City Council Agenda
AGENDA
ALISO VIEJO CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2026
7:00 PM REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
12 JOURNEY
ALISO VIEJO, CA
13 Mayor Max Duncan
Mayor Pro Tem Mike Munzing
Councilmember Tiffany Ackley
Councilmember Garrett Dwyer
Councilmember Tim Zandbergen
WELCOME to the City of Aliso Viejo City Council meeting. Those persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to complete and submit to the City Clerk a “Request to Address City Council” form available at the entrance to the City Council Chamber s. Speakers will be called at the appropriate time as their interested matter is heard. COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER. Council proceedings are recorded.
It is the City's intention to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) . If you need special assistance to participate in the meeting, the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and/or accommodations. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II] Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (949) 425-2505 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Regular meetings of the City Council are held on the first and third Wednesday of the month at the City Hall Council Chambers, 12 Journey, Aliso Viejo. Copies of the agenda are available in the lobby at City Hall on the Thursday preceding a regularly sched uled City Council meeting. All communications received by the City regarding an agenda item have been included in the agenda materials. Supplemental documents relating to specific agenda items, including communications received after agenda delivery, are p resented at the dais and in the Public Copy agenda binder at the time of the meeting. Supplemental documents are also available for review in the City Clerk's office, 12 Journey, Aliso Viejo. For more information, please contact City Hall at (949) 425 -2505.
This meeting will be broadcast live on Cox Communications Channel 851, AT&T U -Verse Channel 99 and the City's website. By attending the City Council Meeting, you are giving your permission to be televised. The Council Meetings are rebroadcast on Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. on Cox Communications Channel 851, AT&T U -Verse Channel 99, and can be viewed on the internet at www.avcity.org.
ANN EIFERT SCOTT C. SMITH KATHY BAILOR
INTERIM CITY MANAGER CITY ATTORNEY INTERIM CITY CLERK
1
City Council Agenda
PLEASE SILENCE ALL CELL PHONES AND OTHER
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT WHILE CITY COUNCIL IS IN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER: Convene Regular Meeting
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION:
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
1.1 Business of the Month – Webb’s Grainworks
1.2 OCTA E-Bike Safety Video
2. ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, REORDERING TO THE AGENDA:
3. COMMUNITY INPUT:
Members of the public wishing to address the City Council are requested to complete and submit to the City Clerk a "Request to Address City Council" form available at the entrance to the City Council Chambers. In compliance with the Brown Act, no discussio n or action may be taken on comments received at this time, except the City Council may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed. Comments are limited to three (3) minutes per speaker.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar will be acted upon by one vote unless members of the City Council, or staff request a matter to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be discussed and voted upon immediately following City Council action on the remainder of the Consent Calendar.
4.1 WAIVE THE READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Recommended Action: Approve the reading by title only of all ordinances and resolutions wherein the titles appear on the public agenda; said titles shall be determined to have been ready by title, and further reading is waived.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes as submitted for the February 4, 2026, Special Meeting and the February 4, 2026, Regular Meeting.
Draft Minutes - February 4, 2026, Special Meeting
Draft Minutes - February 4, 2026, Regular Meeting
2
City Council Agenda
4.3 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Recommended Action: Ratify accounts payable checks and electronic funds transfers issued between January 16, 2026, and January 29, 2026, in the amount of $357,175.37.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Accounts Payable Report
4.4 APPROVAL OF OFFICE SPACE FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT AND APPROPRATION OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE AND
INSTALLATION OF FURNITURE
Recommended Action: 1. Approve and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute documents necessary to effectuate the use of City Hall, Suite 200; and Authorize the Interim City Manager to appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the fiscal year 2025-26 budget for the purchase and installation of furniture.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Letter Agreement Regarding an Office Space Provision in the OCSD Law Enforcement Services Agreement
Attachment 2 - PeopleSpace Furniture Quote
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
None.
6. DISCUSSION:
6.1 RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM DISCUSSION
Recommended Action: 1. Receive and file the report on permit parking; and Provide direction, if any, to staff regarding whether to pursue development of a Residential Permit Parking Program for the City of Aliso Viejo.
Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Attorney General Opinion 14-304
Attachment 2 - Presentation
7. CITY MANAGER' S REPORT:
8. ANNOUNCEMENTS / COUNCIL COMMENTS / COMMITTEE UPDATES:
9. ADJOURNMENT:
The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Tuesday, March 4, 2026.
3
Special Meeting Minutes
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
February 4, 2026, 6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall, 12 Journey
Aliso Viejo, California
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Duncan called the Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo to order at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: MAYOR MAX DUNCAN
MAYOR PRO TEM MIKE MUNZING
COUNCILMEMBER TIFFANY ACKLEY
COUNCILMEMBER GARRETT DWYER
COUNCILMEMBER TIM A. ZANDBERGEN
ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: HONGDAO Nguyen, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
CLOSED SESSION:
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT
Pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)
Title: City Manager
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code section 54957.6
Agency Designated Representatives: Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION:
Assistant City Attorney HongDao Nguyen stated no reportable action was taken.
ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Duncan adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m. to February 4, 2026, Regular City Council Meeting.
4
Special Meeting Minutes
Respectfully submitted: Approved by:
________________________ ________________________
LAUREN TORRES MAX DUNCAN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK MAYOR
5 CITY OF ALISO VIEJO
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 4, 2026, 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall, 12 Journey
Aliso Viejo, California
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Duncan called the Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: MAYOR MAX DUNCAN
MAYOR PRO TEM MIKE MUNZING
COUNCILMEMBER TIFFANY ACKLEY
COUNCILMEMBER GARRETT DWYER
COUNCILMEMBER TIM A. ZANDBERGEN
ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: ANN EIFERT, INTERIM CITY MANAGER/FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR
HONGDAO NGUYEN, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
LAUREN TORRES, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
SHAUN PELLETIER, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SO KIM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
CORA SWANSON, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER
LIZZY MENDOZA, RECREATION & COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER
ISAAC AZIZ, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER
CAPT. RYAN BUHR, CHIEF OF POLICE SERVICES
REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION:
Assistant City Attorney HongDao Nguyen stated no reportable action was taken.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Ted Fuentes led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
1.1 INTRODUCTION OF OCFA DIVISION FIRE CHIEF RYAN BISHOP Mayor Duncan introduced Chief Ryan Bishop, who said a few words and expressed gratitude for the opportunity to work with the City of Aliso Viejo.
2. ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, REORDERING TO THE AGENDA:
None.
6 3. COMMUNITY INPUT:
1. Ted Fuentes expressed condolences on the passing of former City Manager Mitzi Ortiz and commented on City parking regulations.
2. James Hadley commented on alleged littering near Aliso Niguel High School.
3. Scott Sanderson, general contractor for Panini Kabob Grill , commented on the City’s temporary signage policy.
4. Becki Pro csal encouraged residents to become volunteer tax preparers with Orange County United Way.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar.
Motion: Councilmember Zandbergen moved and Councilmember Ackley seconded to approve the recommended actions. Motion carried 5-0.
4.1 WAIVE THE READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
Recommended Action: Approve the reading by title only of all ordinances and resolutions wherein the titles appear on the public agenda; said titles shall be determined to have been read by title, and further reading is waived.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes as submitted for the January 21, 2026, Regular Meeting and the January 21, 2026, Special Meeting.
4.3 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Recommended Action: Ratify accounts payable checks and electronic funds transfers issued between December 20 , 2025, and January 15, 202 6, in the amount of $2,632,121.59.
4.4 TREASURER’S STATEMENT– DECEMBER 2025
Recommended Action: Receive and file the December 2025 Treasurer’s Statement.
4.5 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION
14.080 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY UNITS
Recommended Action: Conduct a Second reading and adopt an Ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 15.14.080 OF THE ALISO VIEJO MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS AND FINDI NG THE ACTION TO BE STATUTORILY EXEMPT FROM CEQA UNDER Public Resources Code § 21080.17
7 4.6 AGREEMENT WITH HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS AND ASSOCIATES FOR SALES.TAX CONSULTING AND AUDITING SERVICES
Recommended Action: Approve and authorize the Acting City Manager to execute a five-year Professional Services Agreement with Hinderliter de Llamas and Associates for sales tax consulting and auditing services in an amount not-to exceed $100,000.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
5.1 USE PERMIT TO PERMIT ALCOHOL SALES WITHIN A NEW RESTAURANT AT .26511 ALISO CREEK ROAD (USE-2025-00020)
Acting City Manager Ann Eifert introduced Assistant Planner Michael Delgadillo , who provided an overview. Staff responded to questions regarding types of alcohol that would be sold at the restaurant . Mayor Duncan opened the Public Hearing, and the following persons provided comment:
1. James Hadley commented on local housing options.
There were no other comments. Mayor Duncan closed the Public Hearing.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2026-01 approving a Conditional Use Permit to permit alcohol sales within a new restaurant at 26511 Aliso Creek Road (USE- 2025- 00020)
Motion: Mayor Pro Tem Munzing moved and Councilmember Ackley seconded to approve the recommended actions. Motion carried 5-0.
