Calimesa City Council
March 20, 2023

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, March 20, 2023

CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: MAYOR DAVIS, MAYOR PRO TEM HEWITT, COUNCIL MEMBER CERVANTEZ, COUNCIL MEMBER MANLY AND COUNCIL MEMBER MOLINA.

STAFF: CITY MANAGER KOLBOW, CITY ATTORNEY BARROW, CITY CLERK

GERDES, FINANCE DIRECTOR REID, PLANNING DIRECTOR LUCIA, PUBLIC

WORKS DIRECTOR MONSON, CITY ENGINEER THORNTON, FIRE CHIEF O’CONNELL AND SHERIFF CAPTAIN SALAS.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Anyone wishing to address the Council on any item within the Council’s jurisdiction that is not on the agenda may do so at this time. This is not a time for City Council discussion of non-agenda items. After receiving public comments, Council Members, or staff, after being recognized by the Mayor, may briefly respond to statements made by the public or questions posed by the public. In addition, Council Members may ask questions for clarification or make a referral to staff for factual information to be reported back to the Council at a later meeting.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Meeting Agenda
Monday, March 20, 2023 – 6:00 p.m.

Norton Younglove Multipurpose Senior Center
908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320
William Davis, Mayor  Wendy Hewitt, Mayor Pro Tem
Jeff Cervantez, Council Member  John Manly, Council Member  Linda Molina, Council Member Will Kolbow, City Manager  Quinn Barrow, City Attorney The Calimesa City Council will be conducting this meeting in the Norton Younglove Senior Center. Members of the public may attend this meeting in person at the Norton Younglove Senior Center, 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320, or the public may view the City Council meetings live at https://www.facebook.com/cityof.calimesa or https://www.youtube.com/@calimesacity900/live beginning at 6:00 p.m.

Submission of Public Comments: If attending the meeting, public comment will be allowed by completing a speaker slip and providing it to the City Clerk at the meeting. Please observe a time limit of three (3) minutes when giving your presentation. When called upon, please step forward to the microphone, state your name for the record, whom you represent and any statement you wish to make. Please be advised that you may not defer your three (3) minutes to another speaker. Otherwise, public comment will be accepted via email. Please send comments via email to the Calimesa City Clerk at [email protected]. Identify public comment or the specific agenda item you wish to comment on in your email’s subject line. You may submit comments on any agenda item. Emailed comments must be submitted by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, March 20, 2023 and will be read by the City Clerk. Electronic comments on agenda items may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (909) 795-9801. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. Any public writings distributed by the City to at least a majority of the Council Members regarding any item on this regular meeting agenda will be made available at the public counter at City Hall located at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, March 20, 2023

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
RECOMMENDATION: Move to approve the agenda
Motion________________________ Second_______________________ Vote___________________________ CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 – 8)
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. Council will act upon them at one time without discussion. Any Council Member or staff member may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

1. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES.
a) City Council action minutes of a regular meeting of March 6, 2023

2. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COMMISSION & BOARD MINUTES.
a) Library Commission action minutes of 2/7/2023
b) Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission action minutes of 2/1/2023.

3. APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTERS.
a) Check Register Report with a total of $1,560,956.23 (Check Nos. 39965 to 40051) b) March 16, 2023 Payroll of $103,186.22

4. WAIVE FULL READING OF ANY PROPOSED ORDINANCES ON THE AGENDA.

This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text of the Ordinances. This does not take policy action on the Ordinances or approve or disapprove any Ordinances on the agenda.

5. COUNCIL TRAVEL EXPENSES
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council move to approve the Council Travel Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through February 28, 2023.

6. TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED JANUARY 31, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the Investment Report for the month ended January 31, 2023.

7. CALIMESA FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPIRATORY PROTECTION PROGRAM SELF

CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS(SCBA) PURCHASE AND REPLACEMENT AND WAIVER OF FORMAL BIDDING THEREWITH.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Approve Resolution 2023-13, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Calimesa Waiving Formal Bidding Requirements as Provided by the City’s Municipal Code in Connection with the Purchase and Replacement of the Fire Department Respiratory Protection Program Self Contained Breathing Apparatus Equipment.

2. Approve the purchase of Self Contained Breathing Apparatus equipment from Allstar Fire Equipment, Inc. in the amount of $197,173.34.

8. CITY HALL RELEVELING PROJECT BID #2023-01 – REJECT ALL BIDS.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Reject all bids for the City Hall Releveling Project, Bid No. 2023-01, and

2. Direct staff to obtain informal quotes for the project and return to City Council with an award recommendation and a resolution waiving formal bidding requirements.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, March 20, 2023

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORTS

POLICE CHIEF COMMENTS & REPORTS

FIRE CHIEF COMMENTS & REPORTS

MAYOR & COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTING OF COUNTY & REGIONAL MEETINGS This is the time for comments, announcements and/or reports on meetings attended at public expense as required by AB 1234.

BUSINESS ITEMS

9. REQUEST FROM THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO OPPOSE INITIATIVE 21- 0042A1, THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide staff direction on taking a position on Initiative 21-0042A1, The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.

10. SCHEDULING OF SPECIAL WORKSHOPS, AND SUMMER MEETINGS OF THE CITY

COUNCIL AS WELL AS CONSIDERATION OF THE POSSIBLE CLOSURE OF CITY HALL DURING THE CHRISTMAS AND NEW YEAR’S HOLIDAYS.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Schedule a Joint City Council and Planning Commission Land Use and Development Workshop for April 22, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.

2. Schedule the 2023/2024 Fiscal Year Budget Study Session for May 22, 2023 at 3:30 p.m.

3. Provide direction to staff pertaining to the 2023 summer meeting schedule.

4. Consider the closure of City Hall from December 25, 2023 – January 1, 2024, returning Tuesday, January 2, 2024.

5. Approve the cancellation of the January 2, 2024 Regular City Council meeting.

COUNCIL MEMBERS’ COMMENTS & REPORTS
This is the time for additional general comments, announcements, reports on meetings attended at public expense as required by AB 1234, requests of staff, and other issues of concern to Council Members may be presented briefly at this time. The Council may not legally take action on any item presented at this time other than to direct staff to investigate a complaint or place an item on a future agenda unless (1) by a majority vote, the Council determines that an emergency situation exists, as defined by Government Code § 54956.5 or (2) by a four-fifths vote, the Council determines that there is a need for immediate action and the need for action arose subsequent to the agenda being posted as required by Government Code § 54954.2(b).

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS & REPORTS

ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the Regular Meeting of the City Council on Monday, April 3, 2023 at 6:00 p.m.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 1
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the action minutes as presented for the Regular City Council Meeting of March 6, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: City Council action minutes of March 6, 2023 regular meeting.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 2
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the action minutes as presented for the February 7, 2023 Library Commission regular meeting and the February 1, 2023 Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission regular meeting.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Library Commission action minutes of February 7, 2023 regular meeting.

Attachment B: Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission action minutes of February 1, 2023 regular meeting

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 3
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Celeste Reid, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Warrant Register as presented.

SUMMARY: The attached Check Register Report for City Council’s approval is as follows:
a) Check Register Report with a total of $1,560,956.23 (Check Nos. 39965-40051) b) March 16, 2023 Payroll of $103,186.22

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4
SUBJECT: WAIVE FULL READING OF ANY PROPOSED ORDINANCES ON

THE AGENDA
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text of the ordinances. This does not take
policy action on the Ordinances or approve or
disapprove any Ordinances on the agenda.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5
SUBJECT: COUNCIL TRAVEL, TRAINING AND MEETING/MILEAGE

EXPENSES
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Council Travel, Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through February 28, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Council Travel, Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through February 28, 2023.

FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 5A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
15-Dec LOCC New Mayors/Council Academy $ 625.00 August 18th Yucaipa State of the City $ 55.00 1/31-2/2/23 Hotel for New Mayors/Council $ 693.68
1/31-2/2/23 LOCC Travel/parking/food costs $ 209.86
$200 transferred from Bdavis 2-2023
to clear negative balance
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ 1,528.54 TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ 55.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 121.46 REMAINING BALANCE $ 545.00
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
August 18th Yucaipa State of the City $ 55.00
8-Dec Riverside State of County $ 50.00
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ - TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ 105.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 1,450.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 495.00

JEFF CERVANTEZ TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

WENDY HEWITT TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 5A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
22-Feb transfer of funds to Cervantez $ 200.00
22-Feb transfer of funds to Manly $ 800.00
22-Feb transfer of funds to Molina $ 500.00
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ 1,500.00 TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ - REMAINING BALANCE $ 400.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 600.00
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
7-9 Sep LOCC Conference Hotel Residence Inn $ 608.16 August 18th Yucaipa State of the City $ 55.00 9-Sep LOCC Conf. Division Lunch $ 50.00 24-Sep Beaumont State of the City $ 65.00 14-Nov LOCC Riverside County Div. Dinner $ 50.00 16-Mar Banning Chamber Installation $ 82.00 30-Nov Flight to Monterey LOCC Meeting $ 468.20
$500 transferred from Bdavis 2-2023
to provide additonal funds for travel
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ 1,176.36 TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ 202.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 773.64 REMAINING BALANCE $ 398.00

LINDA MOLINA TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

BILL DAVIS TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 5A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
7-9 Sep LOCC Conference Hotel Westin $ 605.42 18-Aug Yucaipa State of the City $ 55.00 7-9 Sep LOCC Conference Parking $ 15.00 24-Sep Beaumont State of the City $ 65.00 7-9 Sep LOCC Conference Vehicle Fuel $ 31.21
15-Dec LOCC Mayor/Council Academy $625.00
1/31/-2/2/23Hotel for LOCC Academy $ 693.68
1/31/-2/2/23LOCC Academy reimb. Meals/mileage $ 155.38
$800 transferred from Bdavis 2-2023
to clear negative balance
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ 2,125.69 TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ 120.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 124.31 REMAINING BALANCE $ 480.00

JOHN MANLY - WYNONA DUVALL TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6
SUBJECT: TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED
JANUARY 31, 2023
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Celeste Reid, Finance Director and Treasurer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the Investment Report for the month ended January 31, 2023.

BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council Resolution No. 2022-61 approved on November 7, 2022, the monthly Treasurer’s Report is hereby submitted. The report complies with the aforementioned Council resolution, as well as Government Code Section 53646.

DISCUSSION: The investment report provides information in accordance with the Investment Policy approved by Council Resolution No. 2022-61. Information includes the reporting of realized and unrealized gain and loss activity for the respective month of reporting. Generally, unrealized gains and losses are the day to day increases or decreases in an assets value. Until an investment is sold for cash, the gains or losses remain unrealized. Realized gains and losses reflect the results of selling of investments and are the difference between the cost basis and the market value as of the transaction date of sale. The City will continually have reportable changes of unrealized gain and loss activity between cost basis and market value as underlying investments are subject to the variability of market conditions. Staff evaluates investment options on an ongoing basis to ensure reasonable access to funds and reserves are set aside to maintain availability of cash position for general operations and capital assets.

Significant transactions during the month include a transfer on January 13, 2023 of $750,000 from the General Checking account to the LAIF Investment Fund and LAIF interest and dividend earnings for the Quarter October 2022 - December 2022 of $143,654.82 received in January 2023.

FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue was recognized for interest and dividend earnings of $150,311 for LAIF, CFD and Successor Agency funds.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Treasurer’s Report for the month ended January 31, 2023.

Attachment 6A

CITY OF CALIMESA

INVESTMENT REPORT
For the Month Ended January 31, 2023

CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD FOR CITY OPERATIONS
Yield Interest &
Par Maturity Cost Market % of Coupon Interest Dividends Realized Unrealized Institution/Investment Type Value Call Date Basis Value Porfolio Rate Rate Earned Gain(Loss) Gain(Loss) Bank of America (Checking) 3,413,095 On Demand $ 3,413,095 $ 3,413,095 11% N/A None $ - N/A N/A Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 28,082,285 On Demand 28,082,285 27,559,652 89% N/A 2.43% 143,655 (522,632) - $ Petty Cash 400 On Demand 400 400 0% N/A None - N/A N/ATotal Cash and Investments Held by City $ 31,495,779 $ 30,973,147 100% $ 143,655

CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD BY THIRD PARTY TRUSTEE
Yield Interest &
Par Maturity Cost Market % of Coupon Interest Dividends Realized Unrealized Institution/Investment Type Value Call Date Basis Value Porfolio Rate Rate Earned Gain(Loss) Gain(Loss) Bank of New York Mellon - Successor Agency Bond Accounts Blackrock Treasury Trust Instl 10 (Money Market fund) 200,480 On Demand $ 200,480 $ 200,480 9% N/A 4.23% $ 684 N/A N/A Blackrock Treasury Trust Instl 62 (Money Market fund) 13,892 On Demand 13,892 13,892 1% N/A 4.23% - N/A N/AUS Bank - Community Facilities DistrictsBlackrock Liquidity Fund (Money Market fund) 1,652,418 On Demand 1,652,418 1,652,418 72% N/A 4.54% 5,520 N/A N/AUS Money Market (Money Market fund) 110,339 On Demand 110,339 110,339 5% N/A 0.00% 0 N/A N/AJP Morgan 100% US Treasury Premier (Money Market fund) 331,371 On Demand 331,370 331,370 13% N/A 3.60% 452 N/A N/ATotal Cash and Investments Held by Trustee $ 2,308,499 $ 2,308,499 100% $ 6,656

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7
SUBJECT: CALIMESA FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPIRATORY PROTECTION

PROGRAM SELF CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS (SCBA)

PURCHASE AND REPLACEMENT AND WAIVER OF FORMAL

BIDDING THEREWITH
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Tim O’Connell, Fire Chief
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Approve Resolution 2023-13, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Calimesa Waiving Formal Bidding Requirements as Provided by the City’s Municipal Code in Connection with the Purchase and Replacement of the Fire Department Respiratory Protection Program Self Contained Breathing Apparatus Equipment.

2. Approve the purchase of Self Contained Breathing Apparatus equipment from Allstar Fire Equipment, Inc. in the amount of $197,173.34.

BACKGROUND: Upon formation of the City’s municipal Fire Department effective January 1, 2018, as a result of the termination of the previous Fire Protection Services Agreement with the County of Riverside, the City Council authorized the City Manager and Fire Consultants to purchase the suggested, recommended and required equipment to provide “all risk, full service,” fire protection and suppression services. The compressed timeframe for the transition and the availability of open market purchase of some of the necessary equipment resulted in the acquisition of some reconditioned and/or in-service used appliances and or equipment, which at the time met regulatory and/or legislative guidelines, requirements, and mandates, to be used as front-line equipment for life safety firefighting operations. Some of this equipment included the Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) inventory, which was manufactured by Drager, Inc. The current inventory of SCBA’s were acquired during the upfitting and transition to in-house fire services and were procured based upon market availability within the transition timelines. At the time of acquisition, the year, services model, and operational requirements met the guidelines of the National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The units currently being utilized range from the 2007 to 2013 manufacturer standard.

The use, maintenance and systems upgrades pertaining to SCBA’s are reviewed updated periodically via the published the standards and guidelines as set forth through several sections of the NFPA and mandated by Cal/OSHA and the National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH). The in-service SCBA’s currently utilized by Calimesa Firefighters are two service standard guideline requirements behind the upcoming 2024 adopted standard for hardware and or software

requirements, outlined by NFPA and being mandated by OSHA in 2024. The current inventory of SCBA’s are unable to be retrofitted or upgraded to meet the 2024 standard and are required to be certified annually for use in Inherently Dangerous to Life of Health (IDLH) environments.

DISCUSSION: The action before the City Council is for the authorization to purchase equipment required for use during Inherently Dangerous to Life or Death (IDLH) operations. A General Fund appropriation of $176,000 was established for SCBA equipment in the FY 2022-23 Approved Budget.

The Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC) Section 3.15.130 authorizes the City Manager to make purchases up to $10,000 if three written bids are obtained. However, CMC Section 3.15.110, formal contract procedure, provides, among other requirements, that all purchases over $10,000 must be made pursuant to a formal bid process wherein there is a formal published notice soliciting sealed bids. The purchase of the replacement of the SCBA inventory (24 units, 48 bottles, 1- RIT Pack) falls within this category. Please note that CMC Section 3.15.050 provides that:
“The city council may, also by majority vote of its entire membership, dispense with such bidding and other procedures required by this chapter in any instance upon finding that it would be impractical, useless or uneconomical in such instance to follow such procedures, and that the public welfare would be promoted by dispensing with same.”
Staff recommends the formal bid process be waived for the acquisition and replacement of the current SCBA inventory. The reason for waiver of the formal bid process are as follows:

1. The replacement manufacturer, model, style, and specification being sought, has previously been designated for use by neighboring city, county, and state fire agencies.

2. Three competitive bids were obtained, for the same specification, from three different vendors.

3. The specification and pricing for the replacement units are at a reduced price point as they are considered as an “Add – On” to the ‘State of California – CAL FIRE” purchasing program through Contract ID 1-22-42-04.

4. A delay in purchasing may result in a significant inflationary price increase per fiscal quarter.

5. Equipment reliability of the current SCBA inventory is deteriorating.

6. The selected replacement specification is compatible and interoperable with the city’s automatic aid and mutual aid, cooperators.

Staff obtained several bids and evaluated several models and styles from potential vendors. The favored replacement SCBA is currently utilized and listed in attachment “B” of this report. Staff recommends the acquisition of the SCOTT Air-Pak X3 Pro and is requesting that the City Council waive formal bidding procedures and to authorize the purchase of the SCBA inventory as listed in attachment “B” of this report from Allstar Fire Equipment, Inc. in the amount of $197,173.34.

FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase of SCBA equipment in the amount of $197,173.34 will be funded by the General Fund within the Fire Department. The approved Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget includes an appropriation of $176,000 for this purchase. The difference of $21,173.34 will be absorbed with savings in other areas.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Resolution 2023-13
Attachment B: SCBA Quotes

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA, WAIVING FORMAL BIDDING
REQUIREMENTS AS PROVIDED BY THE CITY’S MUNICIPAL

CODE IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE AND

REPLACEMENT OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPIRATORY

PROTECTION PROGRAM SELF CONTAINED BREATHING

APPARATUS (SCBA) EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, Effective January 1, 2018, The City of Calimesa California formed the City’s municipal “full service. All risk,” fire department and authorized the acquisition and purchase of required apparatus and equipment necessary to perform fire protection and fire suppression services.

WHEREAS, some of the procured equipment is required to meet certain standards as set forth in compliance with National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) guidelines, as well as adhere to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) mandates, for use by firefighters in Inherently Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) environments.

WHEREAS, the current inventory of Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus’ (SCBA) equipment may no longer meet the requirements for use as described and may be unable to be retrofitted or upgraded and have exceeded their service life.

WHEREAS, the City’s Fire Department is in need of specialized equipment to support staff in the event of an emergency; and has identified an economical and suitable replacement system.

WHEREAS, due to a variety of factors, as delineated in section 1 below, it was determined that it was more practical, useful or economical to utilize informal bidding procedures rather than noticed public bidding procedures for this purchase and thus seek City Council approval to waive formal bidding requirements and the minimum requirements as would normally be required by the Calimesa Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, City Staff have presented sufficient facts to conclude that it would be impractical, useless, or uneconomical to purchase the SCBA by following normal bidding procedures, and that public welfare would be promoted by dispensing the same.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds that the waiver of requirements for formal bidding for the items of equipment or supplies values at over $10,000.00 is warranted in connection with the purchase of the described Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus as listed in Attachment “C” for the following reasons and authorizes City Staff to proceed with the acquisition of the equipment described: (i) The replacement manufacture, model, style, and specification being sought, has previously been designated for use by neighboring city, county, and state fire agencies.(ii) Three competitive bids were obtained, for the same specification, from three different vendors.(iii) The specification and pricing for the replacement units are at a reduced price point, as they are to be considered as an “Add -On,” to the State of California – Cal Fire,” purchasing program.(iv ) A delay in purchasing may result in a significant inflationary price increase per fiscal quarter. (vi) The selected Attachment 7A

replacement specification is compatible and interoperable with the city’s automatic aid and mutual aid cooperators.

SECTION 2: This purchase was allocated during the Adopted Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget, as a Program expense of $197,173.34 in Fire Department account 01-4300- 7725.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of September 2022. _____________________________________

WILLIAM DAVIS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

To:

Attn:

E-Mail:

Qty Unit Description Price Extension
24 Ea Scott - p/n X8814N25305303 / Air-Pak X3 Pro, 4500 psi (2018 Edition) CGA Connection, Standard Harness, QD Regulator with Rectus Fitting, Dual Universal EBSS with Rectus Fitting, PASS with Pak- Tracker, Fixed EZ-Scape Pro Belt, Less Spare Harness - Cal Fire Spec Includes:
$6,373.00 $152,952.00
(24) Mask - AV-3000-HT (S,M,L) face piece with Amp Bracket (24) Cylinder - Carbon 4500 psi, CGA , 45-min,
(24) EPIC 3 - Voice Amplifier
24 Ea Scott - p/n 804722-01 / Cylinder, 4500 psig 45 Minute, Cylinder with CGA Valve Assembly
$1,039.00 $24,936.00
6 Ea Scott - p/n 201215-28 / AV-3000-HT, 4 Point, Kevlar Headnet & Right Side Amp Bracket - Size: Med
$311.00 $1,866.00
1 Ea Scott - p/n 200954-12 / RIT Pack III, 4500 psig (2018 Edition) CGA Air Source Kit with Carrying Bag, Shoulder Strap, 6' UEBSS, 5' RIC Hose, Rit-Pak Facepiece, EZ-Flo Regulator with Rectus Fitting (Less Cylinder)
$3,237.50 $3,237.50
Terms: Net 30
FOB: Destination (Free Shipping on complete order Only) Delivery: 8-12 Weeks ARO or Sooner
Subtotal $182,991.50

7.750% $14,181.84
Rene Reyes S & H $0.00
[email protected] Total $197,173.34
Per your request, we are pleased to quote on the following. [email protected]
Phone 626-652-0900 Fax 626-652-0920
January 17, 2023
Sales Quote
12328 Lower Azusa Road
Arcadia, California 91006
Calimesa FD
Captain Vega
Quote Valid till 6-30-25
Cal-Fire Piggyback - Contract ID 1-22-42-04

Attachment 7B

Budgetary Quote
01/30/2023
Calimesa Fire Department
Attn: Fire Captain Matt Vega
Created By:

Steve Hanks
858-226-7420; [email protected]
Expires 04/01/2023
Line Items Qty Unit Price Total Price
X8814N25305303, NFPA 2018 X3 Pro 24 $10,928.17 $262,288.80 201215-28 – AV3000HT Facepiece 30 $479.47 $14,384.10
804722-01 – 45-minute cylinder, 4500psi 48 $1,802.83 $86,535.84 201275-01 – Epic 3 Voice Amp 24 $837.42 $20,098.08
200954-12 – RIT Pak III 1 $4,834.92 $4,834.92
Estimated Sales Tax for Calimesa 7.75% 1 $30,080.98 $30,080.98 Estimated Freight Charge 1 $998.00 $998.00
Grand Total $419,220.73

4343 Viewridge Ave.

Suite A
San Diego, CA 92123
Quote
Quote # QT1662753
Date 01/30/2023
QT1662753

Bill To
Chief O'Connell

CITY OF CALIMESA FIRE DEPTMENT
906 Park Ave
Calimesa CA 92320
United States
Expires 02/14/2023
Sales Rep Meyer, Lisa
Shipping Method FedEx Ground
Customer CITY OF CALIMESA FIRE DEPT(CA)
Customer # C206505
Ship To
Attn: Chief O'Connell

CITY OF CALIMESA FIRE DEPARTMENT
906 PARK AVE.

CALIMESA CA 92320
United States
Item Alt. Item # Units Description QTY Unit Price Amount Scott X3 P/N:

X8814N25305303
P/N: X8814N25305303
Scott X3
Air-Pak X3 Pro, 4500 psi (2018 Edition) CGA
Connection, Standard Harness, QD Regulator with
Rectus Fitting, Dual Universal EBSS with Rectus
Fitting, PASS with Pak-Tracker, Fixed EZ-Scape Pro
Belt, Less Spare - Harness
24 $7,260.41 $174,249.84
201275-01 EPIC 3 Voice Amplifier (Individually Packaged) 24 $565.19 $13,564.56 804722-01 CYL&VLV ASSY,CARB,45MIN,4500 24 $1,230.60 $29,534.40 201215-28 SCOTT NEW AV3000HT 4 POINT - KEVLAR - RT

BRKT - SIZE MED
6 $327.28 $1,963.68
200954-12 RIT-PAK III,4.5,LG,AV,RECTUS 1 $3,361.47 $3,361.47 To place an order please contact Lisa Meyer at (951) 903-3749.

Thank you for doing business with MES!
Subtotal $222,673.95
Shipping Cost $0.00
Tax Total $17,257.23
Total $239,931.18
This Quotation is subject to any applicable sales tax and shipping & handling charges that may apply. Tax and shipping charges are considered estimated and will be recalculated at the time of shipment to ensure they take into account the most current information.

All returns must be processed within 30 days of receipt and require a return authorization number and are subject to a restocking fee.

Custom orders are not returnable. Effective tax rate will be applicable at the time of invoice.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8
SUBJECT: CITY HALL RELEVELING PROJECT BID #2023-01 – REJECT ALL BIDS
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Mari Shakir, Associate Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1) Reject all bids for the City Hall Releveling Project, Bid No. 2023-01, and 2) Direct staff to obtain informal quotes for the project and return to City Council with an award recommendation and a resolution waiving formal bidding requirements.

BACKGROUND: The City Hall and Annex Buildings are in need of releveling. The uneven levels were made apparent to staff by buckling in the skirting around the buildings, roof drainage issues, and splitting carpets. As such, it is critical to get this project completed as to not further damage to these buildings.

In August 2022, staff had unsuccessfully solicited quotes from multiple contractors who specialize in modular buildings. Staff then asked the contractor for the City Hall Expansion Project, I.E.

General, to investigate the buildings and provide a scope of work and quote. The quote they provided was $13,300. As this is over $10,000, the City is required to obtain formal bids.

On February 15, 2023, staff released a Notice Inviting Bids for the City Hall Releveling Project. This project would consist of the re-leveling of the City Hall and Annex Buildings by installing blocks and piers. Only one bid was received at the March 14, 2023 bid opening from Three Peaks Corp in the amount of $26,453. This is over the budget amount of $10,000 and higher than the quote received by I.E. General.

It is in the City’s best interest to forego the re-bidding of this project and re-solicit informal quotes.

