CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APRIL 22, 2025
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY APRIL 22, 2025 @ 5:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBERS & VIA ZOOM
21000 HACIENDA BLVD., CALIFORNIA CITY, CA 93505
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, contact the City Clerk at (760) 373-7140 or via email at [email protected]. We request a 24- hour notification prior to the meeting in order for the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 American Disabilities Act Title II)
Zoom instructions and notes:
Web Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87032659806
Meeting ID: 870 3265 9806
1. Public can dial into the Zoom line:
a. One tap mobile: +16694449171,87254527178# US
b. Dial the following number: +1 564 217 2000 US
1. Comments
a. Public must join Zoom meeting to comment
b. Keep your mic on Mute until you are requested to speak c. Use the “Raise your Hand” button to request to speak or, d. Send a chat request to City Clerk for request to speak e. When requested to speak state your name for the record f. Re-mute when your time to speak has ended
Marquette Hawkins
MAYOR
Michael Kulikoff
MAYOR PRO TEM
Jesse Hightower
Michael Hurles
Ronald Smith
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Christopher Lopez
CITY MANAGER
1 CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APRIL 22, 2025
Public is urged to listen to the meeting in a quiet place, to avoid background noise.
We also request public to MUTE your audio device when not commenting to avoid disruption during meeting.
**Please take this time to turn off your cell phones ** CLOSED SESSION 4:00PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins
ADOPT THE AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public are welcome to address the City Council ONLY on those items listed on the Closed Session agenda. Each member of the public will be given (3) three minutes to speak
CLOSED SESSION
CS 1. POTENTIAL LITIGATION – CONFERNECE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(d)(2) – TWO (2) MATTERS
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
CITY COUNCIL CONVENES TO REGULAR MEETING
REGULAR MEETING 5:00PM
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE / INNVOCATION
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
PD
PLANNING
PW
FINANCE
TREASURER
CANNABIS
2 CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APRIL 22, 2025
CITY CLERK REPORTS/RECEIVED COMMUNICATIONS
Correspondence received from JM POWERS DATEDApril 11, 2025-Cal City First Quarter Single-Family Housing Sales Show Slight Decrease 2025 April 12, 2025-Examination of Cal City Building Permits Revenue Over the Past Decade April 13, 2025-Annual General Fund Cash-on-Hand Trails Operating Indebtedness
CIVIC/COMMUNITY/ORGANIZATION ANNOUNCEMENTS
PRESENTATIONS
Certificates of Recognition presented by Mayor Hawkins
• Lay’Arie J. Williams – Academic Scholar, Student Athlete, and Community Volunteer • Avery Spears – Scholar Athlete and Inspirational Leader • Dianne Perry – Animal Rescue/Animal Shelter Hero
• James Creighton – Volunteer and Community Advocate
• Shawn Bradley – Animal Rescue & Community Advocate
• Pastor James Robinson – Golf Course Volunteer Manager & Religious Leader • Pastor Robert Trautman – Volunteer & Religious Leader
PUBLIC HEARING
PH 1. Staff Report: Joaquin Vazquez, Special Outside Counsel (Hensley Law Group)
1. Public Hearing to Consider California City Cannabis Company, LLC’s Appeal of City’s Revised Audit Determination Letter for Cannabis Business Tax
2. Open Public Hearing
3. Public Comment
4. Close Public Hearing
5. Discussion
6. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider:
a) Conduct a public hearing to consider California Cannabis Company LLC’s (“Appellant”) appeal of the California City (“City”) Tax Administrator’s revised audit determination letter for Appellant’s cannabis business tax payment, pursuant to California City Municipal Code (“CCMC”) Title 3 (Finance), Chapter 2 (Revenue), Article 8 (Cannabis Business Tax). b) Determine, by minute order, whether to uphold, modify, or reject the California City (“City”) Tax Administrator’s imposition of cannabis business tax, as demanded in the Tax Administrator’s June 5, 2024 notice of violation and set forth in the Tax Administrator’s correspondence to Appellant dated June 12, 2024, in the amount of $75,744. c) Direct special counsel to memorialize the City Council’s determination and supporting findings in a resolution for the City Council’s consideration and approval at a future City Council meeting.
d) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
PH 2. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez- City Manager
1. TO START AT A TIME CERTAIN OF 6:00 P.M. - FIFTH PUBLIC HEARING TO
RECEIVE COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE SELECTED DISTRICT MAP (DRAFT MAP
A) AND SEQUENCING OF ELECTIONS, AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE CHANGING
THE ELECTION METHOD FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OTHER THAN THE DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR, FROM AT-LARGE TO BY DISTRICT;
ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES AND IDENTIFYING 3 CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APRIL 22, 2025
NUMBERS FOR EACH ELECTORAL DISTRICT; ESTABLISHING THE ELECTION ORDER OF EACH DISTRICT; AND ESTABLISHING RELATED PROCEDURES.
2. Open Public Hearing
3. Public Comment
4. Close Public Hearing
5. Discussion
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider:
PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR / PUBLIC COMMENT
This portion of the meeting is reserved for the public to address the City Council on any matter NOT on this agenda and over which the City Council has jurisdiction. Please state your name for the record and limit your comments to (3) three minutes. The City Council will receive the comments but cannot engage in back-and- forth discussion with the public or make any decision. The City Council can direct staff to bring the item back to a future agenda for discussion.
CONSENT CALENDAR
WAIVER OF FULL READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Consideration to waive full-text reading of all Resolutions and Ordinances by single motion made at the start of each meeting, subject to the ability of the City Council / Agency to read the full text of selected resolutions and ordinances when the item is addressed by subsequent motion. All items on the consent calendar are considered routine, and non-controversial and will be approved by (1) one motion if no member of the council, staff, or public wishes to comment or ask questions. Public comments are to be limited to (3) three minutes. Roll call vote required.
CC 1. Approve City Check Register dated 04/04/2025-04/17/2025 CC 2. Approve Minutes for 3/25/2025
CC3. Staff Report: Christopher Lopez, City Manager - Joe Barragan, Public Works Director Subject: 2025/26 Letter of Authorization for the Used Oil Payment Program Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign the attached letter.
CC 4. Staff Report: Christopher Lopez, City Manager-Latisha Lamberth, HR Director Subject: Insurance Update
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council Receive and File the attached report CC 5. Staff Report:
Subject: An Ordinance of the City of California City Amending Article 24.5 (Residential Tiny and Small Homes Overlay Zone) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Title 9 (Land Use and Development) of the City of California City Municipal Code (Second Reading and Adoption) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 25-850 Amending Article 24.5 (Residential Tiny and Small Homes Overlay Zone) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Title 9 (Land Use and Development) of the City of California City Municipal Code.
CC 6. Staff Report: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Subject: Authorize the Mayor, City Council, and City Manager of California City to Sign a Letter of Support for Aerospace Valley Futures, Inc. (AVF) Proposal for the Kern Coalition CA Jobs First Catalyst Fund RFP
4 CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APRIL 22, 2025
NEW BUSINESS
NB 1. Staff Report: Christopher Lopez, City Manager - Joe Barragan, Public Works Director Subject: Water Mains Replacement in Section 21 – Vivian Place Project Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Task Order from BHT for the design of the Vivian Project for $24,200.
NB 2. Staff Report: Marquette Hawkins, Mayor
Subject: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of California City Appointing Gesele McBroomMarsh and Della Clark to the Planning Commission Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution approving the appointment of Gesele McBroom-Marsh and Della Clark to the California City Planning Commission, effective immediately NB 3. Staff Report: Christopher Lopez, City Manager-Tech-45, Airport Management Subject: Discussion and Direction Regarding California City Airport Tenant Leases and Fuel Farm Upgrades
Recommendation: Staff Recommends that the City Council provide direction on the following:
1. Feedback regarding land lease rates and direction on bringing back modifications to leases and direction to the City Attorney to develop draft agreements
2. Direction to move forward with the replacement of the fuel card reader and amendments to the agreement with Tech-45 to fund the card reader replacement.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS, AGENDA REQUESTS, AND AB1234 REPORTS This portion of the meeting is reserved for council members to present information, announcements, and items that
have come to their attention. The Brown Act precludes Council, staff, or public discussion. Short staff responses are appropriate. The Council will take no formal action. A Council member may request the City Clerk to calendar an item for consideration at a future meeting or refer an item to staff.
ADJOURNMENT
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk for the City of California City, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing notice was posted on all official City bulletin boards and the City’s website at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in compliance with the provisions of the Brown Act.
APRIL 17, 2025
5 1
DR-PD
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Dr. Justin Vincent, Director of Public Safety
SUBJECT: PD MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORT
March 2025 Stats
0 0 0 0 0
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
MURDER - MARCH
12 10
4 9
5 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
TOTAL VIOLENT
CRIMES - MARCH
13 11
19 15
11 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
TOTAL PROPERTY
CRIMES - MARCH
38 23 23
24 16
0 10
20 30
40 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
TOTAL PART 1 CRIMES
Total Violent and Property Crimes Reported 2021 - 2025
March Part 1 Crimes - as of 4/2/2025
6 2
0 0 0
5 5
3 5
2 0
FEBRUARY 2025 PART 1
CRIMES BY AREA
0 0 1
3 1
5 5
1 0
MARCH 2025 PART 1
CRIMES BY AREA
FEBRUARY 2025 vs. MARCH 2025, DOWN BY 25%
Part 1 Crimes February 2025 – 20
Part 1 Crimes March 2025 -- 16
MARCH 2025 – PATROL STATISTICS
Total Incidents (Mar): 1,382 Total Arrests (Mar): 29 Felony Arrests: 16 Misd. Arrests: 13 Total Incidents (2025): 4,196 Total Arrests (2025): 87 Felony Arrests: 42 Misd. Arrests: 45 Calls for Service (Mar): 1075 Calls for Service (2025): 3,133 Citations Issued (Mar): 23 Citations Issued (2025): 83
7 DR-PLANNING
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Anu Doravari, Consultant Planner
SUBJECT: PLANNING MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORT
Report Overview
This report includes the following sections:
A. Active Planning Projects under Review and Upcoming Projects B. Additional Reports & Applications
C. Financial Report for March 2025
A. Active Planning Projects under Review
Project
Code
Project
Name/Description Project Type Location Status
SPR 18-19 Cal City
Cultivation Group Cannabis
22380
Yerba
Blvd
Director’s Hearing
Approved on
03/17/2025
SPR 25-05 IWVGA Pipeline Pipeline/Infrastructure 50 miles Engineering review
and discussions
underway.
Environmental
Documents pending
submission.
SPR 25-06 Mojave Legal
Docs LLC
Office space out of an
existing building CCB Approved at Planning
MV 25-01 Minor Variance
Residential
Residential RV Carport
Construction within the
setback area
- Approved by
Planning & PWD
8 B. Additional Reports & Applications
TUP 25-01 Farmer’s Market
Temporary Use
Permit - Farmer’s
Market
Parking lot
8016 Cal
City Blvd
Approved by Planning
and City Manager’s
Office on April 2, 2025
1. General Plan Update: The City’s General Plan, which serves as the long-term blueprint for growth, development, and community priorities, is scheduled to expire in 2028. In preparation for this, the City is in the early stages of developing a comprehensive Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit qualified consultants to assist in updating the Plan. This update will ensure the General Plan reflects current community values, addresses emerging trends and challenges, and aligns with regional and state policies. The RFP will outline the scope of work, desired qualifications, and the process for selecting a consultant to guide the City through this important planning effort.
9 C. Financial Report – March 2025
This section details the financial report for March 2025, highlighting revenue, expenses, and notable financial activities or changes.
PLANNING RECAP
Covers Period March 1- March 31, 2025
NEW PROJECTS
PROJECT TYPE MAR TOTALS YTD TOTALS
CUP:
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS:
LOT MERGERS:
SPR MAJOR: 1 1
SPR MINOR: 1 3
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS:
VARIANCE/MINOR : 1 1
ZONE CHANGE & GPA:
ZONE TEXT AMENDMENTS:
APPROVED / COMPLETED
PROJE
CTS
PROJECT TYPE MAR TOTALS YTD TOTALS
CUP:
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS:
LOT MERGERS:
SPR MAJOR:
SPR MINOR : 1 3
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS:
VARIANCE/MINOR : 1 1
ZONE CHANGE & GPA:
ZONE TEXT AMENDMENTS:
REVENUE (Non Reimbursable)
PROJECT TYPE MAR TOTALS YTD TOTAL
CUP:
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS:
LOT MERGERS:
SPR MAJOR/ MINOR: $3,205.00 $8,202.00
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS:
10 TENATIVE TRACT MAPS:
VARIANC/MINOR: $
250.00
$
250.00
ZONE CHANGE & GPA:
Other:
Monthly Total $3,455.00 $8,452.00
11
DR-PW
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Joe Barragan, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Monthly Department Report-April 2025
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ACTIVE PROJECTS
LIST
BHT PROJECT #
Task Order
Executed
/Received
PROJECT NAME / Limits PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATUS
UPDATED: 4/2/2025
FEDERAL / STATE FUNDED PROJECTS
1 19410 8/19/2019
CMAQ Redwood Blvd. Rehab.
5933-(029) - Preliminary
Engineering
500-ft East of Hacienda Blvd. to 98th Street
12/02/19: Environmental Completed. 2/01/21: Email & Phone comm with Raquel Pacheco from Kern COG. City applied for 2021 CMAQ Call for projects. Kern COG Recommended
Construction funds for funding 2021 CMAQ Call for Projects. 03/07/24 – Const RFA submitted to Caltrans for processing. 04/24/24 - Receive Caltrans Const E-76 and Finance Letter. 04/30/24 – Received PSA from Caltrans - City to accept PSA at 5/14/24 CC meeting. 06/17/24: Spectrum and Frontier to adjust utilities. Bids opened 01/9/25. Low Bidder is Westrock.
Proposed Council Acceptance at 2/11/25 CC Meeting.
Construction is underway
2 20407 3/18/2021 Mendiburu Rd
Reconstruction. 5399-(031)
CMAQ paving of existing dirt road from
Hacienda to Neuralia.
City approved program supplement 02/23/2021. Environmental completed. Design In Progress. Invoices sent to Caltrans.
Construction plans ready, project specifications in progress, staff report for council approval of bidding phase January 17th 2023.
Bids opened March 16, 2023. 6 bids received; apparent low bidder is Granite Conts. Project Underfunded. Requested more CMAQ funds to Kern COG. 4/5/23 TTAC committee
recommended additional CMAQ funds. 4/20/23 Kern County
Board voted to authorize additional funds $993,669. 06/13/23 - Council awarded project to Granite Const. Construction
COMPLETED. 4/23/24 - City Accepted project, City Clerk to file NOC w County. 08/06/24 – Caltrans conducted post-construction review - all in order. 08/19/24 – Received Bridge ID 50C0419 from Caltrans. 08/28/24 – Received Contractor executed Exh 17-F and 17-O, reviewed and emailed a copy to Peter Mututwa @ Caltrans. -- Caltrans Close-out in progress
3 21420 7/13/2021 HSIP Cycle 10 - Pedestrian
improvements On CCB from Yerba to Neuralia
3/26/21: Caltrans approved project. Caltrans approved PE funds on 08/02/21. Preliminary engineering Completed. 03/16/23 – Received Construction allocation letter from Caltrans. Bid Opening 6/22/23 - awarded to Cen-Cal Construction. Const.
Completed. 4/23/24 - City Accepted project, City Clerk to file NOC w County. Caltrans Close-out in progress
4 22408 7/25/2022
CDBG # 13.21.1 Balsitis Park
Playground and basketball
court
Prepare construction plans and Specs for new
construction of playground equipment and
basketball court
Council to authorized project advertisement on 6/13/23. Project awarded to ANM Construction. Project completed. Notice of Completion recorded CDBG Invoicing in progress
5 23401 1/4/2023 Hacienda Blvd Rehabilitation
5399-(033)
RSTP On Hacienda Blvd from Manzanita Ave
to Redwood Blvd - Prepare construction plans
and Specs for new Hacienda Blvd pavements
rehabilitation.
Received Caltrans E-76 on 02/08/2023 Authorization to Proceed with Preliminary Engineering. Project will designed together with TDA Art 3 project. 05/03/23 – Received fully executed program supplement agreement – and forwarded to City Staff. - Design Completed. 02/04/24 – Received and filed Const. E-76 from Caltrans. Bid opening July 11, 2024. 08/15/24 – City Council did not approve award of the project. 09/10/24 – Council approved award of project. 09/11/24 – Project completed. Close-out in progress
12
6 24411 8/2/2024 CMAQ - California City Blvd -
Shoulder Paving
On CCB from Baron Blvd to Maverick St. -
Request Preliminary Engineering Phase
08/13/24 – Completed PE RFA and emailed to Caltrans for execution. Kern COG emailed EPSP to City and to Caltrans. 08/29/24 – Received PE E-76 and FN from Caltrans. 09/04/24 – Received program supplement from Caltrans at 9/24/24 CC meeting for acceptance. 09/09/24 – Received City executed Task order for PE. - Design/Environmental Phase In Progress
7 25401 1/7/2025
RSTP - California City Blvd
Rehab - Hacienda Blvd. to
94th St.
On CCB from Hacienda Blvd. tp 94th Street -
Request Preliminary Engineering Phase
01/14/25 – Received City executed PE RFA, processed, and transmitted to Caltrans. - Awaiting Caltrans approval for PE Phase
SB1 FUNDED PROJECTS
2 24407 5/7/2024 SB1- 2024 Call for Projects Kenniston St pavement rehabilitation from CCB to Walpole
SB1 2024 submittal completed uploaded to CalSMART. Project design to begin in May 2025
LOCAL FUNDED PROJECTS
1 22403 3/14/2022 Striping Plan at Redwood
Blvd. & 98th Street
Prepare Striping Plan for Installation of STOP
Sign and markings at the intersection of
Redwood Blvd. & 98th Street.
03/29/22 - Finalized DRAFT Striping Plan and emailed to City Manager (Anne Ambrose) for her to verify with consultant Engineer and City Attorneys if this is what they recommend. 08/06/22: Forwarded email from former City Manager (Anne) to City Manager (Doug) . 10/21/22 & 12/01/22: Forwarded email to Interim City Manager Dr. Jim Hart - regarding approval of striping plan by City Council. 10/23/23 - Sent email dated 10/4/22 to Joe Barragan regarding approval of striping plan by City Council. Also sent copy of Draft Striping Plan. - See BHT# 19410
2 22411 3/7/2023 Indian Wells VGA Project
IWVGA (Indian Wells Valley Groundwater
Authority) Pipeline Project from Cal-City to
Ridgecrest
Began communications with Provost and Prichard Engineers for initial project planning and impacts on Cal-City's right of way.
Indian Wells to reimburse for all plan checking and project coordination process within City's right of way. Ok to continue per PW email 03/07/2023. 10/04/23 City received $30K initial fee from Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority. Project coordination in progress
3 23409 6/11/2021
Isabella Blvd new water main
construction from CCB to
Moss
Prepare construction plans and Specs for new
construction of 12" water main on Isabella
Blvd from CCB to Moss Ave (Approximately
9,000 ft). Formal bidding process.
Design completed, currently waiting construction grant funds allocation
4 23410 6/11/2021
CCB new water main
construction from Yerba to
Neuralia
Prepare construction plans and Specs for new
construction of 12" water main on CCB from
Yerba to Neuralia (Approximately 10,000 ft).
Formal bidding process.
Project on hold until funds are available
5 23411 8/9/2023 Well 3 Motor upgrade
Prepare One-Line Diagram for Well #3 for
new 200 HP well motor, plans and
specifications. Formal bid process
Currently seeking natural gas powered motor with Waukesha contractor. Quote preparation is in progress.
6 23412 7/27/2023 Splash Pad Skating Park
project
Prepare construction plans and specifications
for the construction of new splash pad and
skate park including onsite and offsite
improvements
Bid opening March 27, 2024. No bids received. Waiting for Council direction. Construction underway by ANM.
7 TBD TBD New 8 in Sewer Main
Lahontan application
Prepare application for new 8 in sewer main
on Cal-City frontage rd. from So. Loop to 88th
St. then, on Aspen to Corwin, the along
Corwin to Catalpa approx. 2,520 feet
Lahontan Sewer main construction application. Waiting City's direction
8 23415 n/a Rancho Tracts Grants Rancho Tracts water replacement project Grant for project funding was prepared and sent State. Application submitted March 2024. One million awarded to project,
implementation steps in progress. Received email from
awarding agency.
26 24405 6/13/2024 Well 10 Rehabilitation Well 10 Rehabilitation Layne preparing a quote for rehabilitation expected end of August After analysis of Layne proposal, project will put out to bid. 27 24409 6/13/2024 Wonder Acres Water Tank Install a 90,000 gal water storage and pumping equipment
Record of Survey completed. Topographic survey and design in progress. Geotechnical Report in progress. Edison power coordination in progress
28 25402 Indian Wells VGA Project WATER TRUNK LINE Project on hold until SPR process begins 29 25403 1/2/2025 City Yard Area Lights Installation of area lights improvements Design in progress 30 25404 Splash Pad Parking Lot New parking lot on Conklin for the Splash Pad Design in progress 31 25406 Little League Area lights Field lighting upgrades Currently awaiting city's direction to proceed with scope of work 32 25407 FAA ACIP 2025 FAA-CALTRANS DIV OF AERONAUTICS ACIP in progress 33 25408 2/13/2025 2024 LAMP ANNUAL
REPORT In progress
13 DR-FINANCE
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Kenny Cooper, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Finance Monthly Report
14 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
March 2025 Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
SUBJECT: TREASURER MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORT
Balance on Net Balance on Percent
2/28/2025 Transactions 3/31/2025 of Total
Bank of the Sierra -- General Checking $ 2,861,173 $ (704,726) $ 2,156,447 10.52% Bank of the Sierra -- Cannibas Checking $ 459,198 $ 18,046 $ 477,243 2.33% Sub-Total Operating Accounts $ 3,320,371 $ (686,680) $ 2,633,691 Balance on Net Balance on Percent
2/28/2025 Transactions 3/31/2025 of Total
Local Agency Investment Fund (122) $ 12,147,733 $ - $ 12,147,733 59.26% Kern County Investment Fund (20202) $ 4,672,343 $ 13,368 $ 4,685,711 22.86% Multi-Bank Securities (CD Manager) $ 1,026,764 $ 3,868 $ 1,030,632 5.03% Sub-Total Investment Accounts $ 17,846,840 $ 17,236 $ 17,864,076 Total City Operating Funds $ 21,167,211 $ (669,445) $ 20,497,767 100.00% Checking & CD Accounts 2/28/2025 Net Transactions 3/31/2025 Housing Corp. -- Bank of the Sierra, Checking $ 1,980,325 $ 17,539 $ 1,997,865 72.21% Housing Corp. -- Bank of the Sierra, CD 7653 $ 112,226 $ 319 $ 112,545 4.07% Housing Corp. -- Bank of the Sierra, CD 7654 $ 140,373 $ 399 $ 140,772 5.09% Housing Corp. -- Bank of the Sierra, CD 6574 $ 257,138 $ 731 $ 257,869 9.32% Housing Corp. -- Bank of the Sierra, CD 6582 $ 257,138 $ 731 $ 257,869 9.32% Total Housing Corporation Funds $ 2,747,200 $ 19,719 $ 2,766,919 100.00% Checking & CD Investment Accounts 2/28/2025 Net Transactions 3/31/2025 SDI -- Bank of the Sierra, Checking $ 502,745 $ (6,627) $ 496,118 0.55% SDI -- Bank of the Sierra CD $ 262,374 $ 746 $ 263,120 0.29% SDI -- US Bank Investments *$ 89,719,535 $ 435,214 $ 90,154,749 99.16% Total SDI Agency Funds $ 90,484,654 $ 429,333 $ 90,913,987 100.00% Checking & Investment Accounts 2/28/2025 Net Transactions 3/31/2025 Successor -- Bank of the Sierra, Checking $ 274,118 $ (75,000) $ 199,118 17.13% RDA/Successor -- US Bank Investments $ 1,228,265 $ (264,999) $ 963,266 82.87% Total Successor Agency Funds $ 1,502,383 $ (339,999) $ 1,162,385 100.00% Restricted SDI Accounts
Note: Interest earned from the SDI CD is directly deposited into the SDI checking account monthly.
