FY21 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.009 ‐ Marina Plaza 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
23,317.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Application valid until end of
2026. If permit has not been
submitted for construction,
the item will be removed.
44 FY22 Community development 701 Current
Planning
750.029 ‐ Vallco SB35/Rise 100‐71‐701 ‐ General Fund‐Planning‐
Current Planning
109,207.00 1,382.50 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A Active application and waiting
for building permit. Some
permits for grading and site
preparation work issued.
Carried over in the event that
permits are received.
45 FY22 Community development 714 Construction
Plan Check
750.031 ‐ Westport 100‐73‐714 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Construction Plan Check
64,621.00 1,087.50 33,194.23 In Progress 2026 None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of building permit
for the assisted living
component to be submitted in
2025.
46 FY20 Community development 714 Construction
Plan Check
750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐73‐714 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Construction Plan Check
14,595,179.00 870.00 2,594,309.46 In Progress Ongoing None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of additional
submittal of building permits.
47 FY20 Community development 715 Building
Inspection
750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐73‐715 ‐ General Fund‐Building‐
Building Inspection
5,406,634.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing None N/A In progress. Carried over in
anticipation of additional
submittal of building permits.
48 FY20 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.067 ‐ VTC 100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan Review
1,961,366.00 22,910.00 1,173,678.68 In Progress Ongoing None N/A This is an ongoing support for
development project funded
with pass‐through funds.
Total 22,268,964.00 26,250.00 3,801,182.37
40
0
CC 06-03-2025
400 of 1012
Special Projects as Defined in City Council Special Projects Policy Attachment AE
#FY
Added
Department Program Base And Detail
Account With Detail
Description
Full Org Set Code
And Description
Amended
Budget
Actual Amount
(Expenses)
Encumbrances Status Estimated
Completion
Outside Funding
Sources (Grant,
Other, or None)
Grant or Outside
Funding Source
Notes (e.g., carried over to
next fiscal year)
50 FY24 Administration 120 City Manager 750.239 ‐ PR & Strategic Comm
Strategy
100‐12‐120 ‐ General Fund‐City
Manager‐City Manager
127,400.00 0.00 0.00 Cancelled 6/30/2026 None N/A Defund
This project was canceled in 2024 and
was intended to be defunded in Q3.
Staff recommends defunding at year
d k h ti d i51 FY23 Community
development
705 Economic
Development
750.179 ‐ Econ Dev Strategy
Outreach
100‐71‐705 ‐ General Fund‐
Planning‐Economic
Development
20,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started None N/A Defund
Economic Development projects are
being funded through the FY 25‐27
CWP. This project can be defunded.
52 FY24 Community
development
705 Economic
Development
750.230 ‐ Business Continuity
Resilience
100‐71‐705 ‐ General Fund‐
Planning‐Economic
Development
310,487.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2025 Grant This is the Cal OES grant that was
received in 2022, which was
originally $1million. This grant
does not appear on the grants
Do not defund, these are grant funds
that can still be used.
About $175k previously used for sm‐
53 FY22 Information Services 986 GIS 750.166 ‐ AR McClellan Ranch 610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation &
Technology‐I&T GIS‐GIS
11,333.00 11,333.32 0.00 Completed 12/30/2024 None N/A
54 Information Services 308 Applications 750.181 ‐ ERP (Phase II) 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
69,166.00 0.00 0.00 Cancelled
55 FY23 Information Services 308 Applications 750.183 ‐ ACA Guide &
Wrapper
100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A
56 FY23 Information Services 308 Applications 750.184 ‐ Accela Roadmap 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
23,000.00 0.00 23,000.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A
57 FY23 Information Services 986 GIS 750.212 ‐ Laserfiche Scanning 610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation &
Technology‐I&T GIS‐GIS
4,099.00 0.00 4,098.54 Completed 9/30/2024 None N/A
58 FY21 Information Services 308 Applications 750.236 ‐ Project Dox 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
394.00 393.75 0.00 Completed 8/1/2024 None N/A
59 Information Services 308 Applications 750.237 ‐ ERP (Phase III) 100‐32‐308 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Applications‐Applications
2,500,000.00 0.00 0.00
60 FY24 Information Services 986 GIS 750.238 ‐ VR Decarb 610‐35‐986 ‐ Innovation &
Technology‐I&T GIS‐GIS
112,002.00 45,810.93 67,900.25 In Progress 6/30/2025 Grant Silicon Valley Clean Energy (fully
funded by Grant)
61 FY24 Information Services 305 Video 900.995 ‐ Special Projects ‐
CDD/I&T
100‐31‐305 ‐ General Fund‐I&T
Video‐Video
1,242,675.00 20,427.33 1,102,479.49 In Progress 6/30/2025 0.00 0.00
49 FY24 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.176 ‐ Climate AP Vision
Summary Doc
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐
Sustainability Division
10,000.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Defunded Q3
62 FY19 Public works 804 Plan Review 750.039 ‐ PW Scanning Project 100‐82‐804 ‐ General Fund‐
Developmental Services‐Plan
Review
9,310.00 0.00 9,310.29 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Project in progress. Vendor will bill in
June when scanning completed this FY.
63 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.040 ‐ Planned
Transportation Project
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic
Engineering
2,788.00 2,565.00 222.50 Completed 6/30/2025
64 FY23 Public works 853 Storm Drain
Fee
750.063 ‐ Rainwater Capture 230‐81‐853 ‐ Env Mgmt Cln Crk
Strm Drain‐Environmental
Programs‐Storm Drain Fee
28,207.00 6,634.62 9,072.44 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Other Funded by 2019 Clean Water
and Storm Protection parcel fee.
This will be going away after this FY due
to expiration of rebate matching
agreement with Valley Water as part of
cost cutting to allow parcel fee revenues
to fund more of the basic compliance
and infrastructure maintenance needs.
65 FY21 Public works 800 Public Works
Admin
750.071 ‐ Municipal Water
System
100‐80‐800 ‐ General Fund‐PW
Administration‐Public Works
Admin
5,811.00 11,842.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 Project completed.
66 FY22 Public works 122 Sustainability
Division
750.106 ‐ Electric Cooking
Workshop Series
100‐81‐122 ‐ General Fund‐
Environmental Programs‐
Sustainability Division
6,400.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress 6/30/2025 None N/A Project is in progress and funds will be
encumbered by end of this FY.
67 FY22 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.137 ‐ SB1383 Procurement
Requirements
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource
Recovery‐Environmental
Programs‐Resources Recovery
205,653.00 0.00 0.00 In Progress Ongoing annual
project
Grant CalRecycle grant funds are
paying for compost brokering to
meet the SB1383 procurement
requirement.
109,151.92 encumbered. No completion
date. Needs to be in base for FY 25‐26
under 600‐621. Not a Special Project.
Funded by grant funds.
40
1
CC 06-03-2025
401 of 1012
Special Projects as Defined in City Council Special Projects Policy Attachment AE
68 FY22 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.163 ‐ VMT to LOS
Standards
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic
Engineering
30,637.00 30,538.93 (0.00) Completed 6/30/2025 Completed
69 FY22 Public works 801 Resources
Recovery
750.174 ‐ New Lndfill
Agrmnt/Solid Wst con
520‐81‐801 ‐ Resource
Recovery‐Environmental
Programs‐Resources Recovery
103,542.00 32,629.62 39,296.63 In Progress 8/31/2025 None No impact to General Fund. Project in progress. Will be completed
FY 25‐26. Funds encumbered. Will carry
over.
70 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.231 ‐ SC Corridor Vision
Study
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic
Engineering
154,079.00 151,968.63 0.00 Completed 6/30/2025 None N/A Completed
71 FY23 Public works 844 Traffic
Engineering
750.242 ‐ AC2 Traffic
Monitoring
100‐88‐844 ‐ General Fund‐
Transportation‐Traffic
Engineering
42,975.00 780.00 42,195.00 Completed 6/30/2026 Other Apple Donation Funds encumbered. Waiting for
invoices. Completed for this FY.
72 FY20 Recreation services 632 Comm
Outreach & Neigh
Watch
750.056 ‐ Neighborhood
Engagement
100‐65‐632 ‐ General Fund‐
Community Services‐Comm
Outreach & Neigh Watch
56,781.00 23,562.29 0.00 Completed 9/30/2024 Grant California Volunteers Local
Governments: Connecting
Neighbors to Neighbors (This
specific GL is only the materials
portion of the grant)
City secured for block leader
enhancement. ($200K + for staff cost
reimbursement in 2023. We got an
extension in Sep 2024. Tom had a memo
73 FY24 Recreation services 633 Disaster
Preparedness
750.230 ‐ Business Continuity
Resilience
100‐65‐633 ‐ General Fund‐
Community Services‐Disaster
Preparedness
500,000.00 0.00 0.00 Not Started 6/30/2024 Grant This is the Cal OES grant that was
received in 2022, which was
originally $1million. This grant
does not appear on the grants
tracking sheet.
Do not defund, these are grant funds
that can still be used.
74 FY23 Recreation services 633 Disaster
Preparedness
750.240 ‐ MRC Rise 100‐65‐633 ‐ General Fund‐
Community Services‐Disaster
Preparedness
2,194.00 1,176.24 0.00 Completed 9/30/2024 Grant National Association of City and
County Health Officials
(NACCHO) Respond, Innovate,
Sustain, and Equip (RISE) Awards
Additional supplies purchased for MRC
Rise in July 2024. Project is now
complete.
Total 5,603,933.00 339,662.66 1,322,575.14
40
2
CC 06-03-2025
402 of 1012
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 BY
APPROPRIATING, TRANSFERRING, AND UNAPPROPRIATING MONIES
FOR SPECIFIED FUNDS
WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government depends
on a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ratio of expenditures within
anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, accomplishing City Council directives, projects and programs,
and performing staff duties and responsibilities likewise depends on the monies
available for that purpose; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the balances from the
funds specified in this resolution are adequate to cover the proposed amended
appropriations, and therefore recommends the fund reallocations described
herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
approve the recommended fund reallocations and ratifies the attached amended
appropriations as set forth in Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 3rd day of June 2025, by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
403
CC 06-03-2025
403 of 1012
Resolution No. __________________
Page 2
SIGNED:
________
Liang Chao, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
404
CC 06-03-2025
404 of 1012
Attachment B
Exhibit A
405
CC 06-03-2025
405 of 1012
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14012 Agenda Date: 6/3/2025
Agenda #: 9.
Subject: Consider the potential purchase of and appoint a negotiator for 10480 Finch Avenue, owned
by the Cupertino Unified School District, adjacent to Sedgwick Elementary School
Appoint the Interim City Attorney and Acting City Manager to negotiate with the Superintendent of
the Cupertino Unified School District or her designee regarding the possible purchase of 10480 Finch
Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014, Assessor’s Parcel Number 375-40-067, from Cupertino Unified School
District on terms established by the City Council
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 5/29/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™406
CC 06-03-2025
406 of 1012
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 3, 2025
Subject
Consider the potential purchase of and appoint a negotiator for 10480 Finch Avenue,
owned by the Cupertino Unified School District, adjacent to Sedgwick Elementary
School
Recommended Action
Appoint the Interim City Attorney and Acting City Manager to negotiate with the
Superintendent of the Cupertino Unified School District or her designee regarding the
possible purchase of 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014, Assessor’s Parcel
Number 375-40-067, from Cupertino Unified School District on terms established by the
City Council.
Background
10480 Finch Avenue (“Finch Property”) is an approximate 1.5-acre vacant parcel
currently owned by the Cupertino Unified School District (“CUSD”). Adjacent to
Sedgwick Elementary School, it is located in the southeastern portion of the City in the
Rancho Rinconada district, bounded by Stevens Creek Blvd. to the north, Miller Avenue
to the west, Bollinger Road to the south and Lawrence Expressway to the east.
In 2016, the CUSD Board authorized the purchase of the Finch Property for $5,386,750 in
order to expand Sedgwick Elementary School. Due to the property’s prior use for
agricultural purposes and the potential presence of pesticides, CUSD retained an
environmental consultant to complete a Geologic and Environmental Hazards Report.
Testing by the consultant revealed pesticide residue, lead, and hydrocarbon deposits
from an underground fuel tank. Under the oversight of the Department of Toxic
Substances (“DTSC”), a Preliminary Environmental Assessment and a Supplemental Site
Investigation were completed in September and November 2015. Although CUSD has
confirmed providing all documentation in their possession, they did not provide a copy
of a closure letter from DTSC. Further investigation into the environmental condition of
the site is advisable and an updated Phase 1 Environmental Report should be obtained
during negotiations.
407
CC 06-03-2025
407 of 1012
Pertinent Environmental documents from CUSD are as follows:
i. Attachment A: Preliminary Environmental Assessment (September 2015)
ii. Attachment B: Supplemental Site Investigation (November 2015)
iii. Attachment C: School Cleanup Agreement with DTSC (June 2017)
iv. Attachment D: Removal Action Workplan (January 2018)
v. Attachment E: Hazardous Materials Management Report (June2018)
Parkland Dedication in lieu Fee fund
Pursuant to Municipal Code section 13.08 and Government Code section 66477,
permissible uses of the Parkland Dedication in lieu Funds (“Parkland Funds”) include
acquisition of parkland or developing new parks and recreational facilities.
Currently, the City’s Parkland Fund has a balance of approximately $19.1 million (as
shown on 118 of the FY23-24 ACFR), of which $5.9 M is allocated toward Lawrence-
Mitty Park design and construction, leaving approximately $13.2 million currently not
allocated. If the City Council intends to convert this parcel into a public park space, the
available Parkland funds could be used towards the purchase and development of the
property.
Next Steps
Should Council direct staff to proceed with exploring a purchase of the Finch Property,
the following due diligence information will need to be prepared prior to a discussion in
Closed Session:
i. Obtain an updated Title Report;
ii. Perform any required environmental analysis;
iii. Obtain a property appraisal.
The above are estimated to cost approximately $10,000 and to take approximately 6 to 10
weeks to complete.
Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.
Fiscal Impact
Appointment of negotiators will result in the use of staff time and expenses for time
used by Aleshire & Wynder, LLP. Approximately $10,000 will be used from the City
Manager’s contingency fund (100-14-123 719-705) to procure the necessary
documentation to inform the purchasing discussions.
City Work Program Item/Description
408
CC 06-03-2025
408 of 1012
None
Council Goals
Quality of Life
California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable at this time.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Floy Andrews, City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Acting City Manager
Attachments:
A - Preliminary Environmental Assessment (September 2015)
B - Supplemental Site Investigation (November 2015)
C - School Cleanup Agreement with DTSC (June 2017)
D - Removal Action Workplan (January 2018)
E - Hazardous Materials Management Report (June 2018)
409
CC 06-03-2025
409 of 1012
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
SEDGWICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
EXPANSION PROJECT
10480 FINCH AVENUE
CUPERTINO, SANTA CL ARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
September 2015
Attachment A
410
CC 06-03-2025
410 of 1012
41
1
CC 06-03-2025
411 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
- i -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ ES1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE ........................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................... 1-1
2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND CONTACTS ............................................... 2-1
2.1 SITE ADDRESS / ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER .......................... 2-1
2.2 DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON AND MAILING ADDRESS .......... 2-1
2.3 PROPERTY USE ................................................................................. 2-1
2.4 ENVIROSTOR DATABASE NUMBER ................................................. 2-1
2.5 TOWNSHIP, RANGE, AND SECTION ................................................. 2-1
2.6 SITE MAPS .......................................................................................... 2-1
2.7 PHYSICAL SETTING ........................................................................... 2-1
2.8 SURROUNDING PROPERTY LAND USE ........................................... 2-2
3.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS ......................................... 3-1
3.2 CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN........................................... 3-2
4.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL ......................................................................... 4-1
5.0 PEA ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................ 5-1
5.1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS ......................................................................... 5-1
5.1.1 Soil Sampling .......................................................................... 5-1
5.1.2 Soil Gas Sampling ................................................................... 5-3
5.1.3 Quality Assurance / Quality Control Samples ........................... 5-3
5.2 SAMPLE COLLECTION ....................................................................... 5-3
5.2.1 Soil Sample Collection .............................................................. 5-3
5.2.2 Soil Gas Sample Collection ...................................................... 5-4
5.2.3 Decontamination Procedures ................................................... 5-5
5.3 SAMPLE ANALYSES .......................................................................... 5-5
5.3.1 Chain-of-Custody Records ....................................................... 5-6
5.4 FIELD VARIANCES ............................................................................. 5-6
6.0 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS ................................................................ 6-1
6.1.1 OCPs ...................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.2 Lead ........................................................................................ 6-1
412
CC 06-03-2025
412 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
- ii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
6.1.3 Arsenic .................................................................................... 6-2
6.1.4 PCBs ....................................................................................... 6-2
6.1.5 TPHg and BTEX ...................................................................... 6-2
6.2 SOIL GAS SAMPLING RESULTS ....................................................... 6-2
6.2.1 VOCs ...................................................................................... 6-2
6.3 QA/QC SAMPLES ............................................................................... 6-3
6.3.1 Duplicates ................................................................................ 6-3
6.3.2 Equipment Blank ...................................................................... 6-4
6.3.3 Field Blank ............................................................................... 6-4
6.3.4 Laboratory QA/QC .................................................................... 6-4
7.0 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING EVALUATION ............................................... 7-1
7.1 CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN........................................... 7-1
7.2 SOIL RISK ASSESSMENT .................................................................. 7-1
7.3 SOIL GAS RISK ASSESSMENT .......................................................... 7-2
8.0 ECOLOGICAL SCREENING ........................................................................... 8-1
9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 9-1
10.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 10-1
TABLES
5-1 Field Sampling Schedule (Soil) ........................................................................ 5-7
5-2 Field Sampling Schedule (Soil Gas) ................................................................ 5-9
5-3 Sample Collection Information ......................................................................... 5-10
6-1 Soil Results for OCPs ...................................................................................... 6-6
6-2 Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead .................................................................... 6-8
6-3 Soil Results for PCBs ...................................................................................... 6-11
6-4 Soil Results for TPHg and BTEX ..................................................................... 6-12
6-5 Soil Gas Results for VOCs .............................................................................. 6-13
7-1 Soil Exposure Screening Evaluation ................................................................ 7-4
7-2 Soil Gas Exposure Screening Evaluation ........................................................ 7-5
413
CC 06-03-2025
413 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
- iii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
PLATES
Site Location ............................................................................................................... Plate 1-1
Site Plan ..................................................................................................................... Plate 1-2
Conceptual Site Model ................................................................................................ Plate 4-1
Site Sampling Plan ........................................................................................................... Plate 5-1
Soil Vapor/Drill Hole Locations ......................................................................................... Plate 5-2
Soil Vapor Probe and Sample Schematic ........................................................................ Plate 5-3
Chlordane Results ..................................................................................................... Plate 6-1
Lead Results ............................................................................................................... Plate 6-2
Arsenic Results ........................................................................................................... Plate 6-3
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DTSC CORRESPONDENCE
APPENDIX B: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP)
APPENDIX C: DRILL HOLE LOGS
APPENDIX D: ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORTS AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODYS
APPENDIX E: RISK SPREADSHEETS
414
CC 06-03-2025
414 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre), on behalf of the Cupertino Union School District
(District), has prepared this Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) report for the
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project located at 10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino,
Santa Clara County, California (Project Site).
The Project Site consists of 1.48 acres of residential use property, and is located
adjacent to the northwest corner of the Sedgwick Elementary School property. According to
Padre’s review of available historical aerial photographs, the Project Site was planted as an
orchard from at least 1939 through the late 1950s. The existing residential building is present
in a 1956 aerial photograph.
The Project Site is bordered to the north by Phil Lane, beyond which is residential
property; to the east and south by Sedgwick Elementary School; to the west by residential
property; and to the northwest by Finch Avenue, beyond which is residential property.
The PEA was conducted in accordance with the Padre document titled Preliminary
Environmental Assessment Work Plan, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project, 10480
Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California, dated May 2015. The PEA Work Plan
was conditionally approved by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) in a letter to District dated June 4, 2015. This
PEA Report will be made available to the public for review and comment pursuant to Option A of
the California Education Code (CEC) §17213.1.a (6)(A).
The purpose of the PEA was to establish whether a release or potential release of
hazardous substances, which pose a threat to human health via ingestion, dermal contact, and
inhalation exposure pathways, exists at the Project Site. Chemicals of potential concern
(COPCs) identified at the Project Site included:
• Organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and arsenic in soil from historic agricultural use;
• Lead in soil from weathering of lead-based paint used on historic on-site building
structures; and termiticides in soil from historic on-site building structures with
wood components;
• Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soil from the weathering of window caulking
used in historic building structures; and
• Petroleum hydrocarbons and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil and soil
gas from a former 500-gallon gasoline underground storage tank (UST).
The results of the PEA screening level risk assessment estimated the total risk from
COPCs identified in soils at the Project Site to be 3.2 x 10-5, which provides an increased cancer
risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The total health hazard from COPCs identified in
soils at the Project Site is estimated to be 0.46, which does not provide an increased health
415
CC 06-03-2025
415 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL ES-2
hazard (i.e., >1). Therefore, a response action to reduce and/or eliminate the COPCs identified
in surficial soils at the Project Site is recommended.
Lead concentrations ranged from 9.0 to 310 milligrams (mg/kg) in soil samples collected
throughout the Project Site. Using DTSC’s lead risk assessment spreadsheet model
(LeadSpread Version 8), exposure to the lead concentrations identified at the Project Site would
result in a 90th percentile blood lead concentration of 8.0 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dl) in
children, which exceeds the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA)
blood toxicity level of 1 µg/dl. Therefore, a response action to reduce or eliminate lead-
impacted soil is recommended.
Arsenic concentrations ranged from 5.2 to 15 mg/kg in soil samples collected from
across the Project Site. The arsenic data set consisted of four soil samples collected as part of
the PEA, and 16 soil samples previously collected as part of a preliminary soil evaluation
completed by others (Cornerstone, 2014). The four PEA soil samples were collected as step-
out and step-down samples at the location of soil sample SS-6, which reported the highest
Project Site arsenic concentration at 15 mg/kg. Arsenic concentrations reported for the PEA soil
samples ranged from 5.7 to 13 mg/kg, indicating that arsenic concentrations in soil at this
location do not present a potential “hotspot” for arsenic in soil. A statistical evaluation was
performed by calculating the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) for the arsenic data set. The
95% UCL for arsenic in soil at the Project Site was calculated to be 10 mg/kg. A graphical
evaluation completed by creating a normal probability plot of the arsenic data set. The shape of
the plotted data presents a relatively normal distribution. Therefore, arsenic concentrations
identified in surface soil at the Project Site are representative of ambient concentrations and
further assessment and/or remedial action for arsenic in soil is not warranted.
Results of the soil gas assessment conducted at the Project Site identified low level
concentrations of VOCs; however, none of the of the VOCs exceeded their respective human
health screening levels. The results of the PEA screening level risk assessment for soil gas
estimated the total risk to be 8.6 x 10-9, which does not provide an increased cancer risk of
greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The cumulative hazard was estimated to be 0.0003, which
does not provide a significant health hazard (>1). Therefore, further assessment and/or
remediation regarding VOCs identified in soil gas at the Project Site is not warranted.
Due to elevated concentrations of OCPs and lead identified in surface soil around
existing structures at the Project Site, Padre recommends a response action to reduce or
eliminate the potential impact of these contaminants. The recommended remedial action is
excavation, removal, and offsite disposal at an appropriate landfill. Prior to the response action,
Padre recommends conducting a Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) to further define
chlordane and lead impacts around the structures.
416
CC 06-03-2025
416 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the results of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA),
which was completed by Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre) on behalf of the Cupertino Union
School District (District), for the Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project located at
10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (Project Site). The Project Site
is identified on Plate 1-1: Site Location and Plate 1-2: Site Plan.
The Project Site consists of 1.48 acres of residential property located adjacent to the
northwest corner of the existing Sedgewick Elementary School. The expansion project will not
result in an addition of classrooms or students to the existing elementary school. Public water
and sewer will be provided to the Project Site by the San Jose Water Company and the
Sunnyvale Sanitation District, respectively.
The PEA was conducted in accordance with the Padre document titled Preliminary
Environmental Assessment Work Plan, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project, 10480
Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California, dated May 2015. The PEA Work Plan
was conditionally approved by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) in a letter to District dated June 4, 2015. This
PEA Report will be made available to the public for review and comment pursuant to Option A of
the California Education Code (CEC) §17213.1.a(6)(A). A copy of the DTSC approval letter is
included in Appendix A.
1.1 PURPOSE
California Department of Education statutes (Assembly Bill 387, Senate Bill 162 and
Assembly Bill 2644) require the CalEPA/DTSC to review environmental assessments for
proposed new school sites and/or new construction school expansion projects. The role of the
DTSC is to ensure that selected properties do not contain hazardous substances that are a
threat to public health and the environment.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
This PEA was conducted consistent with the DTSC guidance manual for evaluation of
hazardous substance release sites titled Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance
Manual, State of California, Environmental Protection Agency, January 1994 (Interim Final –
Revised October 2013). Pursuant to the Health and Safety Code §25355.5 (a) (1) (C), the
activities performed were to fulfill the requirements of the Environmental Oversight Agreement
(EOA) issued to the school district by CalEPA/DTSC.
The objectives of the PEA included:
• Evaluating historical information for indications of past use, storage, disposal, and/or
release of hazardous substances at the Project Site;
• Establishing through a field sampling and laboratory analysis program, the nature,
417
CC 06-03-2025
417 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
1-2
concentration, and general extent of hazardous substances that may be present in
soil and/or groundwater at the Project Site; and
• Estimating the potential threat to public health and the environment presented by
hazardous constituents identified at the property, and providing an indicator of
relative risk using a residential land-use scenario.
Based on information developed during the course of the PEA and the conservative
human and ecological risk evaluation using the DTSC’s PEA Guidance Manual (January 1994
(Interim Final – Revised October 2013), DTSC will then make an informed decision regarding
potential risks posed by the Project Site.
Possible outcomes of the PEA decision include the issuance of a “No Further Action”
finding if the risk level is found to be less than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6) which is DTSC’s “point of
departure”, and the health hazard index is less than 1.0. Additional outcomes may include the
need for further assessment through the Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
process if the Project Site presents a risk and/or health hazard; the need to perform a Removal
Action if localized impacts by hazardous substances release(s) are found; or the abandonment
of the Project Site as a potential school site and the pursuit of alternative sites.
418
CC 06-03-2025
418 of 1012
419
CC 06-03-2025
419 of 1012
42
0
CC 06-03-2025
420 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
2-1
2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND CONTACTS
2.1 SITE ADDRESS / ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER
The Project Site consists of approximately 1.48 acres of residential property located at
10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California. The County of Santa Clara
identifies the Project Site as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 375-40-067. A copy of the APN
map was presented in the PEA Work Plan.
2.2 DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON AND MAILING ADDRESS
Mary Ann Duggan, P.E., Director – Facility Modernization
Cupertino Union School District
10301 Vista Drive,
Cupertino, CA 94014
Phone No. (408) 252-3000
Duggan_maryann@csdk8.org
2.3 PROPERTY USE
The Project Site consists of 1.48-acres of residential use property, and is located
adjacent to the northwest corner of the Sedgwick Elementary School property. According to a
review of available historical aerial photographs, the Project Site was planted as an orchard
from at least 1939 through the late 1950s. The existing residential building is present in a 1956
aerial photograph.
2.4 ENVIROSTOR DATABASE NUMBER
The EnviroStor database number for the Project Site is 60002143.
2.5 TOWNSHIP, RANGE, AND SECTION
The Project Site is located in Section 19, Township 7 South, Range 1 West, of the
Cupertino Quadrangle, California USGS 7½-Minute Series, Topographic Map (1991).
Approximate latitude and longitude of the central area of the property are identified to be:
• Latitude (North) 37° 18’ 56.5194” (37.3157)
• Longitude (West) -122° 0’ 35.2794” (-122.0098)
2.6 SITE MAPS
A Site Location Map is included as Plate 1-1, and a Site Plan is included as Plate 1-2.
2.7 PHYSICAL SETTING
Based on a review of the USGS 7.5-minute series topographic map Cupertino
Quadrangle, California, 1991 (photorevised 1982), the Project Site lies at an approximate
421
CC 06-03-2025
421 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
2-2
elevation of 205 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the center of the Project Site. The overall
topographic gradient for the surrounding area is to the northeast. The Project Site is relatively
flat with storm water runoff directed northerly towards storm drains located in the adjacent
street.