Staff will return to council with an award recommendation and a resolution waiving formal bidding requirements.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Three Peaks Bid

Attachment 8A

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9
SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO OPPOSE INITIATIVE 21-0042A1, THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION

AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PREPARED BY: Will Kolbow, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide staff direction on taking a position on Initiative 21-0042A1, The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.

DISCUSSION: On Jan. 4, 2022, the California Business Roundtable filed the “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act” or AG# 21-0042A1. On Feb. 1, 2023, the measure qualified for the November 2024 ballot.

The League of California Cities has stated their opposition to the Initiative and has requested that member cities consider adopting Resolutions to oppose the Initiative. Staff has attached a sample Resolution based on a form provided by the League.

According to the League, the major provisions of the Act are as follows:

Fees and Charges
• Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.
• Requires fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property and the amount paid to purchase or rent government property to be “reasonable.” These fees and charges are currently allowed to be market-based. Whether the amount is “reasonable” (introducing a new legal standard) must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.” The standard may significantly reduce the amount companies that use the public right-of-way will pay for the use of local public property.
• Franchise fees — historically considered fees, not taxes — will more likely be considered taxes due to the elimination of an existing category of “fee” and the requirement that charges to entrance, purchase, rental, or lease of government property be “reasonable.” The state and cities issue franchises to utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations.
• Prohibits fees on new development based on vehicle miles traveled.

Taxes
• Taxes and fees adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
• Invalidates Upland decision that allows a majority of local voters to pass special taxes. The measure specifies that taxes proposed by the initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council.
• Requires voter approval to expand existing taxes (e.g., Utility, Transient Occupancy) to new territory (e.g., annexations) or to expand the tax base (e.g., new utility service). • New taxes can only be imposed for a specific time period. • City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • All state taxes require majority voter approval.

Fines and Penalties
• May require voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for violators of state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact resulting from any City Council action relating to this item. If the Initiative were to pass, it could have an impact on the City’s franchise fees, fees and charges for services, and fines and penalties revenue.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Sample Resolution Opposing Initiative 21-0042A1 Attachment B: Full Text of Initiative
Attachment C: Fiscal and Program Effects of Initiative 21-0042A1 on Local Governments provided by California City Finance

SAMPLE RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA OPPOSING STATEWIDE INITIATIVE 21-0042A1 ENTITLED

THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations and developers is spending millions to push a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2024 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and WHEREAS, the measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure and our environment; and WHEREAS, the measure may make it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to local services at risk and could force cuts to fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City of Calimesa opposes Initiative 21-0042A1.

Section 2. The City of Calimesa will join the No on Initiative 21-0042A1 Coalition, a growing coalition of public safety, education, labor, local government, and infrastructure groups throughout the state.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of March, 2023. _____________________________________

WILLIAM DAVIS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

Attachment 9A
BELL, McANDREWS & HILTACHK, LLP
Anabel Renteria
Initiative Coordinator
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSEL-ORS AT I.AW
455 C APITO L MALL, S UITE 600
SACRAMENTO, CALIFOE=INIA 95014
(916) 44;a-7757
FAX [916) 44-;a-77 59
www.bmhlaw.com
January 4, 2022
2 1 - 0 0 4 2

RECEIVED
JAN O 4 2022
Office of the Attorney General
State of California

INITIATIVE COORDINATOR

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
PO Box 994255
Sacramento, CA 94244-25550
Re: Initiative 21-0042 - Amendment Number One
Dear Initiative Coordinator:

Pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 9002 of the Elections Code, enclosed please find Amendment #1 to Initiative No. 21-0042 "The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act." The amendments are reasonably germane to the theme, purpose or subject of the initiative measure as originally proposed.

I am the proponent of the measure and request that the Attorney General prepare a circulating title and summary of the measure as provided by law, using the amended language.

Thank you for your time and attention processing my request.

Sincerely,
Thomas W.
~ Hiltachk
Attachment 9B

2 1 - 0 0 4 2 Arndt. # /
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act [Deleted codified text is denoted in strikeout. Added codified text is denoted by italics and underline.] Section 1. Title
This Act shall be known, and may be cited as, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.

Section 2. Findings and Declarations
(a) Californians are overtaxed. We pay the nation's highest state income tax, sales tax, and gasoline tax. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, California's combined state and local tax burden is the highest in the nation. Despite this, and despite two consecutive years of obscene revenue surpluses, state politicians in 2021 alone introduced legislation to raise more than $234 billion in new and higher taxes and fees.
(b) Taxes are only part of the reason for California's rising cost-of-living crisis. Californians pay billions more in hidden "fees" passed through to consumers in the price they pay for products, services, food, fuel, utilities and housing. Since 2010, government revenue from state and local "fees" has more than doubled.
(c) California's high cost of living not only contributes to the state's skyrocketing rates of poverty and homelessness, they are the pushing working families and job-providing businesses out of the state. The most recent Census showed that California's population dropped for the first time in history, costing us a seat in Congress. In the past four years, nearly 300 major corporations relocated to other states, not counting thousands more small businesses that were forced to move, sell or close. (d) California voters have tried repeatedly, at great expense, to assert control over whether and how taxes and fees are raised. We have enacted a series of measures to make taxes more predictable, to limit what passes as a "fee," to require voter approval, and to guarantee transparency and accountability. These measures include Proposition 13 (1978), Proposition 62 (1986), Proposition 218 (1996), and Proposition 26 (2010).
(e) Contrary to the voters' intent, these measures that were designed to control taxes, spending and accountability, have been weakened and hamstrung by the Legislature, government lawyers, and the courts, making it necessary to pass yet another initiative to close loopholes and reverse hostile court decisions.

Section 3. Statement of Purpose
(a) In enacting this measure, the voters reassert their right to a voice and a vote on new and higher taxes by requiring any new or higher tax to be put before voters for approval. Voters also intend that all fees and other charges are passed or rejected by the voters themselves or a governing body elected by voters and not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.
(b) Furthermore, the purpose and intent of the voters in enacting this measure is to increase transparency and accountability over higher taxes and charges by requiring any tax measure placed on the ballot1

either at the state or local level-to clearly state the type and rate of any tax, how long it will be in effect, and the use of the revenue generated by the tax.
(c) Furthermore, the purpose and intent of the voters in enacting this measure is to clarify that any new or increased form of state government revenue, by any name or manner of extraction paid directly or indirectly by Californians, shall be authorized only by a vote of the Legislature and signature of the Governor to ensure that the purposes for such charges are broadly supported and transparently debated. (d) Furthermore, the purpose and intent of the voters in enacting this measure is also to ensure that taxpayers have the right and ability to effectively balance new or increased taxes and other charges with the rapidly increasing costs Californians are already paying for housing, food, childcare, gasoline, energy, healthcare, education, and other basic costs of living, and to further protect the existing constitutional limit on property taxes and ensure that the revenue from such taxes remains local, without changing or superseding existing constitutional provisions contained in Section 1{c) of Article XIII A. (e) In enacting this measure, the voters also additionally intend to reverse loopholes in the legislative twothirds vote and voter approval requirements for government revenue increases created by the courts including, but not limited to, Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, Chamber of Commerce v. Air Resources Board, Schmeer v. Los Angeles County, Johnson v. County of Mendocino, Citizens Assn. of Sunset Beach v.

Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission, and Wilde v. City of Dunsmuir.

Section 4. Section 3 of Article XIII A of the California Constitution is amended to read:

Sec. 3(a} Every levy, charge. or exaction of any kind imposed by state law is either a tax or an exempt charge.
illlJ1l ~ Any change in state statute Jaw which results in any taxpayer paying a new or higher tax must be imposed by an act passed by not less than two-thirds of all members elected to each of the two houses of the Legislature, and submitted to the electorate and approved by a maiority vote, except that no new ad valorem taxes on real property, or sales or transaction taxes on the sales of real property, may be imposed. Each Act shall include:
(A) A specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed and an estimate of the annual amount expected to be derived from the tax.
(BJ A specific and legally binding and enforceable limitation on how the revenue from the tax can be spent.

If the revenue from the tax can be spent for unrestricted general revenue purposes. then a statement that the tax revenue can be spent for "unrestricted general revenue purposes" shall be included in a separate, stand-alone section. Any proposed change to the use of the revenue from the tax shall be adopted by a separate act that is passed by not less than two-thirds of all members elected to each of the two houses of the Legislature and submitted to the electorate and approved by a maiority vote. (2) The title and summary and ballot label or question required for a measure pursuant to the Elections Code shall. for each measure providing for the imposition of a tax, including a measure proposed by an elector pursuant to Article II, include:
{A) The type and amount or rate of the tax;
(BJ The duration of the tax: and
2

(CJ The use of the revenue derived from the tax.
(c} Any change in state law which results in any taxpayer paying a new or higher exempt charge must be imposed by an act passed by each of the two houses of the Legislature. Each act shall specify the type of exempt charge as provided in subdivision (e ), and the amount or rate of the exempt charge to be imposed.