Restricted RDA/Successor Agency Accounts
Restricted Housing Corporation Accounts
FROM: Keith Middleton, City Treasurer
The values presented in this report are extracted from End of Month bank and investments statements.
The General Funds investment portfolio consists of funds for operations, Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), water rate stabilization, administration replacements and reserves.
General Operating Accounts
General Investment Accounts
1 of 2
15 March 2025 Report
INVESTMENT POLICY
2/28/2025 3/31/2025
Beginning Market Value 88,677,326 89,719,535
Ending Market Value 89,719,535 90,154,749
1,042,210 435,214
2/28/2025 3/31/2025
Beginning Market Value - -
Ending Market Value - -
- -
2/28/2025 3/31/2025
Beginning Market Value 1 1
Ending Market Value 101,181 101,181
101,181 101,181
2/28/2025 3/31/2025
Beginning Market Value 265,002 265,002
Ending Market Value 265,002 3
0 (264,999)
2/28/2025 3/31/2025
Beginning Market Value 862,082 862,082
Ending Market Value 862,082 862,082
- -
Total RDA/Successor Investment Assets 1,228,265 963,266 Total "US Bank" Investment Assets 90,947,801 91,118,016 Market Value Summary - SUCCESSOR AGENCY Proj Area TAX RESERVE Investment Results (Acct. Number 211146003)
Market Value Summary - REDEVELOPEMENT AGENCY PROJ AREA TAX Investment Results (Acct. Number 211146000)
Market Value Summary - SUCCESSOR AGENCY Proj Area TAX INTEREST Investment Results (Acct. Number 211146001)
Market Value Summary - SUCCESSOR AGENCY Proj Area TAX PRINCIPAL Investment Results (Acct. Number 211146002)
RDA/Successor Agency Accounts
California City, California 93505
TREASURER'S MONTHLY REPORT OF INVESTMENT
The Treasurer shall invest the City's monies as permitted in the Citie's approved investment policy and approval of both the City Manager and Finance Director. The Treasurer shall consider current and projected cash needs in making such investments.
US Bank
SDI Account
Market Value Summary - CUSTODIAN ACCOUNT
Investment Results (Acct. Number 104388-010)
US Bank
2 of 2
16 DR-CANNABIS
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Inge Elmes, Cannabis Tax Administrator
SUBJECT: CANNABIS MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORT
MONTHLY ACTIVITY
• Cannabis Intent to Renew Letters are due on May 1, 2025. Once signed letters are received, billing will be issued for FY 25/26 cannabis permit renewals on May 31, 2025. All cannabis permit renewal fees are due by June 30, 2025, end of business day. • 3rd Quarter cannabis taxes are due April 30, 2025, by 5pm. • One additional cannabis business held Director’s Hearing to fulfill city and DCC requirements for compliance and in order to begin operations. • Inspections by Cannabis Tax Administrator have been reinstated to continue verification of cannabis tax reporting and audits. Three cultivation facilities have been inspected for accurate reporting.
• Final Cannabis Appeal set to be heard in the near future.
ONGOING ACTIVITY
• Cannabis spreadsheet updated continuously with accurate information. • Review of all facilities for accurate cannabis tax reporting.
QUARTERLY TAX REPORT
Total taxes collected for FY 24/25 to date are $477,243.31:
• Cannabis Back Taxes - $46,303.69
• Cannabis Cultivation - $183,310.31
• Cannabis Non-Cultivation - $247,408.92
• Cannabis Penalties & Interest - $220.39
ATTACHMENT
• Cannabis Income Report for FY 18/19 – FY 24/25
17 18
Deputy City Clerk Weible
California City Hall, 21000 Hacienda Blvd
California City, CA 93505-2259
Deputy City Clerk Weible,
April 11, 2025
Re: Cal City First Quarter Single-Family Housing Sales Show Slight Decrease in 2025 Include this letter into the record for the upcoming city council meeting and distribute to city council members, city manager, and finance director; place this topic on the agenda to discuss at the next city council meeting.
The first quarter 2025 Single Family Housing (SFH) shows the slowest sales over the past four years. While Median Sale Price stays below $300K, sluggish sales have resulted in an increase in housing inventory approaching nine months. Half of Cal City residents are low income. Total housing growth rate has averaged 0.8% per year over the past 4 years.
The first quarter single-family housing (SFH) sales have decreased slightly over the prior years. There is currently a 9-month inventory, over 130, of unsold single-family homes, a significant increase in inventory level, which may decrease later in the calendar year.
Cal City Single Family Housing (SFH) Sales
Comparing First Quarters 2022 to 2025
111 120
'g, 100
C
'iii
::i
� 80
.E
l 60
U) 40
0 ... 20
0 Median Sale Price
$275,500
105
Sold
Median Sale Price
Jan-Mar
2022
I
$250,000
53 Sold
Jan-Mar
2023
Median Sale Price
I
$300,-000
59 Sold
Jan-Mar
2024
Median Sale Price
$290,000
43 -
Sold
-
Jan-Mar
2025
Half of the population is low income and 25% is at or below the State poverty level. Cal City new SFH construction starts are catering to middle and upper-middle income clientele with fewer starts for lower income families. The city has 4, 195 detached SFH, and 128 attached SFH; comprising 80.5% of Cal City housing. By comparison, there are 627 apartments and 418 manufactured homes, 19.5% of Cal City housing (source: CA Dept of Finance, Table E-5, January 2024). Between Jan 2020 and Jan 2024 (4-year period), 172 housing units were added. The January 2025 Cal City housing data update will be out in May 202 fr m the CA Dept. of Finance.
Cc: Each Council Member, City Manager Lopez, MON, A!I
19 Deputy City Clerk Weible
California City Hall, 21000 Hacienda Blvd
California City, CA 93505-2259
Deputy City Clerk Weible,
April 12, 2025
Include this letter into the record for the upcoming city council meeting and distribute to city council members, city manager, and finance director; place this topic on the agenda to discuss at the next city council meeting.
·rhe ii-year history of Buiiding Permit Revenue has been reasonably predictabia until this year. For this year, building permit revenue may spike above $1.5M. This surge happened in August & September 2024. Building permit revenue, so far, seems to have tapered back to normal monthly revenue rates between Oct .2024 and present, Peb 20.25.
The City'$ Bv.ilotng and Pli;lnn,ng depg_rtments we.re a $tanoa1Qne Fund 1.1 vntil m,d-2017, During that time, expenses substantially exceeded revenue. The City has a practice of absorbing cash indebted funds into the General Fund, which tends to mask shortfalls. Building & Planning departments can be fQund in accounts 1 Q-4168. & 1 Q-4170 and they are decoupled from the revenue they generate so there is not a direct comparison between Building & Planning revenue and expenses. The chart below illustrates an 11-year history of BuildinQ Permit Revenue.
Annual Revenue from
City Building Permits 2014 to Feb 2025
Source: City Finance Dept. June Financial Statements
G> $1,400,000
� $1,000,000
$1,200,000
£f $800,000
g> $600,000
� $400,000
co
� $200,000 0
$0
Until June 2017 the
Building & Planning
expenses > revenue
Then B & P moved to
General Fund 10 in 2018
$95K/ ear
Average
$370K/year
Average
Oct 2024 to
Feb 2025
Since 2018, Building Permit revenue has averaged $370K/year. Announced by the Mayor, building permit revenue has spiked and may exceed $1.SM this year due to large revenue amounts received in AugY$t & September 2024, Permit mgn,thlY re .nue ha$. returned tQ average values.
J
cc� Each council Member-, City Manager Lopez·, M Stakeholders Received
Communication
20 Deputy City Clerk Weible April 13, 2025
California City Hall, 21000 Hacienda Blvd
California City, CA 93505-2259
Deputy City Clerk Weible,
Re: Annual General Fund Cash-on-Hand Trails Operating Indebtedness Include this letter into the record for the upcoming city council meeting and distribute to city council members, city manager, and finance director; place this topic on the agenda to discuss at the next city council meeting.
The claim of $15M cash in the General Fund may look good on paper but is overshadowed by a current debt of ($17.7M). The chart below plots the competition between General Fund cash and City Operating indebtedness. There are no efforts to reduce the growing debt in the 2024/25 budget; the city could end the current fiscal year with close to ($21.8M) in debt.
As shown in the chart below, the City's Operating funds' debt has steadily grown by more than ($17M) over the past 10 years. Rather than paying off the debt as it occurs, the Council and Staff have been contented to accumulate cash in the General Fund instead; even though debt exceeds cash available much of the time. Then the city resorts to Special Revenue and Enterprise Funds to cover debt shortfalls. The late-approved 2024/25 budget makes no restructuring of the short-term loans into subsidies and long-term loans that would clarify the city's true financial state.
General Fund Cash vs. Operating Debt
2014/15 thru Feb 2024/25
$20,000,000
� $16,000,000
'5
� $8,000,000
C
0 $4,000,000
$0
Source: City Finance Dept. June Financial Statements
G;m General Fund Cash-on-Hand
Operating O&M and CIP Debt
Excluded funds:
SDI/RDA/Successor
+--����---;�-----l Water & Sewer
Housing
The expectation of competent municipal finances is for debt to be low and declining while General Fund cash to be at stable levels to provide a minimum of two months of reserves (higher is better), GFOA and State Auditor recommends. The recently approved 2024/25 budget has substantially over-estimated revenue and expenses; deni� rowing internal debt is unwise.
. ers
Cc: Each Council Member, City Manager Lopez, M , Al takeholders 21 PH 1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Joaquin Vazquez, Special Outside Counsel (Hensley Law Group) SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider California City Cannabis Company, LLC’s Appeal of City’s Revised Audit Determination Letter for Cannabis Business Tax
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Conduct a public hearing to consider California Cannabis Company LLC’s (“Appellant”) appeal of the California City (“City”) Tax Administrator’s revised audit determination letter for Appellant’s cannabis business tax payment, pursuant to California City Municipal Code (“CCMC”) Title 3 (Finance), Chapter 2 (Revenue), Article 8 (Cannabis Business Tax).
2. Determine, by minute order, whether to uphold, modify, or reject the California City (“City”) Tax Administrator’s imposition of cannabis business tax, as demanded in the Tax Administrator’s June 5, 2024 notice of violation and set forth in the Tax Administrator’s correspondence to Appellant dated June 12, 2024, in the amount of $75,744.
3. Direct special counsel to memorialize the City Council’s determination and supporting findings in a resolution for the City Council’s consideration and approval at a future City Council meeting.
4. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Regulatory Framework
At the June 6, 2017 municipal election, City voters approved Measure A, which established taxes for various cannabis business activities, such as commercial cannabis cultivation. The cannabis business tax rates are set forth in CMC Title 3 (Finance), Chapter 2 (Revenue), Article 8 (Cannabis Business Tax). Article 8 is attached to this report as Attachment 1.
Commercial cannabis cultivation is taxed at a rate based on canopy square footage of and the type of cultivation as follows:
22 • Artificial Lighting: $7.00 per square foot of canopy space annually. • Combination Lighting: $5.00 per square foot of canopy space annually. • No Artificial Lighting: $1.00 per square foot of canopy space annually. • Nurseries: $0.50 per square foot of canopy space annually. (CCMC §§ 3-2.8.050(b) and 3-
2.8.050(d)).
A cannabis business must remit payment for cannabis business taxes, in arrears, on a quarterly basis to the City’s Tax Administrator. The failure to timely remit payment deems the taxes delinquent and subjects the business to penalties and interest. (CCMC §§ 3-2.8.060-3-2.8.100).
For commercial cannabis cultivation, the tax due for each calendar quarter is based upon the cultivation business’s canopy square footage for the quarter and must be 25% of the applicable annual rate. (CCMC § 3-2.8.060(a)).
The City’s Tax Administrator can conduct an audit of a cannabis business’s books and records to determine the amount of cannabis taxes that the business owes. (CCMC §§ 3-2.8.190). The Tax Administrator may make a deficiency determination regarding taxes owe based upon a cannabis business statement or any information that may come into the Tax Administrator’s possession within three years the tax was originally due and payable and must send a deficiency notice to the business. (CCMC §§ 3-2.8.220 and 3-2.8.240).
A cannabis business can appeal a Tax Administrator’s determination of taxes, interest, penalties, and fees owed to the City Council within 30 days of the tax determination. The City Council’s administrative determination of the appeal is final and conclusive and must be served upon the appealing business. Any amount found to be due must be immediately due and payable upon the service of the notice. (CCMC § 3-2.8.150).
Factual Background
Following a March 18, 2023 City audit survey that found Appellant had conducted commercial cannabis activity at the property located at 5750 Mendiburu Road, the City, on June 10, 2024, issued a notice of violation to Appellant, alleging its violations of CCMC §§ 3-2.8.060(a)-(c) (Reporting and Remittance of Tax); and 3-2.8.070 (Timely Remittance); and 3-2.8.080 (Delinquent Taxes. The notice of violation is attached to this report as Attachment 2. On June 12, 2024, the Tax Administrator provided Appellant a summary of the amounts owed relevant to the notice of violation. This correspondence is attached as Attachment 3 and indicates an amount that Appellant owes $75,744 in delinquent cannabis business tax to the City. Appellant filed an appeal (filed by Appellant’s accounting firm, Maloney and Novotny), dated June 20, 2024, of the notice of violation to the City Council, contesting the apparent violations of Sections 3-2.8.070, 3-
2.8.080, and 3-2.8.060(a)–(c). The appeal is attached to this report as Attachments 4.
Conduct of Hearing/Due Process Obligations
To ensure fair and due process rights, a decision-making body must be fair and impartial for quasijudicial or “administrative” hearings, including appeal hearings. This fairness and impartiality requirement extends to legal counsel for the enforcing agency and appellate body. Accordingly, the City Council approved the retention of the Hensley Law Group as special counsel, on September 17, 2024, to provide independent legal advice to the City Council for appeal hearings 23 when the City Attorney’s office has provided legal advice to City staff in its enforcement capacity and is, consequently, precluded from advising the City Council.
To ensure legally sufficient due process, it is recommended that the City Council follow special counsel’s hearing procedures and protocols, as provided to the City and Appellant, which are attached as Attachment 5. Appellant did not provide a written brief pursuant to the protocols. The City’s written brief was timely filed and is attached to this report as Attachment 6.
Following the conduct of the hearing, the City Council will determine, by minute order, whether to uphold, modify, or reject the California City (“City”) Tax Administrator’s imposition of cannabis business tax upon Appellant, as set forth in the revised audit determination letter. Then, it will direct special counsel to memorialize the City Council’s determination and supporting findings in a resolution for the City Council’s consideration and approval at a future City Council meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The actions contemplated in this report are exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3)) as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activities in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City Council’s consideration of the subject appeal will establish a final administrative determination of any amount of cannabis business tax that Appellant owes to the City.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. CCMC Title 3 (Finance), Chapter 2 (Revenue), Article 8 (Cannabis Business Tax)
2. City’s notice of violation
3. City’s provision of taxes owed to Appellant
4. Appellant’s appeal
5. Special counsel protocols/ground rules
6. City’s Written Brief
24 ATTACHMENT 1
CCMC Title 3 (Finance), Chapter 2 (Revenue), Article 8
(Cannabis Business Tax)
25 - Code of Ordinances
TITLE 3 - FINANCE
CHAPTER 2. - REVENUE
ARTICLE 8. CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
California City, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST] (Supp. No. 10)
ARTICLE 8. CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
Sec. 3-2.8.010. Title.
This article shall be known as the Cannabis Business Tax. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.020. Authority and Purpose.
The purpose of this article is to adopt a tax, for revenue purposes, pursuant to Sections 37101 and 37100.5 of the California Government Code, upon Cannabis Businesses that engage in business in the City. The Cannabis Business Tax is levied based upon business gross receipts and square footage of plant canopy. It is not a sales and use tax, a tax upon income, or a tax upon real property.
The Cannabis Business Tax is a general tax enacted solely for general governmental purposes of the City and not for specific purposes. All of the proceeds from the tax imposed by this article shall be placed in the City's general fund and be available for any legal municipal purpose. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.030. Intent.
The intent of this article is to levy a tax on all Cannabis Businesses that operate in the City, regardless of whether such business would have been legal at the time this article was adopted. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted to authorize or permit any business activity that would not otherwise be legal or permissible under laws applicable to the activity at the time the activity is undertaken. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.040. Definitions.
The following words and phrases shall have the meanings set forth below when used in this article:
(a) "Business" shall include all activities engaged in or caused to be engaged in within the City, including any commercial or industrial enterprise, trade, profession, occupation, vocation, calling, or livelihood, whether or not carried on for gain or profit, but shall not include the services rendered by an employee to his or her employer.
(b) "Cannabis" means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin, whether crude or purified, extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or resin. "Cannabis" also means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from cannabis. "Cannabis" also means marijuana as defined by Section 11018 of the California Health and Safety Code and is not limited to medical cannabis. 26 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
(c) "Cannabis product" means raw cannabis that has undergone a process whereby the raw agricultural product has been transformed into a concentrate, an edible product, or a topical product. "Cannabis product" also means marijuana products as defined by Section 11018.1 of the California Health and Safety Code and is not limited to medical cannabis products. (d) "Canopy" means all areas occupied by any portion of a cannabis plant whether contiguous or noncontiguous on any one site. When plants occupy multiple horizontal planes (as when plants are placed on shelving above other plants) each plane shall be counted as a separate canopy area. (e) "Cannabis business" means any business activity involving cannabis, including but not limited to cultivating, transporting, distributing, manufacturing, compounding, converting, processing, preparing, storing, packaging, delivering, testing, dispensing, retailing and wholesaling of cannabis, of cannabis products or of ancillary products and accessories, whether or not carried on for gain or profit. (f) "Cannabis business tax" or "business tax," means the tax due pursuant to this article for engaging in cannabis business in the City.
(g) "Commercial cannabis cultivation" means cultivation in the course of conducting a cannabis business. (h) "City permit" means a permit issued by the City to a person to authorize that person to operate or engage in a cannabis business.
(i) "Cultivation" means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of cannabis and includes, but is not limited to, the operation of a nursery. (j) "Distribution" shall have the same definition as set forth in California Business and Professions Code § 26001, as may be amended from time to time.
(k) "Distributor" shall mean persons engaging in Distribution. (l) "Employee" means each and every person engaged in the operation or conduct of any business, whether as owner, member of the owner's family, partner, associate, agent, manager or solicitor, and each and every other person employed or working in such business for a wage, salary, commission, barter or any other form of compensation.
(m) "Engaged in business as a cannabis business" means the commencing, conducting, operating, managing or carrying on of a cannabis business, whether done as owner, or by means of an officer, agent, manager, employee, or otherwise, whether operating from a fixed location in the City or coming into the City from an outside location to engage in such activities. A person shall be deemed engaged in business within the City if:
1. Such person or person's employee maintains a fixed place of business within the City for the benefit or partial benefit of such person;
2. Such person or person's employee owns or leases real property within the City for business purposes;
3. Such person or person's employee regularly maintains a stock of tangible personal property in the City for sale in the ordinary course of business;
4. Such person or person's employee regularly conducts solicitation of business within the City; or
5. Such person or person's employee performs work or renders services in the City.
The foregoing specified activities shall not be a limitation on the meaning of "engaged in business." (n) "Evidence of doing business" means evidence such as, without limitation, use of signs, circulars, cards or any other advertising media, including the use of internet or telephone solicitation, or 27 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
representation to a government agency or to the public that such person is engaged in a cannabis business in the City.
(o) "Fiscal year" means July 1 through June 30 of the following calendar year. (p) "Gross receipts," except as otherwise specifically provided, means, whether designated a sales price, royalty, rent, commission, dividend, or other designation, the total amount (including all receipts, cash, credits and property of any kind or nature) received or payable for sales of goods, wares or merchandise or for the performance of any act or service of any nature for which a charge is made or credit allowed (whether such service, act or employment is done as part of or in connection with the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or not), without any deduction therefrom on account of the cost of the property sold, the cost of materials used, labor or service costs, interest paid or payable, losses or any other expense whatsoever. However, the following shall be excluded from gross receipts:
1. Cash discounts where allowed and taken on sales;
2. Any tax required by law to be included in or added to the purchase price and collected from the consumer or purchaser;
3. Such part of the sale price of any property returned by purchasers to the seller as refunded by the seller by way of cash or credit allowances or return of refundable deposits previously included in gross receipts;
4. Receipts derived from the occasional sale of used, obsolete or surplus trade fixtures, machinery or other equipment used by the taxpayer in the regular course of the taxpayer's business;
5. Cash value of sales, trades or transactions between departments or units of the same business;
6. Whenever there are included within the gross receipts amounts which reflect sales for which credit is extended and such amount proved uncollectible in a subsequent year, those amounts may be excluded from the gross receipts in the year they prove to be uncollectible; provided, however, if the whole or portion of such amounts excluded as uncollectible are subsequently collected they shall be included in the amount of gross receipts for the period when they are recovered;
7. Receipts of refundable deposits, except that such deposits when forfeited and taken into income of the business shall not be excluded when in excess of one dollar;
8. Amounts collected for others where the business is acting as an agent or trustee and to the extent that such amounts are paid to those for whom collected. These agents or trustees must provide the finance department with the names and the addresses of the others and the amounts paid to them. This exclusion shall not apply to any fees, percentages, or other payments retained by the agent or trustees.
(q) "Lighting" means a source of light that is primarily used for promoting the biological process of plant growth. Lighting does not include sources of light that primarily exist for the safety or convenience of staff or visitors to the facility, such as emergency lighting, walkway lighting, or light admitted via small skylights, windows or ventilation openings.
(r) "Manufacture" shall have the same definition as set forth in California Business and Professions Code § 26001, as may be amended from time to time.
(s) "Manufacturer" shall have the same definition set forth in California Business and Professions Code § 26001, as may be amended from time to time.
(t) "Nursery" means a facility or part of a facility that is used only for producing clones, immature plants, seeds, and other agricultural products used specifically for the planting, propagation, and cultivation of cannabis.
28 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
(u) "Person" means an individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, corporation, limited liability company, estate, trust, business trust, receiver, syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a unit, whether organized as a nonprofit or for-profit entity, and includes the plural as well as the singular number.
(v) "Sale" means and includes any sale, exchange, or barter. (w) "State" means the State of California.
(x) "State license," "license," or "registration" means a state license issued pursuant to California Business & Professions Code Sections 19300, et seq. or other applicable state law. (y) "Tax Administrator" means the Finance Director of the City of California City or his or her designee. (z) "Testing Laboratory" means a cannabis business that (i) offers or performs tests of medical cannabis or medical cannabis products, (ii) offers no service other than such tests, (iii) sells no products, excepting only testing supplies and materials, (iv) is accredited by an accrediting body that is independent from all other persons involved in the medical cannabis industry in the state and (v) is registered with the State Department of Public Health.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017; Ord. No. 21-786 , § 2, 4-27-2021) Sec. 3-2.8.050. Tax Imposed.
(a) Beginning July 1, 2018, there is imposed upon each person who is engaged in business as a cannabis business a cannabis business tax.
(b) The initial rate of the cannabis business tax shall be as follows:
1. For every person who is engaged in commercial cannabis cultivation in the City:
a. Seven dollars ($7.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in facility that uses exclusively artificial lighting.
b. Five dollars ($5.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in a facility that uses a combination of natural and supplemental artificial lighting.
c. One dollar ($1.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in a facility that uses no artificial lighting.
d. Fifty cents ($0.50) annually per square foot of canopy space for any nursery.