Calabazas Creek is located approximately 1,600-feet northwest of the Project Site and
flows in a northeasterly direction. Saratoga Creek is located approximately 0.75 miles west of
the Project Site and flows in a northerly direction.
The Project Site is located within the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province of California.
The Coast Ranges stretch approximately 600 miles from the Oregon border to the Santa Ynez
River and fall into two sub-provinces: the ranges north of San Francisco Bay and those from the
bay south to Santa Barbara County. The northern ranges lie east of the San Andreas Fault
zone, whereas most of the southern ranges are to the west. The province contains many
elongate ranges and narrow valleys that are approximately parallel to the coast, although the
coast usually shows a somewhat more northerly trend than do the ridges and valleys.
Therefore, some valleys intersect the shore at acute angles and some mountains terminate
abruptly at the sea. The northern Coast Ranges are higher than the southern where Solomon
Peak located in Trinity County rises to an elevation of 7,581 feet, the highest point in the Coast
Ranges (Norris and Webb, 1990).
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources
Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/), two soil types
are identified for the Project Site. Soils located within the southeast half of the Project Site
consist of Urban Land-Stevens Creek Complex located on 0 to 2 percent slopes. Native soils
consist of sandy loam, silt loam, and silty clay loam. Soils in the northwest half of the Project
Site consist of Urban Land-Elpaloalto Complex located on 0 to 2 percent slopes. Native soils
consist of clay loam and silty clay loam. Both of these soils are well drained and runoff is slow.
A review of the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker website
(http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov), identified groundwater assessment activities that
were conducted for a facility located approximately 0.56 miles northeast of the Project
Site. Reportedly, the depth to first groundwater at the referenced site is greater than 80
feet bgs, and groundwater is inferred to flow in a northeast direction.
2.8 SURROUNDING PROPERTY LAND USE
The Project Site is bordered to the north by Phil Lane, beyond which is residential
property; to the east and south by Sedgwick Elementary School; to the west by residential
property; and to the northwest by Finch Avenue, beyond which is residential property.
422
CC 06-03-2025
422 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
3-1
3.0 BACKGROUND
3.1 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS
Padre reviewed the document titled Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and
Preliminary Soil Quality Evaluation, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, California and dated July
1, 2014. A copy of the Phase I ESA has previously been provided to DTSC. The Phase I ESA
was prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone) on behalf of David J. Powers &
Associates and, a copy was provided to DTSC. Below is a summary of the findings presented
in the Phase I ESA:
The property is currently owned by F.A. Pestarino Jr. Trustee, and has been owned by
the Pestarino family since the 1930s. The property historically contained a prune tree orchard.
According to a review of available historical aerial photographs, the Project Site was planted as
an orchard from at least 1939 through the late 1950s. The existing residential building is
present in a 1956 aerial photograph.
In addition to the residence, the Project Site contains a workshop (wood-framed with
corrugate metal roof) located at the southeast corner of the Project Site. Located south and
adjacent to the workshop are two, small, single-room dwellings that are wood-framed and
situated on concrete blocks.
In 1996 a 500-gallon gasoline UST was removed from the Project Site. Reportedly, the
UST had been empty for approximately 20 years prior to removal. Two soil samples were
collected below the ends of the UST at depths of approximately 7-feet below grade surface
(bgs). Total petroleum hydrocarbons identified as gasoline (TPHg) were identified in soil at
concentrations up to 60 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The Santa Clara Valley Water District
(SCVWD) subsequently issued a case-closure letter for the UST dated March 26, 1997 stating
that “Due to the low levels of hydrocarbons detected and the site location, Santa Clara Valley
Water District staff believes that with time the residual pollution will naturally attenuate and does
not require any further corrective action at this time.”
Because recognized environmental conditions (RECs) were identified as part of the
Phase I ESA, Cornerstone conducted preliminary soil assessment activities at the Project Site.
Based on the historic agricultural use (orchard) at the Project Site and the age/construction of
the existing structures, a total of sixteen surface soil samples were collected throughout the
Project Site and chemically analyzed for the presence of pesticides, arsenic, lead, and mercury.
Five of the soil samples were collected at the perimeter of the residence, and two soil samples
were collected at the perimeter of the workshop. Below is summary of the analytical results:
• Chlordane was reported at a concentration of 2.8 mg/kg at the location of soil
sample SS-5, which exceeds the U.S. EPA Region 9 Residential Screening Level
(RSL, EPA June 2015) of 1.7 mg/kg. Soil sample SS-5 is located along the
western side of the residence;
423
CC 06-03-2025
423 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
3-2
• Arsenic was reported at concentrations ranging from 5.2 mg/kg to 15 mg/kg. The
highest arsenic concentration was identified at the location of soil sample SS-6
located along the northwest property boundary; and
• Lead was reported at concentrations ranging from 9.0 mg/kg to 100 mg/kg, which
exceeds the California Human Health Screening Level (CHHSL) of 80 mg/kg.
The highest lead concentration was identified at the location of soil sample SS-2
located along the western side of the workshop.
The soil assessment activities included the advancement of one drill hole using direct-
push drilling technology to an approximate depth of 20 feet at the location of the former UST.
Soil samples were collected from approximate depths of 8 feet and 12 feet, which were
chemically analyzed for the presence of TPHg, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes
(BTEX) and methyl-tert butyl ether (MTBE). Reportedly, TPHg, BTEX, or MTBE concentrations
were not identified in the soil sample collected from a depth of 8 feet below ground surface
(bgs). However, TPHg, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes were identified at concentrations of
1,300 mg/kg, 27 mg/kg, and 180 mg/kg, respectively in the 12-foot soil sample.
3.2 CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
The chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) identified at the Project Site was based on
the results of a previous environmental investigation and historic property use. This information
is summarized below:
• The Project Site had been used for agricultural purposes (orchard) from at
least 1939 through the late 1950s. Based on preliminary soil data, further
assessment for OCPs associated with historic agricultural use was not
warranted. However, arsenic concentrations ranged from 5.2 to 15 mg/kg
across the Project Site. Therefore, at the location of soil sample SS-6 (which
contained the highest concentration of arsenic), the collection of step-out soil
samples was performed;
• Based on preliminary soil data, chlordane was identified at a concentration of
2.8 mg/kg at the location of soil sample SS-5, which is located on the west
side of the residence (constructed circa 1950s). Therefore, step-out soil
sampling for OCPs was performed at the location of SS-5 and around the
perimeter of the residence and outbuildings (workshop, single-room
dwelling);
• Based on preliminary soil data, lead was identified at a concentration of 100
mg/kg at the location of soil sample SS-2, which is located on the west side
of the workshop. Therefore, step-out soil sampling for lead at the location of
SS-2 and around the perimeter of the residence and outbuildings was
performed;
• In recent years, U.S. EPA has disovered that caulk containing PCBs was
used in many buildings from the 1950s through the 1970s. The residential
424
CC 06-03-2025
424 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
3-3
structure at the Project Site was constructed in the 1950s. Therefore, soil
sampling for the presence of PCBs beneath large window panes at the
residence was performed;
• No electrical transformers, either pad-mounted and/or pole-mounted, were
identified on the Project Site. Therefore, the collection of soil samples to
assess for the presence of PCBs related to electrical transformers was not
performed;
• Based on the presence of a former gasoline UST and identified petroleum
hydrocarbon contamination, soil vapor sampling for TPHg and VOCs was
performed;
• According to the California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of
San Francisco – San Jose Quadrangle California, (1:250,000), 1990
(Second Printing 2005) ultramafic outcrops are mapped approximately 7.5
miles east/south east of the Project Site, and approximately 7.5 miles south
of the Project Site. Based on a review of U.S.G.S. topographic maps for the
Project Site and surrounding areas (San Jose, Santa Clara), the main
drainage from the ultramafic outcrops appear to be Coyote Creek, Alamitos
Creek, and Los Gatos Creek which drain along the east side of the Santa
Clara Valley. The Project Site is situated along the west side of the Santa
Clara Valley within the drainage of Calabazas Creek. Therefore, the
potential presence of naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) at the Project Site
from weathering and deposition of ultramafic rock outcrops is considered low
and soil sampling for NOA was not performed;
425
CC 06-03-2025
425 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
4-1
4.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
The conceptual site model is the tool used to identify the primary sources of COPCs
identified at the Project Site, release mechanisms for the COPCs, points of exposure at the
Project Site, and the exposure pathways (ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact) for the
screening level evaluation of chronic health risks. The objective of this PEA is to evaluate the
Project Site for an unrestricted land use (residential) scenario.
There are several ways a receptor may be exposed to COPCs, ie. pesticides, metals.
Receptors can include humans, animals, vegetation, surface water, and/or groundwater.
Typical pathways for exposure to COPCs include:
• Physical transport via tracking chemicals of concern on people, clothing,
and/or equipment; and
• Transport by airborne particulate matter.
For humans and animals, exposure usually occurs by the following exposure routes:
• Ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil particles;
• Dermal contact with contaminated soil particles.
The conceptual site model for the Project Site was developed based on the following
assumptions:
• Exposure of students, staff, and site visitors to COPCs in soil via the
ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation routes is considered a complete
exposure pathway;
• Exposure of students, staff, and site visitors to COPCs in airborne particulate
matter via the inhalation route is considered a complete exposure pathway;
• Exposure of students, staff, and site visitors to COPCs in soil vapor via the
inhalation route is considered a complete exposure pathway;
• The Project Site will be connected to municipal water. Therefore, exposure
to groundwater beneath the Project Site is considered an incomplete
exposure pathway;
• Surface water was not observed at the Project Site. Therefore, exposure to
surface water at the Project Site is an incomplete exposure pathway; and
• Ingestion of vegetation and animals is considered an incomplete exposure
pathway because of the proposed use as an elementary school site.
A conceptual site model is presented on Plate 4-1.
426
CC 06-03-2025
426 of 1012
42
7
CC 06-03-2025
427 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-1
5.0 PEA ASSESSMENT
On July 9th and 10th, 2015 Padre completed the PEA soil and soil gas sampling activities
at the Project Site in general accordance with the DTSC approved Final PEA Work Plan dated
May 2015. At the time of the PEA sample collection activities, there were no unusual Project
Site conditions.
The District provided notification to residents in the “immediate area” of the Project Site
prior to the commencement of PEA field activities. The “immediate area” is defined as in line of
sight of the Project Site. The notices were submitted on District letterhead and delivered via
United States Postal Service a minimum of 5 days prior field activities. A copy of the draft
notification letter was presented in the PEA Work Plan.
5.1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS
Soil samples collected around the perimeters of the buildings were located in the field
using pin flags. The field sampling schedule is presented in Tables 5-1 and 5-2, and the
sample collection information is presented in Table 5-3. Additionally, the sample collection
locations are presented on Plates 5-1 and 5-2. Specific sample locations are described below.
5.1.1 Soil Sampling
The soil sample collection activities were implemented in general accordance with the
guidelines of the following documents:
• California DTSC, PEA Guidance Manual, January 1994 (Interim Final – Revised
October 2013);
• DTSC’s Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Soil
Contamination as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based Paint, Organochlorine
Pesticides from Termiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical
Transformers, Revised June 9, 2006; and
• DTSC’s Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties, Revised August
7, 2008.
Residence Structure. Additional soil samples were collected to further delineate the
potential presence of pesticides in soil around the perimeter of the building structure and lead
from weathering of lead-based paint. Soil samples were also collected beneath large window
panes to identify the potential presence of PCBs from the weathering of caulking.
• At the location of SS-5 soil samples were collected at approximate depths of 1.0
to 1.5 feet and 2.0 to 2.5 feet. The 1.0 to 1.5-foot soil sample was chemically
analyzed for the presence of OCPs, and the 2.0 to 2.5-foot sample was placed
on-hold with the analytical laboratory;
428
CC 06-03-2025
428 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-2
• Around the perimeter of the residence, soil samples were collected from
approximate depths of surface to 0.5 feet, 1.0 to 1.5 feet, and 2.0 to 2.5 feet bgs.
The surface and 1.0 to 1.5-foot samples were chemically analyzed for the
presence of OCPs and lead, and the 2.0 to 2.5-foot soil samples were placed on-
hold with the analytical laboratory; and
• Surface soil samples collected beneath window panes (P-4, -9, -10, -11, -14, and
-15) were chemically analyzed for the potential presence of PCBs with the
deeper soil samples placed on-hold.
Outbuildings. Soil samples were collected to further delineate the presence of lead and
to potentially identify residual termiticides in soil along the east and south side of the
outbuildings.
• At the location of SS-2, a soil sample was collected at an approximate depth of
1.0 to 1.5 feet and chemically analyzed for the presence of lead;
• Along the west side of the outbuildings, step-out soil samples (5- and 10-foot
centers) were collected at approximate depths of surface to 0.5 feet and 1.0 to
1.5 feet and chemically analyzed for the presence of lead. Soil sample P-22 was
placed on-hold with the analytical laboratory pending the results of sample P-20;
and
• Along the eastern and southern sides of the outbuildings, soil samples were
collected at approximate depths of surface to 0.5 feet and 1.0 to 1.5 feet and
chemically analyzed for OCPs and lead.
Arsenic soil samples. At the location of soil sample SS-6, discrete soil samples were
collected from approximate depths of 1.0 to 1.5 feet and 2.0 to 2.5 feet to be chemically
analyzed for the presence of arsenic. The 2.0 to 2.5-foot sample was placed on-hold with the
analytical laboratory pending results of the 1.0 to 1.5-foot soil sample. Additionally, three step-
out soil samples (AS-1, -2, and -3) were collected from approximate depths of surface to 0.5
feet, 1.0 to 1.5 feet, and 2.0 to 2.5 feet to be chemically analyzed for the presence of arsenic.
The deeper soil samples were placed on hold with the analytical laboratory pending results of
the surface soil samples.
Former Gasoline UST. In the area of the former 500-gallon gasoline UST, five drill holes
(DH-1 through DH-5) were advanced to approximate depths of 20 feet. Drill hole DH-1 was
advanced to confirm and vertically define identified contamination at the location of drill hole EB-
1 (June 2014). Drill holes DH-2 through DH-5 were advanced to laterally define potential
impacts. Soil samples were visually inspected and field screened using a hand-held
photoionization detector (PID). Based on field screening and in consultation with the DTSC
project manager, 2 to 3 soil samples per drill hole (12-, 15-, and 20-feet) were collected and
chemically analyzed for the presence of TPHg, BTEX and MTBE.
429
CC 06-03-2025
429 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-3
5.1.2 Soil Gas Sampling
The soil gas sample collection activities were implemented in general accordance with
the guidelines of the following documents:
• California DTSC, PEA Guidance Manual, January 1994 (Interim Final – Revised
October 2013); and
• CALEPA, DTSC, Advisory, Active Soil Gas Investigations, April 2012.
The soil gas investigation was directed at an identified area of contamination (EB-1).
Although soil gas samples were collected at the location of drill hole DH-1, there were no
indications (visual, field screening) of contamination which was also observed by the DTSC
project manager. Additionally, no indications of contamination at the locations of DH-2 through
DH-5 were observed. Therefore, in consultation with the DTSC project manager, no additional
soil gas samples were collected.
Soil gas samples were collected using the Drive Point Method. At the location of the
former UST, a direct push drill rig was utilized to collect soil gas samples for chemical analyses.
Prior to collection of the soil gas samples, a continuous core drill hole was completed to visually
inspect and document the soil types encountered. Temporary vapor wells were completed at
approximate depths of 5- and 8-feet. A soil vapor probe was constructed within the drill hole
using sand-pack and hydrated bentonite to seal the wells annular space. The vapor probe was
completed with a gas-tight fitting well cap and sample port. Soil gas samples were collected in
summa canisters and chemically analyzed for the presence of TPHg and VOCs. The soil vapor
sample locations are presented on Plate 5-2, and the Field Sampling Schedule for soil gas is
presented in Table 5-2. A schematic diagram of the well design and sampling train is presented
as Plate 5-3.
5.1.3 Quality Analysis/Quality Control Samples
For quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), approximately 10% of the soil samples
were split by the analytical laboratory and chemically analyzed as duplicates for OCPs and lead.
Based on the quantity of soil gas samples collected, duplicate samples were not analyzed.
One equipment blank sample and one field blank sample per soil sampling event (water
samples) were also collected and analyzed for the presence of arsenic and lead. The collection
of these samples is discussed in more detail in the QAPP presented in Appendix B.
5.2 SAMPLE COLLECTION
5.2.1 Soil Sample Collection
Surface and shallow subsurface soil samples were collected using hand sampling tools
including a hand pick and auger. Soil sampling equipment was decontaminated prior to use at
each sample collection location and sampling event. Soil samples were collected in 2-inch x 6-
430
CC 06-03-2025
430 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-4
inch stainless steel sleeves. Surface soil was loosened with a hand pick and placed into the
sample sleeves. Soil cuttings were placed back in the hole after sample collection.
At select locations soil samples were collected using GeoprobeTM direct-push
technology. The drill rod was hydraulically advanced to the desired depth and undisturbed soil
samples were collected in 4 to 5-foot continuous core acetate liners. The soil cores were
visually inspected and classified by a Padre geologist in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS). Direct-push drill holes were backfilled with a tremmied neat-
cement grout to approximately 6-inches bgs and completed with native soil to surface. Copies
of the drill hole logs are presented as Appendix C.
The soil samples were sealed, labeled, and preserved on ice in the field. After
completion of soil sampling activities, the soil samples were transferred to a State-certified
analytical laboratory under chain-of-custody protocol for chemical analyses. Field sampling
methods conformed to guidelines set forth in the Health and Safety Plan included in Appendix E
of the PEA Work Plan.
5.2.2 Soil Gas Sample Collection
Soil gas sampling activities were performed in general accordance with the DTSC
Advisory- Active Soil Gas Investigations dated April 2012. Soil gas samples were collected from
depths of approximately 5-feet and 8-feet using direct-push technology and the following
procedure:
• Driving a 1-inch steel rod to the desired depth of the drill hole and then removing
the rod;
• Placing a 2 to 3-inch layer of clean sand at the base of the drill hole;
• Installing a new plastic vapor implant connected to ¼-inch new Teflon tubing at
the top of the clean sand;
• Placing an additional 3-inches of clean sand into the drill hole to cover the vapor
implant;
• Placing approximately 1-foot of dry bentonite above the sand pack;
• Sealing the drill hole with bentonite hydrated in approximate 1-foot increments;
and
• Labeling each drill hole with a unique sample id and depth.
After subsurface conditions had equilibrated (no less than two hours), a shut-in test was
performed to check for leaks in the fittings. The shut-in test consisted of assembling the
aboveground section of the sampling train (e.g. valve lines, fittings, flow controllers, and Summa
canister downstream from the top of the probe), and evacuating the flow lines to a measured
vacuum of about 100-inches of water; then shutting the valves at either end of the above ground
section of the sampling train including the valve attached to the summa canister and observing
the vacuum for a minimum of one minute. If there was any observable loss of vacuum, then the
431
CC 06-03-2025
431 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-5
fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum in the aboveground section of the sample
train does not noticeably dissipate. After the shut-in test was successful, a leak check was
performed. The leak check consisted of applying the leak check compound (1,1-difluoroethane)
inside a shroud covering the surface and bentonite seal and tubing. Additionally, the leak check
compound was applied near connections along the sample train. The leak-check compound
was included in the laboratory analyte list and the laboratory quantified and annotated all
detections of the leak-check compound at the reporting limit of the target analytes. The shut-in
test and leak check were conducted prior to collecting each soil gas sample.
After performing the shut-in test and leak check, three purge volumes of soil vapor were
removed from the sample lines prior to collecting the soil gas sample in 1-liter summa canisters.
As discussed above, during sampling, a leak check compound is used to confirm that the
sample train and probe rod is tight and leak free. After purging is complete, the valve at the top
of the 1-liter summa was opened to collect the soil gas sample. The flow rate of vapor was
monitored and maintained at less than 200-milliliters (mL) per minute using the flow control
provided with the canisters. Additionally, during purging and sampling, a calibrated vacuum
gauge was used to maintain a vacuum of less than 100-inches of water to minimize stripping
and prevent ambient air from diluting the soil gas samples. As the pressure gauge reached just
below 5-inches of mercury, the valve was closed and the pressure reading recorded. New
tubing and canisters were used for each sample location. Sample canisters were pre-cleaned
and supplied by the analytical laboratory.
5.2.3 Decontamination Procedures
All equipment that came into contact with potentially contaminated soil was
decontaminated consistently so as to assure the quality of samples collected. Disposable
equipment intended for one time use was not decontaminated, but was packaged for
appropriate disposal. Decontamination occurred prior to and after each use of a piece of
equipment. All sampling devices used were decontaminated using the following procedures:
• Non-phosphate detergent and tap water wash, in a 5-gallon plastic bucket, using
a brush;
• Deionized/distilled water rinse, in a 5-gallon plastic bucket; and
• Final deionized/distilled water rinse in a 5-gallon plastic bucket.
At the completion of sampling activities the small amount of wash water was dispersed
to the ground surface.
5.3 SAMPLE ANALYSES
The sampling schedule is summarized in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. Analytical methods, types
of containers, preservative, and holding times are summarized in Table 5-3. The laboratory
analytical program consisted of chemical analyses of soil and soil gas samples collected from
the Project Site for the presence of:
432
CC 06-03-2025
432 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
5-6
Soil –
• OCPs by U.S. EPA Method 8081A;
• Arsenic by U.S. EPA Method 6020;
• Lead by U.S. EPA Method 6020;
• PCBs by U.S. EPA Method 8082;
• TPHg by U.S. EPA Method 8015M; and
• BTEX, MTBE by U.S. EPA Method 8260.
Soil Gas –
• TPHg, VOCs by U.S. EPA Method TO-15.
5.3.1 Chain-of-Custody Records
Chain-of-custody (COPC) records were used to document sample collection and
shipment to the laboratory for analysis. A COPC record accompanied all samples delivered for
analysis to McCampbell Analytical, Inc. located in Pittsburg, California. The COPC record
identified the contents of each shipment and maintained the custodial integrity of the samples.
Generally, a sample is considered to be in someone’s custody if it is either in someone’s
physical possession, in someone’s view, locked up, or kept in a secured area that is restricted to
authorized personnel. Until receipt by the laboratory, the custody of the samples was the
responsibility of the sample collector.
5.4 FIELD VARIANCES
At the request of the DTSC project manager, an additional soil sample (P-27) was
collected along the eastern side of the outbuildings and chemically analyzed for the presence of
OCPs and lead.
The PEA Workplan proposed that soil samples P-3, P-7, and P-12 were to be chemically
analyzed for the presence of PCBs related to weathered window caulking. However, these
samples were not located beneath large window panes and therefore not chemically analyzed
for PCBs.
Due to low flow conditions (clay) encountered at 10 feet, a soil gas sample was collected
at 8 feet (SV-1-8’). This was discussed with and approved by the DTSC project manager on
July 9, 2015.
433
CC 06-03-2025
433 of 1012
Cupertino USD
Project No. 1401-2171
5-7
Table 5-1. Soil Sampling Schedule
Test Method Sample Depth Number of Samples Sample
Location
Submittal
Status
Residence and Outbuildings
OCPs
U.S. EPA Method 8081A
Surface to 0.5 feet
1.0 to 1.5 feet
18 (discrete)
17 (discrete)
P-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16
25, 26, 27
Dupe ~10% of samples
P-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 25,
26, 27
Dupe ~10% of samples
Analyze
Analyze
Arsenic
U.S. EPA Method 6020
Surface to 0.5 feet
1.0 to 1.5 feet
3 (discrete)
1 (discrete)
AS-1, 2, and 3
SS-6A
Analyze
Analyze
Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020
Surface to 0.5 feet
1.0 to 1.5 feet
15 (discrete)
15 (discrete)
P-7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27, 28
Dupe ~10% of samples
P-7, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25,
26, 27, 28
Dupe ~10% of samples
Analyze
Analyze
PCBs
U.S. EPA Method 8082
Surface to 0.5 feet
1.0 to 1.5 feet
7 (discrete)
7 (discrete)
P-4, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15
P-4, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15
Analyze
Hold
43
4
CC 06-03-2025
434 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
5-8
Table 5-1. Soil Sampling Schedule (continued)
Test Method Sample Depth Number of Samples Sample
Location
Submittal
Status
Former Gasoline UST
TPHg
U.S. EPA Method 8015m
12 feet
15 feet
20 feet
1 (discrete)
5 (discrete)
5 (discrete)
DH-1
DH-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
DH-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
Analyze
Analyze
Analyze
BTEX, MTBE
U.S. EPA Method 8260
12 feet
15 feet
20 feet
1 (discrete)
5 (discrete)
5 (discrete)
DH-1
DH-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
DH-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
Analyze
Analyze
Analyze
Notes:
OCPs – Organochlorine Pesticides
PCBs – Polychlorinated Biphenyls
TPHg – Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Gasoline
BTEX – Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes
MTBE – Methyl tert butyl ether
43
5
CC 06-03-2025
435 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
5-9
Table 5-2. Soil Gas Sampling Schedule
Sample Matrix and
Test
Method
Sample Depth Number of
Samples*
Sample
Location
Submittal
Status
Soil Gas
TPHg
U.S. EPA Method
TO-15
5-feet
8-feet
1
1
SV-1
SV-1
Analyze
Analyze
VOCs
U.S. EPA Method
TO-15
5-feet
8-feet
1
1
SV-1
SV-1
Analyze
Analyze
Notes:
TPHs – Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
VOCs – Volatile Organic Compounds
436
CC 06-03-2025
436 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
5-10
Table 5-3. Sample Collection Information
Sample Matrix and Test Method Container Preservative
Holding Time
From Sample
Collection to
Extraction
Soil
OCPs
U.S. EPA Method 8081A
2 inch x 6 inch stainless steel sample
sleeves and plastic end caps Ice 14 days
Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6010
2 inch x 6 inch stainless steel sample
sleeves and plastic end caps Ice 180 days
Arsenic
U.S. EPA Method 6020
2 inch x 6 inch stainless steel sample
sleeves and plastic end caps Ice 180 days
PCBs
U.S. EPA Method 8082
2 inch x 6 inch stainless steel sample
sleeves and plastic end caps Ice 14 days
TPHg
U.S. EPA Method 8015m 25 gram EncoreTM Container Ice 48 hrs
BTEX, MTBE
U.S. EPA Method 8260 25 gram EncoreTM Container Ice 48 hrs
Soil Gas
TPHg
U.S. EPA Method TO-15 Summa Canister (1 Liter) Keep out of
sun /heat 30 days
VOCs
U.S. EPA Method TO-15 Summa Canister (1 Liter) Keep out of
sun /heat 30 days
QA/QC Samples (water)
Arsenic and Lead
U.S. EPA Method 200.8 250 mL poly bottle HNO3 / Ice 180 days
Notes:
OCPs – Organochlorine Pesticides
PCBs – Polychlorinated Biphenyls
VOCs – Volatile Organic Compounds
TPHg – Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Gasoline
HNO3 – Nitric Acid
437
CC 06-03-2025
437 of 1012
43
8
CC 06-03-2025
438 of 1012
43
9
CC 06-03-2025
439 of 1012
440
CC 06-03-2025
440 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
6-1
6.0 FINDINGS
The following sections describe the results of the field sampling activities performed by
Padre at the Project Site on July 9th and 10th, 2015. The laboratory analytical results are
summarized in Table 6-1 through Table 6-6. Certified analytical laboratory reports and chain-
of-custody documentation are provided in Appendix D.
6.1 SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS
The following subsections describe soil sample analytical results, locations, and depth
intervals for soil samples collected at the Project Site.
6.1.1 OCPs
A total of thirty-five discrete surface and subsurface soil samples were collected near the
perimeters of the existing building structures and chemically analyzed for the presence of OCPs
by U.S. EPA Method 8081A. Results of the laboratory analyses are presented in Table 6-1 with
the chlordane results shown on Plate 6-1. Additionally the results are summarized below:
• Chlordane-technical (chlordane) was reported at concentrations ranging from <25 to
13,000 micrograms per kilogram (µg/kg);
• DDD was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 9.3 µg/kg;
• DDE was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 410 µg/kg;
• DDT was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 260 µg/kg;
• Dieldrin was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 6.8J µg/kg;
• g-BHC (lindane) was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 0.49J µg/kg;
• Heptachlor was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 21 µg/kg; and
• Heptachlor epoxide was reported at concentrations ranging from <1.0 to 57 µg/kg.
6.1.2 Lead
A total of thirty discrete surface and subsurface soil samples were collected near the
perimeters of the existing building structures and chemically analyzed for the presence of lead
by U.S. EPA Method 6020. Results of the laboratory analyses are presented in Table 6-2 and
shown on Plate 6-2. Additionally the results are summarized below:
• Lead was reported at concentrations ranging from 9.0 to 310 mg/kg.