6. DISCUSSION:
6.1 INTERIM CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
Interim City Manager Ann Eifert introduced Assistant City Attorney HongDao Nguyen who provided an overview. Mayor Duncan opened for public comment and there were no requests to speak.
Recommended Action: Approve the Interim City Manager Employment Agreement between the City of Aliso Viejo and Ann Eifert for working out of class with the additional duties of Interim City Manager, effective retroactively to December 22, 2025, and establishing the terms and conditions of the appointment.
Motion: Councilmember Zandbergen moved and Councilmember Dwyer seconded to approve the recommended actions. Motion carried 5-0.
6. CITY MANAGER' S REPORT:
Interim City Manager Ann Eifert announced open registration for winter recreation classes; summer camp registration begins Friday, February 6th, 2026; and the Artisans Market event at Aliso Viejo Ranch to be held on Sunday, March 8th, 2026, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.
8 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS / COUNCIL COMMENTS / COMMITTEE UPDATES:
Councilmember Ackley:
• Provided a status update on the Aliso Viejo Library renovation.
Councilmember Dwyer:
• Encouraged residents to stop by the Nourishing Great Futures Market at Via Iglesia Park Community Center every Wednesday, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. • Attended a fundraiser for International Sanctuary, a nonprofit organization that aims to help those affected by human trafficking and commended Nolet Spirits USA for hosting the event.
• Recognized Councilmember Zandbergen for his collaboration on the City Manager Hiring Ad Hoc Committee and encouraged qualified candidates to apply for the position.
• Expressed appreciation for City staff’s hard work during the City Manager recruitment process.
Councilmember Zandbergen:
• Acknowledged Councilmember Dwyer for his collaboration on the City Manager Hiring Ad Hoc Committee.
• Attended Aliso Viejo Chamber of Commerce After Hours Mixer event at Lucky Strike. • Toured the newly opened Sender One Climbing location in The Commons. • Announced Aliso Viejo Chamber of Commerce Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for Opah Seafood + Grill, to be held on Friday, February 6th at 4:00 p.m. • Encouraged residents to shop and dine in Aliso Viejo.
Mayor Pro Tem Munzing:
• Commented on recent openings of several businesses within the city. • Attended OCFA Executive Committee Board meeting.
• Attended OCFA Human Resources Committee meeting and was named Vice Chair. • Attended Aliso Viejo Chamber of Commerce After Hours Mixer event at Lucky Strike. • Commented on Sender One Climbing’s opening.
• Attended the Rental Showcase at Aliso Viejo Ranch.
Mayor Duncan:
• Expressed appreciation for OCSD’s continued focus on e-bike safety enforcement. • Commended City staff for their work on the Aliso Viejo Aquatic Center’s pool renovation.
• Visited Sender One Climbing and Lucky Strike.
• Commented on ANHS Girls Varsity Soccer’s recent division championship win.
7. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Duncan adjourned the meeting in honor of Mr. John Whitman at 7:40 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting of February 18, 2025.
Respectfully submitted: Approved by:
________________________ ________________________
LAUREN TORRES MAX DUNCAN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK MAYOR
9 City of Aliso Viejo
AGENDA ITEM
DATE: February 18, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ann Eifert, Director of Financial Services
SUBJECT: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Recommended Action:
Ratify accounts payable checks and electronic funds transfers issued between January 16, 2026, and January 29, 2026, in the amount of $357,175.37.
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditures in the amount of $357,175.37.
Background:
The City issues accounts payable checks on a bi-weekly basis and presents them to the City Council for ratification at its next regularly scheduled City Council meeting.
Discussion:
The attached registers containing checks and electronic funds transfers issued between January 16, 2026 , and January 29, 2026 , for $357,175.37, are being p resented for ratification. All payments have been made in compliance with the City’s purchasing policy and procedures. Payments have been reviewed and approved by the appropriate departmental staff. The issued accounts payable checks and electronic funds transfers have been reviewed and deemed in accordance with the fiscal year budget by the Director of Financial Services.
Attachment:
1. Accounts Payable Report
10 Accounts Payable
Description (Item)Vendor Name Amount
101 - GENERAL FUND
FEB'26 LIFE INSURANCEUNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE CO. 1,414.56 FEB'26 TZ - HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 1,750.56
FEB'26 CALPERS HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 30,085.46
FEB'26 TZ - HEALTH PREMIUM PEMCA MINIMUMCALPERS HEALTH 162.00 DEC'25 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR SHEA HOMESKOSMONT & ASSOCIATES 6,162.00 39,574.58
CITY COUNCIL
10/17/25-11/16/25 CITY COUNCIL PHONESAT&T 292.08
11/17/25-12/16/25 CITY COUNCIL PHONE LINESAT&T 191.66
12/17/25-01/16/26 CITY COUNCIL PHONESAT&T 193.90
NOV'25 COUNCIL OFFICE SUPPLIESSTAPLES ADVANTAGE 27.13
LL 11/18 FIVE STAR AWARDS-GD NAMEPLATEUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 26.94 LL 10/29 JM TROPHIES-RH PLAQUE & GD PLATESUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 126.81 CITY COUNCIL TOTAL: 858.52
CITY MANAGER
FEB'26 LIFE INSURANCE -MOUNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE CO. 96.16 FEB'26 PG - HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 162.00
JAN'26 MEDICAL - MOCALPERS HEALTH (987.69)
10/17/25-11/16/25 CITY MANAGER PHONEAT&T 90.78
11/17/25-12/16/25 CITY MANAGER & CITY CLERK PHONESAT&T 90.78 12/17/25-01/16/26 CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK LINEAT&T 91.90 CITY MANAGER TOTAL: -456.07
HUMAN RESOURCES
2026 ERC MEMBERSHIPLIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 4,025.00
HUMAN RESOURCES TOTAL: 4,025.00
CITY CLERK
NOV'25 CCLK OFFICE SUPPLIESSTAPLES ADVANTAGE 130.96
AVMC-WEB UPDATE/30PGS ORD2025-245&2025-246ICC GENERAL CODE, INC 645.00 LL 11/18 OC CLERK RECORDER-LL NOTARY BOND/OATHUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 43.00 LL 11/06 LA TIMES SBSCPTN/4 WKSUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 7.96 LL 11/05 OC REGISTER SBSCPTN/4 WKSUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 26.00 CITY CLERK TOTAL: 852.92
FINANCE
FEB'26 CALPERS ADMIN FEECALPERS HEALTH 27.07
FY24-25 STATE CONTROLLER'S REPORTDAVIS FARR LLP 2,700.00 FY24-25 AV CITY ANNUAL AUDIT - FINAL BILLINGDAVIS FARR LLP 3,040.00 FY24-25 CITY STREET REPORTDAVIS FARR LLP 1,250.00
NOV'25 PARS REP FEESPARS (PHASE II SYSTEMS AND CALIFORNIA CORPORATION) 300.00 OCT-DEC'25 INVESTMENT ADVISORY SERVICESMEEDER PUBLIC FUNDS, INC. 4,125.00 JAN-MAR'26 PROPERTY TAX CONTRACT SERVICESHDL COREN & CONE 4,103.33 FINANCE TOTAL: 15,545.40
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
10/17/25-11/16/25 CITY HALL MIFIAT&T 126.20
10/17/25-11/16/25 FLEET COMPLETE GPSAT&T 201.92
10/17/25-11/16/25 EOC MIFIAT&T 152.60
10/17/25-11/16/25 EOC PHONESAT&T 110.22
11/17/25-12/16/25 EOC MIFIAT&T 152.60
11/17/25-12/16/25 FLEET COMPLETE GPSAT&T 203.72
11/17/25-12/16/25 EOC PHONESAT&T 110.22
11/17/25-12/16/25 CITY HALL MIFIAT&T 182.88
12/17/25-01/16/26 CITY HALL MIFIAT&T 121.04
12/17/25-01/16/26 EOC MIFIAT&T 154.60
12/17/25-01/16/26 FLEET COMPLETE GPSAT&T 207.72