2. For every person who engages in the operation of a testing laboratory: 2% of gross receipts.
3. For every person who engages in manufacturing: 1% of gross receipts.
4. For every person who engages in distribution: .5% of gross receipts.
5. For every person who engages in a cannabis business not identified in Subsection 1. through 4.: 6% of gross receipts.
(c) The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, adjust the rate of the cannabis business tax. However, in no event may the City Council set any adjusted rate that exceeds the maximum rate calculated pursuant to subdivision (d) of this section for the date on which the adjusted rate will commence. (d) The maximum rate shall be calculated as follows:
1. For every person who is engaged in commercial cannabis cultivation in the City:
a. Through June 30, 2021, the maximum rate shall be:
29 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
i. Seven dollars ($7.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in a facility that uses exclusively artificial lighting.
ii. Five dollars ($5.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in a facility that uses a combination of natural and supplemental artificial lighting. iii. One dollar ($1.00) annually per square foot of canopy space in a facility that uses no artificial lighting.
iv. Fifty cents ($.50) annually per square foot of canopy space for any nursery. b. On July 1, 2021 and on each July 1 thereafter, the maximum annual tax rate per square foot of each type of canopy space shall increase by the percentage change between January of the calendar year prior to such increase and January of the calendar year of the increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for all urban consumers in the Los-Angeles-Riverside-Orange County areas as published by the United States Government Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, no CPI adjustment resulting in a decrease of any tax imposed by this subsection shall be made.
2. For every person who engages in a cannabis business in the City other than commercial cannabis cultivation the maximum rate shall be the rate set forth in subdivision (b) of this section. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017; Ord. No. 21-786 , § 3, 4-27-2021) Sec. 3-2.8.060. Reporting and Remittance of Tax.
(a) The cannabis business tax imposed by this article shall be paid, in arrears, on a quarterly basis. For commercial cannabis cultivation, the tax due for each calendar quarter shall be based on the square footage of the business's canopy space during the quarter and the rate shall be 25% of the applicable annual rate. For all other cannabis businesses activities, the tax due for each calendar quarter shall be based on the gross receipts for the quarter.
(b) Each person owing cannabis business tax for a calendar quarter shall, no later than the last day of the month following the close of the calendar quarter, file with the Tax Administrator a statement of the tax owed for that calendar quarter and the basis for calculating that tax. The Tax Administrator may require that the statement be submitted on a form prescribed by the Tax Administrator. The tax for each calendar quarter shall be due and payable on that same date as the statement for the calendar quarter is due. (c) Upon cessation of a cannabis business, tax statements and payments shall be immediately due for all calendar quarters up to the calendar quarter during which cessation occurred. (d) The Tax Administrator may, at his or her discretion, establish shorter report and payment periods for any taxpayer as the Tax Administrator deems necessary to ensure collection of the tax. The Tax Administrator may also require that a deposit, to be applied against the taxes for a calendar quarter, be made by a taxpayer at the beginning that calendar quarter. In no event shall the deposit required by the Tax Administrator exceed the tax amount he or she projects will be owed by the taxpayer for the calendar quarter. The Tax Administrator may require that a taxpayer make payments via a cashier's check, money order, wire transfer, or similar instrument.
(e) For purposes of this section, the square feet of canopy space for a business shall be rebuttably presumed to be no less than the maximum square footage of canopy allowed by the business's City permit for commercial cannabis cultivation, or, in the absence of a City permit, the square footage shall be the maximum square footage of canopy for commercial cannabis cultivation allowed by the state license type. In no case shall canopy square footage which is authorized by the permit or license but not utilized for cultivation be excluded from taxation unless the Tax Administrator is informed in writing, prior to the period for which the space will not be used, that such space will not be used. 30 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.070. Payments and Communications—Timely Remittance.
Whenever any payment, statement, report, request or other communication is due, it must be received by the Tax Administrator on or before the final due date. A postmark will not be accepted as timely remittance. If the due date would fall on a Saturday, Sunday or a holiday, the due date shall be the next regular business day on which the City is open to the public.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.080. Payment—When Taxes Deemed Delinquent.
Unless otherwise specifically provided under other provisions of this article, the taxes required to be paid pursuant to this article shall be deemed delinquent if not received by the Tax Administrator on or before the due date as specified in Sections 3-2.8.060 and 3-2.8.070.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.090. Notice not Required by the City.
The City may as a courtesy send a tax notice to the business. However, the Tax Administrator is not required to send a delinquency or other notice or bill to any person subject to the provisions of this article. Failure to send such notice or bill shall not affect the validity of any tax or penalty due under the provisions of this article. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.100. Penalties and Interest.
(a) Any person who fails or refuses to pay any cannabis business tax required to be paid pursuant to this article on or before the due date shall pay penalties and interest as follows:
1. A penalty equal to 10% of the amount of the tax, in addition to the amount of the tax, plus interest on the unpaid tax calculated from the due date of the tax at the rate of 1.0% per month.
2. If the tax remains unpaid for a period exceeding one calendar month beyond the due date, an additional penalty equal to 25% of the amount of the tax, plus interest at the rate of 1.0% per month on the unpaid tax and on the unpaid penalties.
3. Interest shall be applied at the rate of 1.0% per month on the first day of the month for the full month, and will continue to accrue monthly on the tax and penalty until the balance is paid in full. (b) Whenever a check or electronic payment is submitted in payment of a cannabis business tax and the payment is subsequently returned unpaid by the bank for any reason, the taxpayer will be liable for the tax amount due plus any fees, penalties and interest as provided for in this section, and any other amount allowed under state law.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.110. Refunds and Credits.
(a) No refund shall be made of any tax collected pursuant to this article, except as provided in Section 3-2.8.120. 31 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
(b) No refund of any tax collected pursuant to this article shall be made because of the discontinuation, dissolution, or other termination of a business.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.120. Refunds and Procedures.
(a) Whenever the amount of any cannabis business tax, penalty or interest has been overpaid, paid more than once, or has been erroneously collected or received by the City under this article, it may be refunded to the claimant who paid the tax provided that a written claim for refund is filed with the Tax Administrator within one year of the date the tax was originally due and payable. (b) The Tax Administrator, his or her designee or any other City officer charged with the administration of this article shall have the right to examine and audit all the books and business records of the claimant in order to determine the eligibility of the claimant to the claimed refund. No claim for refund shall be allowed if the claimant refuses to allow such examination of claimant's books and business records after request by the Tax Administrator to do so.
(c) In the event that the cannabis business tax was erroneously paid and the error is attributable to the City, the City shall refund the amount of tax erroneously paid up to one year from when the error was identified. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.130. Personal Cultivation not Taxed.
The provisions of this article shall not apply to personal cannabis cultivation as defined in the "California Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Initiative". This article shall not apply to personal use of cannabis that is specifically exempted from state licensing requirements, that meets the definition of personal use or equivalent terminology under state law, and for which the individual receives no compensation whatsoever related to that personal use.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.140. Administration of the Tax.
(a) It shall be the duty of the Tax Administrator to collect the taxes, penalties, fees, and perform the duties required by this article.
(b) For purposes of administration and enforcement of this article generally, the Tax Administrator may from time to time promulgate such administrative interpretations, rules, and procedures consistent with the purpose, intent, and express terms of this article as he or she deems necessary to implement or clarify such provisions or aid in enforcement.
(c) The Tax Administrator may take such administrative actions as needed to administer the tax, including but not limited to:
1. Provide to all cannabis business taxpayers forms for the reporting of the tax;
2. Provide information to any taxpayer concerning the provisions of this article;
3. Receive and record all taxes remitted to the City as provided in this article;
4. Maintain records of taxpayer reports and taxes collected pursuant to this article;
5. Assess penalties and interest to taxpayers pursuant to this article; 32 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
6. Determine amounts owed and enforce collection pursuant to this article. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.150. Appeal Procedure.
Any taxpayer aggrieved by any decision of the Tax Administrator with respect to the amount of tax, interest, penalties and fees, if any, due under this article may appeal to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within thirty (30) days of the serving or mailing of the determination of tax due. The City Clerk shall fix a time and place for hearing such appeal, and the City Clerk shall give notice in writing to such operator at the last known place of address. The finding of the City Council shall be final and conclusive and shall be served upon the appellant in the manner prescribed by this article for service of notice of hearing. Any amount found to be due shall be immediately due and payable upon the service of the notice. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.160. Enforcement—Action to Collect.
Any taxes, penalties and/or fees required to be paid under the provisions of this article shall be deemed a debt owed to the City. Any person owing money to the City under the provisions of this article shall be liable in an action brought in the name of the City for the recovery of such debt. The provisions of this section shall not be deemed a limitation upon the right of the City to bring any other action including criminal, civil and equitable actions, based upon the failure to pay the tax, penalties and/or fees imposed by this article or the failure to comply with any of the provisions of this article.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.170. Apportionment.
If a business subject to the tax is operating both within and outside the City, it is the intent of the City to apply the cannabis business tax so that the measure of the tax fairly reflects the proportion of the taxed activity actually carried on in the City. To the extent federal or state law requires that any tax due from any taxpayer be apportioned, the taxpayer may indicate said apportionment on his or her tax return. The Tax Administrator may promulgate administrative procedures for apportionment as he or she finds useful or necessary. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.180. Constitutionality and Legality.
This tax is intended to be applied in a manner consistent with the United States and California Constitutions and state law. None of the tax provided for by this article shall be applied in a manner that causes an undue burden upon interstate commerce, a violation of the equal protection or due process clauses of the Constitutions of the United States or the State of California or a violation of any other provision of the California Constitution or state law. If a person believes that the tax, as applied to him or her, is impermissible under applicable law, he or she may request that the Tax Administrator release him or her from the obligation to pay the impermissible portion of the tax.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
33 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
Sec. 3-2.8.190. Audit and Examination of Premises and Records. (a) For the purpose of ascertaining the amount of cannabis business tax owed or verifying any representations made by any taxpayer to the City in support of his or her tax calculation, the Tax Administrator shall have the power to inspect any location where commercial cannabis cultivation occurs and to audit and examine all books and records (including, but not limited to bookkeeping records, state and federal income tax returns, and other records relating to the gross receipts of the business) of persons engaged in cannabis businesses.
In conducting such investigation, the Tax Administrator shall have the power to inspect any equipment, such as computers or point of sale machines, that may contain such records. (b) It shall be the duty of every person liable for the collection and payment to the City of any tax imposed by this article to keep and preserve, for a period of at least three (3) years, all records as may be necessary to determine the amount of such tax as he or she may have been liable for the collection of and payment to the City, which records the Tax Administrator or his/her designee shall have the right to inspect at all reasonable times.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.200. Other Licenses, Permits, Taxes, Fees or Charges. (a) Nothing contained in this article shall be deemed to repeal, amend, be in lieu of, replace or in any way affect any requirements for any permit or license required by, under or by virtue of any provision of any other article of this Code or any other ordinance or resolution of the City, nor be deemed to repeal, amend, be in lieu of, replace or in any way affect any tax, fee or other charge imposed, assessed or required by, under or by virtue of any other article of this Code or any other ordinance or resolution of the City. Any references made or contained in any other article of this Code to any licenses, license taxes, fees, or charges, or to any schedule of license fees, shall be deemed to refer to the licenses, license taxes, fees or charges, or schedule of license fees, provided for in other article of this Code. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of this section a cannabis business shall not be required to pay the license fee required by Division 2 of Article 3 of Chapter 2 of Title 3 of this Code so long as all of business's activities within the City that would require payment of a license fee are activities subject to the cannabis business tax. (c) The Tax Administrator may revoke or refuse to renew the license required by Section 3-3.2.201 of this Code for any business that is delinquent in the payment of any tax due pursuant to this article or that fails to make a deposit required by the Tax Administrator pursuant to Section 3-2.8.060. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.210. Payment of Tax does not Authorize Unlawful Business. (a) The payment of a cannabis business tax required by this article, and its acceptance by the City, shall not entitle any person to carry on any cannabis business unless the person has complied with all of the requirements of this Code and all other applicable state laws. (b) No tax paid under the provisions of this article shall be construed as authorizing the conduct or continuance of any illegal or unlawful business, or any business in violation of any local or state law. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
34 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
Sec. 3-2.8.220. Deficiency Determinations.
If the Tax Administrator is not satisfied that any statement filed as required under the provisions of this article is correct, or that the amount of tax is correctly computed, he or she may compute and determine the amount to be paid and make a deficiency determination upon the basis of the facts contained in the statement or upon the basis of any information in his or her possession or that may come into his or her possession within three (3) years of the date the tax was originally due and payable. One or more deficiency determinations of the amount of tax due for a period or periods may be made. When a person discontinues engaging in a business, a deficiency determination may be made at any time within three (3) years thereafter as to any liability arising from engaging in such business whether or not a deficiency determination is issued prior to the date the tax would otherwise be due. Whenever a deficiency determination is made, a notice shall be given to the person concerned in the same manner as notices of assessment are given under Section 3-2.8.240. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.230. Failure to Report—Nonpayment, Fraud.
(a) Under any of the following circumstances, the Tax Administrator may make and give notice of an assessment of the amount of tax owed by a person under this article at any time:
1. If the person has not filed a complete statement required under the provisions of this article;
2. If the person has not paid the tax due under the provisions of this article;
3. If the person has not, after demand by the Tax Administrator, filed a corrected statement, or furnished to the Tax Administrator adequate substantiation of the information contained in a statement already filed, or paid any additional amount of tax due under the provisions of this article; or
4. If the Tax Administrator determines that the nonpayment of any business tax due under this article is due to fraud, a penalty of 25% of the amount of the tax shall be added thereto in addition to penalties and interest otherwise stated in this article and any other penalties allowed by law. (b) The notice of assessment shall separately set forth the amount of any tax known by the Tax Administrator to be due or estimated by the Tax Administrator, after consideration of all information within the Tax Administrator's knowledge concerning the business and activities of the person assessed, to be due under each applicable section of this article, and shall include the amount of any penalties or interest accrued on each amount to the date of the notice of assessment.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.240. Tax Assessment—Notice Requirements.
The notice of assessment shall be served upon the person either by personal delivery, or by a deposit of the notice in the United States mail, postage prepaid thereon, addressed to the person at the address of the location of the business or to such other address as he or she shall register with the Tax Administrator for the purpose of receiving notices provided under this article; or, should the person have no address registered with the Tax Administrator for such purpose, then to such person's last known address. For the purposes of this section, a service by mail is complete at the time of deposit in the United States mail. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
35 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
Sec. 3-2.8.250. Tax Assessment—Hearing, Application and Determination.
Within thirty (30) days after the date of service the person may apply in writing to the Tax Administrator for a hearing on the assessment. If application for a hearing before the City is not made within the time herein prescribed, the tax assessed by the Tax Administrator shall become final and conclusive. Within thirty (30) days of the receipt of any such application for hearing, the Tax Administrator shall cause the matter to be set for hearing before him or her no later than thirty (30) days after the receipt of the application, unless a later date is agreed to by the Tax Administrator and the person requesting the hearing. Notice of such hearing shall be given by the Tax Administrator to the person requesting such hearing not later than five (5) days prior to such hearing. At such hearing said applicant may appear and offer evidence why the assessment as made by the Tax Administrator should not be confirmed and fixed as the tax due. After such hearing the Tax Administrator shall determine and reassess the proper tax to be charged and shall give written notice to the person in the manner prescribed in Section 3-2.8.240 for giving notice of assessment.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.260. Conviction for Violation—Taxes not Waived.
The conviction and punishment of any person for failure to pay the required tax shall not excuse or exempt such person from any civil action for the tax debt unpaid at the time of such conviction. No civil action shall prevent a criminal prosecution for any violation of the provisions of this article or of any state law requiring the payment of all taxes.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.270. Violation Deemed Misdemeanor.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.280. Severability.
If any provision of this article, or its application to any person or circumstance, is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, that determination shall have no effect on any other provision of this article or the application of this article to any other person or circumstance and, to that end, the provisions hereof are severable.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
Sec. 3-2.8.290. Remedies Cumulative.
All remedies and penalties prescribed by this article or which are available under Title 1 of the City Code and any other provision of law or equity are cumulative. The use of one or more remedies by the City shall not bar the use of any other remedy for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this article. ( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
36 Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:07 [EST]
(Supp. No. 10)
Sec. 3-2.8.300. Amendment or Repeal.
This article may be repealed or amended by the City Council without a vote of the people to the extent allowed by law. However, as required by Article XIII C of the California Constitution, voter approval is required for any amendment that would increase the rate of any tax levied pursuant to this article. The people of the City of California City affirm that the following actions shall not constitute an increase of the rate of a tax:
(a) The restoration of the rate of the tax to a rate that is no higher than that set by this article, if the City Council has acted to reduce the rate of the tax;
(b) An action that interprets or clarifies the methodology of the tax, or any definition applicable to the tax, so long as interpretation or clarification (even if contrary to some prior interpretation or clarification) is not inconsistent with the language of this article; or
(c) The collection of the tax imposed by this article, even if the City had, for some period of time, failed to collect the tax.
( Ord. No. 17-748, § 1, 6-6-2017)
37 ATTACHMENT 2
Audit Inspection Form
38 39
40 41
42 43
44 45
46 47
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 69
ATTACHMENT 3
Audit Determination Letter
(with additional attachments to Notice of Violation)
70 ln,2e Elmes
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Cannabis Compliance
Wednesday, June 12, 2024 12:53 PM
Prandi, Amy
[email protected]; Kenny Cooper
Subject:
Attachments:
California City Cannabis Company, LLC - Calculations of back taxes due CBT - Late Payment Calculation California City Cannabis Company LLC.xlsx Importance: High
Good afternoon Amy,
Please see attached cannabis tax returns for California City Cannabis Company, LLC. There is a summary page included for your convenience.
As discussed, staff has calculated the total of back taxes due based on maximum cultivation space per CCMC (California City Municipal Code):
Sec. 3.2.8060 (e)- Reporting and Remittance of Tax:
• For purposes of this section, the square feet of canopy space for a business shall be rebuttably presumed to be no less than the maximum square footage of canopy allowed by the business's City permit for commercial cannabis cultivation, or, in the absence of a City permit, the square footage shall be the maximum square footage of canopy for commercial cannabis cultivation allowed by the state license type. In no case shall canopy square footage which is authorized by the permit or license but not utilized for cultivation be excluded from taxation unless the Tax Administrator is informed in writing, prior to the period for which the space will not be used, that such space will not be used.
Please be advised that the calculations include the previous FY 22/23 - 4th quarter t axes owed through the current FY 23/24 - 3rd quarter, as stated in the Notice of Violation Letter. Penalties and interest have been calculated correctly according the CCMC.
Additionally, and for your convenience, Finance Manager Cooper, has been notified to send you the tax documentation for the current quarter which will end June 30, 2024 and due by July 31, 2024. Taxes are paid in arrears and considered delinquent after the end of the following month. All taxes are paid quarterly.
Please contact me if you have any further questions.
Thank you for your time and cooperation!
Respectfully,
1 71
llllillll
Cannabis
-
Tax Administrator
Inge Elmes
7 60-33 8-1080
[email protected]
2 72
Summary Cannabis Tax Due
California City Cannabis Company
Cannabis Tax Period 4/01/22 - 3/31/24
Period Due Date Tax Penalty
4th (Apr-Jun) 7/31/2023 $ 14,400.00 $ 3,600.00
1st (Jul-Sep) 10/31/2023 $ 14,400.00 $ 3,600.00
2nd (Oct-Dec) 1/31/2024 $ 14,400.00 $ 3,600.00
3rd (Jan-Mar) 4/30/2024 $ 14,400.00 $ 3,600.00
Totals $ 57,600.00 $ 14,400.00
Interest Total Due
$ 1,584.00 $ 19,584.00
$ 1,152.00 $ 19,152.00
$ 720.00 $ 18,720.00
$ 288.00 $ 18,288.00
$ 3,744.00 $ 75,744.00
73 Section •
CALIFORNIA CITY
CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
QUARTERLY TAX RETURN
Business Name: California City Cannabis Company Permit No. 20230065 Business Address: 5750 Mendiburu Rd
City, State California City, CA Zipcode: 93505
Business Phone:
Cannabis Business Type: Cultivation
Tax Period: Quarter (select below) 3rd (Jan-Mar) Due Date: 4/30/2024 1st (Jul-Sep) 2nd (Oct-Dec) 3rd (Jan-Mar) 4th (Apr-Jun) Payments must be received on or before the last business day of the month Jo/lowing the reporting period. Post marks or other indicat ions of submitta are not accepted.
Use Square Feet of Cultivation
Permit Type - Cultivation:
Artificial Light @ sq. ft.
Mixed Light@ sq. ft.
No Artificial Light @ sq. ft.
10 Nursery @ sq. ft.
Use Gross Receipts of Non-Cultivation
Permit Type - Non-Cultivation:
10 Testing Lab - 2%
11 Other Cannabis Businesses - 6%
12 Cannabis Manufacturing - 1%
13 Cannabis Distribution • 0.5%
Tax Rate
$7.00
$5.00
$1.00
$0.50
Tax Rate
2%
6%
1%
0.5%
Sq. Ft. Canopy Annual This Quarter 25%
$ 25% ,. .
. .,_
11,520 $ 57,600.00 25%
~ ~Cl $ 25% '"
:i,...., ,_c:$,t. $ 25%
Gross Receipts
If payment is received after due date, penalties and interest must be calculated and remitted.
Penalty and Interest
1• Penalty 1. < Month -10%
" Penalty 2. > Month - 25%
1• Interest 1% per month
Date Paid:
Rate
10%
25%
1%
Months Late:
Tax Due
$ 14,400.00
$ r. 14,400.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
17 TOTAL TAX, PENALTIES AND INTEREST DUE - PAY THIS AMOUNT $ Make checks payable to California City 21000 Hacienda Blvd., California City, CA 93505 I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature: Date:
Printed Name:
Tax Due
14,400.00
-
Tax Due
Penalty & Interest
3,600.00
288.00
18,288.00
Rev. 4/01/21 74
Section •
CALIFORNIA CITY
CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
QUARTERLY TAX RETURN
Business Name: California City Cannabis Company Permit No. 20230065 Business Address: 5750 Mendiburu Rd
City, State California City, CA Zipcode: 93505
Business Phone:
Cannabis Business Type: Cultivation
Tax Period: Quarter (select below) 2nd (Oct-Dec) Due Date: 1/31/2024 1st (Jul-Sep) 2nd (Oct-Dec) 3rd (Jan-Mar) 4th (Apr-Jun) Payments must be received on or before the lost business day of the month fallowing the reporting period. Post marks or other indications of submitta are not accepted.
Use Square Feet of Cultivation
Permit Type - Cultivation:
Artificial Light @sq.ft.
Mixed Light@ sq. ft.
No Artificial Light @ sq. ft.
10 Nursery @ sq. ft.
Use Gross Receipts of Non-Cultivation
Permit Type- Non-Cultivation:
10 Testing Lab - 2%
11 other Cannabis Businesses - 6%
12 Cannabis Manufacturing - 1%
13 Cannabis Distribution - 0.5%
Tax Rate
$7.00
$5.00
$1.00
$0.50
Tax Rate
2%
6%
1%
0.5%
Sq. Ft. Canopy Annual This Quarter 25%
s 25%
,1 ,c 11,520 $ 57,600.00 25%
~~
s - 25% ...I ·-
l'c!'' " $ 25%
Gross Receipts
If payment is received after due date, penalties and interest must be calculated and remitted.