441
CC 06-03-2025
441 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
6-2
6.1.3 Arsenic
A total of three discrete surface soil samples and one subsurface soil sample were
collected near the northwest corner of Project Site and chemically analyzed for the presence of
arsenic by U.S. EPA Method 6020. Results of the laboratory analyses are presented in Table
6-2 and shown on Plate 6-3. Additionally the results are summarized below:
• Arsenic was reported at concentrations ranging from 5.7 to 13 mg/kg.
6.1.4 PCBs
Six discrete surface soil samples were collected from areas below window panes at the
residential building and chemically analyzed for the presence of PCBs by U.S. EPA Method
8082. Results of the laboratory analyses are presented in Table 6-3 and summarized below:
• Total PCBs (Aroclors) were not reported at concentrations at or above the reporting
limit of 0.05 mg/kg.
6.1.5 TPHg and BTEX
Eleven discrete subsurface soil samples were collected from five locations in the area of
the former UST and chemically analyzed for the presence of TPHg and BTEX by U.S. EPA
Methods 8215M and 8260, respectively. Results of the laboratory analyses are presented in
Table 6-4 and summarized below:
• TPH-g was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 0.081 mg/kg to 0.18
mg/kg;
• Total xylenes were reported at concentrations ranging from less than 0.0032 mg/kg
to 0.026 mg/kg; and
• Benzene, toluene and ethylbenzene were not reported at concentrations exceeding
their respective analytical reporting limits.
6.2 SOIL GAS SAMPLING RESULTS
The following subsection describes soil gas analytical results, depths, and locations of
drill holes advanced at the Project Site.
6.2.1 VOCs
Soil gas samples were collected at approximate depths of 5-feet and 8-feet and
chemically analyzed for the presence of VOCs by U.S. EPA Method TO-15. Results of the
laboratory analyses are presented in Table 6-5, and are summarized below:
442
CC 06-03-2025
442 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
6-3
• TPH-g was not reported above the reporting limit of 720 micrograms per cubic meter
(µg/m3);
• Benzene was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.6 to 2.8 µg/m3;
• Toluene was reported at concentrations rang ing from 5.6 to 11 µg/m3;
• Ethylbenzene was reported at concentrations ranging from 2.9 to 3.4 µg/m3;
• Total xylenes (m,p-xylene, o-xylene) was reported at concentrations ranging from
less than 6.6 to 12 µg/m3; and
• 2-Hexanone was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 2.1 to 5.6 µg/m3.
6.3 QA/QC SAMPLES
6.3.1 Duplicates
The laboratory split soil samples selected by Padre that were chemically analyzed as
duplicates for OCPs. The results are summarized below:
• Soil samples P-1 (SURF) and P-1 (SURF) DUPE detected comparable
concentrations of chlordane (technical), DDE, DDT, and heptachlor epoxide;
• Soil samples P-9 (SURF) and P-9 (SURF) DUPE detected comparable
concentrations of chlordane (technical), DDE, DDT, and heptachlor epoxide;
• Soil sample P-10 (1-1.5’) and P-10 (1-1.5’) DUPE detected comparable
concentrations of chlordane (technical), DDE, DDT, and heptachlor epoxide; and
• Soil samples P-15 (1-1.5’) and P-15 (1-1.5’) DUPE detected comparable
concentrations of DDD, DDE, DDT, and heptachlor epoxide.
The laboratory split soil samples selected by Padre that were chemically analyzed as
duplicates for lead. The results are summarized below:
• Soil samples P-17 (SURF) and P-17 (SURF) DUPE reported identical concentrations
of lead;
• Soil samples P-27 (SURF) and P-27 (SURF) DUPE reported comparable
concentrations of lead;
• Soil samples P-19 (1-1.5’) and P-19 (1-1.5’) DUPE reported comparable
concentrations of lead; and
• Soil samples P-24 (1-1.5’) and P-24 (1-1.5’) DUPE reported comparable
concentrations of lead.
The reported concentrations for OCPs and lead in selected soil samples and the
443
CC 06-03-2025
443 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
6-4
corresponding duplicate soil samples are comparable in concentration. Therefore, the data is
considered to be valid.
6.3.2 Equipment Blank
For each sampling event, distilled water was used as rinseate for decontaminating soil
sampling equipment. The equipment blank samples were collected by pouring rinseate water
over and through recently cleaned equipment, and collected directly into the appropriate sample
container.
Two equipment blank samples were collected and chemically analyzed for arsenic and
lead by U.S. EPA Method 200.8. The results of the laboratory analysis are summarized below:
• The laboratory analyses did not identify arsenic at or above the analytical reporting
limit. The reporting limit for arsenic was 0.5 micrograms per liter (µg/L); and
• The laboratory analyses did not identify lead at or above the analytical reporting limit.
The reporting limit for lead was 0.5 µg/L.
6.3.3 Field Blank
For each sampling event, distilled water was used as rinseate for decontaminating
sampling equipment. The field blank samples were collected by pouring rinseate water into the
appropriate sample container.
Three field blank samples were collected and chemically analyzed for arsenic and lead
by U.S. EPA Method 200.8. The results of the laboratory analysis are summarized below:
• The laboratory analyses did not identify arsenic at or above the analytical reporting
limit. The reporting limit for arsenic was 0.5 µg/L; and
• The laboratory analyses did not identify lead at or above the analytical reporting limit.
The reporting limit for lead was 0.5 µg/L.
6.3.4 Laboratory QA/QC
A cover letter with the signature of the laboratory manager accompanies every
laboratory report received for this project. According to the laboratory manager results reported
conform to the most current NELAP standards, where applicable, unless otherwise stated in the
case narrative.
Work Order 1507320
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding TPH-g, BTEX, and MTBE in soil
by U.S. EPA Method SW8260B:
• The reporting limits for all samples were near, but not identical to, the lab’s standard
444
CC 06-03-2025
444 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
6-5
reporting limit due to the variable encore/solid sample weight;
• The surrogate recovery for soil sample DH-1 (15’) was outside of the control limits
due to matrix interference;
• The surrogate recovery for soil sample DH-2 (15’) was outside of the control limits
due to matrix interference; and
• The spike recovery for sample DH-2 (15’) was outside of the accepted recovery
limits.
Work Order 1507327
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding OCPs in soil by U.S. EPA Methods
SW8081A/SW8082:
• MS/MSD recovery and/or RPD for lead was out of acceptance criteria but the LCS
validated the prep batch;
• DDD was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the practical
laboratory reporting limit in soil samples P-5 (SURF), P-9 (1-1.5’), P-12 (1-1.5’), P-14
(1-1.5’), and P-25 (SURF). Therefore, these concentrations are estimated;
• DDE was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the practical
laboratory reporting limit in soil samples P-2 (1-1.5’) and P-5 (1-1.5’). Therefore,
these concentrations are estimated;
• Dieldrin was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the practical
laboratory reporting limit in soil samples P-11 (1-1.5’) and P-25 (SURF). Therefore,
this concentration is estimated;
• g-BHC was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the practical
laboratory reporting limit in the soil sample P-15 (SURF). Therefore, this
concentration is estimated;
• Heptachlor was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the practical
laboratory reporting limit in soil sample P-14 (SURF). Therefore, this concentration
is estimated; and
• Heptachlor epoxide was detected above the minimum detection limit and below the
practical laboratory reporting limit in soil samples P-3 (SURF), P-14 (SURF), P-9
(SURF) DUP, P-1 (1-1.5’), P-4 (1-1.5’), P-6 (SURF), P-6 (1-1.5’). Therefore, these
concentrations are estimated.
445
CC 06-03-2025
445 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-6
Table 6-1 - Soil Results for OCPs
(results in µg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Al
d
r
i
n
(a
,
b
,
d
)
-
B
H
C
Ga
m
m
a
-
B
H
C
Ch
l
o
r
d
a
n
e
-
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
DD
D
DD
E
DD
T
Di
e
l
d
r
i
n
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
Su
l
f
a
t
e
En
d
r
i
n
En
d
r
i
n
Al
d
e
h
y
d
e
En
d
r
i
n
K
e
t
o
n
e
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
Ep
o
x
i
d
e
Me
t
h
o
x
y
c
h
l
o
r
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
be
n
z
e
n
e
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
cy
c
l
o
p
e
n
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
To
x
a
p
h
e
n
e
P-1 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 3,700 <10 350 260 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 23 <10 <100 <200 <500
P-1 (SURF)DUPE <20 <20 <20 2,800 <20 290 210 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 31 <20 <200 <400 <1,000
P-1 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 87 <1.0 9.5 5.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.86 J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-2 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 120 <1.0 77 44 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-2 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.46 J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-3 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 1,200 <10 56 46 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 4.0 J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-3 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 220 <1.0 6.5 8.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-4 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2,900 <1.0 140 130 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 7.4 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-4 (1-1.5’) <10 <10 <10 1,100 <10 44 38 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 7.8 J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-5 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 63 0.76 J 24 24 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.6 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-5 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.93 J 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-6 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 3,400 <10 120 210 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 6.0 J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-6 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.94 J 0.73 J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-7 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 1,900 <10 120 110 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 26 <10 <100 <200 <500
P-7 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 1.4 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-8 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 57 <1.0 14 11 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.3 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-8 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 1.1 3.9 3.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-9 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2,100 <1.0 53 120 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 13 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-9 (SURF) DUPE <10 <10 <10 1,800 <10 47 120 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 8.3 J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-9 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 38 0.35 J 3.9 12 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 13,000 <1.0 39 160 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 21 57 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 40 <1.0 1.4 4.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (1-1.5’) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 38 <1.0 1.9 4.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 930 <1.0 35 93 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 95 <1.0 12 24 0.53 J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-12 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 110 <1.0 12 18 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-12 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.41 J 2.7 6.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-14 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 60 2.2 97 61 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.25 J 0.71 J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-14 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.47 J 14 9.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 0.49 J 1,500 <1.0 410 160 6.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 11 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 9.3 50 36 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.4 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
HHRA NOTE #3 430
RSLs 39 -- 570 1,700 2,300 2,000 1,900 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 70 -- 210 -- 490
44
6
CC 06-03-2025
446 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-7
Table 6-1 - Soil Results for OCPs (cont’)
(results in µg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Al
d
r
i
n
(a
,
b
,
d
)
-
B
H
C
Ga
m
m
a
-
B
H
C
Ch
l
o
r
d
a
n
e
-
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
DD
D
DD
E
DD
T
Di
e
l
d
r
i
n
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
Su
l
f
a
t
e
En
d
r
i
n
En
d
r
i
n
Al
d
e
h
y
d
e
En
d
r
i
n
K
e
t
o
n
e
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
Ep
o
x
i
d
e
Me
t
h
o
x
y
c
h
l
o
r
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
be
n
z
e
n
e
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
cy
c
l
o
p
e
n
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
To
x
a
p
h
e
n
e
P-15 (1-1.5’) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 8.9 50 31 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.5 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-16 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 170 3.3 4.5 18 2.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-25 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.49 J 62 25 0.43 J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-25 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 2.6 2.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-26 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 43 23 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-26 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 3.1 1.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-27 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 2.8 150 62 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-27 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
Soil Samples (Cornerstone, June 2014)
SS-1* <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <200 21 320 87 <9.9 <9.9 9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 -- -- <200
SS-2* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 26 280 33 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-3* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <39 26 280 33 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-4* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 180 31 230 26 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-5* <20 400 280 2,800 26 360 91 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 -- -- <400
SS-6* <2.0 86 50 520 28 55 26 8.7 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 12 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-7* <2.0 5.9 3.7 <40 29 240 26 2.9 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-8* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 21 120 14 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-9* <2.0 7.0 5.5 67 48 260 29 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-10* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 31 220 16 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-11* <2.0 3.2 3.5 <39 32 180 21 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-12* <9.7 25 31 240 17 150 60 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 -- -- <190
SS-13* <2.0 15 12 110 21 42 14 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-14* <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <200 28 410 88 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 -- -- <200
SS-15* <2.0 3.5 3.9 <40 47 190 26 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-16* <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <39 <1.9 8.8 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 -- -- <39
HHRA NOTE #3 430
RSLs 39 -- 570 1,700 2,300 2,000 1,900 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 70 -- 210 -- 490
Notes:
µg/kg – micrograms per kilogram
* Surface soil sample (Cornerstone, June 2014)
-- Not reported
HHRA – Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 1 (May 2015).
RSL – U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (June, 2015)
3,700 – above RSLs
44
7
CC 06-03-2025
447 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-8
Table 6-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
SS-6A (1-1.5’) 11 --
AS-1 (SURF) 13 --
AS-2 (SURF) 7.2 --
AS-3 (SURF) 5.7 --
P-7 (SURF) -- 39
P-7 (1-1.5’) -- 79
P-10 (SURF) -- 29
P-10 (1-1.5’) -- 9.3
P-11 (SURF) -- 24
P-11 (1-1.5’) -- 13
P-13 (SURF) -- 92
P-13 (1-1.5’) -- 17
P-14 (SURF) -- 36
P-15 (SURF) -- 220
P-17 (SURF) -- 310
P-17 (SURF) DUP -- 310
P-17 (1-1.5’) -- 43
P-18 (SURF) -- 93
P-18 (1-1.5’) -- 17
P-19 (SURF) -- 180
P-19 (1-1.5’) -- 31
P-19 (1-1.5’) DUPE -- 27
P-20 (SURF) -- 35
P-20 (1-1.5’) -- 11
P-21 (SURF) -- 40
P-21 (1-1.5’) -- 9.4
P-23 (SURF) -- 42
P-23 (1-1.5’) -- 13
Screening Level 12A 80B
448
CC 06-03-2025
448 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-9
Table 6-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead (cont’)
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
P-24 (SURF) -- 83
P-24 (1-1.5’) -- 10
P-24 (1-1.5’) DUP -- 9.0
P-25 (SURF) -- 47
P-25 (1-1.5’) -- 9.8
P-26 (SURF) -- 29
P-26 (1-1.5’) -- 12
P-27 (SURF) -- 64
P-27 (SURF) DUP -- 39
P-27 (1-1.5’) -- 14
P-28 (SURF) -- 150
P-28 (1-1.5’) -- 12
Screening Level 12A 80B
Notes:
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
‘--‘ Not analyzed
150 Above screening level
A School Site Screening level from DTSC Guidance (4/30/08)
B California Human Health Screening Level (CHSSL)
449
CC 06-03-2025
449 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-10
Table 6-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead (cont’)
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
SS-1* 11 40
SS-2* 12 100
SS-3* 8.7 20
SS-4* 7.3 23
SS-5* 13 51
SS-6* 15 75
SS-7* 8.0 20
SS-8* 7.8 18
SS-9* 7.8 42
SS-10* 8.9 27
SS-11* 6.4 19
SS-12* 8.2 72
SS-13* 5.2 52
SS-14* 8.9 33
SS-15* 6.6 22
SS-16* 6.8 9.0
Screening Level 12A 80B
Notes:
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
‘*‘ Surface soil sample (Cornerstone, June 2014)
100 Above screening level
A School Site Screening level from DTSC Guidance (4/30/08)
B California Human Health Screening Level (CHSSL)
450
CC 06-03-2025
450 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-11
Table 6-3 - Soil Results for PCBs
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Aroclor
1016
Aroclor
1221
Aroclor
1232
Aroclor
1242
Aroclor
1248
Aroclor
1254
Aroclor
1260
PCBs
Total
P-4 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
P-9 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
P-10 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
P-11 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
P-14 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
P-15 (SURF) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
RSLs 0.23 0.17 0.17 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.24 0.24
Notes:
mg/kg – milligrams per kilogram
RSLs– U.S. EPA Regional Screening Level (June 2015)
45
1
CC 06-03-2025
451 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-12
Table 6-4 – Soil Results for TPHg, BTEX, and MTBE
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification
TPH-
Gasoline
(C6 –C12)
Benzene Toluene Ethyl-
Benzene
Total
Xylenes MTBE
U.S. EPA
Method 8260 8260 8260 8260 8260 8260
DH-1 (12’) 0.18 <0.0034 <0.0034 <0.0034 0.026 <0.0034
DH-1 (15’) <0.081 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033
DH-1 (20’) <0.081 <0.0032 <0.0032 <0.0032 <0.0032 <0.0032
DH-2 (15’) <0.084 <0.0034 <0.0034 <0.0034 <0.0034 <0.0034
DH-2 (20’) <0.081 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033
DH-3 (15’) <0.087 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035
DH-3 (20’) <0.092 <0.0037 <0.0037 <0.0037 <0.0037 <0.0037
DH-4 (15’) <0.088 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035 <0.0035
DH-4 (20’) <0.082 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033 <0.0033
DH-5 (15’) <0.13 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050
DH-5 (20’) <0.14 <0.0057 <0.0057 <0.0057 <0.0057 <0.0057
HHRA Note #3 0.33 1,100
RSL 1.2 4,900 5.8 650 47
Notes:
TPH – Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
BTEX – Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes
MTBE – Methyl tert butyl ether
HHRA – Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 1
RSL – U.S. EPA Regional Screening Level (June 2015)
452
CC 06-03-2025
452 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
6-13
Table 6-5 - Soil Gas Results for TPHg and VOCs
by EPA Method TO-15 (µg/m3 of Vapor)
Sample
ID
TP
H
-
G
a
s
o
l
i
n
e
Be
n
z
e
n
e
To
l
u
e
n
e
Et
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
To
t
a
l
X
y
l
e
n
e
s
Me
t
h
y
l
-
t
b
u
t
y
l
e
t
h
e
r
(M
T
B
E
)
2-
H
e
x
a
n
o
n
e
Al
l
O
t
h
e
r
V
O
C
s
SV-1 (5’) <720 <1.6 5.6 2.9 <6.6 <1.8 <2.1 <1.3
SV-1 (8’) <720 2.8 11 3.4 12 <1.8 5.6 <1.3
HHRA Note #3 97 310,000 1,100 100,000 11,000 31,000
RSLs 31,000 360 5,200,000 1,100 100,000 11,000 31,000
Notes:
µg/m3 – micrograms per cubic meter
TPHg – Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
HHRA – Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 3. Screening level includes attenuation factor (0.001) for future
residential structures.
“—“ - not established or not used
RSL – USEPA Regional Screening Level (June 2015). Screening level includes attenuation factor (0.001) for future
residential structures.
45
3
CC 06-03-2025
453 of 1012
45
4
CC 06-03-2025
454 of 1012
45
5
CC 06-03-2025
455 of 1012
45
6
CC 06-03-2025
456 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 7-1
7.0 HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING-LEVEL EVALUATION
7.1 CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
The COPCs used in the human health screening-level evaluation for the Project Site
completed by Padre included those compounds that were reported at concentrations at or in
excess of their respective analytical laboratory reporting limits. Therefore, the following COPCs
in soil and soil gas were evaluated:
Soil
• OCPs – chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, gamma-BHC (lindane), heptachlor,
and heptachlor epoxide;
• Metals – Arsenic and lead; and
• VOCs – TPH-g and total xylenes.
Soil Gas
• VOCs – benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes, and 2-hexanone.
7.2 SOIL RISK ASSESSMENT
The DTSC-modified screening levels or the U.S. EPA RSLs (if DTSC-modified screening
levels were not available) were used to conduct a screening -level human health risk
assessment using the residential land-use scenario. Carcinogenic screening levels are typically
based on a predicted excess long-term cancer risk of one in a million. Non-carcinogenic
screening levels are based on maintaining the daily COPC intake below the level at which
deleterious health effects are considered possible.
In accordance with PEA guidance documents and DTSC’s Human Health Risk
Assessment (HHRA) Note No.3, dated May 2015, the maximum detected chemical
concentrations in soil were evaluated as potential exposure point concentrations (EPCs). The
EPCs were compared to their respective screening levels. The ratio of an EPC to the
corresponding carcinogenic screening level was multiplied by 1E-06 to estimate the chemical-
specific screening cancer risk. For noncarcinogens, the chemical-specific hazard index is the
ratio of the EPC to the screening level based on noncarcinogenic effects. The sums of the
chemical-specific screening cancer risk and screening hazard index are the cumulative
screening cancer risk and hazard index, respectively.
The total risk from COPCs identified in soils at the Project Site was estimated to be
3.2 x 10-5, which provides an increased cancer risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The
total health hazard from COPCs identified in soils at the Project Site was estimated to be 0.46,
which does not present an increased health hazard (i.e., >1). Therefore, a response action to
reduce or eliminate the COPCs identified in surficial soils at the Project Site is recommended.
The results of the screening-level evaluation are presented in Table 7-1.
457
CC 06-03-2025
457 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 7-2
Arsenic concentrations ranged from 5.2 to 15 mg/kg in soil samples collected from
across the Project Site. The arsenic data set consisted of four soil samples collected as part of
the PEA, and 16 soil samples previously collected as part of a preliminary soil evaluation
completed by others (Cornerstone, 2014). The four PEA soil samples were collected as step-
out and step-down samples at the location of soil sample SS-6, which reported the highest
Project Site arsenic concentration at 15 mg/kg. Arsenic concentrations reported for the PEA soil
samples ranged from 5.7 to 13 mg/kg, indicating that arsenic concentrations in soil at this
location do not present a potential “hotspot” for arsenic in soil. A statistical evaluation was
performed by calculating the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) for the arsenic data set. The
95% UCL for arsenic in soil at the Project Site was calculated to be 10 mg/kg. A graphical
evaluation completed by creating a normal probability plot of the arsenic data set. The shape of
the plotted data presents a relatively normal distribution. Therefore, arsenic concentrations
identified in surface soil at the Project Site are representative of ambient concentrations and
further assessment and/or remedial action for arsenic in soil is not warranted. A copy of the
normal probability plot and ProUCL output sheet are presented in Appendix E.
Lead concentrations ranged from 9.0 mg/kg to 310 mg/kg in soil samples collected
across the Project Site. A risk assessment was performed using the DTSC lead risk
assessment spreadsheet model (LeadSpread Version 8). Based on the LeadSpread output,
exposure to the lead concentrations detected at the Project Site will result in a 90th percentile
blood lead concentration of 8.0 µg/dl in children which exceeds the Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) blood toxicity level of 1 µg/l. Therefore, a response action
to reduce or eliminate the lead-impacted soil is recommended. A copy of the LeadSpread Risk
Assessment Spreadsheet is presented in Appendix E.
7.3 SOIL GAS RISK ASSESSMENT
The objective of the soil gas survey was to evaluate shallow soil gas beneath the Project
Site for potential VOC impacts. The source of the potential impacts was identified to be a
former 500-gallon UST located on the northeast side of the Project Site. Several low level
VOCs constituents, including BTEX, were identified in soil gas samples collected at the Project
Site. Therefore, a risk evaluation was performed.
DTSC’s SG Screen Version 2.0 (4/03) (DTSC modification December 2014) Screening
Level Model for Soil Gas Contamination (based on the Johnson-Ettinger Indoor Vapor Intrusion
Model) was used to estimate the cumulative risk and hazard associated with the carcinogenic
and the non-carcinogenic constituents detected in soil gas. Soil vapor drill holes were advanced
at the former location of the UST. Based on the soil conditions encountered and potential future
building construction, the following parameters were used for the screening evaluation:
• Soil gas sample collection depths were approximately 5 and 8-feet;
• Static groundwater was not encountered;
• The highest constituent concentrations were used from each sample depth;
458
CC 06-03-2025
458 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 7-3
• The depth below grade to bottom of enclosed space floor (L F ) is 15-centimeters
(slab-on-grade);
• The general soil type encountered (within upper 8 feet) was classified as clay (CL);
and
• Conservative default values were used for the remaining input parameters.
The leak check compound (1,1-difluoroethane) was not detected in any of the soil gas
samples. Therefore, the collected soil gas samples are representative of shallow soil gas
conditions at the Project Site.
The results of the soil gas assessment conducted at the Project Site identified low level
concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes (BTEX), as well as 2-
hexanone. However, none of the VOC constituents exceeded their respective human health
screening levels. The results of the PEA screening level risk assessment calculated that the
total risk from COPCs identified in soil gas was estimated to be 8.6 x 10-9, which does not
provide an increased cancer risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The cumulative hazard
is estimated to be 0.0003, which does not provide a significant health hazard (>1). Therefore,
further assessment and/or remediation regarding VOCs identified in soil gas at the Project Site
is not warranted. Results of the soil gas model are summarized in Table 7-2, and copies of the
screening level model spreadsheets are included as Appendix E.
459
CC 06-03-2025
459 of 1012
Table 7‐1
Soil Exposure Screening Evaluation
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project
Cupertino Union School District
Screening
Level (mg/kg)Source Cancer
Risk
Screening
Level (mg/kg)Source Hazard
Index
Chlordane 13 0.43 HHRA Note #3 3.02E‐05 34 RSL 3.82E‐01
DDD 0.0093 2.3 RSL 4.04E‐09 37 Surrogate RSL 2.51E‐04
DDE 0.41 2 RSL 2.05E‐07 37 Surrogate RSL 1.11E‐02
DDT 0.26 1.9 RSL 1.37E‐07 37 RSL 7.03E‐03
Dieldrin 0.0068 0.034 RSL 2.00E‐07 3.2 RSL 2.13E‐03
g‐BHC (lindane)0.00049 0.57 RSL 8.60E‐10 21 RSL 2.33E‐05
Heptachlor 0.021 0.13 RSL 1.62E‐07 39 RSL 5.38E‐04
Heptachlor Epoxide 0.057 0.07 RSL 8.14E‐07 1 RSL 5.70E‐02
TPH‐aromatic low 0.18 nc RSL NA 82 RSL 2.20E‐03
Total Xylenes 0.026 nc RSL NA 650 RSL 4.00E‐05
Total Risk:3.18E‐05 Total Hazard:4.63E‐01
Notes:
COPC = chemical of potential concern
EPC = exposure point concentration
Exposure Point Concentration = maximum detected concentration in soil samples collected at the site
HHRA = Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 1 (DTSC HERO, May 2015)
RSL = regional screening level for residential soil (U.S.EPA June 2015)
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
Surrogate RSL = RSL not established for DDD, DDE. RSL for DDT was used as a surrogate value.
nc = non‐carcinogenic
NE = not established
NA = not applicable
COPC
Exposure‐Point
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Carcinogenic Risk Non‐carcinogenic Hazard
7-4
46
0
CC 06-03-2025
460 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
7-5
Table 7-2. Results of Soil Gas Screening Level Risk Assessment
Project Site Soils (0-8 feet bgs) Project Site Soils (0-8 feet bgs)
COPC (1) Risk by COPC (2) COPC (1) Hazard by COPC (3)
Benzene 7.7E-09 Benzene 2.4E-04
Toluene NA Toluene 8.2E-06
Ethylbenzene 8.5E-10 Ethylbenzene 9.2E-07
Xylenes NA Xylenes 2.4E-05
4-Methyl-4-pentanone (MIBK) NA 4-Methyl-4-pentanone (MIBK) 3.9E-07
Total Risk (4) Total Hazard (5)
Risk by Pathway 8.6E-09 Hazard by Pathway 2.7E-04
Notes
(1) Chemical of Potential Concern (COPC)
(2) Risk from each COPC (Cumulative)
(3) Hazard from each COPC (Cumulative)
(4) Total calculated cancer risk
(5) Total calculated hazard quotient
NA Not Applicable
461
CC 06-03-2025
461 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 8-1
8.0 ECOLOGICAL SCREENING
A detailed ecological screening evaluation was not performed as part of the PEA
because the Project Site has been developed as a residential property since the 1950s. Natural
wildlife areas were not noted at the Project Site during the course of the PEA. Therefore, based
on the available information, there does not appear to be a significant pathway of exposure to
nonhuman, sensitive ecological species.
462
CC 06-03-2025
462 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 9-1
9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the PEA was to establish whether a release or potential release of
hazardous substances, which potentially pose a threat to human health via ingestion, dermal
contact, and inhalation exposure pathways, exists at the Project Site.
Evaluation
The COPCs used in the human health screening-level evaluation for the Project Site
included those compounds that were reported at concentrations at or above their respective
analytical laboratory reporting limits. Therefore, the following COPCs were evaluated:
Soil
• OCPs – chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, gamma-BHC (lindane), heptachlor,
and heptachlor epoxide;
• Metals – Arsenic and lead; and
• VOCs – TPH-g and total xylenes.
Soil Gas
• VOCs – benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes, and 2-hexanone.