Ml._fbt As used in this section and in Section 9 of Article II, "tax" means every aA1f levy, charge, or exaction of any kind imposed by the State state law that is not an exempt charge. e1<eept the follo•Ning:
(e) As used in this section. "exempt charge" means only the following:
(1) a el:iarge imposes fer a s1=1eeifie eenefit eonferreEl or pri'+'ilege granteEl aireetly to tl:ie 13ayor tl:iat is not 1=1ro>viaeEl to tl:iose not et:iargeEI, anEI whiel:i aoes not e1<ceeEl tl:ie reasonal3Ie costs to tl:ie State of eonferring the benefit or granting the pri¥ilege to the 1=1a¥OF.
ill {-2+ A reasonable charge irnposeEl for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the rnasonable actual costs to the State of providing the service or product to the payor. f.11 ~ A charge in,poseEl for the reasonable regulatory costs to the State incident to issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof. (3) A levy, charge. or exaction collected from local units of government. health care providers or health care service plans that is primarily used by the State of California for the purposes of increasing reimbursement rates or payments under the Medi-Cal program, and the revenues of which are primarily used to finance the non-federal portion of Medi-Cal medical assistance expenditures. (4) A reasonable charge iR'l13oseEl for entrance to or use of state property, or the purchase. rental, or lease of state property, except charges governed by Section 15 of Article XI. (5} A fine, or penalty, or other monetary el:large including any applicable interest for nonpayment thereot imposed by the judicial branch of government or the State, as a result of a state administrative enforcement agency pursuant to adiudicatorv due process, to punish a violation of law. (6} A levy, charge, assessment, or exaction collected for the promotion of California tourism pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 13995) of Part 4.7 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. flL~Any tax or exempt charge adopted after January 1, 2022 ~, but prior to the effective date of this act, that was not adopted in compliance with the requirements of this section is void 12 months after the effective date of this act unless the tax or exempt charge is reenacted B'l the begislatuFe anel signea into law ey tl:ie <iio¥ernoF in compliance with the requirements of this section. [gl[.JlJG:} The State bears the burden of proving by a preponEleranee oftl:le clear and convincing evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is an exempt charge and not a tax. The State bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the amount of the exempt charge is reasonable and that the amount charged does not exceed the actual cost of providing the service or product to the payor. ,tR-a-t tl:ie amouRt is RO n,ore tl:ian neeessary to cover the reasonable costs of the go•.•emn,ental actii,•i:t>,• ane 3

that the manner in •Nhiel.:i these cests are allecated ts a pa·1er bear a fair er reasenable relatienshi13 ts the 13a·1or's b1:1relens on, or benefits reeei11eel from, the go•.ieFRmental actit.iit'( (2) The retention ofrevenue by, or the payment to. a non-governmental entity ofa levv. charge, or exaction of any kind imposed by state law, shall not be a factor in determining whether the levy. charge, or exaction is a tax or exempt charge.
(3) The characterization of a levy, charge, or exaction of any kind as being voluntary, or paid in exchange for a benefit, privilege, allowance, authorization, or asset, shall not be a factor in determining whether the levy, charge, or exaction is a tax or an exempt charge. /4} The use of revenue derived from the levy, charge or exaction shall be a factor in determining whether the levy, charge, or exaction is a tax or exempt charge. (h) As used in this section:
(1) "Actual cost" of providing a service or product means: (i) the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the government for the cost of providing the service or product to the payor, and {ii) where the amount charged is not used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost. In computing "actual cost" the maximum amount that may be imposed is the actual cost less all other sources of revenue including, but not limited to taxes, other exempt charges, grants, and state or federal funds received to provide such service or product.
(2) "Extend" includes, but is not limited to, doing any of the following with respect to a tax or exempt charge: lengthening its duration. delaying or eliminating its expiration, expanding its application to a new territory or class ofpayor, or expanding the base to which its rate is applied. (3) "Impose" means adopt, enact, reenact, create, establish, collect, increase or extend. (4) "State law" includes, but is not limited to. any state statute, state regulation, state executive order. state resolution, state ruling, state opinion Jetter, or other legal authority or interpretation adopted, enacted. enforced, issued, or implemented by the legislative or executive branches of state government. "State law" does not include actions taken by the Regents of the University of California, Trustees of the California State University, or the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.

Section 5. Section 1 of Article XIII C of the California Constitution is amended, to read:

Sec. 1. Definitions. As used in this article:
{a) "Actual cost" of providing a service or product means: (i) the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the government for the cost of providing the service or product to the payor. and {ii) where the amount charged is not used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost. In computing "actual cost" the maximum amount that may be imposed is the actual cost less all other sources of revenue including, but not limited to taxes. other exempt charges, grants, and state or federal funds received to provide such service or product.
(b) "Extend" includes, but is not limited to. doing any of the following with respect to a tax. exempt charge, or Article XIII D assessment. fee, or charge: lengthening its duration, delaying or eliminating its expiration. expanding its application to a new territory or class of payor, or expanding the base to which its rate is applied.
4

.lfl..W 11General tax" means any tax imposed for general governmental purposes. (d} "Impose" means adopt, enact, reenact, create, establish, collect, increase, or extend. {clJb} "Local government" means any county, city, city and county, including a charter city or county, any special district, or any other local or regional governmental entity, or an elector pursuant to Article fl or the initiative power provided by a charter or statute.
(f) "Local law" includes. but is not limited to, any ordinance, resolution, regulation. ruling, opinion letter, or other legal authority or interpretation adopted, enacted, enforced, issued, or implemented by a local government.
{gl_{t} "Special district" means an agency of the State, formed pursuant to general law or a special act, for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions with limited geographic boundaries including, but not limited to, school districts and redevelopment agencies. f11L{d} "Special tax" means any tax imposed for specific purposes, including a tax imposed for specific purposes, which is placed into a general fund.
111 i@} As used in this article, and in Section 9 of Article II, "tax" means every aRV-levy, charge, or exaction of any kind, imposed by a local go,;ernmeRt law that is not an exempt charge., exeept tl=le fellowiRg:
(i) As used in this section, "exempt charge" means only the following:
(1) A cl=large imposeel fer a speeifie beAefit eoAferreel or pri,;ilege graAteel eliFeetl')' to tl=le pa1,ior tl=lat is Rot pre1,•ieleel to these Rot ehargea, aA£l which £lees Rot exeeeel tl=le reaseAable costs to tl=le loeal gm,·ernFAeAt of conferriAg the beAefit or graAting tl:1e pri¥ilege.
ill R} A reasonable charge imposes for a specific local government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasoAable actual costs to the local government of providing the service or product. fl1 WA charge im13ose£l for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof.

W {4t A reasonable charge imposeel for entrance to or use of local government property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of local government property.

Ml. fSt A fine, or penalty, or other FAOA@tar,· eharge including any applicable interest for nonpayment thereat imposed by the judicial branch of government or a local government administrative enforcement agency pursuant to adiudicatorv due process, as a res1,1lt of to punish a violation of law. ill -f6t A charge imposed as a condition of property development. No levv, charge, or exaction regulating or related to vehicle miles traveled may be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy. f.i1 f7t An AssessFAeRts a Rel property relate el fees assessment. fee. or charge imJ;1oseel iA aeeoraanee witl=l the pro¥isio A5 of subject to Article XI 11 D, or an assessment imposed upon a business in a tourism marketing district, a parking and business improvement area, or a property and business improvement district. 5

(7) A charge imposed for a specific health care service provided directly to the payor and that is not provided to those not charged. and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the health care service. As used in this paragraph, a "health care service" means a service licensed or exempt from licensure by the state pursuant to Chapters 1. 1.3, or 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code.

The local government bears the b1:1rden of proving by a preponderance of the e .. ·ielence that a lew, charge, or other exaction is not a ta1<, that the amo1:1nt is no more than necessaPJ' to cover the reasonable costs of the go•,ernfflental acti•.«ity anel that tJ:ie manner in which those costs are allocateel to a pa•ror bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the pa•ror's blslrdens on, or bene:fits receiveel from, the go1a1ernmental acfa•ity.

