Exhibit A - Intergovernmental Agreement

{00461500.10} 
Page 1 of 13 
 
 
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT 
BETWEEN 
THE TOWN OF GILBERT, THE CITY OF MESA, AND THE CITY OF CHANDLER 
FOR THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACT STUDY RELATED TO THE SRP/CAP 
INTERCONNECTION FACILITY 
This Intergovernmental Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into this    day of April, 2026, by and 
between the Town of Gilbert, an Arizona municipal corporation, (“Gilbert”), the City of Mesa, an 
Arizona municipal corporation (“Mesa”), and the City of Chandler, an Arizona Municipal 
Corporation (“Chandler”). Gilbert, Mesa, and Chandler are sometimes collectively referred to as 
the “Parties,” and each is referred to as a “Party.” 
 
RECITALS 
 
 
A. Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) §§ 11-951 et seq., provide that public agencies may enter into 
Intergovernmental Agreements for joint or cooperative action. Gilbert, Mesa, and Chandler are 
authorized by A.R.S. §§ 9-240 and 9-511 to provide utility services, including the provision of 
water resources. 
 
B. The Salt River Project (SRP)/Central Arizona Project (CAP) Interconnection Facility (SCIF)                       
project aims to enable SRP water to be pumped into the CAP canal. The Parties are downstream 
water users and wish to evaluate the potential impact of the SCIF project on their infrastructure.  
 
C. The Parties wish to engage a professional consultant, WaterWorks Engineers, to cooperatively 
study the potential effects of the SCIF project to identify new or modified unit processes to meet 
water quality standards under maximum SCIF impact scenarios. To that end, the Parties desire to 
jointly share the costs associated with this study.  
 
D. Because the Parties all own and operate water treatment facilities downstream of the proposed SCIF 
project, the anticipated effects of the project will impact each of the Parties; as such, the cooperation 
between Mesa, Gilbert, and Chandler to jointly complete this study will serve the best interests of 
the public through potential cost savings by reducing duplicative work.  
 
PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT 
 
1) The purpose of this Agreement is to allow for cost sharing between the Parties of the WaterWorks 
Engineers study into the downstream effects of the SCIF project (the Study). The scope of the Study 
is more specifically described in the attached Exhibit A.  
 
TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT 
 
2) Gilbert Responsibilities: 
 
a) Gilbert shall assume the lead for the procurement, negotiation, and management needed to complete 
the Study at a price not to exceed $145,840. All Parties shall have equal authority in the decision-

{00461500.10} 
Page 2 of 13 
 
making process. 
 
b) WaterWorks shall invoice Gilbert for work performed under the contract. Gilbert shall invoice Mesa 
and Chandler each for one-third of the costs reflected in each invoice Gilbert receives from 
WaterWorks. Subject to Section 4, Gilbert shall invoice Mesa and Chandler for one-third each of 
the cost of any change orders approved by all Parties that increase the total contract price above the 
not-to-exceed amount.  
 
c) After the execution of the contract and upon request from Mesa or Chandler, Gilbert will provide 
the requesting entity progress updates every 30 days to the extent Gilbert has responsive information 
in its possession, unless reviews, discussions or decisions by the Parties related to the Study are 
required by the parties, in which case a meeting shall be held pursuant to Section 2(d) below. Mesa 
and Chandler may request such updates no more than once in any thirty (30) day period. 
 
d) Upon receipt of a request from WaterWorks for a meeting related to the Study, Gilbert shall 
promptly notify Mesa and Chandler of the request and shall coordinate a date when all Parties can 
attend. The Parties shall make reasonable efforts to schedule the meeting within 10 days of 
WaterWorks’ request, or within such shorter period as circumstances may require. The Parties 
designate the following representatives to attend such meetings: 
 
 
Gilbert: Lauren Hixson, Water Resources Manager  
 
 
  Rebecca Hamel, Water Manager 
 
 
 
 
Chandler: Simone Kjolsrud, Water Resources Manager 
                                                 Jeremy Abbott, Utilities Director 
 
 
 
 
Mesa: Christopher Mitchell, Assistant Water Resources Director  
 
 
 
 
Joe Giudice, Water Resources Director 
 
e) WaterWorks shall provide all Parties with copies of any draft and final reports. Subject to Section 
4, Gilbert will also provide an invoice for one-third of any remaining costs related to the Study. 
 
f) All Parties shall provide comments on draft reports to WaterWorks and to each other Party within 
15 calendar days of receipt of the draft report. 
 