Risk Assessment
The results of the PEA screening level risk assessment estimated the total risk from
COPCs identified in soils at the Project Site to be 3.2 x 10-5, which provides an increased cancer
risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The total health hazard from COPCs identified in
soils at the Project Site is estimated to be 0.46, which does not provide an increased health
hazard (i.e., >1). Therefore, a response action to reduce and/or eliminate the COPCs identified
in surficial soils at the Project Site is recommended.
Lead concentrations ranged from 9.0 to 310 mg/kg in soil samples collected throughout
the Project Site. Using DTSC’s lead risk assessment spreadsheet model (LeadSpread Version
8), exposure to the lead concentrations identified at the Project Site would result in a 90th
percentile blood lead concentration of 8.0 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dl) in children, which
exceeds OEHHA’s blood toxicity level of 1 µg/dl. Therefore, a response action to reduce or
eliminate lead-impacted soil is recommended.
Arsenic concentrations ranged from 5.2 to 15 mg/kg in soil samples collected from
across the Project Site. The arsenic data set consisted of four soil samples collected as part of
the PEA, and 16 soil samples previously collected as part of a preliminary soil evaluation
completed by others (Cornerstone, 2014). The four PEA soil samples were collected as step-
out and step-down samples at the location of soil sample SS-6, which reported the highest
Project Site arsenic concentration at 15 mg/kg. Arsenic concentrations reported for the PEA soil
samples ranged from 5.7 to 13 mg/kg, indicating that arsenic concentrations in soil at this
463
CC 06-03-2025
463 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL 9-2
location do not present a potential “hotspot” for arsenic in soil. A statistical evaluation was
performed by calculating the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) for the arsenic data set. The
95% UCL for arsenic in soil at the Project Site was calculated to be 10 mg/kg. A graphical
evaluation completed by creating a normal probability plot of the arsenic data set. The shape of
the plotted data presents a relatively normal distribution. Therefore, arsenic concentrations
identified in surface soil at the Project Site are representative of ambient concentrations and
further assessment and/or remedial action for arsenic in soil is not warranted.
Results of the soil gas assessment conducted at the Project Site identified low level
concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes (BTEX), and 2-hexanone.
However, none of the VOC constituents exceeded their respective human health screening
levels. The results of the PEA screening level risk assessment calculated that the total risk from
COPCs identified in soil gas was estimated to be 8.6 x 10-9, which does not provide an
increased cancer risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The cumulative hazard is
estimated to be 0.0003, which does not provide a significant health hazard (>1). Therefore,
further assessment and/or remediation regarding VOCs identified in soil gas at the Project Site
is not warranted.
Recommendations
Based on the results of the PEA, soil and soil gas at the location of the former 500-gallon
capacity gasoline UST has not been sig nificantly impacted from the former presence of the
UST. Subsurface soil in the area of the UST generally consists of a stiff clay material, and any
residual petroleum hydrocarbons in soil will degrade over time by natural attenuation processes.
Therefore, further assessment and/or remediation regarding the former UST is not warranted.
Based on the results of the PEA, chlordane and lead have been identified in surface
soils at the Project Site at concentrations exceeding their respective human health screening
levels. The total increased cancer risk from chlordane identified in soils at the Project Site is
estimated to be 3.2 x 10-5, which exceeds DTSC’s ‘point of departure’ of 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6).
Due to elevated concentrations of chlordane and lead identified in surface soil around existing
structures located at the Project Site, Padre recommends a response action to reduce or
eliminate the potential impact of these contaminants. The recommended remedial action is
excavation, removal, and offsite disposal at an appropriate landfill. Prior to the response action,
Padre recommends conducting a Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) to further define
chlordane and lead impacts around the structures.
464
CC 06-03-2025
464 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
10-1
10.0 REFERENCES
California, Department of Water Resources (http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/)
California, Department of Water Resources, Evaluation of Groundwater Resources South San
Francisco Bay Volume III Northern Santa Clara County Area: Bulletin 118-1, December
1975.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of San Francisco – San Jose
Quadrangle California, (1:250,000), 1990 (Second Printing 2005).
California Geological Survey, 2000, A General Location Guide For Ultramafic Rocks in
California - Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos. Open
File Report 2000-19.
2002, Guidelines for Geologic Investigations of Naturally Occurring Asbestos in
California. Special Publication 124.
California, State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website
(http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov).
Cornerstone Earth Group, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Preliminary Soil Quality
Evaluation, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, California, July 11, 2014.
County of Santa Clara - Assessor’s Office
County of Santa Clara – Planning Deparment
Cupertino, City of, General Plan 2000-2020, Adopted 2005.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Envirostor Database,
(http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/).
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with
Potential Contamination as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based-Paint, Organochlorine
Pesticides from Temiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers,
revised June 9, 2006.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Preliminary Environmental Assessment Guidance
Manual, January 1994, Interim Final – Final October 2013.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Advisory – Active Soil Gas Investigations, April 2012..
Duggan, Mary Ann, P.E., Director – Facility Modernization – Cupertino Union SD
Google Earth.
465
CC 06-03-2025
465 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Cupertino_PEA Report_FINAL
10-2
Jennings and Bryant, 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey.
Norris, R. M., & R. W. Webb, 1976 (Second Edition 1990), Geology of California, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, pp. 412-427.
Padre Associates, Inc., Geologic Hazards Report, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion
Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California, January 2015.
Padre Associates, Inc., Preliminary Environmental Assessment Work Plan, Sedgwick
Elementary School Expansion Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertiono, Santa Clara
County, California, May 2015.
United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service, Web Soil
Survey (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/).
USGS Geological Survey; Cupertino Quadrangle, California, Topographic Map, 1991.
466
CC 06-03-2025
466 of 1012
APPENDIX A
DTSC CORRESPONDENCE
467
CC 06-03-2025
467 of 1012
468
CC 06-03-2025
468 of 1012
469
CC 06-03-2025
469 of 1012
470
CC 06-03-2025
470 of 1012
APPENDIX B
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP)
471
CC 06-03-2025
471 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
APPENDIX B
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
(QA/QC) PROCEDURES
The QA/QC procedures will be employed in both the field and the laboratory. QA/QC
samples include the collection of equipment rinsate samples, field blank samples, and duplicate
split samples.
FIELD QA/QC PROCEDURES
Field QA/QC procedures will be performed at the site and consist of the following
measures:
Chain-of-Custody (COC) forms will be used for sample submittal to the laboratory;
and
Daily information regarding sample collection will be recorded by Padre in Field
Logbooks. Sample types, soil descriptions, sample identification numbers, and
sample times will be collected and recorded on Field Data Sheets and in the Field
Logbooks. Pages will be numbered, dated, and signed by the person performing
data entry.
Field QA/QC samples will be collected and submitted for analysis along with the discrete
soil samples using the following sampling frequency:
Equipment blanks - One equipment rinsate blank per sample event;
Field blanks - One field blank sample per sample event; and
Field duplicates – Approximately 10% of the collected samples will be analyzed as
duplicate samples for select chemical analyses.
Equipment Rinseate Blanks
An equipment rinseate blank (equipment blank) will be collected from the final water
rinsed over equipment after cleaning activities have been performed. The equipment blank will
be collected from non-dedicated (reusable) sampling equipment such as soil sampling tools.
The equipment blank will be analyzed for arsenic using the same analytical method used on the
unique soil samples.
To collect an equipment blank sample, rinse water will be carefully poured over or
through the recently cleaned equipment, and collected directly into an appropriate sample
container held over a bucket. Equipment blank samples will be labeled and handled in the
same manner as all other samples.
472
CC 06-03-2025
472 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
Field Blanks
Field blank samples consist of a sample of the deionized water that was used to rinse
sampling equipment during equipment cleaning activities. The purpose of the field blank
sample is to evaluate the rinse water for compounds detected in the soil samples. A field blank
sample will be collected by pouring rinse water into the appropriate sample container. The field
blank will be analyzed for arsenic using the same analytical method used on the unique soil
samples, and the field blank samples will be handled in the same manner as all other samples.
Duplicate Samples
Duplicate soil sample(s) will be analyzed in order to evaluate the analytical procedures
and methods employed by the laboratory. The field duplicate sample(s) will be selected from
the original soil samples, and split by the laboratory. Duplicate soil samples will be analyzed for
OCPs and lead.
Duplicate soil gas sample(s) will be collected immediately after the original sample, in
separate sample containers, at the same location and depth. Duplicate soil gas samples will be
analyzed for VOCs.
Laboratory QA/QC Procedures
Laboratory QA/QC procedures include the following:
Laboratory analyses will be performed within the required holding time for all
samples;
Appropriate minimum reporting limits (RLs) will be used for each analysis;
A state-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory will conduct the required
analysis;
The laboratory will provide the following information for each sample:
- Method blank data;
- Surrogate recovery, instrument tuning, and calibration data; and
- Signed laboratory reports including the sample designation, date of sample
collection, date of sample analysis, laboratory analytical method employed, sample
volume, and the minimum RL.
To determine whether Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements for
sampling and analysis were met for the project, and to determine whether the data are usable
for risk assessment purposes, a cursory data validation review will be done on the data
summary package provided by the laboratory. This review will include an evaluation of chain-of-
custody documentation, holding times, reporting limits, precision and accuracy of goals,
representativeness, and completeness of the data. QA/QC requirements that are not met will
473
CC 06-03-2025
473 of 1012
Cupertino Union SD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2171
be evaluated in the ‘uncertainty’ portion of the risk assessment. Documentation of the data
validation review will be included with the PEA report.
Detection Limits
Detection limits for OCPs and metals that will be met by the analytical laboratory are
listed in the following DTSC document(s), and are attached:
DTSC’s Advisory – Active Soil gas Investigations, dated April 2012, and
DTSC, Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination
as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based-Paint, Organochlorine Pesticides from
Temiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers, revised
June 9, 2006.
Padre proposes to utilize McCampbell Analytical Inc. (McCampbell) located in Pittsburg,
California to provide the required chemical analyses of collected soil, soil gas, and water
samples. McCampbell is certified (No. 1644) by the California State Environmental Laboratory
Accreditation Program Branch to provide the required chemical analyses.
474
CC 06-03-2025
474 of 1012
APPENDIX C
DRILL HOLE LOGS
475
CC 06-03-2025
475 of 1012
476
CC 06-03-2025
476 of 1012
477
CC 06-03-2025
477 of 1012
478
CC 06-03-2025
478 of 1012
479
CC 06-03-2025
479 of 1012
480
CC 06-03-2025
480 of 1012
APPENDIX D
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORTS AND CHAIN-OF CUSTODYS
481
CC 06-03-2025
481 of 1012
WorkOrder:
Report Created for:Padre Associates. Inc.
555 University Ave., Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
Project Contact:Alan J. Klein
Project Name:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Project P.O.:
Project Received:07/13/2015
Analytical Report reviewed & approved for release on 07/22/2015 by:
Angela Rydelius,
Laboratory Manager
1507427
The report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory.
The analytical results relate only to the items tested. Results reported conform to the most
current NELAP standards, where applicable, unless otherwise stated in the case narrative.
Amended:07/24/2015
Analytical Report
1534 Willow Pass Rd. Pittsburg, CA 94565 ♦ TEL: (877) 252-9262 ♦ FAX: (925) 252-9269 ♦ www.mccampbell.com
NELAP: 4033ORELAP ♦ ELAP: 1644 ♦ ISO/IEC: 17025:2005 ♦ WSDE: C972-11 ♦ ADEC: UST-098 ♦ UCMR3
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
"When Quality Counts"
Page 1 of 85
482
CC 06-03-2025
482 of 1012
Glossary of Terms & Qualifier Definitions
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
WorkOrder:1507427
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Glossary Abbreviation
95% Interval 95% Confident Interval
DF Dilution Factor
DI WET (DISTLC) Waste Extraction Test using DI water
DISS Dissolved (direct analysis of 0.45 µm filtered and acidified water sample)
DUP Duplicate
EDL Estimated Detection Limit
ITEF International Toxicity Equivalence Factor
LCS Laboratory Control Sample
MB Method Blank
MB % Rec % Recovery of Surrogate in Method Blank, if applicable
MDL Method Detection Limit
ML Minimum Level of Quantitation
MS Matrix Spike
MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate
N/A Not Applicable
ND Not detected at or above the indicated MDL or RL
NR Data Not Reported due to matrix interference or insufficient sample amount.
PF Prep Factor
RD Relative Difference
RL Reporting Limit (The RL is the lowest calibration standard in a multipoint calibration.)
RPD Relative Percent Deviation
RRT Relative Retention Time
SPK Val Spike Value
SPKRef Val Spike Reference Value
SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leachate Procedure
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure
TEQ Toxicity Equivalents
WET (STLC)Waste Extraction Test (Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration)
Analytical Qualifiers
J Result is less than the RL but greater than the MDL. The reported concentration is an estimated value.
Quality Control Qualifiers
F1 MS/MSD recovery and/or RPD was out of acceptance criteria; LCS validated the prep batch.
Page 2 of 85
483
CC 06-03-2025
483 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-4 (SURF)1507427-007A Soil 07/09/2015 12:44 GC22 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Chlordane (Technical) 2.9 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 20:46
a-Chlordane 0.32 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:46
g-Chlordane 0.20 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:46
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
p,p-DDE 0.14 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:46
p,p-DDT 0.13 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:46
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0074 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/21/2015 11:37
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 124 70-130 07/21/2015 20:46
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 3 of 85
484
CC 06-03-2025
484 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-9 (SURF)1507427-017A Soil 07/09/2015 14:20 GC22 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Chlordane (Technical) 2.1 0.16 0.25 10 07/20/2015 14:15
a-Chlordane 0.25 0.0047 0.010 10 07/20/2015 14:15
g-Chlordane 0.17 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 14:15
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
p,p-DDE 0.053 0.0032 0.010 10 07/20/2015 14:15
p,p-DDT 0.12 0.0043 0.010 10 07/20/2015 14:15
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Heptachlor epoxide 0.013 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 14:15
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/24/2015 07:01
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 122 70-130 07/20/2015 14:15
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 4 of 85
485
CC 06-03-2025
485 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-10 (SURF)1507427-019A Soil 07/09/2015 14:41 GC22 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Chlordane (Technical) 13 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 23:01
a-Chlordane 1.5 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
g-Chlordane 1.5 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
p,p-DDE 0.039 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
p,p-DDT 0.16 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Heptachlor 0.021 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
Heptachlor epoxide 0.057 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 23:01
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/22/2015 00:09
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 129 70-130 07/21/2015 23:01
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 5 of 85
486
CC 06-03-2025
486 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-11 (SURF)1507427-021A Soil 07/09/2015 15:06 GC22 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Chlordane (Technical) 0.93 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 01:11
a-Chlordane 0.11 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 01:11
g-Chlordane 0.081 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 01:11
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
p,p-DDE 0.035 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 01:11
p,p-DDT 0.093 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 01:11
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0040 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/20/2015 12:31
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 122 70-130 07/21/2015 01:11
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 6 of 85
487
CC 06-03-2025
487 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-14 (SURF)1507427-027A Soil 07/10/2015 08:28 GC23 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Chlordane (Technical) 0.060 0.016 0.025 1 07/18/2015 09:35
a-Chlordane 0.0067 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
g-Chlordane 0.0040 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
p,p-DDD 0.0022 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
p,p-DDE 0.097 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
p,p-DDT 0.061 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Heptachlor 0.00025 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00071 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/18/2015 09:35
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 99 70-130 07/18/2015 09:35
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 7 of 85
488
CC 06-03-2025
488 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A/8082
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) + PCBs
P-15 (SURF)1507427-029A Soil 07/10/2015 08:00 GC22 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
g-BHC 0.00049 J 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Chlordane (Technical) 1.5 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 20:12
a-Chlordane 0.17 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:12
g-Chlordane 0.13 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:12
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
p,p-DDE 0.41 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:12
p,p-DDT 0.16 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:12
Dieldrin 0.0068 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Heptachlor epoxide 0.011 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 20:12
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1016 ND 0.0051 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1221 ND 0.011 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1232 ND 0.0063 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1242 ND 0.0067 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1248 ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1254 ND 0.0068 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Aroclor1260 ND 0.0061 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
PCBs, total ND 0.0040 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:47
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 75 70-130 07/21/2015 20:12
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 8 of 85
489
CC 06-03-2025
489 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-1 (SURF)1507427-001A Soil 07/09/2015 11:56 GC22 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Chlordane (Technical) 3.7 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 21:19
a-Chlordane 0.42 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
g-Chlordane 0.23 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
p,p-DDE 0.35 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
p,p-DDT 0.26 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endrin ND 0.0097 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Heptachlor epoxide 0.023 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/21/2015 21:19
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 121 70-130 07/21/2015 21:19
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 9 of 85
490
CC 06-03-2025
490 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-1 (SURF) DUP 1507427-001B Soil 07/09/2015 11:56 GC22 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0054 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
a-BHC ND 0.0020 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
b-BHC ND 0.0050 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
d-BHC ND 0.0074 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
g-BHC ND 0.0019 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Chlordane (Technical) 2.8 0.32 0.50 20 07/20/2015 16:34
a-Chlordane 0.34 0.0094 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
g-Chlordane 0.19 0.0042 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
p,p-DDD ND 0.0028 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
p,p-DDE 0.29 0.0064 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
p,p-DDT 0.21 0.0086 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Dieldrin ND 0.0066 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endosulfan I ND 0.013 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endosulfan II ND 0.0040 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.013 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endrin ND 0.0084 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0040 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Endrin ketone ND 0.0026 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Heptachlor ND 0.0042 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Heptachlor epoxide 0.031 0.0040 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0054 0.20 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0080 0.40 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Methoxychlor ND 0.018 0.020 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Toxaphene ND 0.70 1.0 20 07/20/2015 16:34
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 126 70-130 07/20/2015 16:34
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 10 of 85
491
CC 06-03-2025
491 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-1 (1-1.5')1507427-002A Soil 07/09/2015 11:59 GC22 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Chlordane (Technical) 0.087 0.016 0.025 1 07/21/2015 14:28
a-Chlordane 0.0094 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
g-Chlordane 0.0053 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
p,p-DDE 0.0095 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
p,p-DDT 0.0059 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00086 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/21/2015 14:28
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 94 70-130 07/21/2015 14:28
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 11 of 85
492
CC 06-03-2025
492 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-2 (SURF)1507427-003A Soil 07/09/2015 12:20 GC22 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Chlordane (Technical) 0.12 0.016 0.025 1 07/21/2015 15:03
a-Chlordane 0.018 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
g-Chlordane 0.0058 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
p,p-DDE 0.077 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
p,p-DDT 0.044 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0048 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/21/2015 15:03
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 100 70-130 07/21/2015 15:03
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 12 of 85
493
CC 06-03-2025
493 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-2 (1-1.5')1507427-004A Soil 07/09/2015 12:25 GC22 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/21/2015 16:12
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
p,p-DDE 0.00046 J 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
p,p-DDT ND 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/21/2015 16:12
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 98 70-130 07/21/2015 16:12
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 13 of 85
494
CC 06-03-2025
494 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-3 (SURF)1507427-005A Soil 07/09/2015 12:26 GC22 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Chlordane (Technical) 1.2 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 22:28
a-Chlordane 0.13 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
g-Chlordane 0.092 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
p,p-DDE 0.056 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
p,p-DDT 0.046 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endrin ND 0.0097 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0040 J 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/21/2015 22:28
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 103 70-130 07/21/2015 22:28
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 14 of 85
495
CC 06-03-2025
495 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-3 (1-1.5')1507427-006A Soil 07/09/2015 12:30 GC40 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Chlordane (Technical) 0.22 0.016 0.025 1 07/16/2015 00:20
a-Chlordane 0.020 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
g-Chlordane 0.020 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
p,p-DDE 0.0065 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
p,p-DDT 0.0082 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/16/2015 00:20
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 07/16/2015 00:20
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 15 of 85
496
CC 06-03-2025
496 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-4 (1-1.5')1507427-008A Soil 07/09/2015 13:02 GC22 107728
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Chlordane (Technical) 1.1 0.16 0.25 10 07/20/2015 17:09
a-Chlordane 0.13 0.0047 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
g-Chlordane 0.079 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
p,p-DDE 0.044 0.0032 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
p,p-DDT 0.038 0.0043 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endrin ND 0.0042 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0078 J 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/20/2015 17:09
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 129 70-130 07/20/2015 17:09
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 16 of 85
497
CC 06-03-2025
497 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-5 (SURF)1507427-009A Soil 07/09/2015 13:14 GC23 107728
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Chlordane (Technical) 0.063 0.016 0.025 1 07/18/2015 07:43
a-Chlordane 0.0055 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
g-Chlordane 0.0023 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
p,p-DDD 0.00076 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
p,p-DDE 0.024 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
p,p-DDT 0.024 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0016 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/18/2015 07:43
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 98 70-130 07/18/2015 07:43
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 17 of 85
498
CC 06-03-2025
498 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-5 (1-1.5')1507427-010A Soil 07/09/2015 13:20 GC40 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/16/2015 04:29
a-Chlordane 0.0014 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
g-Chlordane 0.00054 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
p,p-DDE 0.00093 J 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
p,p-DDT 0.0011 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/16/2015 04:29
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 98 70-130 07/16/2015 04:29
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 18 of 85
499
CC 06-03-2025
499 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-6 (SURF)1507427-011A Soil 07/09/2015 13:33 GC22 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Chlordane (Technical) 3.4 0.16 0.25 10 07/20/2015 15:25
a-Chlordane 0.39 0.0047 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
g-Chlordane 0.28 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
p,p-DDE 0.12 0.0032 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
p,p-DDT 0.21 0.0043 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endrin ND 0.0042 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0060 J 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/20/2015 15:25
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 130 70-130 07/20/2015 15:25
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 19 of 85
500
CC 06-03-2025
500 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-6 (1-1.5')1507427-012A Soil 07/09/2015 13:37 GC23 107728
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/18/2015 07:06
a-Chlordane 0.00094 J 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
g-Chlordane 0.00073 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
p,p-DDE ND 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
p,p-DDT ND 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/18/2015 07:06
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 102 70-130 07/18/2015 07:06
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 20 of 85
501
CC 06-03-2025
501 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-7 (SURF)1507427-013A Soil 07/09/2015 13:52 GC22 107573
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Chlordane (Technical) 1.9 0.16 0.25 10 07/20/2015 16:00
a-Chlordane 0.25 0.0047 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
g-Chlordane 0.15 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
p,p-DDE 0.12 0.0032 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
p,p-DDT 0.11 0.0043 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endrin ND 0.0042 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Heptachlor epoxide 0.026 0.0020 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/20/2015 16:00
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 122 70-130 07/20/2015 16:00
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 21 of 85
502
CC 06-03-2025
502 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-7 (1-1.5')1507427-014A Soil 07/09/2015 13:55 GC40 107573
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/16/2015 06:50
a-Chlordane 0.0014 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
g-Chlordane 0.00054 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
p,p-DDE 0.0014 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
p,p-DDT 0.0011 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/16/2015 06:50
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 81 70-130 07/16/2015 06:50
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 22 of 85
503
CC 06-03-2025
503 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-8 (SURF)1507427-015A Soil 07/09/2015 14:07 GC40 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Chlordane (Technical) 0.057 0.016 0.025 1 07/15/2015 23:45
a-Chlordane 0.010 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
g-Chlordane 0.0045 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
p,p-DDE 0.014 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
p,p-DDT 0.011 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0033 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/15/2015 23:45
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 78 70-130 07/15/2015 23:45
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 23 of 85
504
CC 06-03-2025
504 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-8 (1-1.5')1507427-016A Soil 07/09/2015 14:09 GC40 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/16/2015 07:26
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
g-Chlordane 0.00027 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
p,p-DDD 0.0011 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
p,p-DDE 0.0039 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
p,p-DDT 0.0034 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/16/2015 07:26
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 70 70-130 07/16/2015 07:26
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 24 of 85
505
CC 06-03-2025
505 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-9 (SURF) DUP 1507427-017B Soil 07/09/2015 14:20 GC22 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.0027 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
a-BHC ND 0.0010 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
b-BHC ND 0.0025 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
d-BHC ND 0.0037 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
g-BHC ND 0.00097 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Chlordane (Technical) 1.8 0.16 0.25 10 07/21/2015 00:37
a-Chlordane 0.21 0.0047 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
g-Chlordane 0.15 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
p,p-DDD ND 0.0014 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
p,p-DDE 0.047 0.0032 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
p,p-DDT 0.12 0.0043 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Dieldrin ND 0.0033 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endosulfan I ND 0.0065 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endosulfan II ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0063 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endrin ND 0.0042 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Endrin ketone ND 0.0013 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Heptachlor ND 0.0021 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0083 J 0.0020 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.0027 0.10 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.0040 0.20 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Methoxychlor ND 0.0089 0.010 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Toxaphene ND 0.35 0.50 10 07/21/2015 00:37
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 103 70-130 07/21/2015 00:37
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 25 of 85
506
CC 06-03-2025
506 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-9 (1-1.5')1507427-018A Soil 07/09/2015 14:24 GC23 107728
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Chlordane (Technical) 0.038 0.016 0.025 1 07/18/2015 06:28
a-Chlordane 0.0032 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
g-Chlordane 0.0024 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
p,p-DDD 0.00035 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
p,p-DDE 0.0039 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
p,p-DDT 0.012 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/18/2015 06:28
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 93 70-130 07/18/2015 06:28
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 26 of 85
507
CC 06-03-2025
507 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10 (1-1.5')1507427-020A Soil 07/09/2015 14:45 GC40 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Chlordane (Technical) 0.040 0.016 0.025 1 07/16/2015 09:48
a-Chlordane 0.0051 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
g-Chlordane 0.0052 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
p,p-DDE 0.0014 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
p,p-DDT 0.0040 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/16/2015 09:48
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 71 70-130 07/16/2015 09:48
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 27 of 85
508
CC 06-03-2025
508 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10 (1-1.5') DUP 1507427-020B Soil 07/09/2015 14:45 GC22 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Chlordane (Technical) 0.038 0.016 0.025 1 07/20/2015 13:40
a-Chlordane 0.0052 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
g-Chlordane 0.0040 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
p,p-DDE 0.0019 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
p,p-DDT 0.0048 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0010 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/20/2015 13:40
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 129 70-130 07/20/2015 13:40
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 28 of 85
509
CC 06-03-2025
509 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11 (1-1.5')1507427-022A Soil 07/09/2015 15:10 GC22 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Chlordane (Technical) 0.095 0.016 0.025 1 07/20/2015 20:38
a-Chlordane 0.016 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
g-Chlordane 0.0076 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
p,p-DDE 0.012 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
p,p-DDT 0.024 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Dieldrin 0.00053 J 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0018 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/20/2015 20:38
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 111 70-130 07/20/2015 20:38
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 29 of 85
510
CC 06-03-2025
510 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-12 (SURF)1507427-023A Soil 07/09/2015 15:22 GC22 107585
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Chlordane (Technical) 0.11 0.016 0.025 1 07/20/2015 21:13
a-Chlordane 0.013 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
g-Chlordane 0.011 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
p,p-DDE 0.012 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
p,p-DDT 0.018 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0012 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/20/2015 21:13
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 117 70-130 07/20/2015 21:13
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 30 of 85
511
CC 06-03-2025
511 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-12 (1-1.5')1507427-024A Soil 07/09/2015 15:25 GC22 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/21/2015 07:21
a-Chlordane 0.0012 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
g-Chlordane 0.00059 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
p,p-DDD 0.00041 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
p,p-DDE 0.0027 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
p,p-DDT 0.0063 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/21/2015 07:21
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 82 70-130 07/21/2015 07:21
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 31 of 85
512
CC 06-03-2025
512 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:#1401-2171; CUPERTINO (SEDGWICK PEA)
Date Received:7/13/15 17:18
Date Prepared:7/13/15-7/16/15
WorkOrder:1507427
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-14 (1-1.5')1507427-028A Soil 07/10/2015 08:31 GC23 107585
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 07/18/2015 08:57
a-Chlordane 0.0014 0.00047 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
g-Chlordane 0.00089 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
p,p-DDD 0.00047 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
p,p-DDE 0.014 0.00032 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
p,p-DDT 0.0090 0.00043 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 07/18/2015 08:57
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 96 70-130 07/18/2015 08:57
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 32 of 85
513
CC 06-03-2025
513 of 1012
SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT
SEDGWICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL EXPANSION PROJECT
10480 FINCH AVENUE
CUPERTINO, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(Site Code: 204271)
Prepared for:
CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
NOVEMBER 2015
Attachment B
514
CC 06-03-2025
514 of 1012
51
5
CC 06-03-2025
515 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
- i -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1-1
2.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 2-1
3.0 SSI ACTIVITIES .............................................................................................. 3-1
OCPs ............................................................................................................ 3-1
Lead ............................................................................................................ 3-2
SSI Field Variances ......................................................................................... 3-2
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) .................................................... 3-2
4.0 SSI RESULTS ................................................................................................. 4-1
OCPs in Soil .................................................................................................... 4-1
Lead in Soil ..................................................................................................... 4-2
Duplicate Soil Samples .................................................................................... 4-2
Equipment Blank ............................................................................................. 4-3
Field Blank ...................................................................................................... 4-4
Laboratory QA/QC .......................................................................................... 4-4
5.0 RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................... 5-1
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 6-1
7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 7-1
TABLES
4-1 Soil Results for OCPs ..................................................................................... 4-8
4-2 Soil Results for Lead ....................................................................................... 4-11
5-1 Soil Exposure Screening Evaluation ................................................................ 5-2
516
CC 06-03-2025
516 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
-ii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
PLATES
1-1 Site Plan .......................................................................................................... 1-2
1-2 Site Location.................................................................................................... 1-3
2-1 PEA Chlordane Results .................................................................................. 2-3
2-2 PEA Lead Results (Surface Soil) ..................................................................... 2-4
3-1 Step-out Soil Samples - OCPs......................................................................... 3-3
3-2 Step-out Soil Samples - OCPs......................................................................... 3-4
3-3 Step-out Soil Samples – Lead ......................................................................... 3-5
4-1A Chlordane Results (Surface Soil) ..................................................................... 4-13
4-1B Chlordane Results (Subsurface Soil) ............................................................... 4-14
4-2 Lead Results (Surface Soil) ............................................................................. 4-15
6-1 Estimated Extent of OCP/Lead Impacts (Main Residence) .............................. 6-2
6-2 Estimated Extent of OCP Impacts (Driveway area).......................................... 6-3
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DTSC CORRESPONDENCE
APPENDIX B: QUALTITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP)
APPENDIX C: ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORTS AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODYS
APPENDIX D: LEADSPREAD
517
CC 06-03-2025
517 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the results of a Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) that was
completed by Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre), on behalf of the Cupertino Union School District
(District), for the Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project located at 10480 Finch
Avenue in Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (Project Site). The Project Site is
illustrated on Plate 1-1: Site Location and Plate 1-2: Site Plan.