Section 6. Section 2 of Article XIII C of the California Constitution is amended to read:

Sec. 2. Local Government Tax Limitation. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution:
(a) Every levy. charge. or exaction of any kind imposed by local law is either a tax or an exempt charge. All taxes imposed by any local government shall be deemed to be either general taxes or special taxes. Special purpose districts or agencies, including school districts, shall have no power to levy general taxes. (b) No local Jaw go,.·ernment whether proposed by the governing body or by an elector, may impose, extend, or increase any general tax unless and until that tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a majority vote. A general tax shall not be deemed to have been increased if it is imposed at a rate not higher than the maximum rate so approved. The election required by this subdivision shall be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body of the local government, except in cases of emergency declared by a unanimous vote of the governing body. (c) An•r general tax imposed, el<tended, or increaseel, •.-.iitho1:1t •.·oter approval, lay any local go,.·ernment on or after Janlslary 1, 1995, ana prior ta the effecti,.·e date of this article, shall contin1:1e to be imposed only if appro,.·ea b1• a majority vote of the voters voting in an election OR the issye of the in:iposition, whicl::i election sl::iall be l::ield witl::iin t•Ne 1•ears ef the effectii.ie date of this article and in com13liance with slslbdi\·isien (b}. {El) No local law government. whether proposed by the governing body or by an elector. may impose, eMteRd, er increase any special tax unless and until that tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a two-thirds vote. A special tax shall not be deemed to have been increased if it is imposed at a rate not higher than the maximum rate so approved. {d) The title and summary and ballot label or question required for a measure pursuant to the Elections Code shall. for each measure providing for the imposition of a tax, include:
(1) The type and amount or rate of the tax;
(2) the duration of the tax; and
(3) The use of the revenue derived from the tax. If the proposed tax is a general tax. the phrase "for general government use" shall be required, and no advisory measure may appear on the same ballot that would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will. could. or should be used for a specific purpose. (e) Only the governing body of a local government. other than an elector pursuant to Article II or the initiative power provided by a charter or statute. shall have the authority to impose any exempt charge.

The governing body shall impose an exempt charge by an ordinance specifying the type of exempt charge 6

as provided in Section l(i) and the amount or rate of the exempt charge to be imposed. and passed by the governing body. This subdivision shall not apply to charges specified in paragraph (7) of subdivision (i) of Section 1.
ff) No amendment to a Charter which provides for the imposition, extension, or increase of a tax or exempt charge shall be submitted to or approved by the electors. nor shall any such amendment to a Charter hereafter submitted to or approved by the electors become effective for any purpose. (q) Any tax or exempt charge adopted after January 1, 2022, but prior to the effective date of this act, that was not adopted in compliance with the requirements of this section is void 12 months after the effective date of this act unless the tax or exempt charge is reenacted in compliance with the requirements of this section.
{h)(1) The focal government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that a levy, charge or exaction is an exempt charge and not a tax. The local government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the amount of the exempt charge is reasonable and that the amount charged does not exceed the actual cost of providing the service or product to the payor. (2} The retention of revenue by, or the payment to, a non-governmental entity of a levy. charge, or exaction of any kind imposed by a local law, shall not be a factor in determining whether the levy, charge, or exaction is a tax or exempt charge.
(3) The characterization of a levy. charge. or exaction of any kind imposed by a local law as being paid in exchange for a benefit. privilege, allowance, authorization, or asset, shall not be factors in determining whether the levy, charge, or exaction is a tax or an exempt charge. (4) The use of revenue derived from the levy, charge or exaction shall be a factor in determining whether the levy, charge, or exaction is a tax or exempt charge.

Section 7. Section 3 of Article XIII D of the California Constitution is amended, to read:

Sec. 3. Property Taxes, Assessments, Fees and Charges Limited (a) No tax, assessment, fee, 6f charge, or surcharge, including a surcharge based on the value ofpropertv, shall be assessed 13y a Ry ageRC'f upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership except:
(1) The ad valorem property tax impeseEI p1::1rsYaRt te described in Section 1(a) of Article XIII and Section 1/a) of Article XIII A, and described and enacted pursuant to the voter approval requirement in Section 1/b) Q[Article XII I A.
(2) Any special non-ad valorem tax receiving a two-thirds vote of qualified electors pursuant to Section 4 of Article XIII A, or after receiving a two-thirds vote of those authorized to vote in a community facilities district by the Legislature pursuant to statute as it existed on December 31, 2021. (3) Assessments as provided by this article.
(4) Fees or charges for property related services as provided by this article. 7

(b) For purposes of this article, fees for the provision of electrical or gas service shall not be deemed charges or fees imposed as an incident of property ownership.

Section 8. Sections 1 and 14 of Article XIII are amended to read:

Sec. 1 Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or the laws of the United States:
(a) All property is taxable and shall be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value. When a value standard other than fair market value is prescribed by this Constitution or by statute authorized by this Constitution, the same percentage shall be applied to determine the assessed value. The value to which the percentage is applied, whether it be the fair market value or not, shall be known for property tax purposes as the full value.
(b) All property so assessed shall be taxed in proportion to its full value. (c) All proceeds from the taxation of property shall be apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.

Sec. 14. All property taxed by state or local government shall be assessed in the county, city, and district in which it is situated. Notwithstanding any other provision of/aw, such state or local property taxes shall be apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.

Section 9. General Provisions
A. This Act shall be liberally construed in order to effectuate its purposes.

B. (1) In the event that this initiative measure and another initiative measure or measures relating to state or local requirements for the imposition, adoption, creation, or establishment of taxes, charges, and other revenue measures shall appear on the same statewide election ballot, the other initiative measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conflict with this measure. In the event that this initiative measure receives a greater number of affirmative votes, the provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety, and the provisions ofthe other initiative measure or measures shall be null and void. (2) In furtherance of this provision, the voters hereby declare that this measure conflicts with the provisions of the "Housing Affordability and Tax Cut Act of 2022" and "The Tax Cut and Housing Affordability Act," both of which would impose a new state property tax (called a "surcharge") on certain real property, and where the revenue derived from the tax is provided to the State, rather than retained in the county in which the property is situated and for the use of the county and cities and districts within the county, in direct violation of the provisions of this initiative. (3) If this initiative measure is approved by the voters, but superseded in whole or in part by any other conflicting initiative measure approved by the voters at the same election, and such conflicting initiative is later held invalid, this measure shall be self-executing and given full force and effect.

C. The provisions of this Act are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this Act is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Act. The People of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this Act and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not 8

declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this Act or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

D. If this Act is approved by the voters of the State of California and thereafter subjected to a legal challenge alleging a violation of state or federal law, and both the Governor and Attorney General refuse to defend this Act, then the following actions shall be taken:
(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Chapter 6 of Part 2 of Division 3 ofTitle 2 of the Government Code or any other law, the Attorney General shall appoint independent counsel to faithfully and vigorously defend this Act on behalf of the State of California. (2) Before appointing or thereafter substituting independent counsel, the Attorney General shall exercise due diligence in determining the qualifications of independent counsel and shall obtain written affirmation from independent counsel that independent counsel will faithfully and vigorously defend this Act. The written affirmation shall be made publicly available upon request. (3) A continuous appropriation is hereby made from the General Fund to the Controller, without regard to fiscal years, in an amount necessary to cover the costs of retaining independent counsel to faithfully and vigorously defend this Act on behalf of the State of California. (4) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the proponents of this Act, or a bona fide taxpayers association, from intervening to defend this Act.
9

CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Fiscal and Program Effects of
Initiative 21-0042A1 on Local Governments
If Initiative 21-0042A1 is placed on the ballot and passed by voters, it will result in:
 Over $20 billion of local government fee and charge revenues over 10 years placed at heightened legal peril. Related public service reductions across virtually every aspect of city, county, special district, and school services especially for drinking water, sewer sanitation, and public health and safety.  About $2 billion of revenues each year from fees and charges adopted after January 1, 2021 subject to legal peril.
1  Over $2 billion dollars of annual revenues from dozens of tax measures approved by voters between January 1, 2022 and the effective date of the act2 subject to additional voter approval if not in compliance with the initiative.
 Indeterminable legal and administrative burdens and costs on local government from new and more empowered legal challenges, and bureaucratic cost tracking requirements.  The delay and deterrence of municipal annexations.
 Substantially higher legal and administrative cost of public infrastructure financing which will delay and deter new residential and commercial development.
 Service and infrastructure declines including in fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, drinking water, sewer sanitation, parks, libraries, public schools, affordable housing, homelessness prevention and mental health services.

1. Local Government Taxes and Services Threatened
With regard to taxes, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Prohibits advisory, non-binding measures as to use of tax proceeds on the same ballot. o Voters may be less informed and more likely to vote against measures.  Eliminates the ability of special tax measures proposed by citizen initiative to be enacted by majority voter approval (Upland).3
o Because the case law regarding citizen initiative special taxes approved by majority vote (Upland) is so recent, it is unknown how common these sorts of measures might be in the future. This initiative would prohibit such measures after the effective date of the initiative. Any such measures adopted after January 1, 2022 through the effective date of the Act should it pass would be void a year after the effective date of the initiative.  Requires that tax measures include a specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed. This seems to require that all tax increases or extensions contain a sunset (end date). o This would require additional tax measures to extend previously approved taxes.  A city charter may not be amended to impose, extend, or increase a tax might interfere with the ability of cities that do not already have such authority in their charters to adopt Property Transfer Taxes. o There are no more than a few of these every few years, but it is a valuable tax for those that adopt it.
1 Assumes fee increases since January 1, 2022 would be subject to possible legal challenge if not adopted in compliance with the Initiative.
2 The effective date of the initiative would be sometime in December 2024, the date the California Secretary of State certifies the election results of the November 5, 2024 election.
3 Unlike the initiative 17-0050, this initiative does not eliminate that ability of cities and counties to adopt general taxes by majority voter approval.
2217 Isle Royale Lane • Davis, CA • 95616-6616
Phone: 530.758.3952 • Fax: 530.758.3952
Rev. January 14, 2023
Attachment 9C

– 2 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
 Requires that a tax measure adopted after January 1, 2022 and before the effective date of the initiative that was not adopted in accordance with the measure be readopted in compliance with the measure or will be void twelve months after the effective date of the initiative. o If past election patterns and elections in 2022 are an indication, over 200 tax measures approving more than $2 billion annual revenues to support local public services would not be in compliance and would be subject to reenactment. Most will be taxes without a specific end date and special taxes (including parcel taxes). Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, the measures would each require declaration of emergency and unanimous vote of the governing board to be placed on a special election ballot within a year for approval or the tax will be void after that date. I would expect most to succeed, but some will not, in particular citizen initiative majority vote special taxes which would have to meet a higher voter approval threshold to continue.  Requires voter approval to expand an existing tax to new territory (annexations). This would require additional tax measures and would deter annexations and land development in cities. o If a tax is "extended" to an annexed area without a vote after January 1, 2022, it will be void 12 months later until brought into compliance. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, such extensions would each require unanimous vote of the agency board to be placed on a special election ballot or would be void a year later.