3) Responsibilities of Mesa and Chandler: 
 
a) Mesa and Chandler hereby designate Gilbert as the lead agency for procurement, negotiation, and 
management of the Study. 
 
b) Upon request from WaterWorks, Mesa and Chandler shall provide any information or data within 
their possession that is necessary for the completion of the Study.  
 
c) Mesa and Chandler shall remit payment to Gilbert within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice 
issued pursuant to Section 2 above.

{00461500.10} 
Page 3 of 13 
 
 
4)  Change Orders 
 
Following the execution of the contract, Gilbert shall notify Mesa and Chandler of any change order 
requests. Should Mesa or Chandler object to any change order, it shall notify Gilbert within five (5) 
business days of receipt of the change order request, and the Parties shall meet to resolve their 
disagreement. No change order request shall be approved without the consent of all Parties. 
 
5) Term 
 
a) The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date it is fully executed (“Effective Date”) 
and shall end upon the earlier of (i) the completion and acceptance by the Parties of the final 
report produced as a result of the Study, (ii) three (3) years from the Effective Date, or (iii) upon 
written agreement of the Parties; provided, however, any termination of this Agreement shall not 
terminate any then-existing obligation to pay for the Study nor shall it terminate the indemnities 
specified in Section 6. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any funding provided for in this Agreement 
is contingent upon being budgeted and appropriated by the Gilbert Town Council, the Mesa City 
Council, and the Chandler City Council in accordance with A.R.S. § 42-17106 for such fiscal 
year. 
 
6) Indemnity: 
a) Gilbert hereby agrees that, to the extent permitted by law, Gilbert shall defend, indemnify, and 
hold harmless Mesa and Chandler, their departments, agencies, officers, employees, elected 
officials or agents, (“Mesa & Chandler Indemnitees”) from and against all third party losses, 
damages, claims, and expenses (including court costs, expenses for litigation, and reasonable 
attorney fees), or other liabilities of any kind ("Liability") resulting from or arising out of 
Gilbert’s acts or omissions under this Agreement  (including, without limitation, Liability on 
account of any injury, sickness, disease, or death of any person or damage, destruction, or loss of 
any property), to the extent such Liability is due to the gross negligence or more culpable conduct 
of Gilbert, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents, or anyone under Gilbert's direction 
and control. Nothing herein shall require Gilbert to indemnify or hold harmless the Mesa & 
Chandler Indemnitees for any Liability to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of 
the Mesa & Chandler Indemnitees. 
 
b) Mesa hereby agrees that, to the extent permitted by law, Mesa shall defend, indemnify, and hold 
harmless Gilbert and Chandler, their departments, agencies, officers, employees, elected officials 
or agents, (“Gilbert & Chandler Indemnitees”) from and against all third party losses, damages, 
claims, and expenses (including, without limitation, court costs, expenses for litigation, and 
reasonable attorney fees), or other liabilities of any kind ("Liability") resulting from or arising out 
of Mesa’s acts or omissions under this Agreement  (including, without limitation, Liability on 
account of any injury, sickness, disease, or death of any person or damage, destruction, or loss of 
any property),  to the extent such Liability is due to the gross negligence or more culpable conduct 
of Mesa, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents, or anyone under Mesa's direction and 
control. Nothing herein shall require Mesa to indemnify or hold harmless the Gilbert & Chandler 
Indemnitees for any Liability to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Gilbert 
& Chandler Indemnitees.

{00461500.10} 
Page 4 of 13 
 
 
c) 
Chandler hereby agrees that, to the extent permitted by law, Chandler shall defend, indemnify, 
and hold harmless Gilbert and Mesa, their departments, agencies, officers, employees, elected 
officials or agents, (“Gilbert & Mesa Indemnitees”) from and against all third party losses, 
damages, claims, and expenses (including, without limitation, court costs, expenses for litigation, 
and reasonable attorney fees), or other liabilities of any kind ("Liability") resulting from or arising 
out of Chandler’s acts or omissions under this Agreement  (including, without limitation, Liability 
on account of any injury, sickness, disease, or death of any person or damage, destruction, or loss 
of any property),  to the extent such Liability is due to the gross negligence or more culpable 
conduct of Chandler, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents, or anyone under Chandler's 
direction and control. Nothing herein shall require Chandler to indemnify or hold harmless the 
Gilbert & Mesa Indemnitees for any Liability to the extent caused by the negligent acts or 
omissions of the Gilbert & Mesa Indemnitees. 
 