The SSI was completed in accordance with the Padre document titled, Supplemental
Site Investigation Technical Memorandum, Sedgwick Elementary Expansion Site, Cupertino
Union School District, Cupertino, Ca (Site Code: 204271), dated October 14, 2015 and in
general accordance with the following DTSC guidance documents:
• CALEPA, DTSC, Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual
(January 1994, Interim Final – Final October 2013);
• DTSC, Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties (Third Revision),
dated August 7, 2008; and
• DTSC, Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with Potential
Contamination as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based-Paint, Organochlorine
Pesticides from Temiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical
Transformers, revised June 9, 2006.
Padre previously submitted the report titled Preliminary Environmental Assessment,
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara
County California, dated September 2015. Based on the results of the PEA, elevated
concentrations of chlordane and lead were identified in soil at the Project Site requiring further
remedial investigations. Due to the presence of elevated concentrations of chlordane and lead,
the potential cancer risk for the Project Site is greater than 1E-06, and a response action to
reduce or eliminate the impact of the contaminants is recommended.
Recently, the risk screening level for chlordane was decreased from 1,700 micrograms
per kilogram (μg/kg) to 430 μg/kg. Due to this revision, several soil sample locations were
identified requiring further assessment. Therefore, the purpose of the SSI was to further assess
and delineate the lateral and vertical extent of contaminated soil identified at the Project Site.
The SSI consisted of step-out and step-down soil samples to further delineate the extent
of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and lead contamination in the area of the main residence
and to further evaluate elevated lead concentrations identified at the southeast portion of the
Project Site. The results of the SSI will be used to determine the extent of a response action at
the Project Site.
518
CC 06-03-2025
518 of 1012
519
CC 06-03-2025
519 of 1012
52
0
CC 06-03-2025
520 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
2-1
2.0 BACKGROUND
The Project Site consists of approximately 1.48 acres of residential land and, which is
identified by the Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office as Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 375-
40-067. The Project Site is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the Sedgwick
Elementary School property at 10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino, Santa Clara County,
California.
Cupertino Union School District (District) intends to purchase the property as part of the
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project. The expansion project will not result in an
addition of classrooms or students to the existing elementary school. Public water and sewer
will be provided to the Project Site by the San Jose Water Company and the Sunnyvale
Sanitation District, respectively.
Padre reviewed the document titled Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and
Preliminary Soil Quality Evaluation, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, California dated July 1,
2014. A copy of the Phase I ESA has previously been provided to DTSC. The Phase I ESA was
prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone) on behalf of David J. Powers &
Associates, and a copy was provided to DTSC. Below is a summary of the findings presented
in the Phase I ESA:
The property is currently owned by F.A. Pestarino Jr. Trustee, and has been owned by
the Pestarino family since the 1930s. The property historically contained a prune tree orchard.
According to a review of available historical aerial photographs, the Project Site was planted as
an orchard from at least 1939 through the late 1950s. The existing residential building is
present in a 1956 aerial photograph. In addition to the residence, the Project Site contains a
workshop (wood-framed with corrugate metal roof) located at the southeast corner of the Project
Site. Located south and adjacent to the workshop are two, small, single-room dwellings that are
wood-framed and situated on concrete blocks.
In 1996 a 500-gallon gasoline underground storage tank (UST) was removed from the
Project Site. Reportedly, the UST had been empty for approximately 20 years prior to removal.
Reportedly, two soil samples were collected below the ends of the UST at depths of
approximately 7-feet below grade surface (bgs). Total petroleum hydrocarbons identified as
gasoline (TPHg) were identified in soil at concentrations up to 60 milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg). The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) subsequently issued a case-closure
letter for the UST dated March 26, 1997 stating that “Due to the low levels of hydrocarbons
detected and the site location, Santa Clara Valley Water District staff believes that with time the
residual pollution will naturally attenuate and does not require any further corrective action at
this time.”
Due to recognized environmental conditions (RECs) identified by the Phase I ESA,
Cornerstone conducted preliminary soil assessment activities at the Project Site. Based on the
historic agricultural use (orchard) at the Project Site and the age/construction of the existing
structures, a total of sixteen surface soil samples were collected throughout the Project Site and
521
CC 06-03-2025
521 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
2-2
chemically analyzed for the presence of pesticides, arsenic, lead, and mercury. Five of the soil
samples were collected at the perimeter of the residence, and two soil samples were collected
at the perimeter of the workshop. Below is summary of the analytical results:
• Chlordane was reported at a maximum concentration of 2,800 micrograms per
kilogram (µg/kg) at the location of soil sample SS-5 located along the western
side of the residence;
• Arsenic was reported at concentrations ranging from 5.2 mg/kg to 15 mg/kg. The
highest arsenic concentration was identified at the location of soil sample SS-6
located along the northwest property boundary; and
• Lead was reported at a maximum concentration of 100 mg/kg at the location of
soil sample SS-2 located along the western side of the workshop.
The soil assessment activities included the advancement of one drill hole using direct-
push drilling technology to an approximate depth of 20 feet at the location of the former UST.
Soil samples were collected from approximate depths of 8 feet and 12 feet, which were
chemically analyzed for the presence of TPHg, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes
(BTEX) and methyl-tert butyl ether (MTBE). Reportedly, TPHg, BTEX, or MTBE concentrations
were not identified in the soil sample collected from a depth of 8 feet below ground surface
(bgs). However, TPHg, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes were identified at concentrations of
1,300 mg/kg, 27 mg/kg, and 180 mg/kg, respectively in the 12-foot soil sample.
During July 2015 Padre conducted a Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) to
further assess the chemicals of concern identified as part of Cornerstone’s preliminary soil
assessment activities. The results of the PEA were documented in the Padre report titled
Preliminary Environmental Assessment, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project,
10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California, dated September 2015. Based
on the results of the PEA, elevated concentrations of pesticides and lead were identified at the
Project Site requiring further investigation and/or remediation.
Based on the results of the PEA, chlordane and was identified in surface soils at the
Project Site at concentrations exceeding their respective human health screening levels. The
total increased cancer risk from chlordane identified in soils at the Project Site is estimated to be
3.2 x 10-5, which exceeds DTSC’s “point of departure” of 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). Chlordane
concentrations identified in soil during the course of the PEA are presented on Plate 2-1.
Concentrations of lead ranged from 9.0 to 310 mg/kg in surface soil samples collected at
the Project Site. Using DTSC’s lead risk assessment spreadsheet model (LeadSpread Version
8), exposure to the lead concentrations identified at the Project Site would result in a 90th
percentile blood lead concentration of 8.0 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dl) in children, which
exceeds the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) blood toxicity level of
1 µg/dl. Lead concentrations identified in surface soil during the course of the PEA are
presented on Plate 2-2.
522
CC 06-03-2025
522 of 1012
52
3
CC 06-03-2025
523 of 1012
52
4
CC 06-03-2025
524 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
3-1
3.0 SSI ACTIVITIES
On October 27, 2015 soil samples were collected in accordance with the sample
collection procedures outlined in the Project Site PEA Work Plan, dated May 2015; and the SSI
Technical Memorandum dated October 2015 and approved by DTSC. A copy of the SSI
Technical Memorandum approval letter are presented in Appendix A.
During the completion of the PEA, elevated concentrations of chlordane were identified
around the perimeter of the main residence building at concentrations exceeding the DTSC-
modified screening level of 430 µg/kg. Additionally, lead was identified in several locations at
concentrations exceeding DTSC’s screening level of 80 mg/kg. The SSI field sampling plan is
summarized below:
OCPs
• At the location of sample point P-4 (west side of residence), chlordane was
identified at a concentration of 1,100 µg/kg at a depth of 1.0 to 1.5 feet. At this
location, discrete step-down soil samples were collected from approximate
depths of 2.0 to 2.5 feet and 3.0 to 3.5 feet. The 2.0 to 2.5-foot sample was
chemically analyzed for OCPs and the 3.0 to 3.5-foot sample was placed on-hold
with the analytical laboratory. The step-down soil sample location are presented
on Plate 3-1.
• At the location of sample points P-10 and P-11 (north side of residence) and
P-15 (east side of residence), chlordane was identified in surface soil samples
exceeding 430 µg/kg. At these locations, step-out samples were collected at the
surface to 0.5 feet and depths of 1.0 to 1.5 feet and chemically analyzed for
OCPs. The step-out soil sample locations are presented on Plate 3-1.
• At the location of surface soil sample SS-6 collected during the June 2014
preliminary soil assessment conducted by Cornerstone, chlordane was identified
at a concentration of 520 µg/kg which exceeds the revised DTSC-modified
screening level of 430 µg/kg. Since this location is not near a structure, Padre
collected step-out soil samples on 5 and 10-foot centers from SS-6. Soil
samples were collected at the surface to 0.5 feet, depths of 1.0 to 1.5 feet and
2.0 to 2.5 feet. The surface and 1.0 to 1.5-foot samples were chemically
analyzed for OCPs and the 2.0 to 2.5-foot samples were placed on-hold with the
analytical laboratory. Additionally, the 10-foot step-out samples were placed on-
hold pending the results of the 5-foot step-out soil samples. The step-out soil
sample locations are presented on Plate 3-2.
525
CC 06-03-2025
525 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
3-2
Lead
• At the location of sample points P-13 and P-15 (residence courtyard) step-out
samples were collected at the surface to 0.5 feet and chemically analyzed for
lead. The step-out soil sample locations are presented on Plate 3-3.
• At the location of sample points P-17 and P-28 (single-room dwelling) step-out
samples were collected at the surface to 0.5 feet and chemically analyzed for
lead. The step-out soil sample locations are presented on Plate 3-3.
SSI Field Variances
During the course of sampling activities, one additional soil sample (P-29A (SURF)) was
collected and chemically analyzed for lead to further characterize this area of the Project Site.
Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC)
For quality control/quality assurance (QA/QC) measures, approximately 10% of the
discrete soil samples (OCPs, lead) were split by the analytical laboratory and chemically
analyzed as duplicate samples. Additionally, one equipment blank (water sample) and field
blank (water sample) per sample event were chemically analyzed for the presence of arsenic
and lead. Them, collection of these samples is discussed in more detail in the quality
assurance project plan (QAPP) is presented in Appendix B.
526
CC 06-03-2025
526 of 1012
52
7
CC 06-03-2025
527 of 1012
52
8
CC 06-03-2025
528 of 1012
52
9
CC 06-03-2025
529 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-1
4.0 SSI RESULTS
The following sections of this document present the results of field sampling activities
performed by Padre at the Project Site on October 27th, 2015. The laboratory analytical results
are summarized in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2. Additionally, chlordane concentrations identified at
the Project Site are presented on Plates 4-1A (surface soil) and 4-1B (subsurface soil), and
lead concentrations identified in surface soil are presented on Plate 4-2. Certified analytical
laboratory reports and chain-of-custody documentation are provided in Appendix D.
OCPs in Soil
Main Residence. Discrete step-out soil samples were collected at locations of previously
collected soil samples around the main residence structure where concentrations of OCPs were
identified exceeding their respective screening levels. Results of the laboratory analysis are
summarized below:
The following OPCs were identified at concentrations exceeding regulatory screening
levels:
• Chlordane (technical) was reported at concentrations ranging from less than
25 to 4,800 µg/kg. The highest concentration of chlordane was identified in soil
sample P-10D (SURF).
The following OPCs were identified at concentrations below regulatory screening levels:
• DDD was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 6.4 µg/kg;
• DDE was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 150 µg/kg;
• DDT was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 81 µg/kg;
• Dieldrin was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 1.7 µg/kg;
• Endrin was reported at a concentration 2.1 µg/kg;
• Heptachlor was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to
5.4 µg/kg; and
• Heptachlor epoxide was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to
30 µg/kg.
Soil Sample SS-6. At the approximate location of surface soil sample SS-6, a soil
sample (SS-6A) was collected at the surface to 0.5 feet and 1.0 to 1.5 feet and chemically
analyzed for OCPs. Additionally, step-out soil samples were collected on 5 and 10-foot centers
530
CC 06-03-2025
530 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-2
with the 10-foot sample placed on-hold pending the results of the 5-foot step-out soil samples.
Results of the laboratory analysis are summarized below:
The following OPCs were identified at concentrations below regulatory screening levels:
• Chlordane (technical) was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 25 to 44
µg/kg;
• DDD was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 2.5 µg/kg;
• DDE was reported at concentrations ranging from 0.45J to 25 µg/kg;
• DDT was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 20 µg/kg;
• Heptachlor was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to 0.65J µg/kg;
• Heptachlor epoxide was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 1.0 to
1.0 µg/kg; and
• Toxaphene was reported at concentrations ranging from less than 50 to
410 µg/kg.
Lead in Soil
At the location of PEA sample points P-13 and P-15 (residence courtyard) step-out
samples were collected at the surface to 0.5 feet and chemically analyzed for lead. The results
are summarized below:
• Lead was reported at concentration ranging from 31 to 68 mg/kg.
At the location of sample points P-17 and P-28 (single-room dwelling) step-out samples
were collected at the surface to 0.5 feet and chemically analyzed for lead. The results are
summarized below:
• Lead was detected at concentration ranging from 60 to 73 (mg/kg).
Duplicate Soil Samples
Two discrete soil samples were split by the analytical laboratory and chemically
analyzed for the presence of OCPs by U.S. EPA Method 8081A. The analytical results are
presented in Table 4-1 and summarized below.
For discrete soil sample P-11B (SURF) and the associated duplicate soil sample:
• Chlordane was reported at concentrations of 650 and 470 µg/kg, respectively. The
results are comparable;
• DDD was reported at concentrations of 4.3 and 4.4 µg/kg, respectively. The results
531
CC 06-03-2025
531 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-3
are comparable;
• DDE was reported at concentrations of 26 and 21 µg/kg, respectively. The results
are comparable;
• DDT was reported at concentrations of 55 and 44 µg/kg, respectively. The results
are comparable;
• Dieldrin was not reported at a concentration of less than 1.0 and 1.7 µg/kg in the
associated duplicate soil sample which is slightly above the reporting limit of
1.0 µg/kg. The results are comparable;
• Heptachlor was reported at concentrations of less than 1.0 and 0.71J, respectively.
The results are comparable; and
• Heptachlor epoxide was reported at concentrations of 4.7 and 3.8 µg/kg,
respectively. The results are comparable.
For discrete soil sample P-15A (1.0-1.5’) and the associated duplicate soil sample:
• DDD was reported at concentrations of 1.7 and 0.99J, respectively. The results are
comparable;
• DDE was reported at concentrations of 9.2 and 6.2 µg/kg, respectively. The results
are comparable;
• DDT was reported at concentrations of 7.1 and 6.5 µg/kg, respectively. The results
are comparable;
• Heptachlor was reported at concentrations of 0.34J and less than 1.0 µg/kg,
respectively. The results are comparable.
One discrete soil sample was split by the analytical laboratory and chemically analyzed
for the presence of lead by U.S. EPA Method 6020. The analytical results are presented in
Table 4-1 and summarized below.
For discrete soil sample P-17A (SURF) and the associated duplicate soil sample:
• Lead was reported at concentrations of 73 and 60 mg/kg, respectively. The results
are comparable.
Equipment Blank
Distilled water was used as rinseate for decontaminating sampling equipment. The
equipment blank sample was collected by carefully pouring rinseate water over and through
recently cleaned equipment, and collected directly into the appropriate sample container.
532
CC 06-03-2025
532 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-4
One equipment blank sample was collected for each sample event and chemically
analyzed for lead by U.S. EPA Method 200.8. The results of the laboratory analysis are
summarized below.
• The laboratory analysis did not identify lead at or above the analytical reporting limit.
Field Blank
One field blank sample was collected for each sampling event and chemically analyzed
for lead by U.S. EPA Method 200.8. The results of the laboratory analysis are summarized
below.
• The laboratory analysis did not identify lead at or above the analytical reporting limit.
Laboratory QA/QC
A cover letter with the signature of the lab director of CLS accompanies every laboratory
report received for this project. According to the lab director, samples were analyzed utilizing
EPA or other ELAP approved methodologies, and that the results are in compliance both
technically and for completeness. The data quality objectives (DQO) met by laboratory for this
project was level II. Copies of the CLS laboratory reports are presented in Appendix C.
CLS Work Order # 1510A30 – Report dated October 28, 2015
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding lead analysis:
• The matrix spike, matrix spike duplicate recovery, and relative percent deviation
for lead was out of acceptance criteria but was validated by the post digestion
spike.
• The relative percent deviation for the surrogate recovery was out of acceptance
criteria but was validated by the post digestion spike.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding Organochlorine Pesticides by U.S.
EPA Method 8081A for the following discrete soil samples:
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6A
(SURF):
• The concentration of DDD is less than the minimum level of quantitation (ML) but
greater than the minimum detection limit (MDL). The reported concentration of
DDD is an estimate.
• The concentration of dieldrin is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of dieldrin is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
533
CC 06-03-2025
533 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-5
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6A (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of DDD is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDD is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6B
(SURF):
• The concentration of DDD is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDD is an estimate.
• The concentration of dieldrin is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of dieldrin is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6C
(SURF):
• The concentration of dieldrin is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of dieldrin is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of heptachlor epoxide is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6D
(SURF):
• The concentration of DDD is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDD is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of heptachlor epoxide is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6B (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of DDE is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDE is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6E
(SURF):
• The concentration of dieldrin is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of dieldrin is an estimate.
534
CC 06-03-2025
534 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-6
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample SS-6E (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of DDE is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDE is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-4A (SURF):
• The concentration of chlordane (technical) is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of chlordane is an estimate.
• The concentration of DDE is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDE is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10A (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10B
(SURF):
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10B (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of heptachlor epoxide is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10C
(SURF):
• The concentration of heptachlor for is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10D (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of DDE is an estimate.
535
CC 06-03-2025
535 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
4-7
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-10D (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of DDD is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDD is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of DDE is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-11B
(SURF):
• The concentration of dieldrin is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of dieldrin is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-11B
(SURF) DUPE:
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-11B (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
• The concentration of heptachlor epoxide is less than the ML but greater than the
MDL. The reported concentration of heptachlor epoxide is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-15A (1.0-
1.5’):
• The concentration of heptachlor is less than the ML but greater than the MDL.
The reported concentration of heptachlor is an estimate.
The laboratory reported the following notes regarding discrete soil sample P-15A (1.0-
1.5’) DUPE:
• The concentration of DDD is less than the ML but greater than the MDL. The
reported concentration of DDD is an estimate.
536
CC 06-03-2025
536 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-8
Table 4-1 - Soil Results for OCPs
(results in µg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Al
d
r
i
n
(a
,
b
,
d
)
-
B
H
C
Ga
m
m
a
-
B
H
C
Ch
l
o
r
d
a
n
e
-
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
DD
D
DD
E
DD
T
Di
e
l
d
r
i
n
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
Su
l
f
a
t
e
En
d
r
i
n
En
d
r
i
n
Al
d
e
h
y
d
e
En
d
r
i
n
K
e
t
o
n
e
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
Ep
o
x
i
d
e
Me
t
h
o
x
y
c
h
l
o
r
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
be
n
z
e
n
e
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
cy
c
l
o
p
e
n
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
To
x
a
p
h
e
n
e
PEA (July 2015)
P-1 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 3,700 <10 350 260 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 23 <10 <100 <200 <500
P-1 (SURF)DUPE <20 <20 <20 2,800 <20 290 210 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 31 <20 <200 <400 <1,000
P-1 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 87 <1.0 9.5 5.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.86J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-2 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 120 <1.0 77 44 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-2 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.46J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-3 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 1,200 <10 56 46 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 4.0J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-3 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 220 <1.0 6.5 8.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-4 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2,900 <1.0 140 130 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 7.4 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-4 (1-1.5’) <10 <10 <10 1,100 <10 44 38 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 7.8J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-5 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 63 0.76 J 24 24 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.6 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-5 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.93J 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-6 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 3,400 <10 120 210 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 6.0J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-6 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.94J 0.73J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-7 (SURF) <10 <10 <10 1,900 <10 120 110 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 26 <10 <100 <200 <500
P-7 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 1.4 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-8 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 57 <1.0 14 11 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.3 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-8 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 1.1 3.9 3.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-9 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2,100 <1.0 53 120 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 13 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-9 (SURF) DUPE <10 <10 <10 1,800 <10 47 120 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 8.3J <10 <100 <200 <500
P-9 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 38 0.35J 3.9 12 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 13,000 <1.0 39 160 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 21 57 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 40 <1.0 1.4 4.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10 (1-1.5’) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 38 <1.0 1.9 4.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 930 <1.0 35 93 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 95 <1.0 12 24 0.53J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-12 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 110 <1.0 12 18 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-12 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.41J 2.7 6.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-14 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 60 2.2 97 61 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.25J 0.71J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-14 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.47J 14 9.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 0.49J 1,500 <1.0 410 160 6.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 11 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 9.3 50 36 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.4 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
HHRA NOTE #3 430
RSLs 39 -- 570 1,700 2,300 2,000 1,900 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 70 -- 210 -- 490
53
7
CC 06-03-2025
537 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-9
Table 4-1 - Soil Results for OCPs (cont’)
(results in µg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Al
d
r
i
n
(a
,
b
,
d
)
-
B
H
C
Ga
m
m
a
-
B
H
C
Ch
l
o
r
d
a
n
e
-
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
DD
D
DD
E
DD
T
Di
e
l
d
r
i
n
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
Su
l
f
a
t
e
En
d
r
i
n
En
d
r
i
n
Al
d
e
h
y
d
e
En
d
r
i
n
K
e
t
o
n
e
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
Ep
o
x
i
d
e
Me
t
h
o
x
y
c
h
l
o
r
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
be
n
z
e
n
e
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
cy
c
l
o
p
e
n
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
To
x
a
p
h
e
n
e
P-15 (1-1.5’) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 8.9 50 31 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.5 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-16 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 170 3.3 4.5 18 2.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-25 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.49J 62 25 0.43J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-25 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 2.6 2.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-26 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 43 23 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-26 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 3.1 1.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-27 (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 2.8 150 62 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-27 (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SSI (October 2015)
SS-6A (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.54J 12 6.5 0.42J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.65J <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6A (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.53J 6.9 4.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6B (SURF) <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <50 1.2J 25 15 1.5 J <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <20 <40 410
SS-6B (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.98J 1.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6C (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 1.2 17 16 0.85J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.35J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6C (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 5.0 2.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6D (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 37 0.87J 11 14 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.39J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6D (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 4.2 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6E (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 44 2.5 21 20 0.54J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
SS-6E (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 0.45J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.26 J <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-4A (2-2.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 20J <1.0 0.99J 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10A (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 130 1.6 6.5 7.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10A (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 2.2 7.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.29 J <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10B (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 500 1.6 7.8 8.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.94 J 5.2 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10B (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 <1.0 1.0 1.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.23J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10C (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1,700 <1.0 5.3 5.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.1 <1.0 <1.0 0.76 J 19 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10C (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 410 2.8 6.1 4.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10D (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4,800 <1.0 28 81 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 5.4 30 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-10D (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 31 0.33J 2.7 7.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.28J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11A (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 100 1.8 12 27 0.76J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11A (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 83 2.1 6.9 14 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
HHRA NOTE #3 430
RSLs 39 -- 570 1,700 2,300 2,000 1,900 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 70 -- 210 -- 490
53
8
CC 06-03-2025
538 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-10
Table 4-1 - Soil Results for OCPs (cont’)
(results in µg/kg)
Sample
Identification
Al
d
r
i
n
(a
,
b
,
d
)
-
B
H
C
Ga
m
m
a
-
B
H
C
Ch
l
o
r
d
a
n
e
-
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
DD
D
DD
E
DD
T
Di
e
l
d
r
i
n
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
I
I
En
d
o
s
u
l
f
a
n
Su
l
f
a
t
e
En
d
r
i
n
En
d
r
i
n
Al
d
e
h
y
d
e
En
d
r
i
n
K
e
t
o
n
e
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
He
p
t
a
c
h
l
o
r
Ep
o
x
i
d
e
Me
t
h
o
x
y
c
h
l
o
r
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
be
n
z
e
n
e
He
x
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
cy
c
l
o
p
e
n
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
To
x
a
p
h
e
n
e
P-11B (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 650 4.3 26 55 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.7 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11B (SURF) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 470 4.4 21 44 1.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.71J 3.8 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-11B (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 58 <1.0 3.8 9.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.32J 0.55 J <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15A (SURF) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 190 6.4 150 55 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.4 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15A (1-1.5’) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 1.7 9.2 7.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.34J <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
P-15A (1-1.5’) DUPE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <25 0.99J 6.2 6.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <20 <50
Phase II (July 2014)
SS-1* <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <200 21 320 87 <9.9 <9.9 9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 -- -- <200
SS-2* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 26 280 33 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-3* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <39 26 280 33 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-4* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 180 31 230 26 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-5* <20 400 280 2,800 26 360 91 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 -- -- <400
SS-6* <2.0 86 50 520 28 55 26 8.7 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 12 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-7* <2.0 5.9 3.7 <40 29 240 26 2.9 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-8* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 21 120 14 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-9* <2.0 7.0 5.5 67 48 260 29 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-10* <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <40 31 220 16 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-11* <2.0 3.2 3.5 <39 32 180 21 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <39
SS-12* <9.7 25 31 240 17 150 60 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 -- -- <190
SS-13* <2.0 15 12 110 21 42 14 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-14* <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <200 28 410 88 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 -- -- <200
SS-15* <2.0 3.5 3.9 <40 47 190 26 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 -- -- <40
SS-16* <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <39 <1.9 8.8 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 -- -- <39
HHRA NOTE #3 430
RSLs 39 -- 570 1,700 2,300 2,000 1,900 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 70 -- 210 -- 490
Notes:
µg/kg – micrograms per kilogram
* Surface soil sample (Cornerstone, June 2014)
-- Not reported
HHRA – Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 1 (May 2015).