1.a. Number of Measures and Value of Local Taxes at Risk4 Over a hundred local measures were approved in 2022 that likely do not comply with the provisions of Initiative 21-0042A1. Nearly $2 billion of annual revenues from these voter approved measures will cease a year after the effective date of the measure, reducing the local public services funded by these measures. We can expect a similar volume of measures in 2024 and a similar volume of non-compliance. So the combined total of annual local funding directly affected by Initiative 21-0042A1 due to its retroactivity provision is about $4 billion.

Citizen Initiative Special Taxes in 2022.

Special taxes placed on the ballot by citizen initiative and approved after January 1, 2022 by a majority but less than two-thirds of the voters are out of compliance with Initiative 21-0042A1.

On June 7, 2022, there were three local special tax measures placed on the ballot by citizen initiative. Two failed to get majority voter approval. A one percent transactions and use tax (sales tax) for the John C. Fremont Healthcare District in Mariposa County received 69.6 percent approval, over the two thirds needed for any special tax under California Constitution Article XIIIC. So this measure was passed in compliance with Initiative 21- 0042A1.

On November 8, 2022, there were 14 local special taxes placed on the ballot by citizen initiative. Seven of these 4 Source: Compilation and summary of data from County elections offices.

June 2022 Initiative Special Taxes - majority voter approval Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Estimated
Annual Revenue Use Sunset YES%
John C. Fremont
Healthcare District Mariposa Measure N Transactions & Use Tax 1 cent $ 150,000 hospital 40yrs 69.6% PASS County of Kings Kings Measure F Transactions
& Use Tax 1/2 cent $ 11,700,000 fire none 37.6% FAIL
Manhattan Beach
USD Los Angeles Measure A School Parcel Tax $1095/yr $ 12,000,000 schools 12yrs 31.2% FAIL

– 3 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
measures failed with less than majority voter approval. The other seven measures received majority, but less than two-thirds, voter approval. These measures passed under current law but are out of compliance with Initiative 21- 0042A1. Taken together these seven taxes will provide estimated annual revenues of from $900,000 to $1.4 billion in support of parks and recreation, zoo, library, affordable housing, transportation, homelessness prevention, and schools in these communities.

Non-Specific Tax Durations in 2022
Voters approved 106 measures in June 2022 (10) and November 2022 (96) that do not provide a specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed (end date). Typically, the ballot titles for these measures state that the tax would be imposed “until ended by voters.” Four of these measures also did not include any estimate of the annual revenues that the tax would generate, another violation of initiative 21-0042A1. Taken together, these approved local measures generate $561 million per year that will expire a year after the effective date of the initiative if Initiative 21-0042A1 passes.

November 2022 Initiative Special Taxes - majority voter approval Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Estimated
Annual Revenue Use Sunset YES%
Crockett Community
Services District Contra Costa Measure L Parcel Tax $50/parcel $ 60,000 parks/recr none 62.8% PASS Oakland Alameda Measure Y Parcel Tax $68/parcel $ 12,000,000 zoo 20yrs 62.5% PASS County of Mendocino Measure O Transactions
& Use Tax
1/8 cent then 1/4
cent in 2027 $ 4,000,000 library none 60.8% PASS
Los Angeles Los Angeles Measure ULA Property
Transfer Tax
4% if >$5m, 5.5%
if >$10m $600 m to $1.1 b affordable housing none 57.3% PASS County of Sacramento Measure A Transactions
& Use Tax same 1/2 cent $ 212,512,500 transportati
on
40yrs 55.3% PASS
San Francisco Proposition M Business
Operations Tax
$2500-$5000/
vacant resid unit $ 20,000,000 housing 30yrs 54.5% PASS Santa Monica Los Angeles Measure GS Property
Transfer Tax
$56/$1000 if
>$8m $ 50,000,000
schools,
homelessne
ss, afford.
housing
none 53.3% PASS
Total $900,000 to
$1.4 billion
Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Estimated
Annual Revenue Use Sunset YES%
County of Calaveras Measure A Transactions
& Use Tax 1 cent $ 5,000,000 fire none 49.4% FAIL
South San Francisco
(for Schools) San Mateo Measure DD School Parcel Tax $2.50/sf $ 55,900,000 schools none 47.2% FAIL County of Fresno (for CSU ) Measure E Transactions
& Use Tax
1/5 ct,
1/40 ct (Reedley) $ 36,000,000 Calif State Univ 20yrs 46.9% FAIL Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Measure N Parcel Tax $6k/vacant SFU xxx vacant property
xxx 44.2% FAIL
County of Monterey Measure Q Parcel Tax $49/parcel $ 5,500,000 childcare 10yrs 41.1% FAIL San Francisco City
College
San
Francisco Measure O School Parcel Tax $150/sfu $ 37,000,000 schools 10yrs 36.7% FAIL Morro Bay San Luis
Obispo Measure B Parcel Tax $120+/parcel $ 680,000 harbor none 36.0% FAIL Inverness Public
Utility District Marin Measure O Parcel Tax $0.20/sf, $150/vacant $ 276,000 fire none 27.0% FAIL

– 4 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Measures in 2022 with Non-Specific Durations
Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Annual
Revenue Use Sunset YES%
Oakland Alameda Measure T Business Tax
General various $ 20,900,000 none 71.4% PASS
Culver City Los Angeles Measure BL Business Tax
General various $ 10,000,000 none 60.5% PASS
El Segundo Los Angeles Measure BT Business Tax
General various $ 3,000,000 none 51.2% PASS
Pico Rivera Los Angeles Measure AB Business Tax
General various $ 5,800,000 none 75.5% PASS
Santa Ana Orange Measure W Business Tax
General various neutral none 64.8% PASS
Tracy San Joaquin Measure B Business Tax
General various $ 3,200,000 none 72.6% PASS
Burlingame San Mateo Measure X Business Tax
General various $ 2,500,000 none 75.1% PASS
Los Gatos Santa Clara Measure J Business Tax
General various $ 1,100,000 none 53.4% PASS
Santa Clara Santa Clara Measure H Business Tax
General
$45/employee,
$15/rental unit $ 6,000,000 none 59.5% PASS
Brisbane San Mateo Measure O Business Tax
lodging busn $2.50/rm/day $ 250,000 none 69.2% PASS
East Palo Alto San Mateo Measure L Business Tax
resid. rentals

2.5%
grossRcpts $ 1,480,000 none 69.9% PASS
County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Measure C Busn Tax - disp cups 12.5cents/cup $ 700,000 none 68.2% PASS
South Lake Tahoe El Dorado Measure G Busn Tax
Cannabis
6% retail,
manufacturing $ 950,000 none 62.9% PASS
McFarland Kern Measure O Busn Tax
Cannabis
8% of gross
receipts retail, $ 1,800,000 none 63.5% PASS
Avenal Kings Measure C Busn Tax
Cannabis
$25+/sf or
15% gr rcpts $ 600,000 none 61.8% PASS
Baldwin Park Los Angeles Measure CB Busn Tax
Cannabis
4%
grossRcpts $ 300,000 none 51.3% PASS
Claremont Los Angeles Measure CT Busn Tax
Cannabis
4%-7% gr
rcpts, $1- $ 500,000 none 61.1% PASS
County of Los Angeles Unincorporated Measure C Busn Tax Cannabis
4% gross
receipts retail, $ 15,170,000 none 60.1% PASS
Cudahy Los Angeles Measure BA Busn Tax
Cannabis
15%
grossRcpts $ 3,600,000 none 54.0% PASS
El Segundo Los Angeles Measure Y Busn Tax
Cannabis
10%
GrossRcpt, $ 1,500,000 none 72.8% PASS
Hermosa Beach Los Angeles Measure T Busn Tax
Cannabis
10%
GrossRcpt, $ 1,500,000 none 67.6% PASS
Lynwood Los Angeles Measure TR Busn Tax
Cannabis 5%to10% $ 3,000,000 none 66.4% PASS
Santa Monica Los Angeles Measure HM Busn Tax
Cannabis
10% gross
Rcpts $ 5,000,000 none 66.4% PASS
South El Monte Los Angeles Measure CM Busn Tax
Cannabis
6% special
excise tax on $ 126,000 none 53.7% PASS
Monterey Monterey Measure J Busn Tax
Cannabis 6% grossRcpt $ 1,300,000 none 65.2% PASS
Pacific Grove Monterey Measure N Busn Tax
Cannabis 6% grossRcpt $ 300,000 none 70.8% PASS
Huntington Beach Orange Measure O Busn Tax
Cannabis
6% retail, 1%
other $ 600,000 none 54.7% PASS

– 5 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Notes
?= Ballot measure title did not include an estimate of annual revenues, also not in compliance with Initiative 21-0042A1. n/a*= Arcadia Measure SW passed but sports betting remains illegal after the failure of Propositions 26 and 27 on the November statewide ballot.