7) General Provisions: 
 
a) This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the subjects 
addressed and supersedes all prior negotiations and agreements. 
 
b) This Agreement may be amended only by an instrument in writing signed by authorized 
representatives of the Parties. 
 
c) Nothing in this Agreement shall create a relationship of agency, partnership, or employer-employee 
between Mesa, Gilbert, and Chandler, and it is the intent and desire of the Parties that the 
relationship be and be construed as that of independent contracting parties and not as agents, 
partners, joint ventures, joint employers, or a relationship of employer or employee. 
 
d) This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the Parties hereto and, except as aforesaid, no provision 
of this Agreement shall be deemed to convert any remedy, claim, or right upon any third party, 
including any current or former employee of Mesa, Gilbert, or Chandler or any participant or 
beneficiary in any benefit plan, program, or arrangement. 
 
e) If any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, 
legality, or enforceability of the other provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and 
there shall be deemed substituted for the provision at issue a valid, legal and enforceable provision 
as similar as possible to the provision at issue. 
 
f) All notices, requests, instructions, or other documents to be given hereunder to any Party shall be in 
writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered in person or upon confirmation 
of receipt when transmitted by electronic mail or on receipt after dispatch by registered or certified 
mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

{00461500.10} 
Page 5 of 13 
 
 
If to Gilbert: 
 
 
Water Resources Manager  
50 E Civic Center Dr 
Gilbert, AZ 85296 
 
 
 
Email: Lauren.Hixson@gilbertaz.gov 
 
 
With a copy to: 
 
Public Works Director 
900 E Juniper Ave 
Gilbert, AZ 85234 
 
 
 
 
 
Email: Jessica.Marlow@gilbertaz.gov 
  
 
If to Mesa: 
 
 
Christopher Mitchell, Assistant Director 
 
 
 
640 N. Mesa Drive  
 
 
 
Mesa, Arizona 85201 
 
 
 
Email: christopher.mitchell@mesaaz.gov  
 
 
With a copy to: 
 
Joseph Giudice, Director 
 
 
 
640 N. Mesa Drive  
 
 
 
Mesa, Arizona 85201 
 
 
 
Email: joseph.giudice@mesaaz.gov 
 
 
If to Chandler:  
 
Simone Kjolsrud____ 
 
 
 
975 E. Armstrong Way  
 
 
 
Chandler, AZ 85286_ 
 
 
 
Email: Simone.Kjolsrud@chandleraz.gov 
 
 
With a copy to:  
 
Jeremy Abbott, Utilities Director 
 
 
 
975 E. Armstrong Way 
 
 
 
Chandler, AZ 85286 
 
 
 
Email: Jeremy.Abbott@chandleraz.gov 
 
g) Attached to this Agreement are copies of appropriate action by ordinance, resolution, or otherwise 
authorizing the respective Parties to enter into this Agreement. 
 
h) This Agreement may be cancelled pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-511. 
 
 
Signatures are on the following pages

{00461500.10} 
Page 6 of 13 
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement to be effective the 
date first written above. 
 
TOWN OF GILBERT 
 
Approved and Accepted By: 
 
 
 
Date 
Attest: 
 
Chaveli Herrera, Town Clerk 
Date 
APPROVAL OF GILBERT TOWN ATTORNEY 
I hereby state that I have reviewed the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement between the 
Town of Gilbert, the City of Mesa, and the City of Chandler and declare the Agreement to be in 
proper form and within the powers and authority granted to their respective governing bodies under 
the laws of the State of Arizona. 
 
 
Christopher W. Payne, Town Attorney 
Date

{00461500.10} 
Page 7 of 13 
 
 
 
CITY OF MESA 
 
Approved and Accepted By: 
 
 
 
Date 
Attest: 
 
Holly Moseley,City Clerk 
Date 
 
APPROVAL OF MESA CITY ATTORNEY 
I hereby state that I have reviewed the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement between the 
Town of Gilbert, the City of Mesa, and the City of Chandler and declare the Agreement to be in 
proper form and within the powers and authority granted to their respective governing bodies under 
the laws of the State of Arizona. 
 