RSL – U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (June, 2015)
3,700 – above screening level
53
9
CC 06-03-2025
539 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-11
Table 4-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
PEA (July 2015)
SS-6A (1-1.5’) 11 --
AS-1 (SURF) 13 --
AS-2 (SURF) 7.2 --
AS-3 (SURF) 5.7 --
P-7 (SURF) -- 39
P-7 (1-1.5’) -- 79
P-10 (SURF) -- 29
P-10 (1-1.5’) -- 9.3
P-11 (SURF) -- 24
P-11 (1-1.5’) -- 13
P-13 (SURF) -- 92
P-13 (1-1.5’) -- 17
P-14 (SURF) -- 36
P-15 (SURF) -- 220
P-17 (SURF) -- 310
P-17 (SURF) DUP -- 310
P-17 (1-1.5’) -- 43
P-18 (SURF) -- 93
P-18 (1-1.5’) -- 17
P-19 (SURF) -- 180
P-19 (1-1.5’) -- 31
P-19 (1-1.5’) DUPE -- 27
P-20 (SURF) -- 35
P-20 (1-1.5’) -- 11
P-21 (SURF) -- 40
P-21 (1-1.5’) -- 9.4
P-23 (SURF) -- 42
P-23 (1-1.5’) -- 13
Screening Level 12A 80B
540
CC 06-03-2025
540 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-12
Table 4-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead (cont’)
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
P-24 (SURF) -- 83
P-24 (1-1.5’) -- 10
P-24 (1-1.5’) DUP -- 9.0
P-25 (SURF) -- 47
P-25 (1-1.5’) -- 9.8
P-26 (SURF) -- 29
P-26 (1-1.5’) -- 12
P-27 (SURF) -- 64
P-27 (SURF) DUP -- 39
P-27 (1-1.5’) -- 14
P-28 (SURF) -- 150
P-28 (1-1.5’) -- 12
SSI (October 2015)
P-13A (SURF) -- 68
P-13B (SURF) -- 62
P-15A (SURF) -- 31
P-17A (SURF) -- 73
P-17A (SURF) DUPE -- 60
P-28A (SURF) -- 65
P-29 (SURF) -- 39
P-29A (SURF) -- 36
P-30 (SURF) -- 65
P-31 (SURF) -- 41
P-32 (SURF) -- 42
P-33 (SURF) -- 49
Screening Level 12A 80B
541
CC 06-03-2025
541 of 1012
Cupertino USD - PEA
Project No. 1401-2172
4-13
Table 4-2 - Soil Results for Arsenic and Lead (cont’)
(results in mg/kg)
Sample
Identification Arsenic Lead
U.S. EPA Method 6020 6020
Phase II (June 2014)
SS-1 11 40
SS-2 12 100
SS-3 8.7 20
SS-4 7.3 23
SS-5 13 51
SS-6 15 75
SS-7 8.0 20
SS-8 7.8 18
SS-9 7.8 42
SS-10 8.9 27
SS-11 6.4 19
SS-12 8.2 72
SS-13 5.2 52
SS-14 8.9 33
SS-15 6.6 22
SS-16 6.8 9.0
Screening Level 12A 80B
Notes:
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
‘--‘ Not analyzed
150 Above screening level
A School Site Screening level from DTSC Guidance (4/30/08)
B OEHHA Leadspread Version 8
542
CC 06-03-2025
542 of 1012
54
3
CC 06-03-2025
543 of 1012
54
4
CC 06-03-2025
544 of 1012
54
5
CC 06-03-2025
545 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
5-1
5.0 RISK ASSESSMENT
The chemical of potential concern (COCs) used in the human health screening-level
evaluation for the Project Site included those compounds that were further evaluated as part of
the PEA (pesticides and metals). Therefore, the following COPCs in soil were evaluated:
• Organochlorine Pesticides: Chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, Dieldrin, gamma-BHC
(lindane), Endrin, Heptachlor, Heptachlor Epoxide, and Toxaphene
• Metals: Lead
The DTSC-modified screening levels or the U.S. EPA RSLs (if DTSC-modified screening
levels were not available) were used to conduct a screening-level human health risk
assessment using the residential land-use scenario. Carcinogenic screening levels are typically
based on a predicted excess long-term cancer risk of one in a million. Non-carcinogenic
screening levels are based on maintaining the daily COC intake below the level at which
deleterious health effects are considered possible.
In accordance with PEA guidance documents and DTSC’s Human Health Risk
Assessment (HHRA) Note No.3, dated May 2015, the maximum detected chemical
concentrations in soil were evaluated as potential exposure point concentrations (EPCs). The
EPCs were compared to their respective screening levels. The ratio of an EPC to the
corresponding carcinogenic screening level was multiplied by 1E-06 to estimate the chemical-
specific screening cancer risk. For noncarcinogens, the chemical-specific hazard index is the
ratio of the EPC to the screening level based on noncarcinogenic effects. The sums of the
chemical-specific screening cancer risk and screening hazard index are the cumulative
screening cancer risk and hazard index, respectively.
The total risk from OCPs identified in soils at the Project Site was estimated to be
3.3 x 10-5, which provides an increased cancer risk of greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). The
total health hazard from OCPs identified in soils at the Project Site was estimated to be 0.46,
which does not present an increased health hazard (i.e., >1). Therefore, a response action to
reduce or eliminate the pesticides identified in surficial soils at the Project Site is recommended.
The results of the screening-level evaluation are presented in Table 5-1.
Lead concentrations ranged from 9.0 mg/kg to 310 mg/kg in soil samples collected
across the Project Site which exceeds DTSC’s screening level of 80 mg/kg. A risk assessment
was performed using the DTSC lead risk assessment spreadsheet model (LeadSpread Version
8). Based on the LeadSpread output, exposure to the lead concentrations detected at the
Project Site will result in a 90th percentile blood lead concentration of 8.0 µg/dl in children which
exceeds OEHHA’s blood toxicity level of 1 µg/l. Therefore, a response action to reduce or
eliminate the lead-impacted soil is recommended. A copy of the LeadSpread Risk Assessment
Spreadsheet is presented in Appendix D.
546
CC 06-03-2025
546 of 1012
Table 5‐1
Soil Exposure Screening Evaluation
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project
Cupertino Union School District
Screening
Level (mg/kg)Source Cancer
Risk
Screening
Level (mg/kg)Source Hazard
Index
Chlordane 13 0.43 HHRA Note #3 3.02E‐05 34 RSL 3.82E‐01
DDD 0.0093 2.3 RSL 4.04E‐09 37 Surrogate RSL 2.51E‐04
DDE 0.41 2 RSL 2.05E‐07 37 Surrogate RSL 1.11E‐02
DDT 0.26 1.9 RSL 1.37E‐07 37 RSL 7.03E‐03
Dieldrin 0.0068 0.034 RSL 2.00E‐07 3.2 RSL 2.13E‐03
Endrin 0.0027 nc RSL NA 19 RSL 1.42E‐04
g‐BHC (lindane)0.00049 0.57 RSL 8.60E‐10 21 RSL 2.33E‐05
Heptachlor 0.021 0.13 RSL 1.62E‐07 39 RSL 5.38E‐04
Heptachlor Epoxide 0.057 0.07 RSL 8.14E‐07 1 RSL 5.70E‐02
Toxaphene 0.41 0.49 RSL 8.37E‐07 NE NA NA
Total Risk:3.26E‐05 Total Hazard:4.61E‐01
Notes:
COPC = chemical of potential concern
EPC = exposure point concentration
Exposure Point Concentration = maximum detected concentration in soil samples collected at the site
HHRA = Human Health Risk Assessment Note #3, Table 1 (DTSC HERO, May 2015)
RSL = regional screening level for residential soil (U.S.EPA June 2015)
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
Surrogate RSL = RSL not established for DDD, DDE. RSL for DDT was used as a surrogate value.
nc = non‐carcinogenic
NE = not established
NA = not applicable
COPC
Exposure‐Point
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Carcinogenic Risk Non‐carcinogenic Hazard
5-2
54
7
CC 06-03-2025
547 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
6-1
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The organochlorine pesticides chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, dieldrin, gamma-BHC
(lindane), endrin heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide, and toxaphene were identified in surface soils
at the Project Site. Using the highest concentration for each COC identified at the Project Site,
the total risk index was estimated to be 3.3 x 10-5, which provides an increased cancer risk of
greater than 1 in 1,000,000 (>10-6). Chlordane is the predominant pesticide of concern with the
impacted areas identified to be located at the north, west and southeast perimeters of the main
residence structure. The estimated extent of pesticide-impacted soil identified at the Project
Site is presented on Plate 6-1.
Concentrations of lead ranged from 9 to 310 mg/kg in surface soil samples collected at
the Project Site, which exceeds DTSC’s screening level of 80 mg/kg. Additionally, using
DTSC’s LeadSpread risk evaluation model, exposure to the lead concentrations identified at the
Project Site could result in a 90th percentile blood lead concentration of 8.0 µg/dl in children,
which exceeds OEHHA’s blood toxicity level of 1 µg/dl. The estimated extent of lead-impacted
soil identified at the Project Site is presented on Plate 6-2.
Due to elevated concentrations of COCs identified in surface soil around existing
structures located at the Project Site, Padre recommends further action to reduce or eliminate
the potential impact of these contaminants. The recommended remedial action is excavation,
transportation and off-site disposal at an appropriate landfill. The estimated quantity of OCP
and lead-impacted soil is approximately 300 cubic yards.
548
CC 06-03-2025
548 of 1012
54
9
CC 06-03-2025
549 of 1012
55
0
CC 06-03-2025
550 of 1012
November 2015
Project No. 1401-2172
SSI Sum Rpt_Cupertino
7-1
7.0 REFERENCES
Cornerstone Group, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Preliminary Soil Quality
Evaluation, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, California, July 11, 2014.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with
Potential Contamination as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based-Paint, Organochlorine
Pesticides from Temiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers,
revised June 9, 2006.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties
(Third Revision), August 7, 2008.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Preliminary Environmental Assessment Guidance
Manual, January 1994, Interim Final – Final October 2013.
Padre Associates, Inc., Preliminary Environmental Assessment, Sedgwick Elementary School
Expansion Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California,
September 2015.
Padre Associates, Inc., Preliminary Environmental Assessment Workplan, Sedgwick
Elementary School Expansion Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara
County, California, May 2015.
Padre Associates, Inc., Technical Memorandum, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion
Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California Cupertino
Union School District, September 2015.
551
CC 06-03-2025
551 of 1012
APPENDIX A
DTSC CORRESPONDANCE
552
CC 06-03-2025
552 of 1012
553
CC 06-03-2025
553 of 1012
554
CC 06-03-2025
554 of 1012
APPENDIX B
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
555
CC 06-03-2025
555 of 1012
May 2015
Project No. 1401-2171
B - 1
APPENDIX B
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
(QA/QC) PROCEDURES
The QA/QC procedures will be employed in both the field and the laboratory. QA/QC
samples include the collection of equipment rinseate samples, field blank samples, and
duplicate split samples.
FIELD QA/QC PROCEDURES
Field QA/QC procedures will be performed at the site and consist of the following
measures:
• Chain-of-Custody (COC) forms will be used for sample submittal to the laboratory;
and
• Daily information regarding sample collection will be recorded by Padre in Field
Logbooks. Sample types, soil descriptions, sample identification numbers, and
sample times will be collected and recorded on Field Data Sheets and in the Field
Logbooks. Pages will be numbered, dated, and signed by the person performing
data entry.
Field QA/QC samples will be collected and submitted for analysis along with the discrete
soil samples using the following sampling frequency:
• Equipment blanks - One equipment rinsate blank per sample event;
• Field blanks - One field blank sample per sample event; and
• Field duplicates – Approximately 10% of the collected samples will be analyzed as
duplicate samples for select chemical analyses.
Equipment Rinseate Blanks
An equipment rinseate blank (equipment blank) will be collected from the final water
rinsed over equipment after cleaning activities have been performed. The equipment blank will
be collected from non-dedicated (reusable) sampling equipment such as soil sampling tools.
The equipment blank will be analyzed for arsenic using the same analytical method used on the
unique soil samples.
To collect an equipment blank sample, rinse water will be carefully poured over or
through the recently cleaned equipment, and collected directly into an appropriate sample
container held over a bucket. Equipment blank samples will be labeled and handled in the
same manner as all other samples.
556
CC 06-03-2025
556 of 1012
May 2015
Project No. 1401-2171
B - 2
Field Blanks
Field blank samples consist of a sample of the deionized water that was used to rinse
sampling equipment during equipment cleaning activities. The purpose of the field blank
sample is to evaluate the rinse water for compounds detected in the soil samples. A field blank
sample will be collected by pouring rinse water into the appropriate sample container. The field
blank will be analyzed for arsenic using the same analytical method used on the unique soil
samples, and the field blank samples will be handled in the same manner as all other samples.
Duplicate Samples
Duplicate soil sample(s) will be analyzed in order to evaluate the analytical procedures
and methods employed by the laboratory. The field duplicate sample(s) will be selected from
the original soil samples, and split by the laboratory. Duplicate soil samples will be analyzed for
OCPs and lead.
Duplicate soil gas sample(s) will be collected immediately after the original sample, in
separate sample containers, at the same location and depth. Duplicate soil gas samples will be
analyzed for VOCs.
Laboratory QA/QC Procedures
Laboratory QA/QC procedures include the following:
• Laboratory analyses will be performed within the required holding time for all
samples;
• Appropriate minimum reporting limits (RLs) will be used for each analysis;
• A state-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory will conduct the required
analysis;
• The laboratory will provide the following information for each sample:
- Method blank data;
- Surrogate recovery, instrument tuning, and calibration data; and
- Signed laboratory reports including the sample designation, date of sample
collection, date of sample analysis, laboratory analytical method employed, sample
volume, and the minimum RL.
To determine whether Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements for
sampling and analysis were met for the project, and to determine whether the data are usable
for risk assessment purposes, a cursory data validation review will be done on the data
summary package provided by the laboratory. This review will include an evaluation of chain-of-
custody documentation, holding times, reporting limits, precision and accuracy of goals,
557
CC 06-03-2025
557 of 1012
May 2015
Project No. 1401-2171
B - 3
representativeness, and completeness of the data. QA/QC requirements that are not met will
be evaluated in the ‘uncertainty’ portion of the risk assessment. Documentation of the data
validation review will be included with the PEA report.
Detection Limits
Detection limits for OCPs and metals that will be met by the analytical laboratory are
listed in the following DTSC document(s), and are attached:
• DTSC’s Advisory – Active Soil gas Investigations, dated April 2012, and
• DTSC, Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination
as a Result of Lead from Lead-Based-Paint, Organochlorine Pesticides from
Temiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers, revised
June 9, 2006.
Padre proposes to utilize McCampbell Analytical Inc. (McCampbell) located in Pittsburg,
California to provide the required chemical analyses of collected soil, soil gas, and water
samples. McCampbell is certified (No. 1644) by the California State Environmental Laboratory
Accreditation Program Branch to provide the required chemical analyses.
558
CC 06-03-2025
558 of 1012
APPENDIX C
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORTS AND CHAIN-OF CUSTODYS
559
CC 06-03-2025
559 of 1012
WorkOrder:
Report Created for:Padre Associates. Inc.
555 University Ave., Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
Project Contact:Alan J. Klein
Project Name:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Project P.O.:
Project Received:10/28/2015
Analytical Report reviewed & approved for release on 11/05/2015 by:
Angela Rydelius,
Laboratory Manager
1510A30
The report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory.
The analytical results relate only to the items tested. Results reported conform to the most
current NELAP standards, where applicable, unless otherwise stated in the case narrative.
Amended:11/10/2015
Analytical Report
1534 Willow Pass Rd. Pittsburg, CA 94565 ♦ TEL: (877) 252-9262 ♦ FAX: (925) 252-9269 ♦ www.mccampbell.com
NELAP: 4033ORELAP ♦ ELAP: 1644 ♦ ISO/IEC: 17025:2005 ♦ WSDE: C972-11 ♦ ADEC: UST-098 ♦ UCMR3
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
"When Quality Counts"
Page 1 of 57
560
CC 06-03-2025
560 of 1012
Glossary of Terms & Qualifier Definitions
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
WorkOrder:1510A30
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Glossary Abbreviation
95% Interval 95% Confident Interval
DF Dilution Factor
DI WET (DISTLC) Waste Extraction Test using DI water
DISS Dissolved (direct analysis of 0.45 µm filtered and acidified water sample)
DLT Dilution Test
DUP Duplicate
EDL Estimated Detection Limit
ITEF International Toxicity Equivalence Factor
LCS Laboratory Control Sample
MB Method Blank
MB % Rec % Recovery of Surrogate in Method Blank, if applicable
MDL Method Detection Limit
ML Minimum Level of Quantitation
MS Matrix Spike
MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate
N/A Not Applicable
ND Not detected at or above the indicated MDL or RL
NR Data Not Reported due to matrix interference or insufficient sample amount.
PDS Post Digestion Spike
PDSD Post Digestion Spike Duplicate
PF Prep Factor
RD Relative Difference
RL Reporting Limit (The RL is the lowest calibration standard in a multipoint calibration.)
RPD Relative Percent Deviation
RRT Relative Retention Time
SPK Val Spike Value
SPKRef Val Spike Reference Value
SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leachate Procedure
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure
TEQ Toxicity Equivalents
WET (STLC)Waste Extraction Test (Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration)
Analytical Qualifiers
J Result is less than the RL/ML but greater than the MDL. The reported concentration is an estimated value.
Quality Control Qualifiers
F8 MS/MSD recovery and/or RPD was out of acceptance criteria; PDS validated the prep batch. If PDS recovery
was out of acceptance criteria, DLT validated the prep batch.
Page 2 of 57
561
CC 06-03-2025
561 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-4A (2-2.5')1510A30-001A Soil 10/27/2015 09:00 GC22 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Chlordane (Technical) 0.020 J 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 20:07
a-Chlordane 0.0025 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
g-Chlordane 0.0015 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
p,p-DDE 0.00099 J 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
p,p-DDT 0.0012 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 20:07
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 86 70-130 11/03/2015 20:07
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 3 of 57
562
CC 06-03-2025
562 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10A (SURF)1510A30-003A Soil 10/27/2015 10:00 GC23 112155
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Chlordane (Technical) 0.13 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 17:17
a-Chlordane 0.015 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
g-Chlordane 0.0086 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
p,p-DDD 0.0016 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
p,p-DDE 0.0065 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
p,p-DDT 0.0073 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 17:17
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 78 70-130 10/31/2015 17:17
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 4 of 57
563
CC 06-03-2025
563 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10A (1-1.5')1510A30-004A Soil 10/27/2015 10:03 GC22 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 06:54
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
g-Chlordane 0.00023 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
p,p-DDE 0.0022 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
p,p-DDT 0.0078 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Heptachlor 0.00029 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 06:54
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 78 70-130 11/03/2015 06:54
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 5 of 57
564
CC 06-03-2025
564 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10B (1-1.5')1510A30-006A Soil 10/27/2015 10:15 GC22 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 09:10
a-Chlordane 0.0015 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
g-Chlordane 0.0012 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
p,p-DDE 0.0010 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
p,p-DDT 0.0017 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00023 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 09:10
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 82 70-130 11/03/2015 09:10
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 6 of 57
565
CC 06-03-2025
565 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10C (SURF)1510A30-007A Soil 10/27/2015 09:47 GC23 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Chlordane (Technical) 1.7 0.16 0.25 10 11/04/2015 12:56
a-Chlordane 0.18 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
g-Chlordane 0.13 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
p,p-DDE 0.0053 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
p,p-DDT 0.0058 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endrin 0.0021 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Heptachlor 0.00076 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Heptachlor epoxide 0.019 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/02/2015 22:12
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 11/02/2015 22:12
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 7 of 57
566
CC 06-03-2025
566 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10C (1-1.5')1510A30-008A Soil 10/27/2015 09:48 GC23 112155
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Chlordane (Technical) 0.41 0.080 0.12 5 11/04/2015 04:12
a-Chlordane 0.042 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
g-Chlordane 0.032 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
p,p-DDD 0.0028 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
p,p-DDE 0.0061 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
p,p-DDT 0.0043 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0048 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 21:39
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 84 70-130 10/31/2015 21:39
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 8 of 57
567
CC 06-03-2025
567 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-10D (1-1.5')1510A30-010A Soil 10/27/2015 09:53 GC22 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Chlordane (Technical) 0.031 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 19:32
a-Chlordane 0.0037 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
g-Chlordane 0.0031 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
p,p-DDD 0.00033 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
p,p-DDE 0.0027 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
p,p-DDT 0.0074 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00028 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 19:32
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 85 70-130 11/03/2015 19:32
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 9 of 57
568
CC 06-03-2025
568 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11A (SURF)1510A30-011A Soil 10/27/2015 09:34 GC23 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Chlordane (Technical) 0.10 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 22:17
a-Chlordane 0.014 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
g-Chlordane 0.012 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
p,p-DDD 0.0018 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
p,p-DDE 0.012 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
p,p-DDT 0.027 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Dieldrin 0.00076 J 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0012 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 22:17
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 81 70-130 10/31/2015 22:17
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 10 of 57
569
CC 06-03-2025
569 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11A (1-1.5')1510A30-012A Soil 10/27/2015 09:37 GC23 112155
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Chlordane (Technical) 0.083 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 17:54
a-Chlordane 0.012 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
g-Chlordane 0.011 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
p,p-DDD 0.0021 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
p,p-DDE 0.0069 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
p,p-DDT 0.014 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 17:54
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 92 70-130 10/31/2015 17:54
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 11 of 57
570
CC 06-03-2025
570 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11B (SURF)1510A30-013A Soil 10/27/2015 09:23 GC23 112155
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Chlordane (Technical) 0.65 0.080 0.12 5 11/04/2015 04:50
a-Chlordane 0.067 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
g-Chlordane 0.049 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
p,p-DDD 0.0043 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
p,p-DDE 0.026 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
p,p-DDT 0.055 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0047 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 09:43
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 82 70-130 10/31/2015 09:43
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 12 of 57
571
CC 06-03-2025
571 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11B (SURF) DUP 1510A30-013B Soil 10/27/2015 09:23 GC23 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Chlordane (Technical) 0.47 0.080 0.12 5 11/03/2015 09:24
a-Chlordane 0.058 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
g-Chlordane 0.042 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
p,p-DDD 0.0044 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
p,p-DDE 0.021 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
p,p-DDT 0.044 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Dieldrin 0.0017 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Heptachlor 0.00071 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0038 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 21:02
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 82 70-130 10/31/2015 21:02
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 13 of 57
572
CC 06-03-2025
572 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-11B (1-1.5')1510A30-014A Soil 10/27/2015 09:26 GC22 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Chlordane (Technical) 0.058 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 02:24
a-Chlordane 0.0090 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
g-Chlordane 0.0048 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
p,p-DDE 0.0038 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
p,p-DDT 0.0098 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Heptachlor 0.00032 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00055 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 02:24
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 78 70-130 11/03/2015 02:24
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 14 of 57
573
CC 06-03-2025
573 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-15A (SURF)1510A30-015A Soil 10/27/2015 09:35 GC23 112169
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Chlordane (Technical) 0.19 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 20:24
a-Chlordane 0.035 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
g-Chlordane 0.016 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
p,p-DDD 0.0064 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
p,p-DDE 0.15 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
p,p-DDT 0.055 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0024 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 20:24
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 88 70-130 10/31/2015 20:24
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 15 of 57
574
CC 06-03-2025
574 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-15A (1-1.5')1510A30-016A Soil 10/27/2015 09:38 GC23 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/02/2015 21:34
a-Chlordane 0.0012 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
g-Chlordane 0.00068 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
p,p-DDD 0.0017 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
p,p-DDE 0.0092 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
p,p-DDT 0.0071 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Heptachlor 0.00034 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/02/2015 21:34
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 11/02/2015 21:34
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 16 of 57
575
CC 06-03-2025
575 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
P-15A (1-1.5') DUP 1510A30-016B Soil 10/27/2015 09:38 GC22 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 09:44
a-Chlordane 0.00090 J 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
g-Chlordane 0.00053 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
p,p-DDD 0.00099 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
p,p-DDE 0.0062 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
p,p-DDT 0.0065 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 09:44
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 79 70-130 11/03/2015 09:44
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 17 of 57
576
CC 06-03-2025
576 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6A (1-1.5')1510A30-018A Soil 10/27/2015 10:08 GC23 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 19:47
a-Chlordane 0.00073 J 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
g-Chlordane 0.00061 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
p,p-DDD 0.00053 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
p,p-DDE 0.0069 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
p,p-DDT 0.0046 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 19:47
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 80 70-130 10/31/2015 19:47
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 18 of 57
577
CC 06-03-2025
577 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6B (1-1.5')1510A30-021A Soil 10/27/2015 10:33 GC22 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 04:05
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
p,p-DDE 0.00098 J 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
p,p-DDT 0.0014 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 04:05
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 79 70-130 11/03/2015 04:05
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 19 of 57
578
CC 06-03-2025
578 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6C (1-1.5')1510A30-024A Soil 10/27/2015 10:42 GC23 112169
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 19:09
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
p,p-DDE 0.0050 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
p,p-DDT 0.0021 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 19:09
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 80 70-130 10/31/2015 19:09
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 20 of 57
579
CC 06-03-2025
579 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6D (1-1.5')1510A30-027A Soil 10/27/2015 10:46 GC22 112169
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/02/2015 19:38
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
p,p-DDE 0.0042 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
p,p-DDT 0.0013 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/02/2015 19:38
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 99 70-130 11/02/2015 19:38
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 21 of 57
580
CC 06-03-2025
580 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6E (SURF)1510A30-029A Soil 10/27/2015 10:19 GC23 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Chlordane (Technical) 0.044 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 18:32
a-Chlordane 0.0053 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
g-Chlordane 0.0027 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
p,p-DDD 0.0025 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
p,p-DDE 0.021 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
p,p-DDT 0.020 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Dieldrin 0.00054 J 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0010 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 18:32
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 84 70-130 10/31/2015 18:32
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 22 of 57
581
CC 06-03-2025
581 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List)
SS-6E (1-1.5')1510A30-030A Soil 10/27/2015 10:22 GC22 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/03/2015 08:36
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
p,p-DDE 0.00045 J 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
p,p-DDT ND 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endrin ND 0.00042 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Heptachlor 0.00026 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/03/2015 08:36
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK
Decachlorobiphenyl 76 70-130 11/03/2015 08:36
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 23 of 57
582
CC 06-03-2025
582 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
P-10B (SURF)1510A30-005A Soil 10/27/2015 10:12 GC23 112155
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Chlordane (Technical) 0.50 0.080 0.12 5 11/04/2015 12:19
a-Chlordane 0.054 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
g-Chlordane 0.044 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
p,p-DDD 0.0016 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
p,p-DDE 0.0078 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
p,p-DDT 0.0085 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Heptachlor 0.00094 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0052 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 11:36
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 87 70-130 10/31/2015 11:36
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 24 of 57
583
CC 06-03-2025
583 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
P-10D (SURF)1510A30-009A Soil 10/27/2015 09:49 GC23 112155
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Chlordane (Technical) 4.8 0.80 1.2 50 11/04/2015 09:10
a-Chlordane 0.49 0.024 0.050 50 11/04/2015 09:10
g-Chlordane 0.41 0.010 0.050 50 11/04/2015 09:10
p,p-DDD ND 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
p,p-DDE 0.028 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