12/17/25-01/16/26 EOC PHONESAT&T 112.66
11 Description (Item)Vendor Name Amount
IA 11/28 GOOGLE - EOC YOUTUBE SUBSCRUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 82.99 IA 12/02 AMAZON - UPS BATTERYUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 366.54 IA 12/19 AMAZON PRIME-STUDENT FEEUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 8.07 IA 12/21 GO DADDY-ALISOVIEJOAQUATICCENTER.COMUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 22.19 IA 12/19 GO DADDY-SHOPALISO.COM/SHOPALISO.ORGUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 45.38 IA 12/07 GODADDY-CITYOFALISOVIEJO.COMUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 55.18 IA 12/16 WAITWHILE SUBSCRIPTIONUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 196.00 IA 12/10 PHILZ COFFEE-IT DEPT MEETINGUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 29.67 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TOTAL: 2,642.40
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
2026 MUSIC LICENSE FEESESAC RIGHTS MANAGEMENT INC 2,081.00 JAN'26 C5300S COPY ROOM LEASE (2624) - PRINCIPALRICOH USA 634.47 JAN'26 C5300S COPY ROOM LEASE (2624) - INTERESTRICOH USA 59.73 DEC'25 TREE TRIMMING - VISTA PARKGREAT SCOTT TREE SERVICE, INC 8,391.60 2026 LOCC OC DIVISION MEMBERSHIP DUESLEAGUE OF CA CITIES OC 300.00 JAN'26 VEHICLE FUELVOYAGER FLEET SYSTEMS INC 272.02
DEC'25-7.435 HRS-PIO GENERALKYRSTI NICOLE ASHMALL 669.15 DL 12/02 BRUEGGERS BAGELS-STAFF BKFSTUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 113.80 DL 11/26 DOMINOS PIZZA-CDD LUNCHUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 38.44 EM 10/02 THE HOME DEPOT-WOOD SEALER CITY TRAILERUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 34.44 EM 10/20 BLISS CW-F150 CAR WASHUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 35.00 EM 09/22 SANTA MARGARITA FORD - F150 MAINTENANCEUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 129.31 ASSESSED PENALTY - ER-30-2025-134ORANGE COUNTY TREASURER 250.00 IA 11/24 RALPHS - STAFF MEETINGUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 38.85 JAN'26 BANNERS REMOVAL-HOLIDAYVIGICABI INC 1,449.00
2026 LOCC ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUESLEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 21,361.00 JM 12/14 CANVA-SUBSCRIPTIONUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 119.99 LL 11/01 FEDEX-RH MAILUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 10.95 LL 11/19 URBAN PLATES PASSUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 5.00 LL 11/19 URBAN PLATES-CC MTG 11/19 DINNERUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 191.55 LL 11/05 OC WINE MART-CC MTG 11/5 DINNERUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.16 LL 10/29 PRIMO BRANDS/WATERSERVUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 61.16 LL 11/05 PRIMO BRANDS/WATERSERVUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 175.89 LL 11/05 COSTCO BY INSTACART 2/4US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 30.31 LL 11/6 COSTCO BY INSTACART 3/4US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 156.32 LL 11/05 COSTCO BY INSTACART 1/4US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 85.00 NON-DEPARTMENTAL TOTAL: 36,979.14
C. S. ADMINISTRATION
NOV'25 PV MAINTENANCE - TREE LIGHTING EVENTPV MAINTENANCE INC 868.50 DEC'25 PV MAINTENANCE -TREE LIGHTING EVENTPV MAINTENANCE INC 4,493.00 FEB'26 DP - HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 162.00
FEB'26 HW - HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 162.00
DEC'25 AMAZON-HS UV PROTECTED ZIP TIESAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 7.89 DEC'25 AMAZON-LICHAMP LED CAMPING LANTERNSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 52.78 DEC'25 AMAZON-GORILLA CLEAR CLUE 3.75 OZAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 18.27 DEC'25 AMAZON-DELLA GAO PENCIL CASE LARGEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 12.22 DEC'25 AMAZON-2 PACK SHARPIE 44101AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 12.35 DEC'25 AMAZON-AMAZON BASICS MAGNETIC SCREWDRIVERSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 12.92 DEC'25 AMAZON-GORILLA GLUE GEL XLAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 17.92 DEC'25 AMAZON-SHARPIE KING SIZEAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 7.51 DEC'25 AMAZON-UUP 10 INCH SMALL TOOL BAGAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 20.46 DEC'25 AMAZON-MIND READER FILE STORAGE DRAWERSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 161.60 DEC'25 AMAZON-AVERY PRINTABLE TAB INSERTSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 5.32 DEC'25 AMAZON-AMAZON BASICS NO 1 PAPER CLIPSAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 7.23 NRPA 2026 MEMBERSHIP RENEWALNATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION 735.00 2026 EVENT INSURANCE - MOVIE NIGHTALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 329.00 2026 EVENT INSURANCE - ARTISANS MARKETALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 329.00 2026 EVENT INSURANCE- RANCH RENTAL SHOWCASEALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 329.00 JB 1/14 USPS-PERMIT RENEWALUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 370.00 LL 10/31 FACEBK-META ADSUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 167.80 LL 11/05 COSTCO BY INSTACART 4/4US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 68.68 C. S. ADMINISTRATION TOTAL: 8,350.45
IGLESIA PARK
DEC'25 TREE TRIMMING - IGLESIAGREAT SCOTT TREE SERVICE, INC 11,914.00 12 Description (Item)Vendor Name Amount
12/08/25-1/12/26 MTR#4114 IGLESIA PARK WATEREL TORO WATER DISTRICT 260.24 12/08/25-1/12/26 MTR#3499 IGLESIA PARK WATEREL TORO WATER DISTRICT 260.24 EM 10/01 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS IGLESIA PARKUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 16.68 IGLESIA PARK TOTAL: 12,451.16
IGLESIA BUILDING
JAN'26 IGLESIA JANITORIAL SERVICESTEAM ONE MANAGEMENT 1,064.00 12/08/25-1/12/26 MTR#5016 IGLESIA PARK BLDG WATEREL TORO WATER DISTRICT 301.32 EM 10/01 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS IGLESIA BLDGUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM (33.27) EM 09/25 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS IGLESIA BLDGUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 16.60 IGLESIA BUILDING TOTAL: 1,348.65
IGLESIA PARK COMMUNITY CENTER
DEC'25 B&GCCVBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CAPISTRANO VALLEY 15,000.00 IGLESIA PARK COMMUNITY CENTER TOTAL: 15,000.00
PLANNING
FEB'26 MF - HEALTH PREMIUMCALPERS HEALTH 162.00
PLANNING TOTAL: 162.00
ENGINEERING (GENERAL)
10/17/25-11/16/25 PUBLIC WORKS TABLETSAT&T 120.72
11/17/25-12/16/25 PUBLIC WORKS TABLETSAT&T 120.72
12/17/25-01/16/26 PUBLIC WORKS TABLETSAT&T 122.22
ENGINEERING (GENERAL) TOTAL: 363.66
STREET MAINTENANCE
EM 09/24 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS SD BASKET REPAIRUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 90.08 EM 10/17 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS GRAFFITI REMOVALUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 105.50 STREET MAINTENANCE TOTAL: 195.58
GENERAL FUND TOTAL: 137,893.39
102 - GEN. FD-CITY HALL
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
JAN'26 CH ELEVATOR MAINTENANCETHURSTON ELEVATOR CONCEPTS INC 140.00 JAN'26 CH JANITORIAL SERVICESTEAM ONE MANAGEMENT 3,400.00 JAN'26 CH INTERIOR PLANT MAINTENANCEFOSTERS' GARDENS INC 115.00 FEB'26 CH ASO ASSOCIATION DUESPACIFIC PARK II ASSOCIATION 641.00 NON-DEPARTMENTAL TOTAL: 4,296.00
GEN. FD-CITY HALL TOTAL: 4,296.00
103 - GF-AV RECREATION SERVICES