 
 
Jim Smith, City Attorney 
 
Date

{00461500.10}
Page 8 of 13 
CITY OF CHANDLER 
Approved and Accepted By: 
Date 
Attest: 
City Clerk 
Date 
APPROVAL OF CHANDLER CITY ATTORNEY 
I hereby state that I have reviewed the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement between the 
Town of Gilbert, the City of Mesa, and the City of Chandler and declare the Agreement to be in 
proper form and within the powers and authority granted to their respective governing bodies under 
the laws of the State of Arizona. 
Kelly Schwab, City Attorney 
Date

{00461500.10} 
Page 9 of 13 
 
Exhibit A  
Scope of Work 
 
Participating Owners: Gilbert, Chandler, Mesa 
SRP/CAP Interconnection Facility (SCIF) 
SCIF Downstream Impact Study 
Scope of Work 
Background 
 
The Salt River Project (SRP)/CentralArizona Project (CAP) Interconnection Facility (SCIF) project 
aims to enable SRP water to be pumped into the CAP canal. The SCIF would allow the use of 
existing infrastructure and provide operational flexibility for two of the largest water providers in 
Arizona. If implemented, the SCIF would allow water stored in SRP reservoirs to be transported to 
customers with water treatment plants outside SRP's service territory. Cities like Mesa, Chandler, 
Scottsdale, Phoenix, and Glendale, which have ownership of water within the conservation space 
behind Roosevelt Dam, could benefit by receiving water through CAP, optimizing their water 
resource utilization. The SCIF is essentially the reverse of a previous project, the CAP/SRP 
Interconnection Facility (CSIF), completed in 1990, which allowed CAP water to be delivered 
through the SRP system. 
 
Introduction 
The purpose of this SCIF Downstream Impact Study (Study) is to evaluate the impact to water 
users downstream of the SCIF, specifically the Town of Gilbert (Gilbert), City of Chandler 
(Chandler), and City of Mesa (Mesa) (collectively Owners). This Study is being jointly funded by 
these three municipalities and will be managed by Gilbert and executed by Water Works Engineers 
(Engineer). Cost sharing will be executed through existing Inter-Governmental Agreements (IGAs) 
between Owners. 
While providing the water resource benefits listed above, operation of the SCIF will impact 
downstream water users due to the blending of SRP and CAP water. This blending could affect 
several key water quality parameters, including Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and turbidity, 
potentially exceeding the limits of existing plant processes and systems. 
 
Total Organic Carbon 
TOC levels in SRP water are higher than those typically found in CAP water. Elevated TOC can lead 
to increased formation of disinfection byproducts (DBPs) during the water treatment process. To 
manage higherTOC levels, downstream water treatment plants may need to implement additional 
or enhanced treatment processes. This could result in significant capital improvements to upgrade 
existing infrastructure. 
 
Turbidity 
Turbidity also varies between SRP and CAP sources. Higher turbidity levels in SRP water could 
challenge the existing clarification and filtration systems at downstream treatment plants, 
Scope of Work 
Page 1 of 4

{00461500.10} 
Page 10 of 13 
 
Participating Owners: Gilbert, Chandler, Mesa 
SRP/CAP Interconnection Facility (SCIF) 
SCIF Downstream Impact Study 
potentially requiring upgrades to filtration systems or the addition of pre-treatment processes to 
ensure compliance with regulatory standards. This would involve capital expenditures on new 
equipment and modifications to existing systems. 
 
Scope of Work 
Task Series 1  Project Administration 
Task 1.1 
Project Management 
 
This task involves overseeing all aspects of the Study, including: 
 
• 
Coordinating with Gilbert and Owners to ensure clear communication and alignment on project 
goals, scope, and deliverables. 
• 
Managing the project schedule, budget, and resources to ensure timely and cost-effective 
completion of the project. 
• 
Facilitating regular meetings and progress updates to address any issues or changes in the 
project scope. 
 
Task Series 2  Data Collection and Review 
Engineer will complete data collection and review phase as described in the followingtasks. 
 
Task 2.1  Historical Source Water Quality from both SRP and CAP 
 
SRP is currently completing a blend analysis that evaluates the range of operating blend scenarios 
from the SRP and CAP source waters. It is anticipated that this will include parameters such as 
TOC, turbidity, pH, Alkalinity, TDS, Hardness, Sodium, Chloride, Sulfate, Bromide, UV254 and other 
relevant constituents. It is also understood that this SRP blend analysis will assess variability in 
flow rates from both SRP and CAP sources and evaluate the likelihood and implications of a 
scenario where 100% of the water in the CAP canal is sourced from SRP. The Study will develop 
and analyze a single worst-case scenario in coordination with the stakeholders. The effort 
included under this task is to document and incorporate the results of this SRP blend analysis into 
the study. 
 