Penalty and Interest
1• Penalty 1. < Month -10%
1s Penalty 2. > Month - 25%
10 Interest 1% per month
Date Paid:
Rate
10%
25%
1%
Months Late:
Tax Due
$ - $ ~ 14,400.00
$ ~ 14,400.00 I
s
s
$
s
$
$
$
$
17 TOTAL TAX, PENAL TIES AND INTEREST DUE - PAY THIS AMOUNT $ Make checks payable to California City 21000 Hacienda Blvd., California City, CA 93505 I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature: Date:
Printed Name:
Tax Due
14,400.00
-
Tax Due
Penalty & Interest
3,600.00
720.00
18,720.00
Rev. 4/01/21 75
CALIFORNIA CITY
CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
Section QUARTERLY TAX RETURN
Business Name: California City Cannabis Company Permit No. 20230065 Business Address: 5750 Mendiburu Rd
City, State California City, CA Zipcode: 93505
Business Phone:
Cannabis Business Type: Cultivation
Tax Period: Quarter (select below) 1st (Jul-Sep) Due Date: 10/31/2023 1st (Jul-Sep) 2nd (Oct-Dec) 3rd (Jan-Mar) 4th (Apr-Jun) Payments must be received on or before the last business day of the month following the reporting period. Post morks or other indications of submitto are not accepted.
Use Square Feet of Cultlvation
Permit Type - Cultivation:
Artificial Light @ SQ. ft.
Mixed Light@ sq. ft.
No Artificial Light @ sq. ft.
10 Nursery @ sq. ft.
Use Gross Receipts of Non-Cultivation
Permit Type - Non-Cultivation:
10 Testing Lab - 2%
11 Other Cannabis Businesses • 6%
12 Cannabis Manufacturing - 1%
13 Cannabis Distribution - 0.5%
Tax Rate
$7.00
$5.00
$1.00
$0.50
Tax Rate
2%
6%
1%
0.5%
Sq. Ft. Canopy Annual This Quarter 25%
$ 25%
"' 11,520 $ 57,600.00 25%
$ 25%
1u ,_ $ - 25% - -~
Gross Receipts
If payment is received after due date, penalties and interest must be calculated and remitted, Penalty and Interest
14 Penalty 1. < Month -10%
,. Penalty 2. > Month - 25%
16 Interest 1% per month
Date Paid:
Rate
10%
25%
1%
Months Late:
Tax Due
$
$ ~ 14,400.00 J
' $ 14,400.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
17 TOTAL TAX, PENALTIES AND INTEREST DUE - PAV THIS AMOUNT $ Make checks payable to California City 21000 Hacienda Blvd., California City, CA 93505 I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature: Date:
Printed Name:
Tax Due
14,400.00
Tax Due
Penalty & Interest
3,600.00
1,152.00
19,152.00
Rev. 764/01/21
Sedion •
CALIFORNIA CITY
CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX
QUARTERLY TAX RETURN
Business Name: California City Cannabis Company Permit No. 20230065 Business Address: 5750 Mendiburu Rd
City, State California City, CA Zipcode: 93505
Business Phone:
Cannabis Business Type: Cultivation
Tax Period: Quarter (select below) 4th (Apr-Jun) Due Date: 7/31/2023 1st (Jul-Sep) 2nd (Oct-Dec) 3rd (Jan-Mar) 4th (Apr-Jun) Payments must be received on or before the last business day of the month fa/lowing the reporting period. Post marks or other indications of submltta are not accepted.
Use Square Feet of Cultivation
Permit Type • Cultivation:
Artificial Light@ sq. ft.
Mixed Light @ sq. ft.
No Artificial Light @ sq. ft.
10 Nursery@ sq. ft.
Use Gross Receipts of Non-Cultivation
Permit Type - Non-Cultivation:
10 Testing Lab - 2%
11 Other Cannabis Businesses - 6%
12 Cannabis Manufacturing - 1%
" Cannabis Distribution - 0.5%
Tax Rate
$7.00
$5.00
$1.00
$0.50
Tax Rate
2%
6%
1%
0.5%
Sq. Ft. Canopy Annual This Quarter 25%
$ - 25%
J ~,,....
11,520 $ 57,600.00 25% il"I,
-~ $ 25%
~l~~ $ 25%
Gross Receipts
'ti -
--
If payment is received ofter due dote, penalties and interest must be c:olc:uloted and remitted.
Penalty and Interest
14 Penalty 1. < Month -10%
IS Penalty 2. > Month - 25%
16 Interest 1% per month
Date Paid:
Rate
10%
25%
1%
Months Late:
Tax Due
$
$ ' 14,400.00
$ 14,400.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
17 TOTAL TAX, PENALTIES AND INTEREST DUE - PAY THIS AMOUNT $ Make checks payable to California City 21000 Hacienda Blvd., California City, CA 93505 I declare under penalty of perjury that t he above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Signature: Date:
Printed Name:
Tax Due
14,400.00
Tax Due
Penalty & Interest
3,600.00
1,584.00
19,584.00
Rev77. 4/01/21
ATTACHMENT 4
Notice of Violation Letter
78 79
ATTACHMENT 5
Appellant’s Appeal
80 1
Joaquin Vazquez
From: Joaquin Vazquez
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2025 1:46 PM
To: Speyer, Paul; Prandi, Amy; [email protected]; Sanchez, Brandon A.
Cc: Leanndrea Weible
Subject: California City - Ground Rules and Briefing Schedule for California City Cannabis Company Appeal
Attachments: RE: California City Cannabis
Good aŌernoon, representaƟves of California City Cannabis Company and prosecuƟng counsel for the City of California City City AƩorney’s office. As a follow up to the aƩached, below are the ground rules and schedule according to the hearing date and Ɵme that the City has set. Feel free to reach out with any quesƟons.
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING APPEAL BRIEFING SCHEDULE
1. NoƟce of Appeal
2. Scheduling of Hearing
Date Hearing is Scheduled: April 22, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereaŌer may be heard in the California City City Council Chambers located at 21000 Hacienda Boulevard, California City, California 93505.
3. Brief by Appellant (Business/Operator)
Deadline for Submiƫng Appellant's Brief and Proposed City Council Decision via Email: April 7, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
o The appellant submits a detailed wriƩen brief outlining arguments, evidence, and supporƟng documents and idenƟficaƟon of any witnesses for the hearing. o Appellant submits brief and proposed decision via email to special counsel, Joaquin Vazquez, at [email protected], and Deputy City Clerk, Leanndrea Weible, at [email protected] no later than April 7, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
4. Brief by City Staff/City AƩorney
Deadline for Submiƫng Response Brief and Proposed City Council Decision via Email: April 14, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
o City staff/City AƩorney submits their response, addressing the appellant's arguments and providing rebuƩal evidence or documentaƟon and idenƟfying any witnesses for the hearing. o Appellant submits brief and proposed decision via email to special counsel, Joaquin Vazquez, at [email protected], and Deputy City Clerk, Leanndrea Weible, at [email protected] no later than April 14, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
5. City Council Hearing
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereaŌer may be heard in the California City City Council Chambers located at 21000 Hacienda Boulevard, California City, California 93505. 81 2
o The hearing takes place before the City Council. Both the appellant and the City staff/legal counsel present their cases, call witnesses if necessary, and answer quesƟons from the Council.
The City Council’s decision is final.
PROCEDURAL RULES FOR CITY ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING APPEAL
1. Ex Parte CommunicaƟons
DefiniƟon: Ex parte communicaƟons are direct or indirect communicaƟons between any party involved in the appeal (appellant, City staff, witnesses, or legal counsel) and members of the City Council outside the formal hearing process.
ProhibiƟon:
o No party, representaƟve, or witness may engage in ex parte communicaƟons with City Council members regarding the subject maƩer of the appeal.
o This includes emails, leƩers, phone calls, or informal conversaƟons. Disclosure:
o If any ex parte communicaƟon occurs, it must be disclosed on the record at the beginning of the hearing. The Council member involved must report the substance of the communicaƟon. o Based on the nature of the communicaƟon, the Council may decide to recuse the member or take other correcƟve acƟons to ensure fairness.
2. Evidence Submissions
General Rule of Evidence:
o The hearing will follow an informal evidenƟary process. While the rules of evidence applicable in courts do not strictly apply, only relevant, reliable, and probaƟve evidence will be admiƩed. o All parƟes must submit any documentary evidence, exhibits, or reports by the deadline set in the briefing schedule.
Witness TesƟmony:
o Witnesses may provide sworn tesƟmony during the hearing. o The party calling the witness is responsible for providing an accurate summary of the witness’s anƟcipated tesƟmony as part of their wriƩen submissions. Cross-ExaminaƟon:
o ParƟes will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses presented by the opposing party. o City Council members may also ask quesƟons of witnesses to clarify evidence.
3. Hearsay
DefiniƟon: Hearsay is a statement made outside the hearing, offered into evidence to prove the truth of the maƩer asserted.
Admissibility:
82 3
o Hearsay evidence is admissible in the hearing but is generally given less weight than direct tesƟmony or documentary evidence unless corroborated by other credible evidence. o ParƟes should idenƟfy any hearsay evidence in their briefs and explain its relevance and reliability.
o The City Council may give liƩle or no weight to hearsay that is not supported by other reliable evidence.
4. Relevance and Weight of Evidence
Relevance:
o All evidence presented must relate to the issues on appeal. The City Council may exclude irrelevant evidence.
Weight:
o The City Council has the discreƟon to determine the weight of the evidence presented. The credibility of witnesses, the consistency of documentary evidence, and the probaƟve value of all evidence will be considered when determining the final decision.
5. Public ParƟcipaƟon
Public TesƟmony:
o The hearing will be open to the public. However, only parƟes to the appeal and any invited witnesses may tesƟfy or submit evidence.
Public Comment Period:
o There will be a public comment period during which members of the public may speak, in accordance with Brown Act requirements. This period will be limited in Ɵme, and public comments will not be considered as formal evidence unless corroborated by documentary evidence or tesƟmony from involved parƟes.
6. Procedural ObjecƟons
Raising ObjecƟons:
o Any party may raise procedural objecƟons during the hearing, including objecƟons to the admission of evidence or witness tesƟmony.
Timeliness:
o ObjecƟons must be made promptly at the Ɵme of the alleged procedural error or at the earliest opportunity. Failure to object in a Ɵmely manner may result in a waiver of the objecƟon.
7. DeliberaƟons and Decision
DeliberaƟon:
o Following the presentaƟon of evidence and arguments, the City Council will deliberate on the appeal.
Decision:
o The City Council will issue a wriƩen decision based on the evidence presented during the hearing.
83 4
ORAL ARGUMENT/PRESENTATION SCHEDULE FOR APPEAL HEARING
1. IntroducƟon and Opening Statements by City Council
o The Mayor, or designee, opens the hearing by outlining the procedural rules and the issues on appeal.
o Brief introducƟons of the appellant, City staff, legal representaƟves, and any other parƟcipants.
2. Appellant’s Opening Argument
o The appellant (or their aƩorney/representaƟve) presents their case, focusing on the reasons the City’s decision should be overturned.
o Summary of key arguments, evidence, and legal standards supporƟng the appeal. o PresentaƟon of any witnesses (if any), who may give brief tesƟmony. o Visual aids or exhibits (e.g., maps, photos) may be used to enhance the argument.
3. City Staff/Legal Counsel Response
o The City staff/City AƩorney presents their defense of the original decision, responding directly to the appellant’s arguments.
o ExplanaƟon of how the City’s decision was consistent with the law and the facts of the case. o PresentaƟon of supporƟng evidence, rebuƫng the appellant’s claims. o City may also present witnesses to support its posiƟon.
4. Cross-ExaminaƟon of Witnesses (if any)
o The appellant and City staff may cross-examine any witnesses presented by the opposing party. o Cross-examinaƟon should be limited to clarifying the tesƟmony and challenging the credibility of witnesses if necessary.
5. QuesƟons from City Council Members
o City Council members may ask quesƟons of both the appellant and the City staff, seeking clarificaƟon on specific issues, evidence, or legal arguments. o QuesƟons may be directed to witnesses, if applicable. o Both parƟes must answer quesƟons directly and succinctly, avoiding unnecessary repeƟƟon.
6. Public Comment Period
o Members of the public may briefly address the City Council regarding the appeal. o Public comments will not be considered formal evidence unless supported by the parƟes involved.
7. Appellant’s Closing Argument
o The appellant presents a closing argument, summarizing the key points of their case and reinforcing why the City Council should reverse the original decision.
8. City Staff/Legal Counsel Closing Argument
o City staff/City AƩorney presents a closing argument, summarizing the reasons why the original decision should be upheld.
10. City Council DeliberaƟon and Decision
o AŌer closing arguments, the City Council deliberates on the evidence and arguments presented. 84 5
o The Council may announce its decision immediately or take the maƩer under advisement and issue a wriƩen decision within a specified period.
Best,
Joaquin Vazquez
2600 W. Olive Avenue, Suite 500
Burbank, California 91505
Office: (818) 333-5120
Mobile: (213) 448-3769
[email protected]
www.hensleylawgroup.com
This is a transmission from the Hensley Law Group. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be protected by the attorney-client and/or attorney work-product privileges. This information is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
85 ATTACHMENT 6
Special Counsel Ground Rules
86 87
88 89
90 91
92 93
94 95
96 97
98 99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
PH 2
4901-0950-0470 v2
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
SUBJECT: TO START AT A TIME CERTAIN OF 6:00 P.M. - FIFTH PUBLIC
HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE SELECTED
DISTRICT MAP (DRAFT MAP A) AND SEQUENCING OF ELECTIONS,
AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ELECTION METHOD
FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OTHER THAN THE
DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR, FROM AT-LARGE TO BY DISTRICT;
ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES AND
IDENTIFYING NUMBERS FOR EACH ELECTORAL DISTRICT;
ESTABLISHING THE ELECTION ORDER OF EACH DISTRICT; AND
ESTABLISHING RELATED PROCEDURES.
BACKGROUND
At the February 11, 2025, Council meeting, Council adopted a Resolution of Intent to transition to district-based elections to allow the City to take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of Elections Code Section 10010.
On February 25, 2025 the Mayor and City Council held its first public hearing related to this item.
On March 11, 2025, the Mayor and City Council held its second public hearing related to this item.
On March 25, 2025, the Mayor and City Council will hold the third public hearing related to this item.
On April 8, 2025, the Mayor and City Council held the fourth public hearing related to this item.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, Council selected Draft Map A and the election sequencing (odd numbered districts in 2026 and even numbered districts in 2028) to be included/incorporated in the attached Ordinance..
On April 22, 2025, the Mayor and City Council will hold the final public hearing related to this item. At this fifth public hearing, the City Council will receive community input on the selected district map (Draft Map A) and sequencing of elections and consider adoption of the Ordinance establishing District Elections for City Councilmembers other than the directly elected Mayor, which also adopts Draft Map A describing the boundaries and identifying numbers for each 4901-0950-0470 v2
district, establishes the election order of each district, and establishes related procedures.
Additional information on this process can be found on the City’s website:
https://www.californiacity-ca.gov/CC/index.php/district-elections Several maps have been submitted by members of the public through the City’s “Districtr” mapping tool are identified by a numerical identification number, and the maps that have been prepared by Redistricting Partners are identified by a letter (e.g., Draft Map A). Members of the public have been able to submit maps via the City’s website.
DISCUSSION
I. California Voting Rights Act and Racially Polarized Voting The City of California City currently elects four Councilmembers at-large, which means that each councilmember is elected by the registered voters of the entire City. The Mayor is directly elected, which means that the Mayor is directly elected at-large to the office of the Mayor.
The CVRA was enacted in 2001, in part, to provide minority groups in California with tools to prevent dilution of votes in “at-large” election systems and is more expansive than the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“FVRA”). Under the CVRA, an at-large method of election may not be imposed or applied in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election, as a result of the dilution or the abridgement of the rights of voters who are members of a protected class.1 A violation of the CVRA is established if it is shown that racially polarized voting occurs in elections for members of the governing body or in elections incorporating other electoral choices by the voters of the politicalsubdivision.2 Any voter who is a member of a protected class and who resides in a political subdivision where a violation of the CVRA is alleged may file an action in the superior court in which the political subdivision is located.3
The CVRA defines “protected class” as a class of voters who are members of a race, color, or language minority group, as referenced and defined in the FVRA4 and “racially polarized voting” as voting in which there is a difference, as defined in case law under the FVRA, in the choice of candidates or other electoral choices preferred by voters in a protected class, as compared to the rest of the electorate (i.e., the protected class members vote as a politically cohesive unit, while the majority votes sufficiently as a bloc usually to defeat the protected class’s preferred candidate).5
II. Safe Harbor and Transitioning
California Government Code Section 34886, in certain circumstances, authorizes the legislative body of a city of any population to adopt an ordinance to change its method of election from an “at-large” system to a “district-based” system in which each councilmember is elected only by the voters in the district in which the candidate resides.
Pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010, a city may rely on the “safe harbor” provisions that 1 Cal. Elec. Code §§ 14026 and 14027.
2 Cal. Elec. Code §14028(a); see also § 14027.
3 Cal. Elec. Code §14032.
4 Cal. Elec. Code §14026(d) citing 52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq. 5 Cal. Elec. Code §14026(e) citing 52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq; Thornburg v. Gingles (1986) 478 U.S. 30, 56.
4901-0950-0470 v2
allows a city to adopt a resolution outlining its intention to transition from at-large to districtbased elections within forty-five (45) days of receiving a demand letter from a potential plaintiffs’ attorney.6 These “safe harbor” provisions allow a city to transition in accordance with a statutory timeline and, if followed, insulate a city from litigation arising from alleged CVRA violations and caps attorneys’ fee liability to a maximum of $30,000.7 Under those “safe harbor” provisions, a prospective plaintiff is required to send a written notice to the clerk of a city asserting that the city’s method of conducting elections may violate the CVRA.8
A forty-five (45) day pause is then imposed on a prospective plaintiff’s ability to bring an action.9 That forty-five (45) day pause allows a city to adopt a resolution outlining its intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections.10 If a resolution of intention is adopted by a city council to move to district-based elections, a prospective plaintiff may not commence an action within ninety (90) days of the resolution of intention’s passage.11 After the City has completed the transition to district-based elections following these procedures, a prospective plaintiff would be able to submit a letter demanding that the City pay their attorneys’ fees as mentioned above.
III. Transition to District Based Elections
Since the Council adopted the Resolution of Intent to transition to district based elections on February 11, 2025, a prospective plaintiff may not commence an action within ninety (90) days of the resolution of intention’s passage. The deadline is May 12, 2025, to transition to districts within the timeline of the safe harbor Election Code Section 10010.
As a part of the transition process, the City needs to hold at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts.12 No official maps can be drawn before completion of these two public meetings.
Once the initial two meetings are complete, the demographer and public can begin to officially draw maps that will be considered in the districting process. As stated above, the City held these first two public hearings on February 25, 2025, and March 11, 2025. After such public hearings, the public submitted draft maps. The City’s demographer also prepared and submitted draft maps for Council’s consideration. These draft maps were all made available to the public as required are further discussed below.
Before the final public hearing, the City is required to hold at least two additional hearings over a period of no more than 45 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the proposed sequence of elections.13 This second set of public hearings (Public Hearing Nos. 3 and 4) were held on March 25, 2025, and April 8, 2025. Tonight’s Public Hearing No. 5 is the final public hearing.
IV. Fair Maps Act
The City will also need to comply with the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and 6 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(2).
7 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(f)(1)-(3); Note that this maximum is adjusted annually based upon CPI per the Elections Code.
8 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(1).
9 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(2).
10 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(1)-(3).
11 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(1)-(3).
12 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(a)(1).
13 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(a)(2).
4901-0950-0470 v2
Political Subdivisions (Fair Maps) Act in adopting the districts,14 which provides criteria that the City must utilize when establishing election district boundaries or when undertaking the redistricting process (which must occur every ten years after each population census). The criteria are summarized below.
(a) The election districts must be substantially equal in population based on the most recent census.
(b) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries that comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq.) and consistent with the federal Voting Rights Act, the districting body shall determine whether it is possible to create an election district or districts in which a minority group is sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district, as set forth in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986).
(c) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries using the following criteria as generally set forth in the following order of priority:
(1) To the maximum extent practicable, election districts shall be geographically contiguous. Areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous. Areas that are separated by water and not connected by a bridge, tunnel, or regular ferry service are not contiguous.
(2) To the maximum extent practicable, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local “community of interest” shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division (see discussion below on the definition of a “community of interest” under the Fair Maps Act).
(3) To the maximum extent practicable, the geographic integrity of a city or census designated place shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. This paragraph does not apply to a city.
(4) To the maximum extent practicable, election districts shall be bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the local jurisdiction. Election district boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable by residents.
(5) To the maximum extent practicable, election districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness in a manner that nearby areas of population are not bypassed in favor of more distant populations.
(d) The districting body shall not adopt election district boundaries for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.15 The Fair Maps Act defines a “community of interest” as a population that shares common social or economic interests that should be included within a single election district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Characteristics of communities of interest may include, but are not limited to, shared public policy concerns such as education, public safety, public health, 14 Cal. Elec. Code § 21100 et seq.
15 Cal. Elec. Code § 21130 (a)-(d).
4901-0950-0470 v2
environment, housing, transportation, and access to social services. Characteristics of communities of interest may also include, but are not limited to, cultural districts, shared socioeconomic characteristics, similar voter registration rates and participation rates, and shared histories.
Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates. Some examples of communities of interest in California City may include the existing neighborhoods identified by the City, school districts, parks, etc.
Within 21 days of adopting final election district boundaries, the City Council will be required to issue a report that explains the basis on which it made its decisions in achieving compliance with the requirements and criteria of the Fair Maps Act, including, as to each neighborhood, community of interest, city, or census designated place that was split into two or more districts, the reason for that split.16
Staff prepared an updated tentative timeline, which identifies the preliminary schedule for the required public hearings and public outreach, which complies with Elections Code 10010, with a final deadline date of May 12, 2025, to complete the transition to districts. This timeline may change depending on the level of community involvement and the complexity of the map drawing process. If the timeline needs to adjust beyond the 90 days, then the City may enter into a written agreement with potential plaintiff Shenkman to extend the 90-day period up to an additional 90 days in order to provide additional time to conduct public outreach, encourage public participation, and receive public input, provided that the potential plaintiffs that submitted the initial letter agree.
17 At the public hearings on February 25, 2025, March 11, 2025, and March 25, 2025, and April 8, 2025, the community was encouraged to participate during the public hearings by providing input on the composition of the districts by sharing specific thoughts on communities of interest and any other factors under the Fair Maps Act that the public identifies within California City. The City also provided a Community of Interest Worksheet on its District Elections website to facilitate the public’s input. To date, the City’s has not received any worksheets from the public.
V. Outreach Efforts
City staff has taken steps to provide outreach to its residents of this meeting including placing this information on the City website. The City launched a website dedicated to this district transition process and it went live within a two days of the first public hearing. The website URL is here:
https://www.californiacity-ca.gov/CC/index.php/district-elections.
Since that time, staff has updated the website to include information on maps submitted by the public and maps drafted and submitted by the City’s demographers. The maps submitted by the public and the demographers are attached to this agenda item.
Information on the site provides the public with background information about the districting process, upcoming hearing dates, and supporting documents. This webpage will be continuously updated with dates and locations where community members can share their feedback on this issue.
VI. Draft Council District Maps and Proposed Sequencing of Elections The City has received several maps from the public which are identified by the following ID numbers: 289684, 289096, 289575, 289578, 292639, and 292636. The City’s demographer also 16 Cal. Elec. Code § 21130(f).
17 Cal. Elec. Code § 10010(e)(3)(C)(i).
4901-0950-0470 v2
prepared and submitted Draft Map A based upon Draft Map ID 289096 and Draft Map B (based upon Draft Map ID 289684 with minor clean-up adjustments, such as having the borders follow main roads and to account for contiguity. Additionally, the City’s demographer prepared and submitted Draft Map C to provide the City Council with a different configuration of dividing the City for their review and discussion. All maps establish four Council districts for each Council member (the mayor will continue to be directly elected at large).
Further, all maps have been posted and can be found on the City’s District Elections website here:
https://www.californiacity-ca.gov/CC/index.php/district-elections.