REFUND FACILITY RENTAL_REC#99878075BRENDA MARTINEZBRENDA MARTINEZ 2,530.50 CANCELLATION FEE_REC#99878075_BRENDA MARTINEZBRENDA MARTINEZ (250.00) JAN'26 REC1 REFUND_SEONJEONG KIM_WIN202 ADMIN FEESEONJEONG KIM 5.00 JAN'26 REC1 REFUND_SEONJEONG KIM_WIN202 ELITE HOOPSEONJEONG KIM 108.00 2,393.50
RECREATION SERVICES
WINTER2026-WIN164 SOUND BATH-1 PARTICIPANTL & O ALISO VIEJO, LLC 35.75 DEC'25 AVR BOTTLED WATER SERVICEBLUETRITON BRANDS INC 191.84 WINTER2026-WIN089/086/083/045 TENNIS-14 PARTICIPANJOHN DAVID ALLEN JR 504.00 WINTER2026-WIN168 SPA DAY-2 PARTICIPANTSL & O ALISO VIEJO, LLC 45.50 WINTER2026-WIN101 PET CPR-2 PARTICIPANTSCLICKSTART DOG TRAINING ACADEMY, LLC 221.00 DEC'25 AMAZON-VEVOR HOSE REEL CARTAMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 85.11 10/17/25-11/16/25 REC PHONESAT&T 90.78
10/17/25-11/16/25 RECREATION TABLETAT&T 40.24
11/17/25-12/16/25 RECREATION PHONESAT&T 90.78
11/17/25-12/16/25 RECREATION TABLETAT&T 40.24
12/17/25-01/16/26 RECREATION PHONESAT&T 91.90
12/17/25-01/16/26 RECREATION TABLETAT&T 40.74
JAN'26 AVR INTERIOR PLANT MAINTENANCEFOSTERS' GARDENS INC 110.00 JAN'26 AVR FIRST AID SUPPLIESCINTAS CORPORATION NO. 2 92.09 DEC'25 AVR JANITORIAL SERVICESTEAM ONE MANAGEMENT 5,600.00 8/24/25-12/21/25 FALL2025 CUSD TENNIS FACILITYFACILITRON, INC. 162.54 DEC'25 RENEWABLE FARMSAARON FLORA 20,636.58
EM 10/03 THE HOME DEPOT-WOOD SEALER WOOD POST AVRUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 34.44 EM 10/03 THE HOME DEPOT-MATERIALS AVRUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 50.24 13 Description (Item)Vendor Name Amount
EM RCS 1/13 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDCWK10 EXCURSION ORDER3US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 EM RCS 1/13 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDCWK10 EXCURSION ORDER5US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 EM RCS 1/12 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDCWK10 EXCURSION ORDER1US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 JB 12/24 GOLFLAND-6/18 CAMELOT CDC WK 2 EXCURSIONUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 455.13 JB 1/13 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDC WK 10 EXCURSION ORDER6US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 JB 1/13 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDC WK 10 EXCURSION ORDER4US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 JB 1/13 LEGOLAND-8/13 CDC WK 10 EXCURSION ORDER2US BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 285.00 JB 1/12 DISCOVERY CUBE-6/25 DEP CDC WK 3 EXCURSIONUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 150.00 JB 1/12 PIRATES DINNER-6/11 CDC DEPOSIT WK 1 EXCURUS BANK PURCHASING CARD PROGRAM 846.00 RECREATION SERVICES TOTAL: 31,324.90
GF-AV RECREATION SERVICES TOTAL: 33,718.40
203 - GAS TAX
STREET MAINTENANCE
12/08/25-1/12/26 MTR#5675 CALLE CORTEZ MEDIAN WATEEL TORO WATER DISTRICT 134.91 STREET MAINTENANCE TOTAL: 134.91
GAS TAX TOTAL: 134.91
215 - PUBLIC SAFETY GRANTS
LAW ENFORCEMENT-OTHER
DEC'25 AUTOMATED FINGERPRINT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMCOUNTY OF ORANGE 1,500.00 LAW ENFORCEMENT-OTHER TOTAL: 1,500.00
PUBLIC SAFETY GRANTS TOTAL: 1,500.00
225 - INTEGRATED WASTE MGMT FD
GEN-TECHNOLOGY GRANTS
ANAERGIA BIOENERGY DBA SOCAL BIOMETHANE_PCA PURCHAANAERGIA BIOENERGY FACILITIES, LLC 11,860.20 GEN-TECHNOLOGY GRANTS TOTAL: 11,860.20
INTEGRATED WASTE MGMT FD TOTAL: 11,860.20
231 - OTHER GRANTS
OTHER GRANTS
DEC'25 PLHA GRANT REIMBURSEMENT-CASE MANAGEMENTLAURA'S HOUSE 1,288.00 OTHER GRANTS TOTAL: 1,288.00
OTHER GRANTS TOTAL: 1,288.00
241 - TECHNOLOGY FUND
GEN-TECHNOLOGY GRANTS
DEC'25-CC MTG 12/3 & ADMINERIC WINTER 487.94
GEN-TECHNOLOGY GRANTS TOTAL: 487.94
TECHNOLOGY FUND TOTAL: 487.94
261 - CITY FAC.-AQUATIC CENTER
FEB'26 AQC MANAGEMENT RETENTIONPREMIER AQUATIC SERVICES (1,208.30) -1,208.30
GEN-AQUATIC CENTER
FEB'26 AQC MANAGEMENT FEESPREMIER AQUATIC SERVICES 12,083.00 JAN'26 MISC CUTTERS - AQCCONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS, INC 47.56 OCT'25 POOL MAINTENANCEAQUATIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC 2,693.00 DEC'25 POOL MAINTENANCEAQUATIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC 2,693.00 JAN'26 AQC JANITORIAL SERVICESTEAM ONE MANAGEMENT 2,352.00 OCT-DEC'25 AQ CTR-MTR#4987 ELECTRICITYALISO VIEJO BANQUET CENTER LLC 4,065.81 GEN-AQUATIC CENTER TOTAL: 23,934.37
CITY FAC.-AQUATIC CENTER TOTAL: 22,726.07
331 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
DEC'25 #118 AQC POOL DECK IMPROVEMENTPV MAINTENANCE INC 579.00 60 LOGITECH KEYBOARD WIRELESS/30 UPSSHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 6,772.73 30 LIEBERT UPS HARDWARESHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 615.99
14 Description (Item)Vendor Name Amount
60 POLY VOYAGER 4320 UC - HEADSETSHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 7,416.65 60 CTO ELITEONE 870 G9 COMPUTERSSHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 121,706.69 60 ELECTRONIC HP CARE PACK NEXT DAYSHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 6,179.40 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL: 143,270.46
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL: 143,270.46
GRAND TOTAL: 357,175.37
Fund Summary
Payment AmountFund Expense Amount
101 - GENERAL FUND 137,893.39137,893.39
102 - GEN. FD-CITY HALL 4,296.004,296.00
103 - GF-AV RECREATION SERVICES 33,718.4033,718.40
203 - GAS TAX 134.91134.91
215 - PUBLIC SAFETY GRANTS 1,500.001,500.00
225 - INTEGRATED WASTE MGMT FD 11,860.2011,860.20
231 - OTHER GRANTS 1,288.001,288.00
241 - TECHNOLOGY FUND 487.94487.94
261 - CITY FAC.-AQUATIC CENTER 22,726.0722,726.07
331 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 143,270.46143,270.46
357,175.37Grand Total: 357,175.37
15 Accounts Payable Payable Dates: 01/16/2026 - 01/29/2026 1/28/2026 5:23:07 PM Page 6 of 7
Report Summary
Fund Summary
Payment AmountFund
101 - GENERAL FUND 137,893.39
102 - GEN. FD-CITY HALL 4,296.00
103 - GF-AV RECREATION SERVICES 33,718.40
203 - GAS TAX 134.91
215 - PUBLIC SAFETY GRANTS 1,500.00
225 - INTEGRATED WASTE MGMT FD 11,860.20
231 - OTHER GRANTS 1,288.00
241 - TECHNOLOGY FUND 487.94
261 - CITY FAC.-AQUATIC CENTER 22,726.07
331 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 143,270.46
357,175.37Grand Total:
Account Summary
Payment AmountAccount Number Account Name
101-1203-000 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 1,750.56
101-2506-000 MEDICAL INSURANCE P… 30,247.46
101-2507-000 LIFE INSURANCE PAYABLE 1,414.56
101-2602-000 PLANNING DEPOSIT 6,162.00
101-4-1101-4511-000 COMMUNICATION 677.64
101-4-1101-4601-000 SUPPLIES 180.88
101-4-1501-4206-000 MEDICAL INSURANCE -825.69
101-4-1501-4209-000 LIFE INSURANCE 96.16
101-4-1501-4511-000 COMMUNICATION 273.46
101-4-1503-4520-000 MTGS/CONF./TRNG & D… 4,025.00
101-4-1601-4520-000 MTGS/CONF./TRNG & D… 43.00
101-4-1601-4601-000 SUPPLIES 130.96
101-4-1601-4611-000 PUBLICATIONS/REF MAT… 33.96
101-4-1601-4734-000 CODIFICATION 645.00
101-4-2501-4301-000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15,218.33
101-4-2501-4309-000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL S… 327.07
101-4-3101-4305-000 TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 1,919.37
101-4-3101-4481-000 COMPUTER EXPENSE 693.36
101-4-3101-4520-000 MTGS/CONF./TRNG & D… 29.67
101-4-3501-4301-000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 669.15
101-4-3501-4422-000 EQUIP RENTAL LEASE - P… 634.47
101-4-3501-4431-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 8,641.60
101-4-3501-4512-000 POSTAGE 10.95
101-4-3501-4516-000 FUEL 272.02
101-4-3501-4517-000 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 198.75
101-4-3501-4520-000 MTGS/CONF./TRNG & D… 152.65
101-4-3501-4521-000 MEMBERSHIP & DUES 23,742.00