Task 2.2 Historical WTP Raw Water Quality and WTP Performance 
 
Under this task, historical raw water quality data will be collected from each of the respective water 
treatment plants (WTPs) involved in the study: San Tan Vista Water Treatment Plant (SVWTP), 
Signal Butte WTP, and Brown Road WTP. This data will include measurements of key water quality 
parameters identified above. Historical performance data from each WTP will be collected to 
evaluate the effectiveness of existing treatment processes. This includes data on settled water 
turbidity, filtered water turbidity, TOC removal efficiency, and other performance metrics. 
Historical operating parameters such as the types and dosage rates of chemicals used in the 
 
 
Scope of Work 
Page2 of4

{00461500.10} 
Page 11 of 13 
 
Participating Owners: Gilbert, Chandler, Mesa 
SRP/CAP Interconnection Facility (SCIF) 
SCIF Downstream Impact Study 
treatment processes will bereviewed. This includes data on coagulants, polymers, acids, caustics, 
disinfectants, filter run durations, etc. The scope of this analysis will be limited to three (3) 1-year 
periods identified by the Owners as capturing significant or excursion events that created 
operational challenges in the past. 
 
Task Series 3  Existing WTP Evaluation 
Task 3.1 
Identify Existing Treatment System Sizing and Capacity 
 
Engineer will document the existing water treatment processes and system sizing at each WTP. 
This includes the size, capacity, and number of sedimentation basins, filter basins, and other 
critical components. 
Task 3.2 
Evaluate Existing Treatment Processes under SCIF Scenarios 
 
Engineer will evaluate the performance of the existing treatment processes under the previously 
described SCIF scenarios. This evaluation will identify any treatment capability gaps where the 
existing processes are insufficient. This will involve assessing the effectiveness of sedimentation, 
filtration, TOC removal, chemical feed, and other critical processes in handling the blended water 
quality. Engineer will also identify the predicted reduced capacity of each WTP under the various 
SCIF scenarios developed previously. 
Task 3.3 
Evaluate Solids Handling Processes under SCIF Scenarios 
 
Treating water with higher turbidity and TOC levels will generate more solids which must be 
concentrated, dewatered, and disposed of appropriately. Engineer will perform a mass balance to 
assess solids loading rates in residuals treatment processes to evaluate existing capacity and 
reduced capacity under SCIF scenarios. 
 
Task Series 4  WTP Upgrades and Recommendations 
Task4.1  Process Upgrades 
 
Engineer will identify new or modified unit processes to meet water quality standards under 
maximum SCIF impact scenarios. New or modified unit processes could include pre-
sedimentation, oxidation, enhanced filtration, optimized chemical dosing, etc., to ensure 
compliance with regulatory standards and maintain overall treatment efficacy under SCIF 
scenarios. 
Task4.2  Cost Development 
 
Engineer will evaluate the cost impacts associated with implementing new unit processes and 
upgrades at each WTP. This evaluation will include several key areas: 
 
• 
Capital Expenditures 
 
Scope of Work 
Page3 of4

{00461500.10} 
Page 12 of 13 
 
Participating Owners: Gilbert, Chandler, Mesa 
SRP/CAP Interconnection Facility (SCIF) 
SCIF Downstream Impact Study 
• 
Increased Chemical Usage 
• 
Electrical 
• 
Solids Handling and Disposal 
• 
Maintenance Costs 
• 
Staffing Costs 
 
Task Series 5  Impact Study 
Task 5.1 
Report Development 
 
The Engineer will provide a draft and final comprehensive report summarizing the findings from the 
evaluation of the existing WTPs under various scenarios. This report will include proposed 
upgrades to address identified gaps in treatment capabilities, detailed cost impacts associated 
with implementing new unit processes, and compliance evaluations to ensure adherence to 
regulatory standards. The engineer will develop conceptual designs for the recommended 
upgrades and document the cost estimates for these new unit processes. Additionally, the 
engineer will offer operational recommendations to optimize the performance of the WTPs under 
the anticipated water quality conditions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Scope of Work 
Page4 of 4

{00461500.10} 
Page 13 of 13