After the public hearing April 8, 2025, the City Council selected Draft Map A, and renumbered 2 districts, to be included in the ordinance attached to this report for the purposes of conducting the first reading thereof and for eventual adoption at this April 22, 2025, Council meeting. Similarly, City Council also selected the sequencing of district elections to be included in the attached ordinance as follows:
(1) Odd numbered districts: 2026
(2) Even numbered districts: 2028
VII. District Transition Ordinance
Attached to this staff report is an Ordinance entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, CALIFORNIA, ADDING ARTICLE 5 TO TITLE 2 OF THE CITY OF
CALIFORNIA CITY MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE ELECTION METHOD FOR
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OTHER THAN THE DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR, FROM AT-LARGE TO BY DISTRICT; ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES AND IDENTIFYING NUMBERS FOR EACH ELECTORAL DISTRICT; ESTABLISHING THE ELECTION ORDER OF EACH DISTRICT; AND ESTABLISHING RELATED PROCEDURES” (“Ordinance”).
The Ordinance contains the selections made by Council as described above. As stated in its title, the Ordinance, if adopted, will change the election method for members of the City Council, other than the directly elected mayor, from at-large to by district; adopting a district map and identifying the numbers for each electoral district; established the election order of each district; and establishing related procedures. The office of the mayor will continue to be elected on an at-large basis. Further, for the purposes of the Ordinance, “Draft Map A” is referenced as the “Selected District Map.”
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1) Conduct the final public hearing to receive community input regarding the selected Draft Map A (termed as “Selected District Map” in the Ordinance), sequence of elections for districtbased council elections (odd-numbered districts in 2026 and even-numbered districts in 2028), and the Ordinance.
2) Adopt Ordinance No. 25-826 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, CALIFORNIA, ADDING ARTICLE 5 TO TITLE 2 OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE ELECTION METHOD FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OTHER THAN THE DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR, FROM ATLARGE TO BY DISTRICT; ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES AND IDENTIFYING NUMBERS FOR EACH ELECTORAL DISTRICT; ESTABLISHING THE 4901-0950-0470 v2
ELECTION ORDER OF EACH DISTRICT; AND ESTABLISHING RELATED PROCEDURES. (Second reading and adoption).
3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
TYPE OF ACTION (LEGISLATIVE; QUASI-JUDICIAL; OR ADVISORY) Legislative Action: The recommended action is to take community input as referenced above relating to the transition to district based Council elections and to conduct the second reading and adoption of the attached Ordinance. The City Council therefore acts in its discretionary legislative capacity.
CEQA STATUS
This item does not constitute a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq.) (CEQA) as this does not have the potential to result in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378.).
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action. By transitioning to district based elections by May 12, 2025, the costs that potential plaintiff’s attorney will receive is capped at approximately $30,000 (this amount has been adjusted annually by CPI per the Elections Code).
The City will pay demographer services in an amount up to $80,000, as Council authorized at the February 11, 2025, meeting. The City would also incur its own costs as well, including staff time and attorneys’ fees and costs.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance
2. Draft Map A (referenced by the Ordinance as the “Selected District Map”) 4933-5484-2934 v2
ORDINANCE NO.25-826
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, CALIFORNIA, ADDING ARTICLE 5 TO TITLE 2 OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE ELECTION METHOD FOR
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OTHER THAN THE DIRECTLY
ELECTED MAYOR, FROM AT-LARGE TO BY DISTRICT; ADOPTING A
MAP DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES AND IDENTIFYING NUMBERS
FOR EACH ELECTORAL DISTRICT; ESTABLISHING THE ELECTION
ORDER OF EACH DISTRICT; AND ESTABLISHING RELATED
PROCEDURES
WHEREAS, the City of California City (“City”) currently elects members of the City Council using an “at-large” election system and directly elects the Mayor using an “atlarge” election system; WHEREAS, the City received a certified letter from a potential plaintiffs’ attorney, alleging a violation of the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”) and threatening litigation if the City declines to voluntarily change to a by district-based election system for electing members of the City Council;
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 34886, in certain circumstances, permits the City Council to adopt an ordinance changing the system of elections for members of the City Council from an “at-large” elections system to a “by district” elections system with the Mayor directly elected at-large;
WHEREAS, Elections Code Section 10010 provides a method whereby a jurisdiction can expeditiously transition to a district-based election system and thereby avoid the high cost of litigation under the CVRA if the jurisdiction complied with the “safe harbor” provisions of Elections Code Section 10010;
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2025, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010, the City Council adopted a Resolution of Intention to transition to by district elections; WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010(a)(1), the City Council held duly noticed public hearings for the purposes of receiving public testimony regarding the transition to by district elections, including, without limitation, the composition of communities of interest on February 25, 2025, and March 11, 2025; WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010(a)(2), the City Council held duly noticed public hearings concerning the transition to by district elections, including, without limitation, the content of draft district maps and the proposed sequencing of elections on March 25, 2025, and April 8, 2025, and, further the draft maps considered at each public hearing were posted at least seven days before each respective public hearing;
WHEREAS, at the April 8, 2025, regular meeting, at the conclusion of the duly noticed public hearing, the City Council selected and attached the district map entitled 4933-5484-2934 v2
“Draft Map A” to this Ordinance as Exhibit A (“Selected District Map”); selected the election sequence to be included in this Ordinance; and, further, introduced this Ordinance for a first reading at that time with a public hearing, second reading, and adoption scheduled to take place on April 22, 2025;
WHEREAS, throughout the foregoing process, the City engaged in public outreach and engagement required by California Elections Code Section 10010 and those applicable portions of the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions (“Fair Maps”) Act;
WHEREAS, such outreach included but is not limited to, maintaining a City website dedicated to the process of transitioning from at-large elections to by district elections, regularly notifying residents of meetings and posting notices about the public hearings to discuss the districting process;
WHEREAS, in selecting the map, the City Council considered the criteria set forth in Elections Code Section 21130 of the Fair Maps Act and is adopting district boundaries in accordance with the provisions stated therein, as well as the federal Voting Rights Act, the California Voting Rights Act, the U.S. Constitution, and California Constitution; WHEREAS, the Selected District Map meets all the requirements of state and federal law and was posted on the City’s website for public consideration at least seven (7) days before the introduction of this Ordinance;
WHEREAS, on April 22, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing concerning this Ordinance, the Selected District Map, and the transition to by district elections;
WHEREAS, the change in method for electing members of the City Council is made in furtherance of the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Elections Code Section 14025 et seq.);
WHEREAS, based upon the forgoing, the City Council now desires to adopt an ordinance changing the system of elections for members of the City Council other than the Mayor in the City from an at-large elections system to a by district elections system with a Mayor continued to be elected at-large;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. RECITALS.
The City Council of the City of California City finds and declares that the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
Adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from environmental review as the adoption of this 4933-5484-2934 v2
Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3) since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of this Ordinance would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
SECTION 3. CODE AMENDMENT; DISTRICT ELECTIONS.
Article 5 (By District Election of Council Members) is hereby added to Chapter 1 (City Council) of Title 2 (Administration) of the City of California City Municipal Code as follows:
ARTICLE 5 – BY DISTRICT ELECTION OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Sec. 2-1.501. – Declaration of Purpose.
The purpose of this Article is to further the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Elections Code Section 14025, et seq.), as amended.
Sec. 2-1.502. – Applicability.
(a) This Article shall apply to the election of Council members, but shall not apply to the election of the Mayor.
(b) For the purposes of this Article, references to “Council member” shall not include the Mayor.
Sec. 2-1.503. – By District Elections for Council Members. (a) Pursuant to Government Code Section 34886, all Council members shall be elected by district in four single-member districts. (b) All Council members shall be elected in the electoral districts established in Section 2-1.504 and as such districts are subsequently amended as provided therein. All Council elections shall take place "by district" as that term is defined in Government Code Section 34871, meaning each of the four Council members, other than the directly elected Mayor, shall be elected from each district by the voters of that district alone. Each Council member shall serve a four-year term.
(c) Pursuant to Government Code Section 34882, the Council member elected or appointed to represent a district must reside in that district and be a registered voter in that district, and any candidate for Council must reside in, and be a registered voter in, the district in which he or she seeks election at the time nomination papers are issued, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10227.
(d) Registered voters signing nomination papers or voting for a Council member shall be residents of the geographical area making up the district 4933-5484-2934 v2
from which such member is to be elected.
Sec. 2-1.504. – Council Districts Adoption and Amendment. (a) All Council members shall be elected on a by district basis from the Council districts shown and numbered on the Council District Map in Exhibit “A” of Ordinance No. 25-826 and on file in the City Clerk's Office, which is hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.
(b) The Council districts described in subsection (a) shall be amended after each federal decennial census pursuant to Elections Code Section 21600 et seq. and, further, may otherwise be amended as permitted by applicable law.
Sec. 2-1.505. – Implementation of By District Elections. (a) The by district system of elections provided in this Article shall be implemented, beginning at the general municipal election held in November 2026, as follows:
(1) Council members shall be elected in districts 1 and 3 beginning at the general municipal election in November 2026, and every four years thereafter.
(2) Council members shall be elected in districts 2 and 4 beginning at the general municipal election in November 2028, and every four years thereafter.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, all Council members in office at the time this Article takes effect shall continue in office until the expiration of the at-large term to which they were elected.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any chapter, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance, and each chapter, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more Sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage by the City Council.
SECTION 6. CITY CLERK ACTION.
4933-5484-2934 v2
The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause this Ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation and circulated within the City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933(a) or, to cause this Ordinance to be published in the manner required by law using the alternative summary and pasting procedure authorized under Government Code Section 39633(c).
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of California City on the 22nd day of April, 2025.
_________________________________
Marquette E. Hawkins, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_________________________________ _________________________________ Victor M. Ponto, City Attorney Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk 4933-5484-2934 v2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KERN )
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY )
I, Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk of the City of California City, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. _________, was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of California City held on the 8th day of April, 2025, and was passed by the City Council of the City of California at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of April, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________________
Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk
4933-5484-2934 v2
EXHIBIT A
COUNCIL DISTRICT MAP
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
162
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
1 2 3 4
Population 3,149 3,252 3,385 3,137
Deviation -82 21 154 -94
Deviation % -2.5% 0.6% 4.8% -2.9%
Other 1,396 1,466 1,284 1,315
Other % 44.3% 45.1% 37.9% 41.9%
Latino 952 1,089 1,104 1,078
Latino % 30.2% 33.5% 32.6% 34.4%
Asian 82 107 85 75
Asian % 2.6% 3.3% 2.5% 2.4%
Black 719 590 912 669
Black % 22.8% 18.1% 26.9% 21.3%
2020 Census
1 2 3 4
Total CVAP 2,676 2,445 2,296 1,723
Other CVAP 1,079 1,146 1,085 844
Other CVAP % 40.3% 46.9% 47.3% 49.0%
Latino CVAP 627 743 726 464
Latino CVAP % 23.4% 30.4% 31.6% 26.9%
Asian CVAP 3 31 62 28
Asian CVAP % 0.1% 1.3% 2.7% 1.6%
Black CVAP 967 525 423 387
Black CVAP % 36.1% 21.5% 18.4% 22.5%
Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP)
163
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
District 1
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
2020 Census
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
Citizen Voting Age Population
Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 3,149 -82 -2.5% 1,396 44.3% 952 30.2% 82 2.6% 719 22.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 2,676 1,079 40.3% 627 23.4% 3 0.1% 967 36.1%
164
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
District 2
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
2020 Census
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
Citizen Voting Age Population
Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 3,252 21 0.6% 1,466 45.1% 1,089 33.5% 107 3.3% 590 18.1% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 2,445 1,146 46.9% 743 30.4% 31 1.3% 525 21.5%
165
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
District 3
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
2020 Census
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
Citizen Voting Age Population
Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 3,385 154 4.8% 1,284 37.9% 1,104 32.6% 85 2.5% 912 26.9% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 2,296 1,085 47.3% 726 31.6% 62 2.7% 423 18.4%
166
City of California City
Draft A (renumbered)
District 4
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
2020 Census
Other % Latino % Asian % Black %
Citizen Voting Age Population
Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 3,137 -94 -2.9% 1,315 41.9% 1,078 34.4% 75 2.4% 669 21.3% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 1,723 844 49.0% 464 26.9% 28 1.6% 387 22.5%
167
CC 1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Kenny Cooper, Finance Manager
Saijee Gill, Accounts Payable
SUBJECT: Approve City Check Register dated 04/04/2025-04/17/2025 BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
The following checks have been prepared by the Finance Department. The items are provided to the Mayor and City Council for review and approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council discuss and approve the attached check register. 168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 1
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY MARCH 25, 2025 @ 5:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBERS & VIA ZOOM
21000 HACIENDA BLVD., CALIFORNIA CITY, CA 93505
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, contact the City Clerk at (760) 373-7140 or via email at [email protected]. We request a 24- hour notification prior to the meeting in order for the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 American Disabilities Act Title II)
Zoom instructions and notes:
Web Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85355634524
Meeting ID: 853 5563 4524
1. Public can dial into the Zoom line:
a.One tap mobile: +16694449171,87254527178# US
b.Dial the following number: +1 564 217 2000 US
2. Comments
a. Public must join Zoom meeting to comment
b. Keep your mic on Mute until you are requested to speak c. Use the “Raise your Hand” button to request to speak or, d. Send a chat request to City Clerk for request to speak e. When requested to speak state your name for the record f. Re-mute when your time to speak has ended
Marquette Hawkins
MAYOR
Michael Kulikoff
MAYOR PRO TEM
Jesse Hightower
Michael Hurles
Ronald Smith
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Christopher Lopez
CITY MANAGER
187
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 2
Public is urged to listen to the meeting in a quiet place, to avoid background noise.
We also request public to MUTE your audio device when not commenting to avoid disruption during meeting.
**Please take this time to turn off your cell phones ** CLOSED SESSION 4:00PM
CALL TO ORDER
4PM
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins All Present
** VICTOR PONTO modified the closed session item under Anticipated Litigation- Originally noted to be 2 matters. Updated to reflect 1 matter.
ADOPT THE AGENDA
Motioned by Councilmember Smith/ 2nd by Councilmember Hurles
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public are welcome to address the City Council ONLY on those items listed on the Closed Session agenda. Each member of the public will be given (3) three minutes to speak
CLOSED SESSION
CS 1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – POTENTIAL LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (d) (2)
Number of Matters- Two (2) ONE (1)
CS 2. DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE - PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (b) (1)
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
Victor Ponto reported out of session with direction given and no further reportable action
CITY COUNCIL CONVENES TO REGULAR MEETING
REGULAR MEETING 5:00PM
Mayor Hawkings announced the state of the City prior to calling the meeting to order. 188
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 3
CALL TO ORDER 5:06 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE / INNVOCATION- Given by Pastor Moore
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins All Present
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
PD
FIRE
PLANNING - Robbie Cordes comments on the Planning Dept.
BUILDING
FINANCE- JM Powers comments on Finance
TREASURER
CANNABIS
CITY CLERK REPORTS/RECEIVED COMMUNICATIONS
Correspondence received from JM POWERSMarch 15, 2025-Eventually the Council and City Staff Will Experience Financial “Ground Rush” March 16, 2025-21 Prescriptive Steps for a Soft Landing as Cal City Drifts Towards Insolvency March 17, 2025- Appalling Poor City Performance to Kern County Grand Jury Recommendations
CIVIC/COMMUNITY/ORGANIZATION ANNOUNCEMENTS
PRESENTATIONS
Oath of Office: Darren Hames-Firefighter Paramedic
PUBLIC HEARING- This item was discussed after Public Business From the Floor PH 1. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez- City Manager
TO START AT A TIME CERTAIN OF 6:00 P.M. - THIRD PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE
COMMUNITY INPUT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING SUBMITTED DRAFT
DISTRICT MAPS AND THE PROPOSED SEQUENCE OF ELECTIONS RELATING TO THE
TRANSITION TO DISTRICT BASED COUNCIL ELECTIONS
1. Open Public Hearing
2. Public Comment
3. Close Public Hearing
4. Discussion
Recommendation- It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1) Conduct the third public hearing to receive community input and provide direction to staff regarding the submitted draft district maps and the proposed sequence of elections relating to the transition to district based Council elections.
2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
Motion to approve the next public hearing to be held will be April 8, 2025. Motioned by Councilmember Ron Smith, 2nd by Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff
189
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 4
VOTE 5-0
Ayes- Councilmember(s) Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR / PUBLIC COMMENTThis item was moved up before Public Hearing pending the 6 o clock hour for the Public Hearing to begin.
This portion of the meeting is reserved for the public to address the City Council on any matter NOT on this agenda and over which the City Council has jurisdiction. Please state your name for the record and limit your comments to (3) three minutes. The City Council will receive the comments but cannot engage in back-and- forth discussion with the public or make any decision. The City Council can direct staff to bring the item back to a future agenda for discussion.
CONSENT CALENDAR
WAIVER OF FULL READING OF RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Consideration to waive full-text reading of all Resolutions and Ordinances by single motion made at the start of each meeting, subject to the ability of the City Council / Agency to read the full text of selected resolutions and ordinances when the item is addressed by subsequent motion. All items on the consent calendar are considered routine, and non-controversial and will be approved by (1) one motion if no member of the council, staff, or public wishes to comment or ask questions. Public comments are to be limited to (3) three minutes. Roll call vote required.
Motion to approve Consent Calendar. Motioned by Councilmember Hightower/ 2nd by Councilmember Hurles
VOTE 5-0
Ayes- Councilmember(s) Hightower, Hurles Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins CC 1. Approve City Check Register dated 03/07/2025-03/20/2025 CC 2. Approve Minutes for 3/11/2025 meeting
CC 3. Staff Report- Latisha Lamberth, Human Resources/Risk Management Director Subject- Authorization for City Staff to pay the premium for Law Enforcement Liability Insurance
Recommendation- Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute all necessary documents and authorizing payment for the insurance policy pursuant to the terms therein.
CC 4. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez- City Manager
Subject- A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of California City Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to a Lease Agreement with T-Mobile West Tower, LLC Recommendation- Staff recommends the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to a Lease Agreement with T-Mobile West Tower, LLC CC 5. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez- City Manager
Subject- R.E.A.C.H Land Use Agreement for Farmer’s Market Recommendation-Staff recommends the City Council Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager 190
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 5
to execute a Land Use Agreement subject to concurrence from legal between R.E.A.C.H and California City for the purpose of having the Farmer’s Market for the community.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CONTINUED BUSINESS
CB 1. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez-City Manager
Subject- Proposed Budget FY 24/25
Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council Adopt a Resolution Adopting the FY 24/25 Budget
Motion to approve FY 24/25 Budget
Motioned by Councilmember Hightower / 2nd by Councilmember Hurles VOTE- 4-1
Ayes-Councilmember(s) Hightower, Hurles, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins Noes-Councilmember Smith
NEW BUSINESS
NB 2. Staff Report- Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Subject- A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of California City Authorizing the Mayor and One Member of the SDI Committee to Execute an Agreement with Engel and Engel, LLP Certified Public Accountants to Conduct a Forensic Audit of the SDI Fund for an Initial Not to Exceed Amount of $300,000 and to 1.) Bring Back the Agreement to the Council for Approval, or 2.) Not Bring Back the Agreement to Council for Review
Recommendation- Staff recommends the City Council Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of California City Authorizing the Mayor and one member of the SDI Committee to execute an agreement with Engel and Engel, LLP Certified Public Accountants to conduct a forensic audit of the SDI Fund for an initial not to exceed amount of $300,000 and to 1.) Bring back the agreement to the Council for approval, or 2.) Not bring back the agreement to Council for review.
Motion to approve with changes to the Resolution -
Changes are as follows:
• Change the word “it’s” to “SDI”
• Remove the $300.000.00 limit.
• Mayor and City Treasurer to be added as Signers
• Requests for $10,000.00 for the retainer fee to secure Engel and Engel LLP Motioned by Councilmember Hightower / 2nd by Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff VOTE 5-0
Ayes-Councilmember(s) Hightower, Hurles, Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, Mayor Hawkins Noes- NONE
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS, AGENDA REQUESTS, AND AB1234 REPORTS This portion of the meeting is reserved for council members to present information, announcements, and items that have come to their attention. The Brown Act precludes Council, staff, or public discussion. Short staff responses 191
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MARCH 25, 2025
pg. 6
are appropriate. The Council will take no formal action. A Council member may request the City Clerk to calendar an item for consideration at a future meeting or refer an item to staff.
Councilmember Hightower: Concern brought by the public regarding locking the park restrooms City Manager to provide update on next City Council Meeting.
Councilmember Smith: Agendize an item for Jim Creighton to give Presentation regarding the Transient Occupancy Tax.
Mayor Hawkins: Requests that Awards be agendized to recognize people of the public for their efforts/Announced Community Clean-up scheduled for April 12, 2025
ADJOURNMENT 7:29 PM
Motioned by Mayor Pro Tem Kulikoff, / 2nd by Councilmember Hurles
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk for the City of California City, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing notice was posted on all official City bulletin boards and the City’s website at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in compliance with the provisions of the Brown Act.
April 11, 2025
192
CC 3
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Joe Barragan, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: 2025/26 Letter of Authorization for the Used Oil Payment Program BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
As the lead agency for the Used Oil Program, Kern County will submit an annual application for the Used Oil Payment Program to CalRecycle on behalf of the County and participating jurisdictions for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026. In prior years, the city has chosen to participate. To be a participating jurisdiction, the city must submit a Letter of Authorization (attached).
As lead agency, the County manages and oversees the used oil recycling program. This program consists of operating and overseeing certified used oil collection centers in Kern Unincorporated areas and within the participating jurisdictions. The County also advertises and promotes the program, submits required reporting to the State, and covers other administrative responsibilities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign the attached letter.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter of Authorization
2. Resolution
193
4936-0890-7817 v1 Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 25-3126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CALIFORNIA CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER
INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH KERN COUNTY TO SUBMIT THE
REGIONAL USED OIL PAYMENT PROGRAM APPLICATION AND ACT
AS THE LEAD AGENCY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
The City Council of the City of California City (hereafter referred to as the “City”) does resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City is authorizing the City Manager to bind the City into an agreement with Kern County for the regional Used Oil Payment Program (OPP) application and act as the Lead Agency on behalf of the City; WHEREAS, the County would manage and oversee the used oil recycling program as the lead agency. This program would consist of operating and overseeing certified used oil collection centers in Kern Unincorporated areas and within the participating jurisdictions. The County would also advertise and promote the program, submit required reporting to the State, and cover other administrative responsibilities; WHEREAS, the County of Kem would execute all documents necessary to implement and secure payment under the OPP; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager would sign the Letter of Authorization;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City hereby authorizes the City Manager to bind the City into an agreement with Kern County for the regional Used Oil Payment Program (OPP) application and act as the Lead Agency on behalf of the City.
SECTION 2: The County of Kem will execute all documents necessary to implement and secure payment under the OPP.
SECTION 3: The City Manager will sign the Letter of Authorization.
SECTION 4: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution, and the minutes of this meeting shall so reflect the presentation of the letter.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of California City, this 22nd day of April 2025.
__________________________
Marquette Hawkins
Mayor
194
4936-0890-7817 v1 Page 2 of 2
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________ __________________________
Leanndrea Weible Victor M. Ponto,
Interim City Clerk City Attorney
CERTIFICATION
I, Leanndrea Weible, Interim City Clerk of the City of California City, California, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a meeting of the City Council of said City at its meeting held on the 22nd of April 2025, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of California City, California, this 22nd day of April, 2025.