p,p-DDT 0.081 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Heptachlor 0.0054 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Heptachlor epoxide 0.030 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 12:13
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):CK, SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 91 70-130 10/31/2015 12:13
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 25 of 57
584
CC 06-03-2025
584 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
SS-6A (SURF)1510A30-017A Soil 10/27/2015 10:06 GC23 112169
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 11/04/2015 02:58
a-Chlordane ND 0.00047 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
g-Chlordane ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
p,p-DDD 0.00054 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
p,p-DDE 0.012 0.00032 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
p,p-DDT 0.0065 0.00043 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Dieldrin 0.00042 J 0.00033 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Heptachlor 0.00065 J 0.00021 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 11/04/2015 02:58
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 84 70-130 11/04/2015 02:58
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 26 of 57
585
CC 06-03-2025
585 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
SS-6B (SURF)1510A30-020A Soil 10/27/2015 10:29 GC23 112206
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00054 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
a-BHC ND 0.00020 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
b-BHC ND 0.00050 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
d-BHC ND 0.00074 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
g-BHC ND 0.00019 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.032 0.050 2 10/31/2015 07:14
a-Chlordane 0.0019 J 0.00094 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
g-Chlordane 0.0015 J 0.00042 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
p,p-DDD 0.0012 J 0.00028 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
p,p-DDE 0.025 0.00064 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
p,p-DDT 0.015 0.00086 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Dieldrin 0.0015 J 0.00066 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endosulfan I ND 0.0013 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endosulfan II ND 0.00040 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.0013 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endrin ND 0.0019 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00040 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Endrin ketone ND 0.00026 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Heptachlor ND 0.00042 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Heptachlor epoxide ND 0.00040 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00054 0.020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00080 0.040 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Methoxychlor ND 0.0018 0.0020 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Toxaphene 0.41 0.070 0.10 2 10/31/2015 07:14
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 10/31/2015 07:14
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 27 of 57
586
CC 06-03-2025
586 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
SS-6C (SURF)1510A30-023A Soil 10/27/2015 10:40 GC23 112206
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Chlordane (Technical)ND 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 08:28
a-Chlordane 0.0019 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
g-Chlordane 0.0017 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
p,p-DDD 0.0012 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
p,p-DDE 0.017 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
p,p-DDT 0.016 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Dieldrin 0.00085 J 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00035 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 08:28
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 10/31/2015 08:28
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 28 of 57
587
CC 06-03-2025
587 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Organochlorine Pesticides (Basic Target List) w/ Florisil Clean-Up
SS-6D (SURF)1510A30-026A Soil 10/27/2015 10:41 GC23 112206
Analytes Result Qualifiers DF Date AnalyzedRLMDL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Aldrin ND 0.00027 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
a-BHC ND 0.00010 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
b-BHC ND 0.00025 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
d-BHC ND 0.00037 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
g-BHC ND 0.000097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Chlordane (Technical) 0.037 0.016 0.025 1 10/31/2015 09:06
a-Chlordane 0.0035 0.00047 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
g-Chlordane 0.0033 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
p,p-DDD 0.00087 J 0.00014 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
p,p-DDE 0.011 0.00032 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
p,p-DDT 0.014 0.00043 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Dieldrin ND 0.00033 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endosulfan I ND 0.00065 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endosulfan II ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endosulfan sulfate ND 0.00063 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endrin ND 0.00097 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endrin aldehyde ND 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Endrin ketone ND 0.00013 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Heptachlor ND 0.00021 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00039 J 0.00020 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Hexachlorobenzene ND 0.00027 0.010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 0.00040 0.020 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Methoxychlor ND 0.00089 0.0010 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Toxaphene ND 0.035 0.050 1 10/31/2015 09:06
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):SS
Decachlorobiphenyl 83 70-130 10/31/2015 09:06
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 29 of 57
588
CC 06-03-2025
588 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15-11/4/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3050B
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Lead
P-15A (SURF)1510A30-015A Soil 10/27/2015 09:35 ICP-MS2 112158
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 31 0.50 1 10/30/2015 17:49
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 110 70-130 10/30/2015 17:49
P-13A (SURF)1510A30-047A Soil 10/27/2015 09:00 ICP-MS2 112158
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 68 0.50 1 10/30/2015 17:55
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 105 70-130 10/30/2015 17:55
P-13B (SURF)1510A30-048A Soil 10/27/2015 09:05 ICP-MS2 112158
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 62 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:01
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 103 70-130 10/30/2015 18:01
P-17A (SURF)1510A30-049A Soil 10/27/2015 08:55 ICP-MS2 112437
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 73 0.50 1 11/05/2015 14:44
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):AC
Terbium 111 70-130 11/05/2015 14:44
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 30 of 57
589
CC 06-03-2025
589 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15-11/4/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3050B
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Lead
P-17A (SURF) DUP 1510A30-049B Soil 10/27/2015 08:55 ICP-MS2 112158
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 60 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:13
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 102 70-130 10/30/2015 18:13
P-28A (SURF)1510A30-050A Soil 10/27/2015 08:50 ICP-MS1 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 65 0.50 1 10/30/2015 13:59
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 105 70-130 10/30/2015 13:59
P-29 (SURF)1510A30-051A Soil 10/27/2015 09:10 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 39 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:19
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 100 70-130 10/30/2015 18:19
P-29A (SURF)1510A30-052A Soil 10/27/2015 09:14 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 36 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:25
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 102 70-130 10/30/2015 18:25
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 31 of 57
590
CC 06-03-2025
590 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15-11/4/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:SW3050B
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Lead
P-30 (SURF)1510A30-053A Soil 10/27/2015 09:17 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 65 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:43
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 88 70-130 10/30/2015 18:43
P-31 (SURF)1510A30-054A Soil 10/27/2015 09:21 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 41 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:49
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 105 70-130 10/30/2015 18:49
P-32 (SURF)1510A30-055A Soil 10/27/2015 09:24 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 42 0.50 1 10/30/2015 18:55
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 100 70-130 10/30/2015 18:55
P-33 (SURF)1510A30-056A Soil 10/27/2015 09:28 ICP-MS2 112164
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead 49 0.50 1 10/30/2015 19:01
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 102 70-130 10/30/2015 19:01
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 32 of 57
591
CC 06-03-2025
591 of 1012
Analytical Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Received:10/28/15 18:33
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
Extraction Method:E200.8
Analytical Method:E200.8
Unit:µg/L
Lead
FB #1 1510A30-057A Water 10/27/2015 12:00 ICP-MS1 112159
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead ND 0.50 1 10/29/2015 10:28
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 103 70-130 10/29/2015 10:28
EB #1 1510A30-058A Water 10/27/2015 12:05 ICP-MS1 112159
Analytes Result DF Date AnalyzedRL
Client ID Lab ID Matrix Date Collected Instrument Batch ID
Lead ND 0.50 1 10/30/2015 01:43
Surrogates REC (%)Limits
Analyst(s):DVH
Terbium 111 70-130 10/30/2015 01:43
Angela Rydelius, Lab ManagerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 33 of 57
592
CC 06-03-2025
592 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/28/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112155
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112155
1510A22-001AMS/MSD
Instrument:GC22
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3550B
QC Summary Report for SW8081A
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
MDL RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Aldrin ND 0.0472 0.00027 0.0010 0.050 -94 70-130
a-BHC ND -0.00010 0.0010 ----
b-BHC ND -0.00025 0.0010 ----
d-BHC ND -0.00037 0.0010 ----
g-BHC ND 0.0517 0.000097 0.0010 0.050 -103 70-130
Chlordane (Technical)ND -0.016 0.025 ----
a-Chlordane ND -0.00047 0.0010 ----
g-Chlordane ND -0.00021 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDD ND -0.00014 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDE ND -0.00032 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDT ND 0.0505 0.00043 0.0010 0.050 -101 70-130
Dieldrin ND 0.0546 0.00033 0.0010 0.050 -109 70-130
Endosulfan I ND -0.00065 0.0010 ----
Endosulfan II ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Endosulfan sulfate ND -0.00063 0.0010 ----
Endrin ND 0.0475 0.00042 0.0010 0.050 -95 70-130
Endrin aldehyde ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Endrin ketone ND -0.00013 0.0010 ----
Heptachlor ND 0.0533 0.00021 0.0010 0.050 -107 70-130
Heptachlor epoxide ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Hexachlorobenzene ND -0.00027 0.010 ----
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND -0.00040 0.020 ----
Methoxychlor ND -0.00089 0.0010 ----
Toxaphene ND -0.035 0.050 ----
Surrogate Recovery
Decachlorobiphenyl 0.0436 0.0440 0.050 87 88 70-130
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 34 of 57
593
CC 06-03-2025
593 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/28/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112155
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112155
1510A22-001AMS/MSD
Instrument:GC22
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3550B
QC Summary Report for SW8081A
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Aldrin 0.0483 0.0480 0.050 ND 97 96 70-130 0.619 30
g-BHC 0.0520 0.0517 0.050 ND 104 103 70-130 0.628 30
p,p-DDT 0.0516 0.0517 0.050 ND 103 103 70-130 0 30
Dieldrin 0.0559 0.0563 0.050 ND 112 113 70-130 0.636 30
Endrin 0.0532 0.0532 0.050 ND 106 106 70-130 0 30
Heptachlor 0.0538 0.0535 0.050 ND 108 107 70-130 0.596 30
Surrogate Recovery
Decachlorobiphenyl 0.0449 0.0446 0.050 90 89 70-130 0.521 30
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 35 of 57
594
CC 06-03-2025
594 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:11/2/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112169
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112169
1510A30-014AMS/MSD
Instrument:GC22
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3550B
QC Summary Report for SW8081A
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
MDL RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Aldrin ND 0.0453 0.00027 0.0010 0.050 -91 70-130
a-BHC ND -0.00010 0.0010 ----
b-BHC ND -0.00025 0.0010 ----
d-BHC ND -0.00037 0.0010 ----
g-BHC ND 0.0504 0.000097 0.0010 0.050 -101 70-130
Chlordane (Technical)ND -0.016 0.025 ----
a-Chlordane ND -0.00047 0.0010 ----
g-Chlordane ND -0.00021 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDD ND -0.00014 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDE ND -0.00032 0.0010 ----
p,p-DDT ND 0.0478 0.00043 0.0010 0.050 -96 70-130
Dieldrin ND 0.0513 0.00033 0.0010 0.050 -103 70-130
Endosulfan I ND -0.00065 0.0010 ----
Endosulfan II ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Endosulfan sulfate ND -0.00063 0.0010 ----
Endrin ND 0.0462 0.00042 0.0010 0.050 -92 70-130
Endrin aldehyde ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Endrin ketone ND -0.00013 0.0010 ----
Heptachlor ND 0.0517 0.00021 0.0010 0.050 -103 70-130
Heptachlor epoxide ND -0.00020 0.0010 ----
Hexachlorobenzene ND -0.00027 0.010 ----
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND -0.00040 0.020 ----
Methoxychlor ND -0.00089 0.0010 ----
Toxaphene ND -0.035 0.050 ----
Surrogate Recovery
Decachlorobiphenyl 0.0415 0.0418 0.050 83 84 70-130
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 36 of 57
595
CC 06-03-2025
595 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:11/2/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112169
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112169
1510A30-014AMS/MSD
Instrument:GC22
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3550B
QC Summary Report for SW8081A
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Aldrin 0.0467 0.0464 0.050 ND 93 93 70-130 0 30
g-BHC 0.0521 0.0522 0.050 ND 104 104 70-130 0 30
p,p-DDT 0.0589 0.0584 0.050 0.009770 98 97 70-130 0.931 30
Dieldrin 0.0523 0.0518 0.050 ND 105 104 70-130 0.860 30
Endrin 0.0484 0.0482 0.050 ND 97 96 70-130 0.352 30
Heptachlor 0.0534 0.0540 0.050 ND 106 107 70-130 1.11 30
Surrogate Recovery
Decachlorobiphenyl 0.0393 0.0386 0.050 79 77 70-130 1.75 30
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 37 of 57
596
CC 06-03-2025
596 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/31/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112206
Analytical Method:SW8081A
Unit:mg/kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112206
Instrument:GC23
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3550B/3620B
QC Summary Report for SW8081A w/ Florisil Clean-Up
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Aldrin ND 0.0454 0.0010 0.050 -91 70-130
a-BHC ND -0.0010 ----
b-BHC ND -0.0010 ----
d-BHC ND -0.0010 ----
g-BHC ND 0.0476 0.0010 0.050 -95 70-130
Chlordane (Technical)ND -0.025 ----
a-Chlordane ND -0.0010 ----
g-Chlordane ND -0.0010 ----
p,p-DDD ND -0.0010 ----
p,p-DDE ND -0.0010 ----
p,p-DDT ND 0.0523 0.0010 0.050 -105 70-130
Dieldrin ND 0.0556 0.0010 0.050 -111 70-130
Endosulfan I ND -0.0010 ----
Endosulfan II ND -0.0010 ----
Endosulfan sulfate ND -0.0010 ----
Endrin ND 0.0509 0.0010 0.050 -102 70-130
Endrin aldehyde ND -0.0010 ----
Endrin ketone ND -0.0010 ----
Heptachlor ND 0.0507 0.0010 0.050 -101 70-130
Heptachlor epoxide ND -0.0010 ----
Hexachlorobenzene ND -0.010 ----
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND -0.020 ----
Methoxychlor ND -0.0010 ----
Toxaphene ND -0.050 ----
Surrogate Recovery
Decachlorobiphenyl 0.0435 0.0460 0.050 87 92 70-130
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 38 of 57
597
CC 06-03-2025
597 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/29/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112158
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112158
1510A27-007AMS/MSD
1510A27-007APDS
Instrument:ICP-MS1, ICP-MS2
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3050B
QC Summary Report for Metals
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Lead ND 51.0 0.50 50 -102 75-125
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 508 537 500 102 107 70-130
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Lead 78.6 68.7 50 19.52 118 98 75-125 13.3 20
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 561 577 500 112 115 70-130 2.81 20
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 39 of 57
598
CC 06-03-2025
598 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/30/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112164
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112164
1510A30-050AMS/MSD
1510A30-050APDS
Instrument:ICP-MS1
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3050B
QC Summary Report for Metals
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Lead ND 50.6 0.50 50 -101 75-125
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 539 541 500 108 108 70-130
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Lead 136 82.4 50 65 142,F8 34,F8 75-125 49.1,F8 20
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 522 379 500 104 76 70-130 31.6,F8 20
Analyte PDS
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
PDS
%REC
PDS
Limits
Lead 116 50 65 102 80-120
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
(Cont.)
Page 40 of 57
599
CC 06-03-2025
599 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:11/5/15
Date Prepared:11/4/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112437
Analytical Method:SW6020
Unit:mg/Kg
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112437
1511184-035AMS/MSD
1511184-035APDS
Instrument:ICP-MS1, ICP-MS2
Matrix:Soil
Extraction Method:SW3050B
QC Summary Report for Metals
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Lead ND 50.6 0.50 50 -101 75-125
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 583 495 500 117 99 70-130
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Lead 66.5 60.0 50 23.13 87 74,F8 75-125 10.3 20
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 488 498 500 98 100 70-130 1.99 20
Analyte PDS
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
PDS
%REC
PDS
Limits
Lead 72.3 50 23.13 98 80-120
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 41 of 57
600
CC 06-03-2025
600 of 1012
Quality Control Report
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client:Padre Associates. Inc.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
Date Analyzed:10/29/15
Date Prepared:10/28/15
WorkOrder:1510A30
BatchID:112159
Analytical Method:E200.8
Unit:µg/L
Sample ID:MB/LCS-112159
1510A30-057AMS/MSD
Instrument:ICP-MS1
Matrix:Water
Extraction Method:E200.8
QC Summary Report for Metals
Analyte MB
Result
LCS
Result
RL SPK
Val
MB SS
%REC
LCS
%REC
LCS
Limits
Lead ND 52.1 0.50 50 -104 85-115
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 782 797 750 104 106 70-130
Analyte MS
Result
MSD
Result
SPK
Val
SPKRef
Val
MS
%REC
MSD
%REC
MS/MSD
Limits
RPD RPD
Limit
Lead 52.2 51.2 50 ND 104 102 70-130 1.86 20
Surrogate Recovery
Terbium 806 778 750 107 104 70-130 3.50 20
QA/QC OfficerCDPH ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033ORELAP
Page 42 of 57
601
CC 06-03-2025
601 of 1012
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
1534 Willow Pass Rd
Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
(925) 252-9262
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page
Lab ID Matrix Collection Date Hold
Requested Tests (See legend below)
Report to:
Alan J. Klein
555 University Ave., Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 333-5920 FAX:(916) 333-5921
PO:
11/02/2015
Client ID
ProjectNo:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
WorkOrder:1510A30
1 of 3
Date Printed:
Date Received:10/28/2015
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Padre Associates. Inc.
Bill to:
Accounts Payable
Padre Associates. Inc.
1861 Knoll Drive
Ventura, CA 93003
Requested TAT:5 days;
ClientCode:PAIS
Email:aklein@padreinc.com
EDF EQuIS Email HardCopy ThirdParty
ap@padreinc.com
Excel J-flagWriteOn
cc/3rd Party:
WaterTrax
A1510A30-001 Soil 10/27/2015 9:00P-4A (2-2.5')
A1510A30-003 Soil 10/27/2015 10:00P-10A (SURF)
A1510A30-004 Soil 10/27/2015 10:03P-10A (1-1.5')
A1510A30-005 Soil 10/27/2015 10:12P-10B (SURF)A
A1510A30-006 Soil 10/27/2015 10:15P-10B (1-1.5')
A1510A30-007 Soil 10/27/2015 9:47P-10C (SURF)
A1510A30-008 Soil 10/27/2015 9:48P-10C (1-1.5')
A1510A30-009 Soil 10/27/2015 9:49P-10D (SURF)A
A1510A30-010 Soil 10/27/2015 9:53P-10D (1-1.5')
A1510A30-011 Soil 10/27/2015 9:34P-11A (SURF)
A1510A30-012 Soil 10/27/2015 9:37P-11A (1-1.5')
A1510A30-013 Soil 10/27/2015 9:23P-11B (SURF)
B1510A30-013 Soil 10/27/2015 9:23P-11B (SURF) DUP
A1510A30-014 Soil 10/27/2015 9:26P-11B (1-1.5')
A1510A30-015 Soil 10/27/2015 9:35P-15A (SURF)A
Prepared by: Jena Alfaro
NOTE: Soil samples are discarded 60 days after results are reported unless other arrangements are made (Water samples are 30 days).
Hazardous samples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!! Give to Blake for review
8081_ESL_S (J)8081_FLORISIL_S PBMS_TTLC_S PBMS_TTLC_W1234
5 6 7 8
9 10
Test Legend:
11 12
Page 43 of 57
602
CC 06-03-2025
602 of 1012
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
1534 Willow Pass Rd
Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
(925) 252-9262
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page
Lab ID Matrix Collection Date Hold
Requested Tests (See legend below)
Report to:
Alan J. Klein
555 University Ave., Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 333-5920 FAX:(916) 333-5921
PO:
11/02/2015
Client ID
ProjectNo:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
WorkOrder:1510A30
2 of 3
Date Printed:
Date Received:10/28/2015
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Padre Associates. Inc.
Bill to:
Accounts Payable
Padre Associates. Inc.
1861 Knoll Drive
Ventura, CA 93003
Requested TAT:5 days;
ClientCode:PAIS
Email:aklein@padreinc.com
EDF EQuIS Email HardCopy ThirdParty
ap@padreinc.com
Excel J-flagWriteOn
cc/3rd Party:
WaterTrax
A1510A30-016 Soil 10/27/2015 9:38P-15A (1-1.5')
B1510A30-016 Soil 10/27/2015 9:38P-15A (1-1.5') DUP
A1510A30-017 Soil 10/27/2015 10:06SS-6A (SURF)A
A1510A30-018 Soil 10/27/2015 10:08SS-6A (1-1.5')
A1510A30-020 Soil 10/27/2015 10:29SS-6B (SURF)A
A1510A30-021 Soil 10/27/2015 10:33SS-6B (1-1.5')
A1510A30-023 Soil 10/27/2015 10:40SS-6C (SURF)A
A1510A30-024 Soil 10/27/2015 10:42SS-6C (1-1.5')
A1510A30-026 Soil 10/27/2015 10:41SS-6D (SURF)A
A1510A30-027 Soil 10/27/2015 10:46SS-6D (1-1.5')
A1510A30-029 Soil 10/27/2015 10:19SS-6E (SURF)
A1510A30-030 Soil 10/27/2015 10:22SS-6E (1-1.5')
1510A30-047 Soil 10/27/2015 9:00P-13A (SURF)A
1510A30-048 Soil 10/27/2015 9:05P-13B (SURF)A
1510A30-049 Soil 10/27/2015 8:55P-17A (SURF)A
Prepared by: Jena Alfaro
NOTE: Soil samples are discarded 60 days after results are reported unless other arrangements are made (Water samples are 30 days).
Hazardous samples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!! Give to Blake for review
8081_ESL_S (J)8081_FLORISIL_S PBMS_TTLC_S PBMS_TTLC_W1234
5 6 7 8
9 10
Test Legend:
11 12
Page 44 of 57
603
CC 06-03-2025
603 of 1012
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
1534 Willow Pass Rd
Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
(925) 252-9262
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page
Lab ID Matrix Collection Date Hold
Requested Tests (See legend below)
Report to:
Alan J. Klein
555 University Ave., Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 333-5920 FAX:(916) 333-5921
PO:
11/02/2015
Client ID
ProjectNo:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
WorkOrder:1510A30
3 of 3
Date Printed:
Date Received:10/28/2015
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Padre Associates. Inc.
Bill to:
Accounts Payable
Padre Associates. Inc.
1861 Knoll Drive
Ventura, CA 93003
Requested TAT:5 days;
ClientCode:PAIS
Email:aklein@padreinc.com
EDF EQuIS Email HardCopy ThirdParty
ap@padreinc.com
Excel J-flagWriteOn
cc/3rd Party:
WaterTrax
1510A30-049 Soil 10/27/2015 8:55P-17A (SURF) DUP B
1510A30-050 Soil 10/27/2015 8:50P-28A (SURF)A
1510A30-051 Soil 10/27/2015 9:10P-29 (SURF)A
1510A30-052 Soil 10/27/2015 9:14P-29A (SURF)A
1510A30-053 Soil 10/27/2015 9:17P-30 (SURF)A
1510A30-054 Soil 10/27/2015 9:21P-31 (SURF)A
1510A30-055 Soil 10/27/2015 9:24P-32 (SURF)A
1510A30-056 Soil 10/27/2015 9:28P-33 (SURF)A
1510A30-057 Water 10/27/2015 12:00FB #1 A
1510A30-058 Water 10/27/2015 12:05EB #1 A
Prepared by: Jena Alfaro
NOTE: Soil samples are discarded 60 days after results are reported unless other arrangements are made (Water samples are 30 days).
Hazardous samples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!! Give to Blake for review
8081_ESL_S (J)8081_FLORISIL_S PBMS_TTLC_S PBMS_TTLC_W1234
5 6 7 8
9 10
Test Legend:
11 12
Page 45 of 57
604
CC 06-03-2025
604 of 1012
Lab ID Client ID Collection Date
& Time
Date Received:
TATMatrixTest Name Containers
/Composites
WORK ORDER SUMMARY
Work Order:1510A30
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!!
Give to Blake for review
Client Name:PADRE ASSOCIATES. INC.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
QC Level:LEVEL 2
HoldDe-
chlorinated
SubOutBottle & Preservative
10/28/2015
Sediment
Content
EDF Fax Email HardCopy ThirdPartyExcel J-flagWriteOn
Alan J. KleinClient Contact:
aklein@padreinc.comContact's Email:
WaterTrax
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
1510A30-001A P-4A (2-2.5')10/27/2015 9:00 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-002A P-4A (3-3.5')10/27/2015 9:10Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-003A P-10A (SURF)10/27/2015 10:00 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-004A P-10A (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:03 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-005A P-10B (SURF)10/27/2015 10:12 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-006A P-10B (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:15 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-007A P-10C (SURF)10/27/2015 9:47 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-008A P-10C (1-1.5')10/27/2015 9:48 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-009A P-10D (SURF)10/27/2015 9:49 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-010A P-10D (1-1.5')10/27/2015 9:53 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-011A P-11A (SURF)10/27/2015 9:34 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-012A P-11A (1-1.5')10/27/2015 9:37 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-013A P-11B (SURF)10/27/2015 9:23 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-013B P-11B (SURF) DUP 10/27/2015 9:23 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1 of 5Page
- STLC and TCLP extractions require 2 days to complete; therefore, all TATs begin after the extraction is completed (i.e., One-day TAT yields results
in 3 days from sample submission).
NOTES:
- MAI assumes that all material present in the provided sampling container is considered part of the sample - MAI does not exclude any material from
the sample prior to sample preparation unless requested in writing by the client.
Page 46 of 57
605
CC 06-03-2025
605 of 1012
Lab ID Client ID Collection Date
& Time
Date Received:
TATMatrixTest Name Containers
/Composites
WORK ORDER SUMMARY
Work Order:1510A30
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!!
Give to Blake for review
Client Name:PADRE ASSOCIATES. INC.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
QC Level:LEVEL 2
HoldDe-
chlorinated
SubOutBottle & Preservative
10/28/2015
Sediment
Content
EDF Fax Email HardCopy ThirdPartyExcel J-flagWriteOn
Alan J. KleinClient Contact:
aklein@padreinc.comContact's Email:
WaterTrax
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
1510A30-014A P-11B (1-1.5')10/27/2015 9:26 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-015A P-15A (SURF)10/27/2015 9:35 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-016A P-15A (1-1.5')10/27/2015 9:38 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-016B P-15A (1-1.5') DUP 10/27/2015 9:38 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-017A SS-6A (SURF)10/27/2015 10:06 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-018A SS-6A (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:08 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-019A SS-6A (2-2.5')10/27/2015 10:12Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-020A SS-6B (SURF)10/27/2015 10:29 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-021A SS-6B (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:33 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-022A SS-6B (2-2.5')10/27/2015 10:36Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-023A SS-6C (SURF)10/27/2015 10:40 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
2 of 5Page
- STLC and TCLP extractions require 2 days to complete; therefore, all TATs begin after the extraction is completed (i.e., One-day TAT yields results
in 3 days from sample submission).
NOTES:
- MAI assumes that all material present in the provided sampling container is considered part of the sample - MAI does not exclude any material from
the sample prior to sample preparation unless requested in writing by the client.
Page 47 of 57
606
CC 06-03-2025
606 of 1012
Lab ID Client ID Collection Date
& Time
Date Received:
TATMatrixTest Name Containers
/Composites
WORK ORDER SUMMARY
Work Order:1510A30
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!!
Give to Blake for review
Client Name:PADRE ASSOCIATES. INC.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
QC Level:LEVEL 2
HoldDe-
chlorinated
SubOutBottle & Preservative
10/28/2015
Sediment
Content
EDF Fax Email HardCopy ThirdPartyExcel J-flagWriteOn
Alan J. KleinClient Contact:
aklein@padreinc.comContact's Email:
WaterTrax
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
1510A30-024A SS-6C (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:42 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-025A SS-6C (2-2.5')10/27/2015 10:46Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-026A SS-6D (SURF)10/27/2015 10:41 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides w/ Florisil
Clean-Up)
1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
5 daysSW8081A (OC Pesticides)
1510A30-027A SS-6D (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:46 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-028A SS-6D (2-2.5')10/27/2015 10:51Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-029A SS-6E (SURF)10/27/2015 10:19 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-030A SS-6E (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:22 5 daysSoilSW8081A (OC Pesticides)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-031A SS-6E (2-2.5')10/27/2015 10:27Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-032A SS-6F (SURF)10/27/2015 11:04Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-033A SS-6F (1-1.5')10/27/2015 11:07Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-034A SS-6F (2-2.5')10/27/2015 11:11Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-035A SS-6G (SURF)10/27/2015 11:33Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-036A SS-6G (1-1.5')10/27/2015 11:34Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-037A SS-6G (2-2.5')10/27/2015 11:36Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-038A SS-6H (SURF)10/27/2015 11:10Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
3 of 5Page
- STLC and TCLP extractions require 2 days to complete; therefore, all TATs begin after the extraction is completed (i.e., One-day TAT yields results
in 3 days from sample submission).
NOTES:
- MAI assumes that all material present in the provided sampling container is considered part of the sample - MAI does not exclude any material from
the sample prior to sample preparation unless requested in writing by the client.
Page 48 of 57
607
CC 06-03-2025
607 of 1012
Lab ID Client ID Collection Date
& Time
Date Received:
TATMatrixTest Name Containers
/Composites
WORK ORDER SUMMARY
Work Order:1510A30
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!!
Give to Blake for review
Client Name:PADRE ASSOCIATES. INC.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
QC Level:LEVEL 2
HoldDe-
chlorinated
SubOutBottle & Preservative
10/28/2015
Sediment
Content
EDF Fax Email HardCopy ThirdPartyExcel J-flagWriteOn
Alan J. KleinClient Contact:
aklein@padreinc.comContact's Email:
WaterTrax
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
1510A30-039A SS-6H (1-1.5')10/27/2015 11:13Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-040A SS-6H (2-2.5')10/27/2015 11:17Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-041A SS-6I (SURF)10/27/2015 10:55Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-042A SS-6I (1-1.5')10/27/2015 10:59Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-043A SS-6I (2-2.5')10/27/2015 11:01Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-044A SS-6J (SURF)10/27/2015 11:35Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-045A SS-6J (1-1.5')10/27/2015 11:38Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-046A SS-6J (2-2.5')10/27/2015 11:44Soil1Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-047A P-13A (SURF)10/27/2015 9:00 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-048A P-13B (SURF)10/27/2015 9:05 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-049A P-17A (SURF)10/27/2015 8:55 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-049B P-17A (SURF) DUP 10/27/2015 8:55 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-050A P-28A (SURF)10/27/2015 8:50 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-051A P-29 (SURF)10/27/2015 9:10 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-052A P-29A (SURF)10/27/2015 9:14 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-053A P-30 (SURF)10/27/2015 9:17 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
4 of 5Page
- STLC and TCLP extractions require 2 days to complete; therefore, all TATs begin after the extraction is completed (i.e., One-day TAT yields results
in 3 days from sample submission).