101-4-3501-4542-000 INTEREST EXPENSE - LEA… 59.73
101-4-3501-4553-000 COMMUNITY BRANDING 1,568.99
101-4-3501-4612-000 OPERATING SUPPLIES 1,028.83
101-4-4101-4206-000 MEDICAL INSURANCE 324.00
101-4-4101-4501-000 ADVERTISING & PROMO… 537.80
101-4-4101-4521-000 MEMBERSHIP & DUES 735.00
101-4-4101-4522-000 INSURANCE EXPENSES 987.00
101-4-4101-4527-000 REC-CITY SPECIAL EVENTS 5,422.17
101-4-4101-4601-000 SUPPLIES 275.80
101-4-4101-4612-000 OPERATING SUPPLIES 68.68
101-4-4102-4411-000 UTILITIES 520.48
101-4-4102-4431-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 11,930.68
101-4-4103-4411-000 UTILITIES 301.32
101-4-4103-4431-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 1,047.33
101-4-4104-4529-000 REC-YOUTH PROGRAMS 15,000.00
101-4-4401-4206-000 MEDICAL INSURANCE 162.00
16 Accounts Payable Payable Dates: 01/16/2026 - 01/29/2026 1/28/2026 5:23:07 PM Page 7 of 7
Account Summary
Payment AmountAccount Number Account Name
101-4-4501-4612-000 OPERATING SUPPLIES 363.66
101-4-4503-4771-000 C.S-STREET MAINTENAN… 195.58
102-4-3501-4431-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 4,296.00
103-34130 FACILITY RENTAL 2,530.50
103-34150 OTHER INCOME 5.00
103-34161 CONTRACT CLASSES 108.00
103-34169 REFUNDS -250.00
103-4-4105-4309-000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL S… 968.79
103-4-4105-4431-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 5,794.68
103-4-4105-4451-000 FARM OPERATING EXPE… 20,636.58
103-4-4105-4511-000 COMMUNICATION 394.68
103-4-4105-4570-000 CITY CAMP EXPENSE 3,161.13
103-4-4105-4601-000 SUPPLIES 283.93
103-4-4105-4620-000 MINOR EQUIPMENT 85.11
203-4-4503-4411-000 UTILITIES 134.91
215-4-5102-4803-000 PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPM… 1,500.00
225-4-6141-4309-000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL S… 11,860.20
231-4-6131-4309-000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL S… 1,288.00
241-4-6141-4309-000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL S… 487.94
261-2103-000 RETENTIONS PAYABLE -1,208.30
261-4-6161-7401-000 EQUIPMENT MAINTENA… 5,386.00
261-4-6161-7411-000 UTILITIES 4,065.81
261-4-6161-7421-000 BUILDING & GROUND M… 2,399.56
261-4-6161-7451-000 MANAGEMENT FEES 12,083.00
331-4-8701-5910-000 IMPROVEMENTS 143,270.46
Grand Total: 357,175.37
Project Account Summary
Payment AmountProject Account Key
**None** 184,522.47
1002FALL 162.54
1002WINTER 806.25
10044309 1,288.00
1185910 579.00
1435910 142,691.46
9014612 481.71
9024612 38.44
9934527 5,422.17
9974570 3,161.13
SB13834309 11,860.20
SDP-2025-00004 6,162.00
Grand Total: 357,175.37
17 City of Aliso Viejo
AGENDA ITEM
DATE: February 18, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ann Eifert, Interim City Manager
Ryan Buhr, Captain Orange County Sheriff’s Department
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF O FFICE SPACE FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT AND APPROPRATION OF FUNDS FOR THE
PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF FURNITURE
Recommended Actions:
1. Approve and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute documents necessary to effectuate the use of City Hall, Suite 200; and
2. Authorize the Interim City Manager to appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the fiscal year 2025-26 budget for the purchase and installation of furniture.
Fiscal Impact:
The cost to relocate Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD) staff to City Hall Suite 200 is approximately $50,000 for the purchase and installation of furniture. Funds will need to be appropriated to fiscal year 2025-26 budget.
Background:
The City contracts with OCSD for law enforcement services. The agreement with OCSD provides the County with rent -free use of office space, office furniture, and office equipment and supplies located in City Hall or other City building for services provided under the contra ct. Suite 200 currently houses a conference room , Information Technology staff, and office space previously leased by EFuel, LLC, which provided the City approximately $6,600 in rent annually.
Discussion:
City Hall currently provides three offices on the first floor for the OCSD Captain, Sergeant, and a third staff member (previously the Emergency Operations Coordinator , which is currently vacant). OCSD has recently requested that the City provide additional space to house report writing workstations for OCSD deputies assigned to the City of Aliso Viejo. 18
In order to provide a space for reporting writing and to keep OCSD staff in one location, OCSD requested to relocate to City Hall Suite 200.
The cost for the relocation includes the purchase and installation of furniture in the amount not-to-exceed $50,000 (a preliminary quote is attached ). These costs will need to be appropriated to the fiscal year 2025 -26 budget. Costs for computer equipment, and the installation and configuration of OCSD network infrastructure, will be paid for by OCSD.
If approved, Suite 200 , which includes two conference rooms, two offices, a reception area, and kitchen, will be used exclusively by OCSD.
Attachments:
1. Letter Agreement Regarding an Office Space Provision in the Orange County Sheriff’s Department Law Enforcement Services Agreement
2. PeopleSpace Furniture Quote
19 60367.01100\44670283.1
LETTER AGREEMENT
This side letter agreement provides additional detail relating to the 2025 County of Orange Contract with City of A liso Viejo for Law Enforcement Services , particularly Attachment B, “Payment Provisions,” Section H, “City Office Space.”
The Parties agree that while performing their assigned duties related to services under the Contract, Sheriff’s personnel may use City Hall Suite 200. Suite 200 is comprised of two offices, two large spaces for conference rooms, a kitchen, and a reception area . Any improvements made to Suite 200 shall be subject to City’s written approval. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, t he Parties agree that the County will provide computer equipment, and install and configure County network infrastructure, at County’s expense. The City will provide phones at City’s expense.
This agreement does not confer County nor Sheriff’s Department with any fee nor possessory interest in Suite 200. The City shall retain authority to repossess Suite 200 for any reason, subject to reasonable written notice and subject to the Contract, Attachment B, Section H.
AGREED TO BY AND BETWEEN:
CITY OF ALISO VIEJO ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
______________________ _________________________
Ann Eifert Ryan Buhr
Interim City Manager Captain
______________________ _________________________
Date Date
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 60367.01100\34434765.2
City of Aliso Viejo
AGENDA ITEM
DATE: February 18, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Shaun Pelletier, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM DISCUSSION
Recommended Actions:
1. Receive and file the report on permit parking; and
2. Provide direction , if any, to staff regarding whether to pursue development of a Residential Permit Parking Program for the City of Aliso Viejo.
Fiscal Impact:
There is no fiscal impact at this time for permit parking . Should the City Council direct staff to move forward, future costs need to be determined and would include program administration and parking enforcement.
Background:
Residential permit -parking programs are used by many California cities to manage excessive on -street parking demand in residential neighborhoods. These programs typically restrict parking during designated hours to vehicles displaying a valid permit.