__________________________
Leanndrea Weible
Interim City Clerk
195
April 23, 2025
CalRecycle c/o
Kem County Public Works Department
Operations and Maintenance Division
Attn: Aaron Guarnizo
2700 M Street
Suite 400
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370
Email: [email protected]
RE: Letter of Authorization
I am the City Manager of City of California City. I am authorized to contractually bind the City of California City. Pursuant to this authority, I hereby authorize the County of Kern to submit a regional Used Oil Payment Program (OPP) application and act as Lead Agency on behalf of the City of California City. The County of Kem is hereby authorized to execute all documents necessary to implement and secure payment under the OPP.
Christopher Lopez
City Manager
CITY HALL
21000 Hacienda Blvd.
California City, CA 93505
___________________________________
760-373-8661
760-373-7532 Fax
www.californiacity-ca.gov
Marquette Hawkins
MAYOR
Michael Kulikoff
MAYOR PRO TEM
Ronald Smith
Jesse Hightower
Michael Hurles
COUNCIL MEMBERS
_____________________
Christopher Lopez
City Manager
196
CC4
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Latisha Lambert, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT: Insurance Update
BACKGROUND:
The City at one point in time was a part of a joint insurance pool but the City was removed from the insurance pool due to numerous issues. As a result, the City has struggled with finding insurance for various coverages necessary for protecting the city. Staff has been working on identifying potential insurers, but this has proved difficult and challenging. The materials related to the Performance Improvement Plan and the backup has been provided as attachments to this document.
The City Manager’s Office requested meetings with the California Intergovernmental Risk Authority (CIRA), to gather more details on the history and the reasoning behind the city’s removal from the pool. The staff shared many documents, and they conveyed that numerous actions by the City created concerns for the pool and its members. Eventually, CIRA placed the city on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) to require the City to change its practices to remain in the pool. The following items were included on the Performance Improvement Plan:
1. Document process and procedures used to (1) respond to traffic signal malfunctions and outages, (2) public requests regarding street defects and repairs, (3) encroachment permits (review, permit issuance, field observations), and (4) traffic complaint review and response.
This documentation, commonly referred to as Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s) provides a description of the activity along with the purpose (city policies or other directives) and importance of performing the activity
2. Contract with private company to provide traffic signal maintenance services
3. Implement improved Encroachment Permit application and Encroachment Permit. Permits should include liability insurance as required by CIRA. Performance bonds should also be required to avoid financial risks to the City for defective or incomplete work by contractors.
4. Train either the building inspector or street maintenance staff to oversee and observe encroachment permit construction activities. This needs to include the ability to recognize proper traffic controls in and around the construction site.
5. The City Manager, Assistant City manager, all department heads, and applicable individuals from public works, finance and purchasing shall complete a course for contractual risk transfer, such as those hosted by Robert Marshburn, at the City’s full cost and expense.
6. The City shall send all contracts to CIRA and City Attorney for review to ensure adequate risk transfer. All insurance, as required by contract, shall be reviewed and approved by CIRA prior to commencement of work.
7. For all serious vehicle incidents, involving fatality and major injuries within the City, the City shall contact the local Major Accident Investigation Team (MAIT) to perform the investigation.
8. For non major accidents, the officers of the Police Department shall undergo accident investigation training hosted by a POST certified organization or with industry recognized experts (such as Lexipol) on the most effective way to conduct accident investigations. This training shall be conducted by the City at the City’s full cost and expense.
9. The City must comply with all accident investigation training for 75% of the identified employees within 90 days and 100% of the identified employees within 105 days.
10. The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with all accident investigation training for all accidents that the City’s law enforcement investigates.
11. The City of California City Police Department shall access and review the law enforcement library of policies available provided by Lexipol and update City policies as required.
Further, the City of California City shall implement all needed policies and shall provide training to all law enforcement personnel on the new policies or any changes to existing policies, include subscribing to and utilizing Lexipol’s Daily Training Bulletins. Lexipol is provided as a service to the City at the expense of CIRA
12. The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with Lexipol policies and complete training as outlined by Lexipol for 75% of the law enforcement personnel within 75 days and 100% of the identified employees within 90 days.
13. The City shall retain an ERMA-recommended employment attorney from the ERMA defense panel to provide the City with ongoing advice and counsel on any/all personnel matters. Such personnel matters include, but are not limited to, termination, lay-off, job/position elimination, demotion, transfer, significant discipline, administrative leave, ADA/religion interactive process communication, and personnel investigation. Advice and counsel services shall be sought before the City takes any personnel action. If the City determines that it would like to disregard any specific advice and counsel recommendation by ERMA’s recommended employment attorney, the City shall first confer with ERMA’s Litigation Manager prior to taking the particular personnel action. If the City successfully completes the Plan and ERMA rescinds its termination of the City as a member, the City will continue to abide by the terms of this paragraph as long as the City retains its membership in ERMA.
14. Lastly, as it relates to hiring practices for department heads, the City shall address industry recognized standard as follows: the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Police Chief, Finance Manager, Public Works Director, Human Resources Manager and any and all department heads shall be individuals with sufficient professional experience to meet minimum job qualifications for his/her position and shall have proper certification as required
15. Regarding the Public Works Director, it is preferred this individual has an engineering background. Alternatively, if the City is unable to hire a qualified full time Public Works Director, the City shall hire a Street Superintendent with experience and knowledge of Water, Wastewater, and Facilities. All individuals as listed above shall have professional recognition sufficient for the position he/she holds. This shall apply to any individuals that are currently placed in such positions and any new hire
16. The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with professional hiring practices for those individuals as outlined above for the identified employees within 180 days.
CIRA mentioned that it would be about four or five years before a pool might consider California City for entry given the City’s record and history.
On April 10, 2025, the City Manager and HR Director hosted a meeting with the Public Entity Risk Management Authority to discuss potential membership into the pool.
The PERMA representatives expressed a willingness to potentially work with California City, contingent upon a review of the City’s loss/run reports. If the City’s claims history is found to be comparable to other members within their pool, PERMA indicated they would consider partnering with the City. However, if the loss history is not favorable, PERMA stated they would assist California City in identifying and working with alternative insurance brokers. They emphasized that the process may be challenging, particularly considering the City’s prior removal from a pool insurance program.
HR staff is working on coordinating the document request list from PERMA.
Attachments:
1. May 19, 2022 CIRA staff report to require PIP
2. PIP Agreement
3. Augst 2022 PIP Update
City of California City Performance Improvement Agreement THIS AGREEMENT (Agreement) is made effective as of May ___, 2022, between the California Intergovernmental Risk Authority (“CIRA”), and the City of California City (“City”), sometimes collectively referred to as the “Parties”.
On May 20, 2022, the Board of Directors of ERMA voted to enter into a Performance Improvement Plan (“Plan”) with the City, which if the conditions of the Plan are met within the term of the Agreement, the CIRA Board of Directors will not consider termination of the City’s participation as a member in CIRA. The CIRA Board is concerned regarding the City’s governance and risk management practices in general but also as it relates to public works, contractual risk transfer, accident investigation, law enforcement use of Lexipol, as well as hiring practices for department heads.
Rather than pursue termination of the City’s participation in CIRA, the City agrees to increase the City’s self-insured retention with CIRA to $250,000 and to participate in and complete the Plan, which consideration is expressly acknowledged and relied upon by CIRA, as follows:
Performance Improvement Plan
• CIRA staff have met with the City staff to discuss the general framework of the Plan prior to consideration by the CIRA Board of Directors.
• The City Council shall adopt the Plan by resolution no later than 30 days following adoption of the Plan by the CIRA Board of Directors. Once the City Council adopts the Plan, the Plan shall continue for throughout the 2022-2023 program year, to be revisited no later than Dec. 31, 2022.
• As it relates to the Public Works department, the City shall address risk management practices as follows:
1. Document process and procedures used to (1) respond to traffic signal malfunctions and outages, (2) public requests regarding street defects and repairs, (3) encroachment permits (review, permit issuance, field observations), and (4) traffic complaint review and response. This documentation, commonly referred to as Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s) provides a description of the activity along with the purpose (city policies or other directives) and importance of performing the activity. Organizational benefits include:
Provide framework to ensure quality and consistency and ongoing opportunities for self-assessment of performance.
Provide good training tool and facilitates a smoother and more efficient transition for new employees.
Ensure intellectual and institutional knowledge remains with the organization and makes the organization less vulnerable to employee turnover.
Components of the SOP must include, at a minimum:
Explanation of task purpose and goals
Roles and Responsibilities
Regulatory/organizational requirements driving need or process 200
Description of what and how things should be done
Training requirements
Communication protocols
2. Contract with private company to provide traffic signal maintenance services.
Scope of services shall include:
24/7 Emergency dispatch and response
Preventative maintenance of signal equipment and controller by certified technicians.
Bi-monthly maintenance interval.
Pole and cabinet knockdown response and repair.
3. Implement improved Encroachment Permit application and Encroachment Permit.
Permits should include liability insurance as required by CIRA. Performance bonds should also be required to avoid financial risks to the City for defective or incomplete work by contractors.
4. Train either the building inspector or street maintenance staff to oversee and observe encroachment permit construction activities. This needs to include the ability to recognize proper traffic controls in and around the construction site.
The City must comply with implementing 90% of these items within 90 days of adoption of this Plan, and full compliance with each of these items shall be in effect within 180 days of adoption of this Plan. This shall be conducted by the City at the City’s full cost and expense.
• As it relates to Contractual Risk Transfer, the City shall address risk management practices as follows:
The City Manager, Assistant City manager, all department heads, and applicable individuals from public works, finance and purchasing shall complete a course for contractual risk transfer, such as those hosted by Robert Marshburn, at the City’s full cost and expense. The City may use Flexible Spending Funds to cover this cost.
The City shall send all contracts to CIRA and City Attorney for review to ensure adequate risk transfer. All insurance, as required by contract, shall be reviewed and approved by CIRA prior to commencement of work.
The City must comply with all contractual risk transfer training for 50% of the identified employees within 90 days and 100% of the identified employees within 180 days.
The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with contractual risk transfer for all contracts entered by the City.
• As it relates to major accident investigation within the police department, the City shall address risk management practices as follows:
201
For all serious vehicle incidents, involving fatality and major injuries within the City, the City shall contact the local Major Accident Investigation Team (MAIT) to perform the investigation.
For non major accidents, the officers of the Police Department shall undergo accident investigation training hosted by a POST certified organization or with industry recognized experts (such as Lexipol) on the most effective way to conduct accident investigations.
This training shall be conducted by the City at the City’s full cost and expense. The City may use Flexible Spending Funds to cover this cost.
The City must comply with all accident investigation training for 75% of the identified employees within 90 days and 100% of the identified employees within 105 days.
The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with all accident investigation training for all accidents that the City’s law enforcement investigates. • As it relates to law enforcement compliance with Lexipol, the City shall address risk management practices as follows:
The City of California City Police Department shall access and review the law enforcement library of policies available provided by Lexipol and update City policies as required.
Further, the City of California City shall implement all needed policies and shall provide training to all law enforcement personnel on the new policies or any changes to existing policies, include subscribing to and utilizing Lexipol’s Daily Training Bulletins . Lexipol is provided as a service to the City at the expense of CIRA. If additional services are needed by City from Lexipol, the additional expense shall be that of the City.
The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with Lexipol policies and complete training as outlined by Lexipol for 75% of the law enforcement personnel within 75 days and 100% of the identified employees within 90 days.
The City shall retain an ERMA-recommended employment attorney from the ERMA defense panel to provide the City with ongoing advice and counsel on any/all personnel matters. Such personnel matters include, but are not limited to, termination, lay-off, job/position elimination, demotion, transfer, significant discipline, administrative leave, ADA/religion interactive process communication, and personnel investigation. Advice and counsel services shall be sought before the City takes any personnel action. If the City determines that it would like to disregard any specific advice and counsel recommendation by ERMA’s recommended employment attorney, the City shall first confer with ERMA’s Litigation Manager prior to taking the particular personnel action. If the City successfully completes the Plan and ERMA rescinds its termination of the City as a member, the City will continue to abide by the terms of this paragraph as long as the City retains its membership in ERMA.
• Lastly, as it relates to hiring practices for department heads, the City shall address industry recognized standard as follows: the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Police Chief, Finance Manager, Public Works Director, Human Resources Manager and any and all department heads shall be individuals with sufficient professional experience to meet minimum job qualifications for his/her position and shall have proper certification as required. Regarding 202
the Public Works Director, it is preferred this individual has an engineering background.
Alternatively, if the City is unable to hire a qualified full time Public Works Director, the City shall hire a Street Superintendent with experience and knowledge of Water, Wastewater, and Facilities. All individuals as listed above shall have professional recognition sufficient for the position he/she holds. This shall apply to any individuals that are currently placed in such positions and any new hires.
The City must fully implement, follow, and comply with professional hiring practices for those individuals as outlined above for the identified employees within 180 days. • CIRA reserves the right to continue implementation of the Plan until such time as CIRA determines that the City’s risk management practices are consistent with and in compliance with the City’s obligations as a Member of CIRA.
For CIRA: For City of California City:
Kin Ong, General Manager
Date: , 2022 Date: , 2022
203
MEETING: August 25, 2022
TO: Executive Committee
FROM: Kin Ong, General Manager
ITEM: California City Performance Improvement Plan
SUMMARY: California City was presented with a Performance Improvement Plan to address certain areas of City operation that posed liability exposure to the City and CIRA.
The plan was approved by the CIRA Board this past May, and staff is presenting an update regarding the City’s progress towards achieving the plan’s objectives.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
DISCUSSION: As a result of two high exposure claims, staff uncovered concerns about how the City maintains documents and investigates accidents. In addition, there were concerns concerning staffing issues and the City’s approach to contractual risk transfer.
The Board approved a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) for California City, effective July 1, 2022. The PIP identified needed areas of improvement within the City’s public works operations, police department training and practices, the process for reviewing contracts, and retaining qualified personnel.
Attached is Mr. Doug Dunford’s, City Manager, updates on compliance with the PIP.
During the past two months, the City’s primary focus has been to hire qualified personnel. They have hired an interim Public Works Director and HR Director. They are actively recruiting for a Police Chief and Finance Director. The City has also changed the encroachment permitting process to ensure further compliance from residents and contractors (contractors were performing work in the city right of way without proper permits). In addition, they have reached out to POST to schedule accident investigation training and are working on updating their Lexipol manual. There remains additional work with policy development, operational practices, and training. Staff will continue to monitor the City’s progress and provide another update in December.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Implementing the recommendations in the PIP will reduce the City’s and CIRA’s liability exposure. The is no additional cost to CIRA to implement the plan.
ATTACHMENTS: Performance Improvement Plan, email update from Doug Dunford. 204
MEETING: May 19, 2022
TO: Executive Committee
FROM: Amy Northam, Deputy General Manager
ITEM #: Performance Improvement Plan and Self Insured Retention Increase – City of California City
SUMMARY: Concurrent with ERMA’s actions to implement a Performance Improvement Plan, and increase the City’s self-insured retention to $350,000, staff is recommending the Board of Directors consider implementing a Performance Improvement Plan with the City of California City and increase the City’s self-insured retention to $250,000 (from $100,000) or higher.
RECOMMENDATION: Executive Committee approve and recommend the Board ratify the Performance Improvement Plan for City of California City and increase the self-insured retention for the City to at least $250,000.
DISCUSSION:
ERMA’s Performance Improvement Plan: As the Board of Directors is aware, CIRA members are also members of ERMA for employment practices liability coverage. At the June 2020 ERMA Board of Directors meeting, the ERMA Board directed staff to proceed with a risk assessment for the City of California City. The assessment was conducted, and staff worked with the former City Manager to provide training for staff, management, and council members. During and after the risk assessment, the City underwent significant staffing changes, including the appointment of Anne Ambrose, Interim City Manager. Ms. Ambrose is no longer with the City as the interim manager, and a new City Manager and Assistant City Manager were appointed. The new City Manager, Mr. Doug Dunford and Assistant City Manager, Greg Greeson, started their positions in early May of 2022.
In September of 2021, ERMA staff met with Ms. Ambrose and Baron Bettenhausen, the City Attorney at the time, to discuss ongoing personnel concerns and the need for additional corrective action. The City was presented with a proposed Performance Improvement Plan (Plan) from ERMA that included stipulations such as an agreement to retain a member of ERMA’s defense panel for on-going advice and counsel relative to all personnel and human resource-related matters, as well as additional targeted management training. As a result, the City retained Tom O’Connell with Best, Best, & Krieger, and had targeted management training with Gerry Preciado with 34th Street Consulting. The City’s Council did approve the proposed Plan via resolution on September 23, 2021.
In November of 2021, ERMA noted that the City continued to incur significant losses primarily related to staffing and other changes within the City’s organizational structure. However, the City was actively addressing the Plan. Ms. Ambrose addressed the Board, acknowledging the City’s 205
challenges and discussing various steps recently taken to assess the causes of and solutions for these challenges. Ms. Ambrose reiterated support from City Council to adhere to the Plan and reduce the City’s future exposure and risk of claims. If the City did not fully implement the Plan, ERMA was going to terminate the City from ERMA membership.
In February of 2022, Ms. Ambrose provided an update to the ERMA Board City’s status of implementing the Plan, noting the City’s adherence to regular monthly meetings, providing management training to all leadership staff, and obtaining training for council members regarding governance practices and Council and City Manager relations. Ms. Ambrose also indicated she was coordinating with the City’s Human Resources staff to review and update personnel rules.
Ms. Ambrose concluded by stating the City will soon be reviewing applications for multiple management positions in an effort to identify appropriate leadership for the City moving forward.
In April of 2022, the ERMA Board of Directors was advised that the City had hired Doug Dunford as the City Manager, and would start in early May. Also, the City had hired an Assistant City Manager and was still committed to implementing the Plan. In addition, the ERMA Board elected to increase the City’s self-insured retention to $350,000, effective July 1, 2022.
The ERMA Board of Directors will decide whether they will proceed with termination of the City’s membership or not at the June 6, 2022, Board of Directors meeting.
CIRA’s Performance Improvement Plan: Concurrently to ERMA’s actions with the City, CIRA staff became aware of some high exposure liability claims. Two of the claims are generally related to dangerous condition of public property. As a result of this claim, CIRA staff uncovered some concerns with how the City of California City maintains documents and investigates accidents. In addition, there are concerns with regards to the City’s approach to contractual risk transfer and the indemnification and insurance language in contract. In response, CIRA staff is also recommending the CIRA Board of Directors consider a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), as well as increase the City’s self-insured retention.
Staff has drafted a PIP for the Board’s consideration and is attached hereto. The CIRA PIP concentrates on four areas: public works, contractual risk transfer, accident investigations by the police department, adoption of Lexipol policies and training, and hiring professional department heads. The CIRA PIP requires City Council to adopt the plan within 30 days of CIRA’s adoption.
The PIP outlines measurable goals for compliance, to help ensure the PIP is being fully embraced and implemented. If the City complies with the PIP, CIRA will not consider termination the City’s membership with CIRA.
CIRA staff have discussed the PIP with Mr. Greeson, and Mr. Greeson agrees with the steps CIRA is taking and supportive of the PIP.
In addition, staff is recommending increasing the City’s self-insured retention to $250,000 (up from $100,000). Please note that even with this increase, there will be gap between the City’s $250,000 and ERMA’s $350,000 self-insured retention.
206
FISCAL IMPLICATION: There is no anticipated cost to CIRA to implement the plan.
However, there could be a fiscal implication in the gap between the City’s self-insured retention with CIRA and the self-insured retention with ERMA.
ATTACHMENTS: California City Performance Improvement Plan. 207
California Intergovernmental Risk Authority
Board of Directors Meeting
Wednesday, September 28, 2022, 10:00 a.m.
This meeting will be held via Zoom
Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88010956448?pwd=TGJ5UCtXN0FRQ25paDI4TTdmUG0rZz09 Dial: +1 669 900 9128
Meeting ID: 880 1095 6448
Passcode: 159711
All portions of this meeting will be conducted by teleconferencing in accordance with the State of California AB 361.
Members of the public may observe and address the meeting telephonically. No physical location will be available from which members may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact Yahaira Martinez at (916) 927-7727 or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible, and at least one full business day before the start of the meeting.
Documents and materials relating to an open session agenda item that are provided to the Board of Directors less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be available for public inspection. Please contact Yahaira Martinez at (916) 927-7727 or [email protected]. [Note: The Board of Directors may take action on any item listed on the Agenda. The General Manager’s Recommendation for each item is solely the recommendation of staff and does not limit the Board’s authority to take action on any Agenda item.] Page General Manager’s
Recommendation
A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: DETERMINE QUORUM
B. APPROVAL/MODIFICATIONS TO AGENDA
3 C. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
1. AB 361 Resolution Approve
D. REGULAR AGENDA
7 2. Discussion Regarding California City’s Membership in CIRA – Kin Ong
Approve
E. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Liability Claims
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.95
Kanzler, et al. v. City of Watsonville
F. GENERAL INFORMATION
G. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
1 208
CIRA Special Board of Directors Agenda
September 28, 2022
During this item on the Agenda, the public is invited to address issues of interest.
H. DIRECTORS’ GENERAL COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS
FOR NEXT AGENDA
I. ADJOURNMENT
2 209
MEETING: September 28, 2022
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Amy Northam, Deputy General Manager
ITEM: AB 361 Resolution
SUMMARY: The Board of Directors must adopt a resolution that “the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person” so that CIRA may conduct remote meetings under the requirements of AB 361 and delegate authority to the Executive Committee to make future findings as needed.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve AB 361 Resolution.
DISCUSSION: AB 361 amends the Brown Act to allow legislative bodies of local agencies to meet remotely during state-declared emergencies under certain conditions. AB 361 was introduced to extend executive order (N-29-20) that applied to public agencies and teleconferencing during the Covid-19 pandemic.
A number of provisions of the Brown Act are suspended under AB 361. Some new rules include:
• agendas need not be posted at all teleconference locations. • each teleconference location need not be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. • each teleconference location need not be accessible to the public. • a quorum of the members of the legislative body do not need to participate in the meeting from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the public agency exercises jurisdiction.
Following are requirements for invoking AB 361 the first time that a public agency does so:
• there is a proclaimed state of emergency by the governor. • and one of these circumstances must exist:
state or local officials have imposed or made recommendations for social distancing measures; or the meeting is held of the local legislative body to determine, by majority vote, that an in-person meeting would pose “imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.”
Once invoked, legislative bodies may continue to use AB 361 if the following criteria are met:
• there is still an active state of emergency or local measures or recommendations for social distancing.
3 210
• every 30 days, the legislative body must make finding by majority vote that “the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.”
Staff recommends that the Board approve continuing to allow remote meetings as necessary since the state of emergency still exists.
FISCAL IMPLICATION: None.
ATTACHMENTS: AB 361 Resolution
4 211
CALIFORNIA INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CALIFORNIA INTERGOVERMENTAL RISK AUTHORITY
MAKING FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS UNDER AB
361 FOR THE CONTINUATION OF VIRTUAL MEETINGS
WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.) generally requires local agencies meeting via teleconference, including through other virtual or electronic means to, among other things, provide public access at each location in which members of the legislative body are teleconferencing; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature recently enacted Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which amended Government Code section 54953 to allow local agencies to meet fully virtually, without fully adhering to the rules otherwise applicable to teleconferencing, during a proclaimed state of emergency if state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, the Governor issued a proclamation declaring a state of emergency on March 4, 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, pursuant to section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act, and this proclaimed state of emergency currently remains in effect; and WHEREAS, state or local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and in particular, Cal-OSHA regulation 3205 recommends physical distancing in the workplace generally and regulates a “close contact,” defined as being within 6 feet of another under certain circumstances; and WHEREAS, the continuation of virtual meetings will allow for full participation by members of the public and compliance with the recommendations of state and local officials with regard to social distancing; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the California Intergovernmental Risk Authority desires to continue to hold virtual meetings pursuant to AB 361 and Government Code section 54953(e).
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CALIFORNIA INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK AUTHORITY AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The Board of Directors has considered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
5 212
SECTION 3. As stated in the recitals, state or local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing.