NOTES:
- MAI assumes that all material present in the provided sampling container is considered part of the sample - MAI does not exclude any material from
the sample prior to sample preparation unless requested in writing by the client.
Page 49 of 57
608
CC 06-03-2025
608 of 1012
Lab ID Client ID Collection Date
& Time
Date Received:
TATMatrixTest Name Containers
/Composites
WORK ORDER SUMMARY
Work Order:1510A30
Comments:ALWAYS SETUP 8081 and/or 8082 w/ ESL TESTCODES!!!!
Give to Blake for review
Client Name:PADRE ASSOCIATES. INC.
Project:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
QC Level:LEVEL 2
HoldDe-
chlorinated
SubOutBottle & Preservative
10/28/2015
Sediment
Content
EDF Fax Email HardCopy ThirdPartyExcel J-flagWriteOn
Alan J. KleinClient Contact:
aklein@padreinc.comContact's Email:
WaterTrax
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
1510A30-054A P-31 (SURF)10/27/2015 9:21 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-055A P-32 (SURF)10/27/2015 9:24 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-056A P-33 (SURF)10/27/2015 9:28 5 daysSoilSW6020 (Lead)1 Stainless Steel tube 2"x6"
1510A30-057A FB #1 10/27/2015 12:00 5 daysWaterE200.8 (Lead)1 250mL HDPE w/ HNO3 None
1510A30-058A EB #1 10/27/2015 12:05 5 daysWaterE200.8 (Lead)1 250mL HDPE w/ HNO3 None
5 of 5Page
- STLC and TCLP extractions require 2 days to complete; therefore, all TATs begin after the extraction is completed (i.e., One-day TAT yields results
in 3 days from sample submission).
NOTES:
- MAI assumes that all material present in the provided sampling container is considered part of the sample - MAI does not exclude any material from
the sample prior to sample preparation unless requested in writing by the client.
Page 50 of 57
609
CC 06-03-2025
609 of 1012
Page 51 of 57
610
CC 06-03-2025
610 of 1012
Page 52 of 57
611
CC 06-03-2025
611 of 1012
Page 53 of 57
612
CC 06-03-2025
612 of 1012
Page 54 of 57
613
CC 06-03-2025
613 of 1012
Page 55 of 57
614
CC 06-03-2025
614 of 1012
Page 56 of 57
615
CC 06-03-2025
615 of 1012
Sample Receipt Checklist
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Toll Free Telephone: (877) 252-9262 / Fax: (925) 252-9269
http://www.mccampbell.com / E-mail: main@mccampbell.com"When Quality Counts"
Client Name:Padre Associates. Inc.
WorkOrder №:1510A30
Date and Time Received:10/28/2015 6:33:12 PM
LogIn Reviewed by:Jena Alfaro
Matrix:Soil/Water Carrier:Daniel (MAI Courier)
Shipping container/cooler in good condition?Yes No
Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler?Yes No NA
Samples Received on Ice?Yes No
Chain of custody present?Yes No
Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received?Yes No
Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?Yes No
Samples in proper containers/bottles?Yes No
Sample containers intact?Yes No
Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?Yes No
All samples received within holding time?Yes No
NASample/Temp Blank temperature
Yes No NAWater - VOA vials have zero headspace / no bubbles?
pH acceptable upon receipt (Metal: <2; 522: <4; 218.7: >8)?Yes No NA
* NOTE: If the "No" box is checked, see comments below.
Temp:3.8°C
Chain of Custody (COC) Information
Yes NoSample IDs noted by Client on COC?
Yes NoDate and Time of collection noted by Client on COC?
Yes NoSampler's name noted on COC?
Sample Receipt Information
Sample Preservation and Hold Time (HT) Information
Sample labels checked for correct preservation?Yes No
Project Name:1401-2172; Cupertino (Sedgwick SSI)
(Ice Type:WET ICE )
Comments:
Total Chlorine tested and acceptable upon receipt for EPA 522?Yes No NA
UCMR3 Samples:
Free Chlorine tested and acceptable upon receipt for EPA 218.7,
300.1, 537, 539?
Yes No NA
Page 57 of 57
616
CC 06-03-2025
616 of 1012
APPENDIX D
LEADSPREAD
617
CC 06-03-2025
617 of 1012
INPUT OUTPUT
MEDIUM LEVEL Percentile Estimate of Blood Pb (ug/dl PRG-90
Lead in Soil/Dust (ug/g)310.0 50th 90th 95th 98th 99th (ug/g)
Respirable Dust (ug/m3)1.5 BLOOD Pb, CHILD 2.2 4.0 4.8 5.8 6.6 77
BLOOD Pb, PICA CHILD 4.4 8.0 9.5 11.5 13.1 39
units
Days per week days/wk
Geometric Standard Deviation PEF ug/dl percent PEF ug/dl percent
Blood lead level of concern (ug/dl)Soil Contact 5.8E-5 0.02 1%0.02 0%
Skin area, residential cm2 Soil Ingestion 7.0E-3 2.18 99% 1.4E-2 4.36 100%
Soil adherence ug/cm2 Inhalation 2.0E-6 0.00 0%0.00 0%
Dermal uptake constant (ug/dl)/(ug/day)
Soil ingestion mg/day
Soil ingestion, pica mg/day
Ingestion constant (ug/dl)/(ug/day)
Bioavailability unitless
Breathing rate m3/day
Inhalation constant (ug/dl)/(ug/day)
Click here for REFERENCES
Click here for ABBREVIATED INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEADSPREAD 8
2900
EXPOSURE PARAMETERS
typical with picaCHILDREN
7
200
LEAD RISK ASSESSMENT SPREADSHEET 8
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL
PATHWAYS
children
Pathway contribution Pathway contribution
1.6
1
Pathway
0.16
6.8
0.192
100
200
0.0001
0.44
61
8
CC 06-03-2025
618 of 1012
EDIT RED CELL
Variable Units
PbS ug/g or ppm 310
Rfetal/maternal --0.9
BKSF ug/dL per ug/day 0.4
GSDi --1.8
PbB0 ug/dL 0.0
IRS g/day 0.050
AFS, D --0.12
EFS, D days/yr 250
ATS, D days/yr 365
PbBadult PbB of adult worker, geometric mean ug/dL 0.5
PbBfetal, 0.90 90th percentile PbB among fetuses of adult workers ug/dL 1.0
PbBt Target PbB level of concern (e.g., 10 ug/dL)ug/dL 1.0
P(PbBfetal > PbBt) Probability that fetal PbB > PbBt, assuming lognormal distribution % 9.2%
PRG90 318
Click here for REFERENCES
Averaging time (same for soil and dust)
Soil ingestion rate (including soil-derived indoor dust)
Absorption fraction (same for soil and dust)
Exposure frequency (same for soil and dust)
Description of Variable
Soil lead concentration
Fetal/maternal PbB ratio
Biokinetic Slope Factor
Geometric standard deviation PbB
Baseline PbB
CALCULATIONS OF BLOOD LEAD CONCENTRATIONS (PbBs) AND PRELMIINARY REMEDIATION GOAL (PRG)
MODIFIED VERSION OF USEPA ADULT LEAD MODEL
61
9
CC 06-03-2025
619 of 1012
Attachment C
620
CC 06-03-2025
620 of 1012
621
CC 06-03-2025
621 of 1012
622
CC 06-03-2025
622 of 1012
623
CC 06-03-2025
623 of 1012
624
CC 06-03-2025
624 of 1012
625
CC 06-03-2025
625 of 1012
626
CC 06-03-2025
626 of 1012
627
CC 06-03-2025
627 of 1012
628
CC 06-03-2025
628 of 1012
629
CC 06-03-2025
629 of 1012
630
CC 06-03-2025
630 of 1012
631
CC 06-03-2025
631 of 1012
632
CC 06-03-2025
632 of 1012
633
CC 06-03-2025
633 of 1012
634
CC 06-03-2025
634 of 1012
635
CC 06-03-2025
635 of 1012
636
CC 06-03-2025
636 of 1012
637
CC 06-03-2025
637 of 1012
638
CC 06-03-2025
638 of 1012
639
CC 06-03-2025
639 of 1012
640
CC 06-03-2025
640 of 1012
641
CC 06-03-2025
641 of 1012
642
CC 06-03-2025
642 of 1012
643
CC 06-03-2025
643 of 1012
644
CC 06-03-2025
644 of 1012
645
CC 06-03-2025
645 of 1012
646
CC 06-03-2025
646 of 1012
647
CC 06-03-2025
647 of 1012
648
CC 06-03-2025
648 of 1012
649
CC 06-03-2025
649 of 1012
650
CC 06-03-2025
650 of 1012
651
CC 06-03-2025
651 of 1012
652
CC 06-03-2025
652 of 1012
653
CC 06-03-2025
653 of 1012
654
CC 06-03-2025
654 of 1012
655
CC 06-03-2025
655 of 1012
656
CC 06-03-2025
656 of 1012
REMOVAL ACTI ON WORKPLAN
SEDGWICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL EXPANSION PROJECT
10480 FINCH AVENUE, CUPERTINO,
SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(Site Code: 204271)
Prepared for:
CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
JANUARY 2018
Attachment D
657
CC 06-03-2025
657 of 1012
65
8
CC 06-03-2025
658 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES ..................................................... 1-1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................. 1-2
2.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ............................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Site Name, Address and Size .................................................... 2-2
2.1.2 Contact Person, Mailing Address and Phone Number ................ 2-2
2.1.3 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers and Map ......................................... 2-2
2.1.4 Ownership ................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.5 Township, Range, and Section ................................................... 2-2
2.2 OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND STATUS .......................................... 2-2
2.3 TOPOGRAPHY ................................................................................... 2-3
2.4 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY .................................................. 2-3
2.5 LAND USES, SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, ECOSYSTEMS AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................. 2-3
2.6 METEOROLOGY ................................................................................ 2-4
2.7 PREVIOUS SITE ACTIONS ................................................................ 2-4
2.7.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment .................................... 2-4
2.7.2 Preliminary Environmental Assessment ..................................... 2-5
2.7.3 Supplemental Site Investigation ................................................. 2-7
3.0 NATURE, SOURCE, AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINANTS ............................. 3-1
3.1 NATURE AND SOURCE OF CONTAMINANTS ................................. 3-1
3.2 EXTENT AND VOLUME OF CONTAMINANTS .................................. 3-1
3.3 HEALTH EFFECT OF CONTAMINANTS ............................................ 3-2
3.4 RECEPTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE SITE .................. 3-3
4.0 RISK EVALUATION AND PRELIMINARY CLEANUP GOALS ........................ 4-1
4.1 RISK EVALUATION ............................................................................ 4-1
4.1.1 Environmental Screening Risk Evaluation ................................... 4-2
4.2 VOLUNTARY CLEANUP AGREEMENT ............................................. 4-2
4.3 CLEANUP GOALS ............................................................................. 4-2
5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION / COST ANALYSIS (EE/CA) ........................... 5-1
5.1 REMOVAL ACTION SCOPE ............................................................... 5-1
659
CC 06-03-2025
659 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
5.2 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF REMOVAL ACTION
ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................. 5-1
5.2.1 EE/CA Alternative Evaluation Criteria.......................................... 5-1
5.2.2 Description and Comparative Analysis of RA Alternatives ........... 5-2
5.2.2.1 No Action .......................................................................... 5-2
5.2.2.2 Excavation and Offsite Disposal ........................................ 5-2
5.2.2.3 Treatment ......................................................................... 5-3
5.2.2.4 Engineering and Institutional Controls ............................... 5-3
5.3 DESCRIPTION OF RECOMMENDED REMEDY ................................ 5-4
5.4 COST ESTIMATES OF RECOMMENDED REMEDY .......................... 5-4
6.0 APPLICABLE OR RELEVENT AND APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS ........ 6-1
6.1 CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC ARARS ............................................................ 6-1
6.1.1 Risk Screening Levels ................................................................ 6-1
6.1.2 Air Quality Management ............................................................. 6-2
6.1.3 Health & Safety Plan ................................................................... 6-3
6.2 ACTION-SPECIFIC ARARS ................................................................ 6-3
6.2.1 Waste Management ................................................................... 6-3
6.2.2 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .............................. 6-4
6.2.3 Stormwater Discharge ................................................................ 6-7
6.2.4 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) ...................................... 6-8
6.2.5 Others ........................................................................................ 6-9
6.3 LOCATION-SPECIFIC ARARS ............................................................ 6-9
6.3.1 Public Participation ..................................................................... 6-9
6.3.1.1 Community Assessment ................................................... 6-9
6.3.1.2 Community Profile Report ................................................. 6-10
6.3.1.3 Public Participation Activities............................................. 6-10
7.0 REMOVAL ACTION IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................ 7-1
7.1 FIELD DOCUMENTATION ................................................................. 7-1
7.1.1 Field Logbooks ........................................................................... 7-1
7.1.2 Chain-of-Custody Records ......................................................... 7-2
7.1.3 Photographs ............................................................................... 7-3
7.2 SITE PREPARATION AND SECURITY MEASURES ......................... 7-3
7.2.1 Delineation of AOCs .................................................................. 7-3
7.2.2 Utility Clearance ......................................................................... 7-3
7.2.3 Security Measures ..................................................................... 7-3
7.2.4 Contaminant Control .................................................................. 7-4
7.2.5 Cultural Resources Consideration .............................................. 7-4
7.2.6 Biological Resources Consideration ........................................... 7-5
660
CC 06-03-2025
660 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
7.2.7 Noise Control ............................................................................. 7-5
7.2.8 Permits and Plans ...................................................................... 7-5
7.3 WORK ZONES ................................................................................... 7-5
7.3.1 Exclusion Zone .......................................................................... 7-5
7.3.2 Decontamination Zone ............................................................... 7-5
7.3.3 Support Zone / Staging Area ...................................................... 7-5
7.4 EXCAVATION ..................................................................................... 7-6
7.4.1 Trenching, Excavation, and Confined Space Entry ..................... 7-6
7.4.2 Soil Staging and Storage Operations ......................................... 7-6
7.4.3 Waste Segregation Operations .................................................. 7-7
7.4.4 Decontamination Procedures ..................................................... 7-7
7.4.5 Excavation Plan ........................................................................ 7-7
7.5 METEOROLOGICAL AND AIR MONITORING .................................. 7-8
7.5.1 Meteorological Monitoring .......................................................... 7-8
7.5.2 Site Air Monitoring ...................................................................... 7-8
7.5.2.1 Site Worker Air Monitoring................................................. 7-9
7.6 DUST CONTROL PLAN .................................................................... 7-9
7.7 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN .................................................... 7-10
7.7.1 Waste Profiling Sampling ........................................................... 7-10
7.7.2 Confirmation Sampling ............................................................... 7-11
7.8 TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR OFF-SITE DISPOSAL .................... 7-12
7.9 BACKFILL AND SITE RESTORATION ............................................... 7-13
7.10 VARIANCE OR EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE (ESD) 7-13
7.10.1 Fundamental, Significant, or Minor Changes ............................ 7-13
7.10.2 ESD Process ............................................................................ 7-13
8.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE AND REPORT OF COMPLETION ............................. 8-1
9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 9-1
TABLES
Page
Table 4-1: Comparison to Screening Levels ............................................................... 4-2
Table 4-2: Cleanup Goals ......................................................................................... 4-3
Table 6-1: Dust Exposure Levels .............................................................................. 6-3
Table 7-1: Site Air Monitoring Action Levels .............................................................. 7-9
Table 8-1: Schedule of Tasks ..................................................................................... 8-1
661
CC 06-03-2025
661 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
iv
PLATES
Page
Plate 1-1: Site Location .............................................................................................. Plate 1-1
Plate 1-2: Site Plan .................................................................................................... Plate 2-1
Plate 3-1: Areas of Concern ...................................................................................... Plate 3-1
Plate 7-1: Organization Chart .................................................................................... Plate 7-1
Plate 7-2: Work Zones ............................................................................................... Plate 7-2
Plate 7-3: Excavation Plan ........................................................................................ Plate 7-3
Plate 7-4: Confirmation Soil Samples ........................................................................ Plate 7-4
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DTSC’S FINAL PEA AND SSI APPROVAL LETTER
APPENDIX B: ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP
APPENDIX C: CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL AND DATA SHEETS
APPENDIX D: NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
APPENDIX E: COMMUNITY PROFILE REPORT
APPENDIX F: DTSC COMMUNITY UPDATE
APPENDIX G: HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN
APPENDIX H: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
APPENDIX I: TRANSPORTATION PLAN
APPENDIX J: DTSC ADVISORY ON IMPORTED CLEANFILL MATERIAL
662
CC 06-03-2025
662 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
1-1
REMOVAL ACTION WORKPLAN
Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project
Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California
(Site Code: 204271)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre), on behalf of Cupertino Union School District (District), has
prepared this Removal Action Workplan (RAW) for the Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion
Project, located at 10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (Project
Site). The Project Site is identified on Plate 1-1: Site Location and Plate 1-2: Site Plan.
This RAW is based on the results of the following documents prepared by Padre:
• Final Preliminary Environmental Assessment, Sedgwick Elementary School
Expansion Project, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County,
California dated September 15, 2015; and
• Supplemental Site Investigation, Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project,
10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (Site Code
204271) dated January 7, 2016.
The Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) and Supplemental Site Investigation
(SSI) defined the extent of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and lead in surface soil at the Project
Site exceeding U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) or DTSC-modified screening levels.
Copies of the DTSC letters approving the PEA and SSI reports are presented in Appendix A.
This RAW includes a detailed engineering plan for conducting the selected response
action (RA) for each chemical of concern (COC) and the goals to be achieved by the RA, as
required by the California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) section 25323.1. The RAW is also
consistent with the criteria specified in the H&SC section 25356.1(h).
1.1 REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES
The removal action objectives (RAOs) have been established to be protective of human
health and the environment. The RAOs include:
• Minimize exposure of humans to COC in soil through the inhalation, dermal
absorption, and ingestion exposure pathways;
• Minimize potential for migration of COC from soil to other media;
• Establish Cleanup Goals (CGs) equivalent to U.S EPA RSLs or DTSC-modified
screening levels; and
• Establish post-RAW site conditions that do not pose a significant risk to human
health, safety or the environment.
663
CC 06-03-2025
663 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
1-2
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The District purchased the Project Site in 2017 as part of the future expansion of Sedgwick
Elementary School. At this time, no specific plans have been developed, however the expansion
project will not result in the addition of classrooms or students to the existing elementary school.
If needed, public water will be provided by the San Jose Water Company, and public sewer will
be provided to the Project Site by the Sunnyvale Sanitation District.
664
CC 06-03-2025
664 of 1012
665
CC 06-03-2025
665 of 1012
PROJECT
SITE
SEDGWICK ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PHIL LANE
FI
N
C
H
A
V
E
.
ST
E
N
D
H
A
L
L
N
.
associates, inc.
ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS &ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
PLATE 1-2
DR. BY
AC
APP. BY SITE PLANDATEPROJECT NO.
7/13/17 AJK1601-3361
SOURCE: GOOGLE EARTH MAP DATED NOV. 2016
66
6
CC 06-03-2025
666 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
2-1
2.0 BACKGROUND
The Project Site consists of approximately 1.48 acres of residential land and, which is
identified by the Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office as Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 375-
40-067. The Project Site is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the Sedgwick Elementary
School property at 10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California.
The Project Site was previously owned by F.A. Pestarino Jr. Trustee, and had been owned
by the Pestarino family since the 1930s. The property historically contained a prune tree orchard.
According to a review of available historical aerial photographs, the Project Site was planted as
an orchard from at least 1939 through the late 1950s. The existing residential building is present
in a 1956 aerial photograph.
In addition to the residence, the Project Site contains a workshop (wood-framed with
corrugate metal roof) located at the southeast corner of the Project Site. Located south and
adjacent to the workshop are two, small, single-room dwellings that are wood-framed and situated
on concrete blocks.
Potential chemicals of concern (COC) identified at the Project Site included residual
pesticides and arsenic in soils associated with historic agricultural use; residual pesticides
associated with termiticides and ant control in surface and subsurface soil from historic and
existing buildings; the potential for lead in soils from the weathering of lead-based paint from
historic and existing buildings; the potential for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soil from the
weathering of caulking around old window frames of historic and existing buildings; and the
potential presence of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) in and soil and soil gas beneath the Project Site associated with a former gasoline
underground storage tank (UST ).
Padre completed a PEA for the Project Site dated September 2015, and an SSI dated
January 2016. The purpose of the investigations was to establish whether a release or potential
release of hazardous materials substances, which pose a threat to human health via ingestion,
dermal contact, and inhalation exposure pathways exist at the Project Site. The results of the
PEA and SSI identified the presence of chlordane (pesticide) and lead in soil above residential
screening levels. Therefore, further action was recommended to eliminate, reduce, and/or
mitigate the identified COC at the Project Site. The results of the PEA and SSI are discussed
further in Sections 2.7.2 and 2.7.3 of this report.
2.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Project Site is located at 10480 Finch Avenue in the eastern portion of City of
Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California. Cupertino is located approximately 36 miles southeast
of downtown San Francisco and 8 miles southwest of downtown San Jose. Additionally,
Cupertino is located in Santa Clara County and is bordered by the City of Sunnyvale and a small
portion of the City of Los Altos to the north, the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose to the east,
the City of Saratoga to the south, and unincorporated Santa Clara County to the west (Apple
Campus 2 Project EIR, June 2013).
667
CC 06-03-2025
667 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
2-2
The Project Site is bordered to the north by Phil Lane, beyond which is residential property;
to the east and south by Sedgwick Elementary School; to the west by residential property; and to
the northwest by Finch Avenue, beyond which is residential property.
2.1.1 Site Name, Address and Size
Site Name: Sedgwick Elementary School Expansion Project
Site Address: 10480 Finch Avenue, City of Cupertino, California, 95014
Site Size: 1.48 acres
2.1.2 Contact Person, Mailing Address and Phone Number
Travis J. Kirk, Director of Facilities and Modernization
Cupertino Union School District
10301 Vista Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone No. (408) 252-3000
2.1.3 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers and Map
The County of Santa Clara identifies the Project Site as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN):
375-40-067. A copy of the Assessor’s Parcel Map is presented in Appendix B.
2.1.4 Ownership
The Project Site is owned by the Cupertino Union School District.
2.1.5 Township, Range, and Section
The Project Site is located in Section 19, Township 7 South, Range 1 West, of the
Cupertino Quadrangle, California USGS 7½-Minute Series, Topographic Map (1991).
Approximate latitude and longitude of the central area of the property are identified to be:
• Latitude (North) 37° 18’ 56.5194” (37.3157)
• Longitude (West) -122° 0’ 35.2794” (-122.0098)
2.2 OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND STATUS
The Project Site consists of 1.48-acres of residential use property, and is located adjacent
to the northwest corner of the Sedgwick Elementary School property. Prior to the 2017 purchase
of the Project Site by the District, the property had been owned by the Pestarino family since the
1930s. The property historically contained a prune tree orchard from at least 1939 through the
late 1950s and the existing residential building is present in a 1956 aerial photograph.
Additionally, the Project Site contains a workshop (wood-framed with corrugate metal roof)
located at the southeast corner of the Project Site. Located south and adjacent to the workshop
are two, small, single-room dwellings that are wood-framed and situated on concrete blocks.
These dwellings were the original residential structures.
668
CC 06-03-2025
668 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
2-3
2.3 TOPOGRAPHY
Based on a review of the USGS 7.5-minute series topographic map Cupertino
Quadrangle, California, 1991 (photorevised 1982), the Project Site lies at an approximate
elevation of 205 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the center of the Project Site. The overall
topographic gradient for the surrounding area is to the northeast. The Project Site is relatively flat
with storm water runoff directed northerly towards storm drains located in the adjacent street.
Calabazas Creek is located approximately 1,600-feet northwest of the Project Site and
flows in a northeasterly direction. Saratoga Creek is located approximately 0.75 miles west of the
Project Site and flows in a northerly direction.
2.4 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
The Project Site is located within the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province of California.
The Coast Ranges stretch approximately 600 miles from the Oregon border to the Santa Ynez
River and fall into two sub-provinces: the ranges north of San Francisco Bay and those from the
bay south to Santa Barbara County. The northern ranges lie east of the San Andreas Fault zone,
whereas most of the southern ranges are to the west. The province contains many elongate
ranges and narrow valleys that are approximately parallel to the coast, although the coast usually
shows a somewhat more northerly trend than do the ridges and valleys. Therefore, some valleys
intersect the shore at acute angles and some mountains terminate abruptly at the sea. The
northern Coast Ranges are higher than the southern where Solomon Peak located in Trinity
County rises to an elevation of 7,581 feet, the highest point in the Coast Ranges (Norris and
Webb, 1990).
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources
Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/), two soil types
are identified for the Project Site. Soils located within the southeast half of the Project Site consist
of Urban Land-Stevens Creek Complex located on 0 to 2 percent slopes. Native soils consist of
sandy loam, silt loam, and silty clay loam. Soils in the northwest half of the Project Site consist
of Urban Land-Elpaloalto Complex located on 0 to 2 percent slopes. Native soils consist of clay
loam and silty clay loam. Both of these soils are well drained and runoff is slow.
A review of the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker website
(http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov), identified groundwater assessment activities that were
conducted for a facility located approximately 0.56 miles northeast of the Project Site.
Reportedly, the depth to first groundwater at the referenced site is greater than 80 feet bgs,
and groundwater is inferred to flow in a northeast direction.
2.5 LAND USES, SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, ECOSYSTEMS AND CULTURAL
RESOURCES
The Project Site is located at 10480 Finch Avenue in Cupertino and according to the City
of Cupertino Zoning Map (April 2017) is zoned as R1-6 (single family residential).
Prior to the 2017 purchase of the Project Site by the District, the property had been owned
by the Pestarino family since the 1930s. The property historically contained a prune tree orchard
669
CC 06-03-2025
669 of 1012
Cupertino Union School District
Project No. 1601-3361
Sedgewick Elem Exp_RAW_Jan 2018.FINAL
2-4
from at least 1939 through the late 1950s and the existing residential building is present in a 1956
aerial photograph. Additionally, the Project Site contains a workshop (wood-framed with
corrugate metal roof) located at the southeast corner of the Project Site. Located south and
adjacent to the workshop are two, small, single-room dwellings that are wood-framed and situated
on concrete blocks. These dwellings were the original residential structures.
The Project Site is bordered to the north by Phil Lane, beyond which is residential property;
to the east and south by Sedgwick Elementary School; to the west by residential property; and to
the northwest by Finch Avenue, beyond which is residential property.
According to the Final Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan dated August 2012, the Project Site
is not located within an area of significant biological resource and no endangered or threatened
species are found in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. Additionally, no wetlands have
been identified at the Project Site.
According to the Cupertino General Plan Community Vision 2015 – 2040 (October 2015)
there are no historic sites located within the immediate vicinity of the project. There are several
structures in the City of Cupertino including schools, churches, and residences that are identified
as historic sites.
There is a potential that prehistoric and historic resources could be located below the
surface and may be encountered during the course of future construction activities. In the event
that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground
disturbing activities, an immediate evaluation of the find should be conducted by a qualified
archaeologist (CEQA §15064.5 (f)).
2.6 METEOROLOGY
Cupertino is located at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay. The eastern part of
the city, located in the Santa Clara Valley, is flat while the western part of the city slopes into the
Santa Cruz Mountains. During the month of July the average low temperature is 54 degrees
Fahrenheit (°F) and the average high temperature is 82 °F. During January the average low
temperature is 39 °F and the average high temperature is 58 °F.
During the summer, there is a moderate flow of marine air through the lower passes of the
mountains that frequently reach speeds of 20 miles per hour (mph) or more. The same pattern
is also responsible for the light to moderate winds from the northwest that blow up the Santa Clara
Valley on summer afternoons. In winter winds are predominantly southerly and are strongest at
higher elevations. Precipitation averages only 16 inches in parts of the Santa Clara Valley, but
over the mountains to the east it is as much as 30 inches.
2.7 PREVIOUS SITE ACTIONS
2.7.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone), on behalf of David J. Powers & Associates,
prepared the document titled Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Preliminary Soil Quality
Evaluation, 10480 Finch Avenue, Cupertino, California and dated July 1, 2014. Base on the
670
CC 06-03-2025
670 of 1012