Permit parking can also help manage on -street congestion by limiting the number of permits issued per household, which can lead to fewer vehicles parked on the street. For example, if a single address currently has ten vehicles parked on the street, a permit program could cap the number of permits available to that household, reducing overcrowding and improving parking availability for the surrounding community.
It is important to note that a residential permit does not guarantee a parking space in front of a resident’s home, nor does it reserve or privatize public streets. Permit parking is not intended to solve private parking shortages on private property (such as insufficient apartment parking), and it is not designed to eliminate all non -resident parking, only to manage it.
Any program adopted by the City must comply with California Vehicle Code §22507 and California Attorney General Opinion No. 14 -304 (2016), which clarifies how cities may 29 60367.01100\34434765.2
issue residential parking permits and what restrictions are legally permissible. Many cities updated their programs after 2016 to ensure compliance. California Vehicle Code §22507 authorizes cities to establish preferential parking zones and issue permits.
The 2016 Attorney General Opinion concluded that cities may not differentiate among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live. Key points from Opinion No. 14-304 include:
1. Cities may not discriminate among residents based on housing type. A city cannot issue permits only to single -family homes, exc lude apartment residents, or apply different rules to residents of houses, condos, duplexes, or large apartment communities.
2. Cities may limit the number of permits per household, but only if the limit is applied uniformly. For example, a city may allow one or two permits per address, but the same limit must apply to all dwelling types.
3. District boundaries must be based on parking -related criteria, not housing type.
Boundaries must be supported by objective data such as parking occupancy, spillover patterns, and demonstrated need.
As a result, Aliso Viejo cannot adopt a program that excludes apartment residents from certain streets or applies different eligibility rules based solely on the type of dwelling in which a resident lives.
Overview of a Residential Permit Parking Program
While each city’s process varies, most permit parking programs begin with a petition submitted by residents requesting that the City evaluate their street or neighborhood for permit parking. Typical initial steps include:
A petition signed by a required percentage of households (thresholds vary by city). A City conducted parking survey to document existing parking conditions, including curb occupancy, parking capacity, and sources of parking demand. City investigates adjacent parking management plans, if any, to determine whether existing conditions of approval are being met. Enforcement may alleviate the concerns without needing permits.
A neighborhood vote to determine whether residents support establishing a permit parking district.
Many Orange County cities use an 85% curb occupancy threshold as the minimum condition for considering a permit parking district. This means that during peak parking periods, 85% or more of available curb space is occupied, indicating that the s treet is approaching full capacity.
30 60367.01100\34434765.2
If a neighborhood meets the criteria and the City approves the request, the area may be designated as a Residential Permit Parking District. The following rules are typical of programs throughout the County and are consistent with state law:
1. Permit Requirement - Vehicles parked on designated streets during restricted hours must display a valid residential or guest permit to avoid citation.
Cities may limit the number of permits issued per household, but limits must be applied uniformly to all dwelling types, as required by the 2016 Attorney General Opinion. Many agencies allow 2–3 permits per address, sometimes using a tiered system.
2. Vehicle Eligibility - Vehicles must be registered to an address within the permit district to qualify for a residential permit.
Company vehicles taken home daily are not eligible for parking permits unless they are registered to an address within the parking district. Rental vehicles typically fall under the same rule.
3. Guest Parking - Guests may park on private property (driveways or assigned spaces).
To park on a permit-only street, they must display a one-day guest permit.
Because guest permits can be used on any vehicle, Cities often impose an annual limit per address to prevent resale or misuse.
4. Service and Maintenance Vehicles - Service providers (contractors, maintenance workers, etc.) are required to display a one-day guest permit to avoid receiving a citation.
5. Street Sweeping - Existing street sweeping restrictions remain in effect and are enforced regardless of permit status.
It should be noted that some r esidents may need to park further from their home to avoid street sweeping and permit restrictions on days their streets are swept.
6. To obtain a residential parking permit, applicants must generally provide:
Proof of residency within the district, and
A vehicle registration showing the address within the district.
Permit fees vary by city and depend on whether the agency seeks full cost recovery for program administration, enforcement, and technology.
31 60367.01100\34434765.2
Discussion:
Permit parking programs can create unintended consequences. These may include shifting spillover parking into nearby streets, forming isolated “islands” of permit -only blocks, or establishing districts so large that enforcement becomes diluted , ultimately increasing congestion on streets without permit restrictions.
Another common misconception is that permit parking guarantees residents a space or eliminates all non -resident vehicles. A permit does not reserve the curb in front of a specific home, nor does it prevent other permitted vehicles, including those from adjacent streets, from parking within the district.
The following scenarios illustrate how these conditions may play out in practice:
1. Chase/Sanborn Area: If residents within the Key West HOA request that their streets be designated as permit-only due to spillover parking from the Aventine Apartments, the process would begin with the City receiving a formal petition from the neighborhood. Aventine Apartments are known to have a parking management plan that will be evaluated before fully pursuing the next steps. The City would then evaluate parking conditions on the affected and adjacent streets to determine whether they meet the typical occupancy threshold for considering permit parking (typically 85% during peak periods). If the threshold is met, the City would establish a proposed district boundary based on where spillover parking is occurring and the neighborhood would have an opportunity to vote to make the streets parking by permit only . In accordance with California Attorney General Opinion No. 14-304, the City must treat all residents within the district equally, regardless of housing type. This means that residents of the Aventine Apartments would be included in the process, and if a permit district is ultimately approved, they would be eligib le to purchase residential parking permits, just like the residents of the surrounding single-family homes.
2. Vantis/Promenade: If residents of the Promenade and Promenade II HOA request that their streets be designated as permit-only due to spillover parking from the Vantis community on Grand Avenue and the streets fronting their homes, the process would begin with the City receiving a formal petition from the neighborhood. The City would then evaluate parking conditions on the af fected and adjacent streets to determine whether they meet the typical occupancy threshold for considering permit parking (typically 85% during peak periods). If the threshold is met, the City would establish a proposed district boundary based on where sp illover parking is occurring. In accordance with California Attorney General Opinion No. 14 -304, the City must treat all residents within the district equally, regardless of housing type. This means that residents of the Vantis community would be included in the process, and if a permit district is ultimately approved, they would be eligible to purchase residential parking permits alongside the residents of the Promenade and Promenade II neighborhoods.
3. Summerfield/Autumglen Streets: If residents of Ravello (formerly St. Moritz), Windflower, Cantora, and Applause HOA request that their streets be designated as 32 60367.01100\34434765.2
permit-only, each household would be limited to a set number of permits. Under this scenario, households that currently park a large number of vehicle s on the street, for example, ten vehicles per address, would no longer be able to do so. By capping the number of permits per household, additional curb space would become available, reducing congestion within the permit parking zone. It is important to note; however, that this area has over 1,000 individual units, while the maximum number of parking spaces is less than 300 parking spaces. As a result, even with permit limits in place, the total number of permits issued could still exceed the physical parking supply, which means having a permit does not guarantee you a parking space, but it does reduce the competition to find a parking space.
Additionally, there are costs associated with administration of a permit parking program and enforcement of vehicles on the street. The City of Lake Forest, for example, currently budgets $10,000 a year for the program and has a $175,000 contract with a permit parking vendor, where the revenue from the citations helps offset the cost of the program and contract . Additional staff would be required for issuing permits, printing and distributing the permits, managing notifications for permit renewals, and issuing/tracking guest permits per household.
Environmental:
None at this time.
Attachment:
1. Attorney General Opinion No. 14-304
2. Presentation
33 _________________________
________________________________________________________________________
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
State of California
KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General
:
OPINION : No. 14-304
:
of : April 14, 2016
:
KAMALA D. HARRIS :
Attorney General :
:
SARA J. RUSSELL :
Deputy Attorney General :
:
THE HONORABLE CONNIE M. LEYVA, MEMBER OF THE STATE
SENATE, has requested an opinion on the following questions:
1. Under Vehicle Code section 22507, may local authorities limit the issuance of long-term preferential parking permits to residents only?
2. In issuing long-term residential parking permits, may local authorities distinguish among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live—for example, by only making permits available to those who reside in single-family dwellings or small (two-to-four-unit) multifamily dwellings, and excluding those who reside in larger multifamily dwelling units such as apartment buildings? 1 14-304
34 CONCLUSIONS
1. Under Vehicle Code section 22507, local authorities may limit the issuance of long-term preferential parking permits to residents only.
2. In issuing long-term residential parking permits, local authorities may not distinguish among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live.