SECTION 4. The Board of Directors of the California Intergovernmental Risk Authority are required to hold public meetings shall continue to meet virtually in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) and without compliance with section 54953(b)(3), based upon the findings and determinations hereby made by the Board of Directors.
Approved at a special Meeting of the California Intergovernmental Risk Authority on September 28, 2022, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Nos:
APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________ ____________________
John Gillison, Board President Kin Ong, Board Secretary 6 213
MEETING: September 28, 2022
TO: CIRA Board of Directors
FROM: Kin Ong, General Manager
ITEM: Discussion Regarding California City's Membership in CIRA SUMMARY: California City was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) this year to address particular areas of City operations that posed liability exposure to the City and CIRA. Due to the resignation of the City Manager, the City will not be able to comply with the requirements of the PIP within the timelines established. ERMA also placed the City on a PIP, and the ERMA Board recently moved to expel the City due to non-compliance. As a result of ongoing challenges and constant changes in City leadership, which impact City operations and pose significant exposure to CIRA, staff is recommending the Board approve the expulsion of California City from CIRA membership, effective November 1, 2022.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve (1) expulsion effective November 1, 2022, (2) retain all unearned premiums which will be applied to future assessments, and (3) allow the City to remain in all fully-insured pass-through programs (i.e. property, cyber, crime) until end of the policy year or until such time the City secures alternative coverage.
DISCUSSION: The City of California City joined PARSAC in 1997. During the first 20 plus years of membership, the City and pool worked well together to address liability exposures and risk management related issues. However, in the past 4 or 5 years, ongoing personnel, organizational, and administrative changes have significantly increased the City's exposure. Since 2018, California City has experienced a high number of wrongful employment claims, and the City significantly exceeded ERMA's threshold for claim severity, claim frequency, and loss ratio. As a result, ERMA conducted a risk assessment to aid in identification of the causes of the City's poor loss history and sought to improve the City's overall performance. The City's risk assessment included targeted guidance from ERMA staff and specialized training aimed at addressing the existing organizational impediments. In addition, due to the City's loss history, ERMA placed the City on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) in November 2021, designed to assist the City in developing an effective personnel management process. Unfortunately, the City has been unable to comply with the terms of the PIP, and the ERMA Board recently approved expelling California City, effective November 1, 2022.
Although California City has not had a history of frequent PARSAC or CIRA liability claims, two recent high exposure claims uncovered some concerns within the City's operations, processes, and internal responsibilities impacting the public right of way.
Staff retained a public works consultant to evaluate the City's public works operations.
Several gaps in services capabilities were identified through conversations with City staff. The areas of greatest concerns were traffic signal maintenance and repair, review and response to traffic complaints, and inspection of encroachment permits. According to the consultant, the most significant challenges to properly addressing these gaps are the 7 214
City's ability to attract and retain qualified staff, specifically a Public Works Director and Street Superintendent. Since the previous Public Works Director and Street Superintendent's departures, the City has had no traffic signal maintenance and repair capabilities. This major gap makes the City vulnerable to risks and liabilities related to traffic signal malfunctions and/or damage to traffic signal poles/equipment due to vehicular accidents or power outages.
In addition, there are concerns regarding the City's hiring practices, approach to contractual risk transfer, accident investigation, law enforcement policies and procedures, and training.
The CIRA Board placed California City on a Performance Improvement Plan, effective July 1, 2022. The PIP concentrates on four areas: public works, contractual risk transfer, accident investigations by the police department, adoption of Lexipol policies and training, and hiring qualified department heads.
CIRA staff discussed the PIP with the City Manager and Assistant City Manager, and the City concurred with the steps CIRA was taking and was supportive of the PIP. In addition, CIRA and ERMA increased the City's self-insured retention to $350,000.
Attached are two updates from the City Manager, Mr. Doug Dunford, regarding compliance with the PIP. The City's primary focus has been to hire qualified personnel.
In July, the City retained an interim Public Works Director and Human Resources Director and is actively recruiting for a Police Chief and Finance Director. The City has also changed the encroachment permitting process to ensure further compliance from residents and contractors (contractors were performing work in the City right of way without proper permits). In addition, they have contacted POST to schedule accident investigation training and are updating their Lexipol manual. However, additional work remains with policy development, operational practices, and training.
In Mr. Dunford's September update, he informed staff of his resignation, effective September 16, and that a new interim City Manager would be appointed on September
13. The City is in the process of hiring a full-time Public Works Director and has hired a City Clerk. Additionally, the City will complete accident investigation training in September and award a traffic signal maintenance contract at the end of the month.
Although the City has made some progress towards compliance with the PIP, it falls short in many areas and will not be able to adhere to deadlines established under the Plan.
Additionally, the Kern County grand jury released its latest report and concluded that California City leadership is in "crisis mode," and the City's financial state is "shocking." After looking into the daily operations of California City, the grand jury found a lack of stability in leadership. The report found "the City's general ledger and financial position as unauditable" and "California City must move on from past mismanagement and solve this dilemma." The report further finds California City has had a high turnover in 8 215
department heads in the past decade, and the City has paid about $3 million in wrongful termination settlements and attorney's fees. Some of the grand jury's recommendations include:
The City Council should empower the City Manager to fill all director positions with permanent and qualified individuals by September 30, 2022. By March 2023, the City Council should complete an ethics course in human resource law and training in the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Fair Labor Standard Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. By December 31, 2022, the City Council should contract with a private agency specializing in human resource/personnel matters to advise their human resource employment and termination practices.
Under the direction of a qualified Finance Director, the City Council should ensure California City's General Ledger is organized (per Generally Accepted Accounting Practices), so an independent financial audit can be completed by the end of every fiscal year.
Given the gravity of issues surrounding California City's management and operations, the constant staff turnover, the challenges in hiring and retaining qualified personnel, and the inability to comply with the conditions of the PIP, the City poses significant liability exposure to CIRA and its members. Therefore, staff is recommending the Board approve the expulsion of California City from CIRA membership, effective November 1, 2022, which coincides with ERMA's action.
Should the Board approve expulsion, staff recommends the City is allowed to continue to participate in CIRA's fully insured pass-through programs such as property, cyber, crime coverage through the end of the policy year or until such time they secure coverage through another provider or insurer. In addition, staff has contacted two pools that will consider underwriting California City for membership.
Finally, it is recommended CIRA not return the unearned premium to the City (approximately $158,000). It is highly likely the City will be assessed in subsequent years, and this premium will be applied to future assessments.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Removing California City would result in a reduction of pool revenue of approximately $211,000. In addition, the City's general administration expense allocation of $35,000 will be allocated to CIRA members next fiscal year.
ATTACHMENTS: Performance Improvement Plan, email updates from Doug Dunford, Grand Jury Report.
9 216
10 217
11 218
12 219
13 220
From: Kin Ong
To: Kin Ong
Subject: FW: CIRA PIP Update
Date: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 10:05:15 AM
From: Douglas Dunford <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 12:24 PM
To: Kin Ong <[email protected]>
Cc: Amy Northam <[email protected]>; Douglas Dunford <[email protected]> Subject: RE: CIRA PIP Update
Kin,
The City of California City has taken the following steps in meeting the requirements of the PIP:
Hired an Interim Public Works Director – Certified Engineer Hired an Interim Human resources Director – ERMA approved hire We are releasing an RFP for Traffic Control Services this next week We have changed our encroachment permit protocol and included liability insurance and performance bonds. Currently waiting on attorney for approval for performance bonds.
We just held interviews for the City Clerk position yesterday and anticipate hiring a person within the week
We have contacted POST to schedule accident investigation classes. However, they can’t be online so we are trying to get someone to come to California City to instruct.
We have released a job announcement advertising for a Police Chief.
We will be releasing a job announce for a Finance Director opening next week.
We are currently updating our Lexipol manual
We have currently placed an announcement for AB361 for military style vehicles.
Respectfully submitted,
Doug
14 221
From: Douglas Dunford
To: Kin Ong
Cc: Amy Northam; Douglas Dunford
Subject: RE: Performance Improve Plan
Date: Thursday, September 8, 2022 10:36:20 AM
Kin,
Here is the current status for California City:
We are hiring an Interim City Manager. It will be on the Council agenda next Tuesday the 13th. He will start on Wednesday. His Name is Dr. Jim Hart. He has 10 years as the Adelanto City Manager.
I am in the process and hope to hire a Public Works Director by next Tuesday as well. His name is Wendall Well from the City of Vernon but lives in California City.
Bakersfield PD is hosting a Basic Traffic Accident Investigation Course for California City PD on September 19-23, at no cost to the City. We have five officers attending including a sergeant.
We closed our RFP for Traffic Signal Maintenance and trying to award it next Tuesday as well. If not it will be on the Sept 27th Council Agenda.
We have hired a City Clerk and will be sending her to training soon.
These are the major changes since our last communication update.
Doug
From: Kin Ong <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2022 4:55 PM
To: Douglas Dunford <[email protected]>
Cc: Amy Northam <[email protected]>
Subject: Performance Improve Plan
EXTERNAL MESSAGE: Use caution when clicking links or attachments Doug,
I heard it is now official and you are leaving Sept. 16th. I enjoyed working with you during this brief time and wish you all the best in your future endeavors. As you know, the city is under a PIP and you recently gave us an update on the city’s progress towards compliance. Attached is your recent update for reference as well as a copy of the PIP. There are several conditions that must be achieved by Sept. 30th. With your pending departure, it appears it will be very challenging for the city to reach these milestones. Can you provide me a status update as to the city progress before you retire? I appreciate your assistance. Please give me a call if you wish to discuss. Thanks Doug.
Kin Ong | General Manager | CIRA
15 222
2330 East Bidwell St. Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: 916-927-7727 | Cell 916-956-2158
Email: [email protected]
16 223
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
A Time to Come Together, 2.0
SUMMARY:
The City of California City (Cal City) has endured much public scrutiny in regard to how it has been managed by various city managers, finance, public works directors and city council members. In fact, a 2018 newspaper article highlighted the acrimony at a farewell ceremony for the out-going mayor and the welcoming of the new mayor and council:
GAVEL DOWN: INCOMING MAYOR AND COUNCIL GET A TASTE OF WHAT AWAITS THEM WITH THE BUDGET:
…Last Tuesday night’s City council meeting was the last one that [out-going mayor] officially “gaveled in” to start and “gaveled out” to finish as [out-going mayor’s] tour of duty as mayor of California City comes to a close. …one might think that as a matter of appreciation and manners that might have spared [out-going mayor] a raucous next to last council meeting, but then one would be wrong. Of course there was the usual tit-for-tat back-and-forth…squabbles on the dais remain even down to the wire, as was evidenced last Tuesday as a condensed window into city management headaches opened for all to see.…Meanwhile, the incoming council members[names omitted]…sat in horror watching what awaits them in a mere two weeks.
The 2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) has been tasked with investigating a compound complaint (Complaint) from a concerned resident. Indeed, the Complaint details 46 areas of concern which include water rates, water main replacement issues, missing water and sewer funds, accounting irregularities of the Tierra Del Sol Golf Course (TDS) and Proposition 218 (Prop 218) non-compliance. Concerned residents’ state City Officials do not respond to the issues they raise.
Preliminary research into the complaint reveals some areas of concern while other areas are readily explained. At the outset, one thing is certain—Cal City needs stability and strong, ethical, dedicated leadership.
PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:
California Penal Code §925(a), authorizes the Grand Jury to investigate complaints as well as the general organization and operations of cities in Kern County. To that end, the Grand Jury investigated this Complaint.
METHODOLOGY:
The Grand Jury conducted interviews with Cal City Officials and concerned citizens. Cal City agendas, minutes and financial statements were studied as well as previously published Grand 17 224
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
Jury reports. Also reviewed was internet information regarding Prop 218 and California Waste and Sewer laws.
DISCUSSION OF FACTS:
Proposition 218
One recurring issue in the Complaint is that Cal City did not comply with Prop 218 when it raised water rates and failed to pay its water bill. In November 1996, California voters passed Prop 218, the “Right to Vote on Taxes Act.” This act protects taxpayers by limiting the methods by which local governments create or increase taxes, fees, and charges without taxpayer consent.
Prop 218 requires:
All local governments to get majority voter approval for new and increased general taxes. The use of general taxes requires majority voter approval, to general-purpose governments i.e., cities and counties. School districts are not allowed to levy a general tax.
Stricter rules on benefit assessments so that, by definition, they must be calculated based on the benefit received by the parcel because of the project financed. Prop 218 created stricter rules for initiating or increasing benefit assessments. Now, an agency must determine the specific benefit the project will have on individual parcels. A general enhancement to property values can no longer serve as the benefit. Agencies put all assessments, charges, and usage fees out to a vote prior to creation or increase. In most cases, the vote will require individual notices be mailed to affected property owners followed by a formal protest hearing, which is required to move forward with the charge or increase.
Restrictions on Use of Fees. Prohibits local governments from imposing fees on property owners for services that are available to the public at large, i.e., garbage collection, sewer service. Fees charged may not exceed the cost of providing the service. Government agencies i.e., cities and counties, must pay their fair share of a benefit assessment, if the property receives benefit from the project or service financed.
Essentially, cities and counties must pay for their water and sewer. Government Agencies give voters the power to repeal. Allow voters the authority to reduce or repeal any existing local tax, assessment, or charge through the initiative process.
According to previous Cal City Officials, as cited in the 2014-2015 Kern County Grand Jury report, CALIFORNIA CITY, Proposition 218 and Water in the Desert:
Finding 2: Water engineering studies calling for a rate increase have been completed. The water customers were notified per Proposition 218 and given proper time to protest.
Approximately 20 letters of protest have been received. Several customers from the community protested at the City Council meetings. While there was a limited protest regarding the increased rates, most water customers were silent.
18 225
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
On April 7, 2022, this Grand Jury attempted to verify Finding 2 and requested documentation from the Cal City Clerk’s Office that Prop 218 was complied with. No documentation or evidence of compliance has been produced. Cal City Officials state, to their knowledge as advised by their legal counsel, Prop 218 has been adhered to. As of May 1, 2022, Cal City has not been able to locate rate increase notices sent to residents and there are no City Council meeting minutes that document the protest votes.
The City Council members are not well versed on Prop 218 and is not aware of how it must be adhered to.
Per Prop 218, cities must pay for their water and sewer. Since 2014, Cal City has paid for water and sewer, but there is no documentation that sewer and water were paid prior to that.
The Grand Jury also noted the following:
Water Line Replacement
A. Cal City has water, lots of it. It sits on a natural aquifer that is estimated to provide water to residents for several generations. The problem is the pipes—steel water lines, installed in the early 1960s, have rusted, are failing and are desperately in need of replacement.
B. In 2002, a Master Water Plan was adopted by the City Council to replace the water lines and recommended that replacement be phased in over 10 to 15 years. $20.4 million in water standby fees was secured, half of which was intended for water main replacement. Additionally, the 2004-2006 Measure L parcel tax collected $1.278 million for water main replacement.
C. As of April 2022, twenty years later, only 10% of the water lines have been replaced.
Cal City Officials recognize that this is largely due to bad or incomplete management and lack of accountability because of constant turnover of city managers, finance directors and public works directors.
D. Cal City Officials state water line blowouts are another contributing factor for the slow water line replacement process:
A blow out is a line hemorrhage that takes approximately five hours to repair. Cal City is averaging three blowouts per week. In one week, they had 10. Public Works has approximately 30 positions, 16 are devoted to water line maintenance and repair, and on call 24/7.
The water line blowouts and maintenance issues consume the majority of person-hours, leaving little time for water line replacement.
E. The Cal City Council is in the process of taking bids from private contractors to complete the water line replacements. This will be a dedicated work team, not employed by the city, whose sole purpose would be to replace the water lines. 19 226
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
Accounting and Financials
F. The Complaint also alleges there is inappropriate General Ledger accounting practices, missing and the comingling of funds:
The 2017-2018 and the 2019-2020 Grand Jury reports on Cal City detailed accounting irregularities.
An independent audit of Cal City’s finances has not been conducted since 2019.
In 2020, the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) firm retained by Cal City to conduct the annual audit, advised that Cal City’s books were unauditable.
This was due to constant turnover of the City Manager and Finance Director positions. The CPA firm has been working, in the capacity of advisor, to bring the Cal City books up to par. The CPA advisor states Cal City should be auditable by June 1, 2022.
In May 2021, Cal City was seized by a ransomware cyber-attack, which lasted seven weeks. Accounting systems were affected, and debits and credits were not properly kept.
A letter from a concerned resident to the City Council states there was $475,000 missing from the Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund for May 2021.
However, the CPA contracted advisor states, the money is not missing but appears to be missing due to accounting irregularities. The ransomware attack also complicated the problem.
The 2021-2022 budget was not adopted until December 2021; however, the fiscal year began July 1, 2021, and ends June 30, 2022. Cal City Officials state, the budget was late due to changes in city manager and finance director positions and because there was disagreement amongst the individual City Council members on how the monies should be allocated. The difficulties with the unauditable state of Cal City’s books were also a factor. As of June 30, 2021, the Fire Department is over budget and supplemented with reserves.
As of June 30, 2021, the Airport is over budget and supplemented with reserves.
As of June 30, 2021, the Police Department is over budget and supplemented with reserves.
As of June 30, 2021, TDS is $450,000 over budget and has an overall arears of $2.46 million:
o TDS is managed by a volunteer who organizes the green fees in an attempt to help salvage TDS.
o TDS has a clubhouse but no restaurant.
o The current green fee activity is not enough to support TDS.
G. The Complaint also expressed concerns about a real estate purchase authorized by the City Council in 2021. On September 3, 2021, in anticipation of expanding the city’s 20 227
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to accommodate the local prison expansion, the City Council voted to purchase 120 acres of land for $450,000 that had an assessed value of $116,900. The appraised value, at the time of purchase, is not known. Prison authorities confirmed there are no plans to expand the prison; that in the past two years there have never been plans to expand.
H. In the past ten years, Cal City has had a high turnover in department heads beginning with the City Manager. On April 28, 2022, the Cal City Fire Chief was the only permanent department head on staff. The City Manager, Finance Director, Public Works Director, and City Attorney were all filled with “interim” personnel.
I. In the past three years, Cal City has paid approximately $3 million in wrongful termination settlements and attorney fees.
J. On May 2, 2022, the City Council swore in a new City Manager.
FINDINGS:
F1. To describe Cal City’s leadership as being in “crisis mode,” is an understatement.
The City of California City’s leadership must be stabilized with qualified department heads for Cal City to survive. The practice of filling leadership positions with interim staff is not sufficient for long-term good governance.
F2. The new City Manager and the current City Council must bridge the communication divide that exists between them and the concerned residents. Cal City would benefit if all comments, concerns, or complaints were addressed and discussed by the City Council and the City Manager, for fact and truth to prevail over anger and emotion.
F3. The City Council’s lack of knowledge regarding Proposition 218 must be remediated. It is the City Council’s responsibility to assure that Prop 218 is followed and implemented.
F4. Cal City’s water line replacement program can only be described as derelict and incompetent. Previous City Officials have continually passed the buck. The “buck” needs to stop somewhere.
F5. The current City Council and the City Manager believe, the “buck” must stop with them. They are in the process of adopting a good plan that will eventually complete all the water line replacements.
F6. To describe Cal City’s general ledger and financial position as unauditable is shocking. Cal City must move on from past mismanagement and solve this dilemma.
21 228
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
F7. The TDS golf course may be an unrealistic dream. However, dreams must be separated from reality. Mired in debt and low green fee revenue, a grass-roots effort from the community may be needed to save it. As it stands, TDS may not be salvageable.
F8. It appears the land purchase for the WWTP expansion was done on a rumor that local prison expansion was imminent; that the WWTP expansion was necessary to accommodate its growth. In essence, an if we build it, they will come reasoning was incorporated into the land purchase.
F9. The $3 million in wrongful termination settlements and attorney fees paid by Cal City demonstrates a major shortcoming in Cal City’s hiring and termination policies.
Cal City management and the City Council would benefit from basic Human Resource law training.
F10. The lack of an experienced Human Resources Director has contributed to the large wrongful termination settlements.
COMMENTS:
In this report, three previous Grand Jury reports were referenced; a fourth is needed for context and balance. The 2018-2019 Grand Jury report, THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, “A Time to Come Together,” looked into resident complaints of fraud and collusion regarding the Measure “C” parcel tax election. The Grand Jury conducted numerous interviews, researched election law, and traveled to Cal City to observe the ballot counting procedure, and concluded Cal City ran a well-organized, legal, stand-alone election. Resident complaints of fraud and collusion, although well intended, were unfounded.
It must be stressed, communication between concerned residents and City Officials must improve in order to separate fact from anger and emotion. The subtitle for this current report is, “A Time to Come Together, 2.0.” The City Manager’s office and the City Council realize the “buck” must stop with them—they must make every effort to respond to each complaint they receive. Equally, the residents of Cal City, especially those who regularly criticize and complain, must agree to thoroughly listen and give the new City Manager and new department heads a chance to rectify the problems Cal City faces.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
R1. The City Council should empower the City Manager to fill all director positions with permanent and qualified individuals by September 30, 2022. (Finding 1) R2. Outside of city business meetings, the City Manager and City Council should schedule quarterly open town hall meetings, by September 30, 2022, with concerned residents; the goal being to improve communication and separate fact from emotion and anger. (Finding 2)
22 229
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
R3. By December 31, 2022, the City Council should complete in-service training on Proposition 218 legislation and review Proposition 13, the original Howard Jarvis Tax Initiative, which led to Prop 218. (Finding 3)
R4. By June 30, 2023, the City Council should complete the bidding process and hire a private contractor to finish the water line replacements. (Finding 4) R5. Under the direction of a qualified Finance Director, the City Council should assure Cal City’s General Ledger is organized (per Generally Accepted Accounting Practices), so an independent financial audit can be completed by the end of every fiscal year. (Finding 6)
R6. By March 1, 2023, the City Council should commission a feasibility study to determine adequate green fees to charge TDS users. The study should also determine if private sponsorships and government/corporate grants are available. (Finding 7)
R7. By March 2024, if the TDS financial picture is not on an upward trend, Cal City should prepare to lease, sell, or divest itself from the property. (Finding 7) R8. By March 2023, the City Council should complete an ethics course in human resource law and training in the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Fair Labor Standard Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Finding 9) R9. By December 31, 2022, the City Council should contract with a private agency that specializes in human resource/personnel matters, to advise their human resource employment and termination practices. (Findings 9 and 10) NOTES:
• The City of California City should post a copy of this report where it will be available for public review.
• Persons wishing to receive an email notification of newly released reports may sign up at:
www.kerncounty.com/grandjury
• Present and past Kern County Grand Jury Final Reports and Responses can be accessed on the Kern County Grand Jury website: www.kerncounty.com/grandjury RESPONSES ARE REQUIRED PURSUANT TO CAL. PENAL CODE § 933, SUBD. (C) AND 933.05 WITHIN 90 DAYS TO:
23 230
2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury Report
PRESIDING JUDGE
KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE, SUITE 212
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301
FOREPERSON
KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY
1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE, SUITE 600
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301
Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Cal. Penal Code § 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury.
24 231
CC 5
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
TO:
FROM:
April 22, 2025
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Victor Ponto, City Attorney
Karin Schambeck, Deputy City Attorney
SUBJECT: An Ordinance of the City of California City Amending Article 24.5 (Residential Tiny and Small Homes Overlay Zone) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Title 9 (Land Use and Development) of the City of California City Municipal Code (Second Reading and Adoption)
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Previously, the Mayor and City Council directed the City Attorney to modify the municipal code to expand the garage size to 1,000 SF for tiny and small homes in California City. The City Attorney’s Office has developed the draft ordinance and it is attached for reference.
Section 9-2.2455. Site and Structure Requirements has been modified to include the following:
Garages shall be no larger than one thousand (1,000) S.F. when constructed on a lot where the primary building is a Tiny Home or Small Home.