ANALYSIS
In accordance with Vehicle Code section 22507, m any California cities have adopted measures that restrict parking on designated public streets, but exempt residents of the affected blocks from the restrictions. 1 Such exemptions are typically granted by issuing parking permits, usually valid for one or two years, to those residents who apply for them. We are told that some local parking programs2 limit residential parking permits to people living in single-family or small (two-to-four-unit) multifamily dwellings.
Under such programs, residents living in larger multifamily dwellings, such as apartment buildings, are not eligible for parking permits.
Given these circumstances, we have been asked to determine (1) whether a local permit parking program may be limited to only residents in the affected area, and (2) whether a parking program may be f urther limited to only those residents who live in single-family or small multifamily units. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that local authorities 3 may generally establish resident-only parking programs, but may not distinguish among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live. 1 In relevant part, Vehicle Code section 22507 provides:
(a) Local authorities may . . . prohibit or restrict the . . . parking . . . of vehicles . . . on certain streets or highways, or portions thereof, during all or certain hours of the day [and] may include a designation of certain streets upon which preferential parking privileges are given to residents and merchants adjacent to the streets for their use . . . under which the residents and merchants may be issued a permit or permits that exempt them from the prohibition or restriction . . . .
2 Local parking programs refer to areas, or zones, where public parking is restricted and permit parking is allowed, and are variously referred to in this opinion as “preferential parking programs,” “permit parking programs,” or “residential parking programs.”
3 A “local authority ” means “the legislative body of every county or municipality having authority to adopt police regulations. ” (Veh. Code, § 385.) In this opinion, we 2 14-304
35 State policy regarding traffic control by cities on public streets was described by the California Supreme Court in 1920: “The streets of a city belong to the people of the state, and every citizen of the state has a right to the use thereof, subject to legislative control. The right of control over street traffic is an exercise of part of the sovereign power of the state. Local ordinances regulating traffic which are inconsistent with general state laws are invalid. [¶] While it is true that the regulation of traffic upon a public street is of special interest to the people of a municipality, it does not follow that such regulation is a municipal affair, and if there is a doubt as to whether or not such regulation is a municipal affair, that doubt must be resolved in favor of the legislative authority of the state.”
4 Upon enactment of the Vehicle Code in 1935, and then again upon its re- codification in 1959, the state Legislature asserted its plenary power over traffic control, and preempted local regulation over the entire field—including parking on public streets.
Vehicle Code section 21 states: “Except as otherwise expressly provided, the provisions of this code are applicable and uniform throughout the State and in all counties and municipalities therein, and no local authority shall enact or enforce any ordinance on the matters covered by this code unless expressly authorized herein.” 5 Thus, in analyzing the questions presented, we must follow the principle that the state’s delegation of power to local authorities is strictly construed, meaning that delegations must be express rather than implied.6
In our analysis, we also apply settled principles of statutory construction. “[The] first task in construing a statute is to ascertain the intent of the Legislature so as to effectuate the purpose of the law. In determining such intent, [we] look first to the words of the statute themselves, giving to the language its usual, ordinary import and according significance, if possible, to every word, phrase and sentence in pursuance of the use the terms “local authority” and “local government” interchangeably. 4 Ex Parte Daniels (1920) 183 Cal. 636, 639, citations omitted; see also Rumford v.
City of Berkeley (1982) 31 Cal.3d 545, 550, fn. 3 (Rumford ) (regulating traffic use on streets is outside the “municipal affairs” constitutional grant of authority to charter cities); City of Lafayette v. County of Contra Costa (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 749, 753-755 (City of Lafayette).
5 Veh. Code, § 21; see also Rumford, supra, 31 Cal.3d at pp. 549-550, 553; County of Los Angeles v. City of Alhambra (1980) 27 Cal.3d 184, 189, 192-193; 75 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 239, 244 (1992).
6 Rumford, supra, 31 Cal.3d at p. 550; O’Connell v. City of Stockton (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1061, 1073-1074; City of Lafayette, supra, 91 Cal.App.3d at pp. 755, 756 & fn. 3; 67 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 1, 4 (1984).
3 14-304
36 legislative purpose. A construction making some words surplusage is to be avoided. The words of the statute must be construed in context, keeping in mind the statutory purpose, and statutes or statutory sections relating to the same subject must be harmonized, both internally and with each other, to the extent possible.” 7 If the statutory language is clear, we “follow its plain meaning unless a literal interpretation would result in absurd consequences the Legislature did not intend.”
8 In addition, where helpful, “[b]oth the
legislative history of the statute and the wider historical circumstances of its enactment may be considered in ascertaining the legislative intent.” 9 With these principles in mind,
we now turn to the questions presented.
Question 1
We first consider whether local authorities may, under Vehicle Code section 22507, issue long-term preferential parking permits to residents only . We conclude that they may do so. The pertinent statutory language provides as follows:
(a) Local authorities may, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit or restrict the . . . parking . . . of vehicles . . . on certain streets or highways, [10] or portions thereof, during all or certain hours of the day. The ordinance or resolution may include a designation of certain streets upon which preferential parking privileges are given to residents [11] and merchants adjacent to the streets for their use and the use of their guests, under which the residents and merchants may be issued a permit or permits that exempt 7 Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing Com. (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1379, 1386 1387 (Dyna-Med, Inc.), citations omitted.
8 Los Angeles Unified School Dist. v. Garcia (2013) 58 Cal.4th 175, 186, internal quotation marks and citations omitted.
9 Dyna-Med, Inc., supra, 43 Cal.3d at p. 1387.
10 “Street” is defined as “a way or place of whatever nature, publicly maintained and open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel” and “includes highway. ” (Veh. Code, §590.) “Highway” is similarly defined and “includes street.” (Veh. Code, § 360.)
11 “Resident” is defined as “any person who manifests an intent to live or be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient basis. Presence in the state for six months or more in any 12- month period gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of residency.” (Veh. Code, § 516.) As used in Vehicle Code section 22507, “residents” are those persons living adjacent to a street or streets on which parking is restricted and parking permits are granted. (See Boccato v. City of Hermosa Beach (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 804, 810-811.)
4 14-304
37 them from the prohibition or restriction of the ordinance or resolution. . . . . A local ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to this section may contain provisions that are reasonable and necessary to ensure the effectiveness of a preferential parking program.
12 The first sentence of this statute gives local authorities broad power to restrict parking on public streets, and the second sentence gives local authorities specific power to adopt preferential parking programs that exempt residents, merchants, and their guests from those restrictions.
The use of the conjunctive phrase “residents and merchants” in the statute’s second sentence has given rise to the question whether local authorities may create resident-only parking programs to the exclusion of merchants. The Court of Appeal resolved that question in Friedman v. City of Beverly Hills, 13 concluding that too strict a reading of the statute—i.e., one which requires permits to be issued to both residents and merchants, or not at all—would thwart the legislative intent to provide flexibility to local authorities in addressing local parking problems.14 The court cited precedent holding that 12 Veh. Code, § 22507, subd. (a). Another, related section of the Vehicle Code— section 22507.5 —addresses the potential implementation of permit parking under more limited circumstances and provides, in relevant part:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 22507, local au thorities may, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit or restrict the parking or standing of vehicles on certain streets or highways, or portions thereof, between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. . . . . The ordinance or resolution relating to parking between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. may provide for a system of permits for the purpose of exempting from the prohibition or restriction of the ordinance or resolution, disabled persons, residents, and guests of residents of residential areas, including, but not limited to, high -density and multiple -family dwelling areas, lacking adequate offstreet parking facilities.
We do not analyze this statute separately in connection with our consideration of Question 1, but note that it provides local authorities with another means of regulating parking and of granting preferential parking privileges to residents and other specified classes of drivers.
13 Friedman v. City of Beverly Hills (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 436 (Friedman). 14 Id. at p. 444. In reaching this conclusion, the court reasoned that the grant of power to restrict parking in the first sentence of Vehicle Code section 22507, subdivision (a), was broad, and that subsequent amendments to the statute to allow preferential parking further expanded the powers of local authorities to ensure that “parking space is readily available to those most affected in a local area.” (Id. at p. 443.) The court noted that the 5 14-304
38 the word “and” may be construed to mean “or” when necessary to effectuate the intent of a statute, and concluded that “[t]he Legislature intended to allow the City to restrict parking to residents or merchants or both, as warranted by the circumstances.” 15 We thus conclude that, under Vehicle Code section 22507, 16 local authorities may limit the issuance of long-term preferential parking permits to residents only.17 Question 2
Having concluded that Vehicle Code section 22507 allows local authorities to limit preferential parking to residents only, we next consider whether, in issuing residential parking permits, local authorities may further distinguish among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live —for example, b y making permits available only to those residents who occupy single-family dwellings or small (two-to four-unit) multifamily dwellings. We conclude that local authorities may not do so.