The modified ordinance is attached for a more complete reference.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 25-850 Amending Article 24.5 (Residential Tiny and Small Homes Overlay Zone) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Title 9 (Land Use and Development) of the City of California City Municipal Code. (First Reading and Introduction).
Attachment
1. Draft ordinance
232
California City, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:29 [EST] (Supp. No. 10)
- Code of Ordinances
TITLE 9 - LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 2. - ZONING
ARTICLE 24.5. RESIDENTIAL TINY AND SMALL HOMES OVERLAY ZONE ARTICLE 24.5. RESIDENTIAL TINY AND SMALL HOMES OVERLAY ZONE Sec. 9-2.2450. Purpose.
The Residential Tiny and Small Homes (R-THO) Overlay Zone District is established to provide housing options in specified tracts within the City by permitting homes smaller in size than the current City minimum square footage of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area, and shall be used for independent living quarters, designed as a permanent, year-round residence. ( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
Sec. 9-2.2451. Location.
The Residential Tiny and Small Homes Overlay Zone shall include City Tract Numbers 2898, 2812 (only if no homes currently on the tract), 3151, 3198, 2223, 2630 and 2404. ( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
Sec. 9-2.2452. Applicability of the R-THO Overlay Zoning District.
The provisions of this Article 24.5 apply to proposed land uses and development in addition to all other applicable requirements of this Zoning Code. If there is a conflict between the provisions of this Article and any other provision of this Zoning Code the specific provisions of this Article shall take precedence and control. (a) Mapping of overlay district. The applicability of this overlay zoning district to a specific site shall be shown on the City Zoning Map.
(b) Allowed land uses, permit requirements, development standards. Except as may be otherwise provided by this Article:
(1) Any land use normally allowed in the primary zoning district by Title 9, Chapter 2 may be allowed within this overlay district, subject to any additional requirements of this overlay district; (2) Development within the R-THO overlay district shall obtain the zoning approvals required by Title 9, Chapter 2 for the primary zoning district; and
(3) Development within this overlay district shall comply with all applicable development standards of the primary zoning district, all other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code, and the City's Design Guidelines for Small Homes.
(4) Small Homes and Tiny Homes shall substantially conform to the approved Small and Tiny Homes Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time.
( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
Sec. 9-2.2453. Permitted Uses.
(a) Tiny Home between 200 sq. ft to 500 sq. ft.
233
California City, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:29 [EST] (Supp. No. 10)
(b) Smaller Home between 500 sq. ft. to 1,200 sq. ft.
(c) All uses permitted in the underlying zone.
( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
Sec. 9-2.2454. Conditional Uses.
(a) All conditional uses permitted in the underlying zone. (b) Swimming Pools.
(c) Community and recreation centers.
(d) Parks.
(e) Garages, Covered Parking Structures, and Accessory Buildings larger than four hundred (4,000) S.F. in size. ( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020).
(e)
Sec. 9-2.2455. Site and Structure Requirements.
(a) The minimum lot area in the R-THO District is six thousand (6,000) square feet. (b) Setbacks shall be the same as those of the underlying residential zone. (c) Garages, Covered Parking Structures, and Accessory Buildings shall be no larger than four hundred (400) S.F. when constructed on a lot where the primary building is a Tiny Home or Small Home. (d) Garages shall be no larger than one thousand (1,000) S.F. when constructed on a lot where the primary building is a Tiny Home or Small Home.
(d)(e) Tiny Homes and Smaller Homes shall be connected to water supply source, sewer/septic, and electric utilities or solar with battery backup.
(e)(f) Tiny Homes and Smaller Homes are not required to have covered parking. (f)(g) Tiny Homes and Smaller Homes are required to have sprinklers and sufficient water supply for fire protection.
(g)(h) Mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the structure and not located on the roof. (h)(i) Tiny Homes and Smaller Homes must comply with all applicable State and Local Codes and Regulations. (i)(j) For each dwelling unit, the occupant may keep for personal use not more than three (3) generally accepted household pets, such as dogs, cats, small caged birds, and rabbits. Such household pets shall be restrained from doing anything which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to neighbors or to the neighborhood. No raising, breeding, boarding or kenneling of dogs, cats, small caged birds, or rabbits is permitted. Fish may be kept in aquariums without numerical limit. No bird cage or aviary shall be located outside the structures and within twenty (20) ft. from lot lines or within one hundred (100) feet of a place where food products are stored, manufactured or consumed by the public. (j)(k) All Small Homes must be placed on a permanent foundation and all undercarriage, foundation system, and external elements below the finished floor shall be screened or constructed with architectural elements that complement the main structure.
(k)(l) Tiny Homes shall have a minimum of four (4) of the following design features:
(1) Upgraded entry feature, such as transom or side windows around an exterior door; (2) Exterior accessories, such as permanent shutters, or fixed sunshade devices, or gutters/downspouts; Formatted: No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font: Bold
Commented [KS1]: This part regarding animals was
recently changed a few months ago in a different ordinance.
We need to be sure the final ordinance reflects all updates 234
California City, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2022-05-13 14:23:29 [EST] (Supp. No. 10)
(3) Pitched roofline (4:12 pitch or steeper);
(4) Dormers;
(5) Premanufactured skylights;
(6) Built-on porch or deck;
(7) Exterior residential light sconces or downcans; or
(8) Other features as otherwise approved by the City Planner. (9) The provision of more than one (1) item within the same category of design features may be counted independently towards the overall minimum requirements (e.g., including both a sunshade and shutters).
( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
Sec. 9-2.2456. Definitions.
(a) "Tiny Home" - A residential structure between two hundred (200) to five hundred (500) square feet of living area under roof installed on a permanent foundation, intended for independent living quarters, designed as a permanent, year-round residence for one (1) household that meets these following conditions:
(1) Has at least one hundred fifty (150) square feet of first-floor interior living space; (2) Materials used as an exterior wall covering shall as set forth in the Small and Tiny Homes Design Guidelines;
(3) Windows shall be at least double pane glass and labeled for building use, and shall include exterior trim;
(4) Insulation with values of at least R19 for the walls, R38 for ceilings, and R19 (for the floors if on a raised foundation).
(b) "Small Home" - A residential structure larger than five hundred (500) square feet of living area under roof, however, less than one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet installed on a permanent foundation, intended for independent living quarters, designed as a permanent, year-round residence for one (1) household that also meets the construction requirements set forth for Tiny Homes above. ( Ord. No. 20-779 , § 2, 8-11-2020)
235
ORDINANCE NO. 25-850
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, CALIFORNIA AMENDING ARTICLE 24.5 (RESIDENTIAL TINY AND SMALL HOMES OVERLAY ZONE) OF CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF TITLE 9 (LAND USE
AND DEVELOPMENT) OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 20-779, adopted on August 11, 2020, established an overlay zone for tiny and small homes (the “R-THO Overlay Zone District”) within specified tracts in California City (“City”) which was codified as Article 24.5 of the California City Municipal Code (“CCMC”); and
WHEREAS, the City desires to amend Article 24.5 to increase the garage size in the R-THO Overlay Zone to a maximum of 1,000 square feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. RECITALS.
The City Council of the City of California City finds and declares that the Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE 24.5 (RESIDENTIAL TINY AND SMALL HOMES OVERLAY ZONE) OF CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF TITLE 9 (LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT) OF THE CALIFORNIA CITY MUNICIPAL CODE.
Article 24.5 of the City of California City Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows in Exhibit A with deletions marked in strikethrough and additions in underline.
SECTION 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
The Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15061(b)(3) as the adoption of the ordinance will have no reasonable possibility that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. No further environmental review is necessary.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any chapter, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance, and each Chapter, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or 236
portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more Sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage by the City Council.
SECTION 6. CITY CLERK ACTION.
The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause this Ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation and circulated within the City in accordance with Government Code Chapter 36933(a) or, to cause this Ordinance to be published in the manner required by law using the alternative summary and posting procedure authorized under Government Code Chapter 39633(c).
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of California City on the 22nd day of April 2025.
________________________________
Marquette Hawkins, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_________________________________ ______________________________________ Victor M. Ponto, City Attorney Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk 237
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF KERN )
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY)
I, Leanndrea Weible, City Clerk of the City of California City, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 25-850, was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of California City held on the 8th day of April, 2025, and was passed by the City Council of the City of California at a regular meeting held on the 22nd day of April, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________________
Leanndrea Weible, Acting City Clerk
238
CC 6
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor, City Council, and City Manager of California City to Sign a Letter of Support for Aerospace Valley Futures, Inc. (AVF) Proposal for the Kern Coalition CA Jobs First Catalyst Fund RFP
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City has been asked to provide a letter of support for an application to the Kern Coalition CA Jobs First Catalyst Fund RFP.
The Aerospace Valley Catalyst Framework presents an integrated approach to economic development in East Kern County, building on the region's unparalleled aerospace testing assets to create high-quality employment opportunities in historically underserved communities with unemployment rates approaching 20%. This Last Mile project seeks $1,220,000 in California Jobs First funding to address critical workforce development needs, enhance regional attractiveness through leisure infrastructure, and create sustainable pathways for job creation through research & development innovation.
The framework leverages East Kern's unique aerospace testing assets, including the R-2508 restricted flight corridor, to build a self-sustaining economic ecosystem that reduces dependency on federal grant funding while increasing regional resilience and prosperity. The Aerospace Valley Catalyst Framework will build the foundation for a self-sustaining economic ecosystem by creating pathways to connect workforce development, regional attraction, and R&D commercialization. It will be implemented through an overarching civic engagement framework that will help establish authentic community ownership and accountability to create conditions where program benefits continue long after grant funding ends.
The project will be measured by the following key performance indicators:
Workforce Development:
● 100 resumes developed for un- or underemployed residents of California City and Mojave. ● 100 individuals trained in relevant innovation skills. ● 10 job placements at $50k+ salary level.
● Pathway to 20 job placements at $50k salary level annually. 239
The draft letter of support is provided for reference.
Attachment
1. Draft letter of support
240
[insert company letterhead]
[insert date]
Re: Kern Coalition CA Jobs First Catalyst Fund Collaboration Dear Colleagues,
I am writing in support of the proposal being submitted by Aerospace Valley Futures, Inc. (AVF) to the Kern Coalition CA Jobs First Catalyst Fund RFP. If AVF is selected for a grant award under this RFP, the City of California City will work together with AVF to:
1) Conduct a feasibility study for the location of a solar panel recycling facility in California City in collaboration with faculty from California State University Bakersfield.
If I can be of any additional assistance in clarifying the details of our collaboration or my familiarity with AVF’s qualifications for performing the proposed work, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
[insert name]
[insert title]
[insert company name]
241
NB 1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Joe Barragan, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Water Mains Replacement in Section 21 – Vivian Place Project BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
On September 20, 2022, the City Council awarded Lyles Utility Construction, LLC, the contract to replace 3 miles of steel water main around the perimeter of Section 21. Replacing this steel water main has allowed the City to connect the new PVC pipe to the transmission line to increase the pressure in that area. Some water customers were put on the new water line and now have increased water pressure. However, many customers are still on the old steel water main. At times, when our wells do not come on, or we have water main breaks in the first community, these customers will not have any water pressure or an amount of pressure that is not above the legal limit.
The goal of the Section 21 project was and still is to eventually have all the customers in this section on the transmission line. The next area that needs to be connected to the new pipe is Vivian Place from CCB to South Charles Place (approximately 1,000 feet). To move this new project forward, the water department needs to have plans designed for the water main replacement and presented to the State Water Board for approval. Staff has asked our City Engineer to provide us with a Task Order to design, communicate with the state water board for approval, put out to bid, and hopefully manage the project to replace the old steel water main with new PVC.
Once the design is complete and the state water board approves the project, Staff will bring back another staff report to have the City Council determine whether it approves the funding to start the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
FY 2025/26 GL# 51-5115-315 $24,200.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Task Order from BHT for the design of the Vivian Project for $24,200.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. BHT Task Order
2. Image of Pipes Replaced and Vivian Place
242
BHT# 25400 MARCH 12, 2025
TASK ORDER
VIVIAN PL WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT
NEW 8” WATER MAIN FROM CAL-CITY BLVD FRONTAGE TO YERBA BLVD APPROXIMATELY 1,262 FEET
BHT Engineering Inc. will perform engineering services and project coordination to prepare construction plans and specifications for water mains replacement.
The scope of work will include the following:
Surveying $ 6,000
Design Engineering $ 12,000
Bidding and contract administration $ 6,200
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 24,200
Not included in this proposal:
- Geotechnical Engineering
- Environmental
The signatures below serve as an authorization to proceed on Task Order from the City and are acknowledged by the consultant BHT Engineering, Inc.
BHT Engineering, Inc. City of California City
________________________________ ________________________________ Juan M. Pantoja, Principal Engineer Joe Barragan, Public Works Director
Date:__03/12/2025_____ Date: ______________________
243
244
NB 2
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Marquette Hawkins
SUBJECT: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of California City Appointing Gesele McBroom-Marsh and Della Clark to the Planning Commission BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission plays a critical role in shaping the physical and economic future of California City. As a quasi-legislative advisory body to the City Council, the Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing land use policies, zoning, site plans, and subdivision proposals. This commission is essential in ensuring that development within the city occurs in a safe, sustainable, and strategically beneficial manner.
Planning Commissioners serve as both stewards and watchdogs—protecting the public interest by upholding municipal codes and state land use laws, while also supporting responsible growth.
Their actions directly influence the economic vitality of the city, especially as California City seeks to attract new industries, improve infrastructure, and support long-term initiatives such as Vision 2050.
DISCUSSION:
In line with our goals to build a responsive and forward-thinking Planning Commission, I am recommending the appointment of two outstanding community members: Gesele McBroomMarsh and Della Clark. • Gesele McBroom-Marsh brings valuable experience in community advocacy and civic engagement. Her commitment to smart growth, environmental awareness, and equitable development aligns closely with our city’s planning goals. Her leadership qualities and attention to community needs make her a strong asset to the commission. • Della Clark has a demonstrated history of involvement in neighborhood development efforts and brings a practical understanding of local infrastructure challenges. Her interest in building code compliance, housing development, and long-term urban planning will support informed decision-making by the commission.
Both candidates have shown a deep commitment to public service and are enthusiastic about playing a more active role in shaping California City's future. Their backgrounds, values, and community insight will help the commission meet its responsibilities with diligence, transparency, and vision.
245
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with these appointments beyond the regular operating costs of Planning Commission administration, which are already included in the approved budget.
CONCLUSION:
The appointment of Gesele McBroom-Marsh and Della Clark will strengthen the capacity and reach of the California City Planning Commission. Their leadership will enhance our efforts to promote thoughtful development, enforce zoning regulations, and advance economic growth.
Their service will be instrumental as we address housing, commercial development, infrastructure modernization, and the regulatory foundation necessary for sustainable progress.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution approving the appointment of Gesele McBroom-Marsh and Della Clark to the California City Planning Commission, effective immediately. 246
4902-2380-0875 v1
RESOLUTION NO25-3128
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY
APPOINTING GESELE MCBROOM-MARSH AND DELLA CLARK AS COMMISSIONERS
OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City of California City (“City”) Planning Commission (“Commission”) is governed by the Califonia City Municpal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is comprised of five members (“Commissioner”); and WHEREAS, the terms of office for members of the Commission are for a period of four (4) years or until their successors are appointed; and
WHEREAS, there will be vacancies on the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Mayor has recommended that Gesele McBroom-Marsh and Della Clark be considered for appointment to the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of California City authorizes the following:
1. Gesele McBroom-Marsh is appointed to serve on the City of California City Planning Commission for the term provided by law; and
2. Della Clark is appointed to serve on the City of California City Planning Commission for the term provided by law; and
3. The term of the appointment for both Commissioners is from May 01, 2025, through April 30, 2027.
4. The Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.
The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of California City held on April 22 , 2025, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATED:
247
4902-2380-0875 v1 2
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
Leanndrea Weible Victor Ponto
Acting City Clerk City Attorney
248
NB 3
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
April 22, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Lopez, City Manager
Tech-45, Airport Management
SUBJECT: Discussion and Direction Regarding California City Airport Tenant Leases and Fuel Farm Upgrades
BACKGROUND
In 2024, the Mayor and City Council approved an agreement with Tech 45 to oversee airport operations. Since then, the Tech 45 group has begun evaluating operations and has prepared this overview for Council’s review, and to provide direction to the City Manager on recommended operations.
Staff is seeking formal direction on the following, which will be reviewed, analyzed, and brought back for Council approval pending direction from a majority of the Council.
1. Land Lease Rates: Staff is seeking feedback and direction to bring back revised land lease rates.
2. Fuel Farm: The fuel farm requires a new card reader, and staff is recommending the purchase of a new card reader to allow for fuel sales.
Discussion:
After a thorough review of existing lease rates and identifying opportunities for operating in a more businesslike manner, Tech-45 has identified the below options for Council discussion. 249
NB 3
Lease Rates:
1. Land Leases on Improved Land: 4 cents per square foot per MONTH, used exclusively by the lessor.
a. These are hangars owned by tenants, with sole use of ramp access when applicable. b. Typically no more than a 15-year lease term as we expect the airport to grow significantly and do not want to diminish future development to the City.
2. Land Leases on Unimproved Land (bare grass or dirt fields): 4 cents per square foot per YEAR, but they must use the area strictly for aviation purposes only. a. This means no parking vehicles other than aircraft or aircraft support equipment without prior specific authorization from the City for each vehicle, and subject to applicable FAA grant assurance guidelines.
3. City-Owned T-Hangars:
a. $120 per month for standard T-Hangar
b. $140 per month for larger T-Hangars that have extra space at the end of the row.
Any current tenants that are utilizing their land / hangars for non-aviation items would receive a 1-year lease with a stipulation that they must be compliant within that 12-month period. After that, they will be given the option for the 15-year lease like all others if they comply with all FAA grant assurances.
If the Council agrees with the abovementioned items, staff will prepare the necessary resolutions and items to be brought back to Council at a future meeting. If Council wishes to make other modifications, staff will bring back those proposed changes or modifications at a future meeting.
The Tech-45 Team has identified the fuel farm as an additional item requiring attention. Based on the terms of the agreement with Tech-45, a certain proportion of funding allocating towards the contract will be reinvested into the airport. The recommended expenditure is summarized below.
Proposed Expenditures:
1. Fuel Farm: The card reader for the fuel farm is non-operations resulting in a loss of revenue to the airport. It is proposed that the agreement with Tech-45 be amended in order to have the City pay for the cost of the unit and deducting the cost from Tech-45’s monthly contract for future invoices. This will result in approximately $20K left for reinvestment into the airport by Tech-45. The total estimate cost for the replacement is $34,000.
2. Landscaping/groundskeeping costs: Tech-45 initially identified a contractor to do landscaping at the airport, but with the proposed replacement of the fuel card reader, there is not adequate budget to accommodate this item.
Council Action/Direction:
Staff is seeking direction on the following:
1. Feedback regarding land lease rates and direction on bringing back modifications to leases and direction to the City Attorney to develop draft agreements
250
NB 3
2. Direction to move forward with the replacement of the fuel card reader and amendments to the agreement with Tech-45 to fund the card reader replacement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Quote: Fuel Serv Card Reader
251
WHEN QUALITY MATTERS AND EXPERIENCE COUNTS!
FUEL SERV
4190 Mission Blvd
Montclair, CA 91763-6012
+18005813710
[email protected]
QUOTE
ADDRESS
NEW CUSTOMER
SHIP TO
California City Airport
22636 Airport Way
California City, CA 93505
QUOTE # 25-0103s
DATE 03/07/2025
EXPIRATION DATE 04/04/2025
QTY DESCRIPTION RATE AMOUNT
SCOPE OF WORK: Fuel Serv will upgrade (1) existing FMU to FM Live with EMV. Fuels Serv will supply the FMU upgrade hardware and Start up fees for Fuel Master. Customer will work directly with Fuel Master to transfer data, proof data and build web base application. Customer will be responsible for setting up third party credit card processor as needed for EMV processing and getting all needed information to Fuel Master. Fuel Serv will program, test and perform initial testing with customer.
NOTE: FM Live will not require LAN or Wireless connectivity to customers network, unit will have a cell modem to connect to cloud hosted database. Also this unit will have an annual renewal fee of $2,716.75 for cell and data hosting services. First year is included in quote.
OPTION 1: Optional line item is included to remove and replace the entire pedestal rather than just the head unit as part of the upgrade. If not approved only the head unit will be replaced.
EXCLUSIONS:
-Communication cable installation of any kind (network/phone/serial/etc) -Pulling/install of wire from tank top to power source. -Repairs to lower pedestal of any kind to include wiring/rewiring. -Repairs, adjustments or service of any kind to fuel dispensers or dispensing equipment.
-Any optional accessories connection to FMU.
-Replacement or repair of damaged conduit, wire and/or junction boxes, above or below ground.
-Installation or pulling of new wire from source power and or communication cable of any kind.
-Concrete work of any kind.
-Cost increases of the equipment or materials 30 days after the date of this proposal, if increases occur the additional cost will be charged as an extra. -Replacement or repair of any existing equipment beyond the scope of this proposal.
-Engineering, architectural drawings, or blue prints of any kind. -Permitting of any kind.
252
WHEN QUALITY MATTERS AND EXPERIENCE COUNTS!
QTY DESCRIPTION RATE AMOUNT
-Insurances beyond those already possessed.
-Any testing not specifically mentioned it the scope of work. -Cost incurred due to delays on this project, not caused by Fuel Serv, such as delays in payment, project change orders or acts of GOD, etc. -The Client shall assume costs incurred do to change orders or delay in receipt of payments as scheduled.
-The Client shall assume costs incurred, after this proposal, due to regulatory directives.
.
1 TOTAL MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, TRAVEL AND LABOR - HEAD UNIT ONLY .
18,096.00 18,096.00
1 OPTION 1: FULL FMU REPLACEMENT - ADDITIONAL=
This is an option, and can be removed from the total, if only the Head Unit Upgraded is wanted.
.
15,207.36 15,207.36
PROGRESSIVE PAYMENT SCHEDULE:
UPON ACCEPTANCE 10% of Total
UPON SHIPMENT OF PARTS FROM MFG 75% of Total
UPON COMPLETION OF WORK Balance
**PROGRESSIVE PAYMENTS WILL BE INVOICED, E-MAILED & DUE ON RECEIPT. IF PAYMENT IS NOT RECEIVED WITH IN 10 DAYS THE PROJECT WILL BE PUT ON HOLD. AT 30 DAYS LATE 1.5% INTEREST RATE WILL BE CHARGED FOR ANY OUTSTANDING BALANCES & EVERY 30DAYS
THEREAFTER. IN ADDITION IF PROJECT IS PUT ON HOLD DUE TO NONPAYMENT OR ANY OTHER REASON OUTSIDE OF FUEL SERV CONTROL,
A MOBILIZATION FEE WILL BE CHARGED FOR THE ADDITIONAL TIME AND
LABOR TO REMOVE ALL RENTAL EQUIPMENT OFF SITE AND BACK ON
SITE AS WELL AS TEAR-DOWN AND SET-UP OF FUEL SERV TRAILER AND EQUIPMENT. MOBILIZATION FEE IS $2,500. WORK WILL ONLY
RECOMMENCE ONCE BALANCE IS PAID IN FULL TO INCLUDE ALL LATE FEES & MOBILIZATION FEE. MOBILIZATION FEES WILL BE COMPOSED OF
LOST LABOR DUE TO RESCHDUELING, MOVING PARTS AND EQUIPMENT OFF AND BACK ON SITE, ETC.
If you have any questions or need modifications to your quote please let us know.
SIGN, DATE AND RETURN TO PROCEED.
By signing this document you certify you are authorized to do so on behalf of your company and agree to all
terms, schedules, exclusions and scope of work here in.
SUBTOTAL 33,303.36
TAX (8.25%) 0.00
TOTAL $33,303.36
Accepted By Accepted Date
253