Section 22507 allows local authorities to “prohibit or restrict the . . . parking . . . of vehicles . . . on certain streets . . . during all or certain hours of the day,” and to grant “preferential parking privileges . . . to residents . . . under which the residents . . . may be statute’s last sentence is designed to “give localities substantial power to tailor preferential parking programs to meet local circumstances.” (Ibid. ) 15 Id. at p. 444.
16 Local authorities’ power to restrict parking to residents is, however, constrained by other state laws exempting certain drivers from parking restrictions generally, such as Vehicle Code section 22511.5, subdivision (a)(1)(A), which allows people with disabilities who have special license plates or distinguishing placards to park for unlimited periods of time in a permit parking zone established under section 22507. 17 Because residential parking programs discriminate against nonresidents, each program must bear a reasonable relationship to its objectives in order to withstand a facial challenge on equal protection grounds. (Arlington County Board v. Richards (1977) 434 U.S. 5.) In 1977, the United States Supreme Court held that a residential parking ordinance enacted by Arlington County, Virginia, did not on its face violate the equal protection guarantee of the federal Constitution because it bore a reasonable relationship to its objectives, which included (1) enhancing the quality of life for residents by reducing air pollution, noise, traffic hazards, and litter resulting from nonresident and commuter traffic in residential areas; (2) encouraging reliance by commuters on car pools and mass transit; and (3) assuring convenient parking for residents. (Id. at p. 7; accord, People v. Housman (1984) 163 Cal.App.3d Supp. 43, 54 [California residential parking ordinance with similar objectives did not violate federal or state Constitutions].) 6 14-304
39 issued . . . permits that exempt them from the [public parking] prohibition or restriction . . . .”18 We emphasize here that the adjective “certain” modifies the terms “streets” and “hours,” but does not modify the term “residents.” A common definition of “certain” is “particular.”19 Applying the rule of statutory construction that we are to give import to every word of a statute, if possible, and to avoid making some words surplusage,20 we can infer from the unmodified use of the term “residents” in section 22507 that the Legislature did not intend to give local authorities discretion to treat certain, or particular, residents differently from other residents in this context.21 While we believe that section 22507’s terms are sufficiently clear, we nonetheless observe that the statute’s legislative history provides further support for our interpretation of those terms. 22 A legislative analysis prepared for the Senate Committee on Local 18 Veh. Code, § 22507, subd. (a), emphasis added.
19 See Webster’s 3d New Internat. Dict. (2002) p. 367 (“2a: PARTICULAR: of a character d ifficult or unwise to specify —used to distinguish a person or thing not otherwise distinguished or not distinguishable in more precise terms." ); see generally Smith v. Selma Community Hospital (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1, 30 (“In scrutinizing the words of a statute, courts generally give them their usual, ordinary meaning, which in turn may be obtained by referring to a dictionary”).
20 City of Long Beach v. California Citizens for Neighborhood Empowerment (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 302, 305; see Civ. Code, § 1858.
21 Cf. Capolungo v. Bondi (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 346, 350 (section 22507’s modification of “streets” and “hours” with the term “certain” indicates that “the designation of particular parking restrictions is a matter left to local needs and the intent of local authorities”).
We are aware that, despite the fact that the term “vehicles” in section 22507, subdivision (a), is not modified by the adjective “certain,” two appellate courts have held that local authorities may prohibit the parking of certain types of vehicles without also restricting all other vehicles. (Homes on Wheels v. City of Santa Barbara (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1173, 1178 [upholding ordinance prohibiting street parking of recreational vehicles]; People v. Garth (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 1797, 1800 [upholding ordinance prohibiting street parking of unhooked boat trailer].) We believe these cases are distinguishable because the authority to grant parking privileges to residents is distinct from the authority to restrict the parking of different types of vehicles, and therefore requires a separate analysis. (See City of Lafayette, supra, 91 Cal.App.3d at pp. 752-753, 756, fn. 2, 757 [ distinguishing between regulating classes of vehicles and excluding classes of persons from using city streets].)
22 Dyna-Med, Inc., supra, 43 Cal.3d at p. 1387 (“Both the legislative history of the statute and the wider historical circumstances of its enactment may be considered in 7 14-304
40 Government addressed section 22507’s provision that allows local authorities to grant parking permits to “residents and merchants, ” noting two Legislative Counsel opinions and an opinion of the San Francisco City Attorney , which discussed the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of a residential-nonresidential distinction. Importantly for our purposes, neither the legislative analysis nor the opinions it cited discussed possible distinctions between different types of residents. To us, this silence indicates that the Legislature did not perceive the legislation as presenting a prospect of discrimination among types of residents.
Moreover, in a separate, comparable parking statute, the Legislature has demonstrated concern about parking problems in areas of high-density, multiple-family dwellings. Vehicle Code section 22507.5 authorizes local governments to restrict parking between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m., and to issue permit s exempting certain classes of drivers, namely “disabled persons, residents, and guests of residents of residential areas, including, but not limited to, high-density and multiple-family dwelling areas, lacking adequate offstreet parking facilities.”
23 Bearing in mind that we are to harmonize, to the
extent possible, statutes that relate to the same subject matter, 24 we believe it would be inappropriate to interpret section 22507 as allowing authorities to withhold preferential onstreet parking permits from the very types of residents that the Legislature has recognized, in section 22507.5, may require onstreet parking.
Our conclusion is not undercut by the Friedman case, discussed above, which held that section 22507 gives local governments the authority to enact a preferential parking program for either residents or merchants (despite the statute’s use of the conjunctive phrasing “residents and merchants).”25 As noted in Friedman, the convention of interpreting a statute’s use of the conjunctive word “and” as the disjunctive word “or” in appropriate cases is well established, and was reasonably invoked in that instance in light of section 22507’s “reasonable and necessary” provision, whose purpose was to “give localities substantial power to tailor preferential parking programs to meet local circumstances.”26 But no maxim of statutory construction would support reading this same provision as expressly granting localities the authority to independently characterize and single out discrete classes of residents—nowhere mentioned in the statute—as ineligible for residential parking permits.
27 Especially here, where the state has occupied
ascertaining the legislative intent.”).
23 Veh. Code, § 22507.5, subd. (a), emphasis added.
24 Dyna-Med, Inc., supra, 43 Cal.3d at p. 1387.
25 Friedman, supra, 47 Cal.App.3d at pp. 443-444.
26 Ibid.
27 Rumford, supra, 31 Cal.3d at p. 550 (“[U]nless ‘expressly provided’ by the 8 14-304
41 the field of traffic control, we are not free to imply powers that are not expressly granted.28
We conclude that Vehicle Code section 22507 does not authorize local authorities, in issuing long-term residential parking permits, to distinguish among residents based on the type of dwelling in which they live.
*****
Legislature, a city has no authority over vehicular traffic control”).) 28 City of Lafayette, supra, 91 Cal.App.3d at p. 756.
9 14-304
42 Residential Permit Parking
43 2
Residential Permit Parking
Permit programs are used to managed on-street parking demand, typically when streets are at or near capacity.
Permits do not guarantee a parking space within a permit district. 44 3
2016 Attorney General Opinion
• Cities may not discriminate among residents based on housing type. A city cannot issue permits only to single-family homes, exclude apartment residents, or apply different rules to residents of houses, condos, duplexes, or large apartment communities.
• Cities may limit the number of permits per household, but only if the limit is applied uniformly. For example, a city may allow one or two permits per address, but the same limit must apply to all dwelling types.
• District boundaries must be based on parking-related criteria, not housing type. Boundaries must be supported by objective data such as parking occupancy, spillover patterns, and demonstrated need. 45 4
Typical Permit Parking Rules
• Must display a valid permit
• Guests and service providers (contractors, maintenance workers, etc.) are required to display a one-day guest permit to avoid receiving a citation.
• Street sweeping restrictions remain in effect
• Applicants must generally provide:
• Proof of residency within the district, and
• A vehicle registration showing the address within the district. • Company and rental vehicles do not typically qualify
46 5
Key Factors to Establish a Permit Program
• District Boundary Lines
• Criteria to Qualify
• Administration Time and Costs
• Enforcement Efforts
47 District Boundaries
6 48
7 Questions
49