Measures in 2022 with Non-Specific Durations
Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Annual
Revenue Use Sunset YES%
Laguna Woods Orange Measure T Busn Tax
Cannabis
4%-10% of
gross receipts $ 750,000 none 61.1% PASS
Corona Riverside Measure G Busn Tax
Cannabis
9% of gross
receipts for $ 5,000,000 none 61.6% PASS
Montclair San Bernardino Measure R Busn Tax
Cannabis
7%
grossRcpts $ 3,500,000 none 70.3% PASS
County of San Diego Unincorporated Measure A Busn Tax
Cannabis
6% retail, 3%
distribution, $ 5,600,000 none 57.4% PASS
Encinitas San Diego Measure L Busn Tax
Cannabis
4% to 7% of
gross receipts $ 1,400,000 none 65.1% PASS
Healdsburg Sonoma Measure M Busn Tax
Cannabis 8% grossRcpt $ 500,000 none 72.7% PASS
Exeter Tulare Measure B Busn Tax
Cannabis
10% retail and
other, $10/sf ? none 66.5% PASS
Tulare Tulare Measure Y Busn Tax
Cannabis
10% retail and
other, $10/sf ? none 65.2% PASS
Woodland Yolo Measure K Busn Tax
Cannabis
10%
grossRcpts
? none 66.2% PASS
Redlands San Bernardino Measure J Busn Tax
Distrib centers
from $0.047/sf
to $0.105/sf $ 530,000 none 53.5% PASS
Arcadia Los Angeles Measure SW Busn Tax
Sports Betting
5%
grossRcpts
n/a* none 63.9% PASS
Albany Alameda Measure K ParcelTax $0.074+/sf $ 1,950,000 fire/EMS none 76.0% PASS Cameron Park Airport
District El Dorado Measure J ParcelTax by $600 to $900/parcel $ 117,900 airport/ streets none 78.2% PASS Highlands Village
Lighting Benefit Zone El Dorado Measure L ParcelTax $140+/parcel $ 10,920 streets none 86.3% PASS Knolls Property
Owners CSD El Dorado Measure P ParcelTax by $300+ to $600+/parcel $ 8,400 streets none 75.5% PASS Sundance Trail Zone of
Benefit El Dorado Measure C ParcelTax $600+/yr $ 24,000 roads none 73.2% PASS South Pasadena Los Angeles Measure LL ParcelTax xxx ? library none 86.2% PASS River Delta Fire District Sacramento Measure H ParcelTax $90/yr $ 130,000 fire none 72.1% PASS Emeryville Alameda Measure O PropTransfTax $15/$1000 if $1m-$2m, $ 5,000,000 none 71.6% PASS
San Mateo San Mateo Measure CC PropTransfTax by 1% to 1.5% if >$10m $ 4,800,000 none 71.8% PASS
Alameda Alameda Measure F TOT by 4% to 14% $ 910,000 none 59.2% PASS Clovis Fresno Measure B TOT by 2% to 12% $ 500,000 none 69.7% PASS Kerman Fresno Measure G TOT 10% $ 40,000 none 62.3% PASS Trinidad Humboldt Measure P TOT by 4% to 12% $ 65,000 none 77.6% PASS Imperial Imperial Measure G TOT by 4% to 12% $ 600,000 none 56.2% PASS Arcadia Los Angeles Measure HT TOT by 2% to 12% $ 730,000 none 54.1% PASS Santa Monica Los Angeles Measure CS TOT by 1%, 3%
home shares $ 4,100,000 none 73.7% PASS

– 6 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Measures in 2022 with Non-Specific Durations
Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Annual
Revenue Use Sunset YES%
Anaheim Orange Measure J TOT online travel
companies $ 3,000,000 none 59.2% PASS
La Palma Orange Measure P TOT by 4% to 12% $ 200,000 none 71.1% PASS Colfax Placer Measure B TOT by 2% to10% $ 29,000 none 73.5% PASS Rocklin Placer Measure F TOT by 2% to 10% $ 300,000 none 59.8% PASS Roseville Placer Measure C TOT by 4% to 10% $ 3,000,000 none 73.0% PASS Big Bear Lake San Bernardino Measure P TOT by 2% to 10% $ 1,300,000 none 54.4% PASS Grand Terrace San Bernardino Measure M TOT new 10% $ 250,000 none 51.9% PASS Yucca Valley San Bernardino Measure K TOT by 5% to 12% $ 1,300,000 none 71.9% PASS Imperial Beach San Diego Measure R TOT by 4% to 14% $ 400,000 none 67.4% PASS El Paso de Robles San Luis ObispoMeasure F TOT by 1% to 11% $ 750,000 none 61.2% PASS Belmont San Mateo Measure K TOT by 2% to 14% $ 600,000 none 79.3% PASS Millbrae San Mateo Measure N TOT by 2% to 14% $ 1,500,000 none 75.8% PASS County of Humboldt Unincorporated Measure J TOT by 2% to 12% $ 3,080,000 none 63.3% PASS County of Placer -
North Tahoe TOT Area Measure A TOT by 2% to 10% $ 4,000,000 none 90.0% PASS County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Measure B TOT by 1% to 12% $ 2,300,000 none 69.2% PASS County of El Dorado -
East Slope Tahoe Measure S TOT 2/3 by 4% to 14% $ 2,500,000 none 81.8% PASS Chico Butte Measure H TrUT 1 cent $ 24,000,000 none 52.4% PASS Mendota Fresno Measure H TrUT 1.25 cent $ 493,498 none 57.2% PASS Blue Lake Humboldt Measure R TrUT 1 cent $ 30,000 none 55.4% PASS Rio Dell Humboldt Measure O TrUT 3/4cent $ 400,000 none 53.3% PASS County of Kern unincorporated areas Measure K TrUT 1 cent $ 54,000,000 none 50.8% PASS McFarland Kern Measure M TrUT 1 cent $ 579,662 none 62.2% PASS Tehachapi Kern Measure S TrUT 1 cent $ 4,000,000 none 57.2% PASS Avenal Kings Measure A TrUT 1 cent $ 500,000 none 72.5% PASS Susanville Lassen Measure P TrUT 1 cent $ 1,750,000 none 54.7% PASS Baldwin Park Los Angeles Measure BP TrUT 3/4 cent $ 6,000,000 none 58.1% PASS Malibu Los Angeles Measure MC TrUT 1/2 cent $ 3,000,000 none 52.6% PASS Monterey Park Los Angeles Measure MP TrUT 3/4 cent $ 6,000,000 none 58.5% PASS Torrance Los Angeles Measure SST TrUT 1/2 cent $ 18,000,000 none 55.0% PASS Larkspur Marin Measure G TrUT 1/4 cent $ 700,000 none 59.4% PASS Sand City Monterey Measure L TrUT by 1/2cent to

1.5cents $ 1,400,000 none 68.7% PASS
Hemet Riverside Measure H TrUT same 1 cent $ 15,000,000 none 58.0% PASS Elk Grove Sacramento Measure E TrUT 1 cent $ 21,000,000 none 54.1% PASS Galt Sacramento Measure Q TrUT 1 cent $ 3,600,000 none 52.4% PASS Colton San Bernardino Measure S TrUT 1 cent $ 9,500,000 none 66.8% PASS Ontario San Bernardino Measure Q TrUT 1 cent $ 95,000,000 none 53.2% PASS Solana Beach San Diego Measure S TrUT 1 cent $ 3,000,000 none 66.7% PASS Brisbane San Mateo Measure U TrUT 1/2 cent $ 2,000,000 none 63.9% PASS Goleta Santa Barbara Measure B TrUT 1 cent $ 10,600,000 none 64.7% PASS Solvang Santa Barbara Measure U TrUT 1 cent $ 1,600,000 none 63.1% PASS

– 7 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Co-temporal Advisory Measures in 2022
At the November 2022 election, there was just one local general tax measure that was accompanied by an advisory measure as to the use of funds. The City of Santa Monica’s Measure DT property transfer tax failed with just 34 percent approval as voters instead chose the citizen initiative Measure GS.

There was also just one such tax use advisory measure on the June 2022 election. Susanville’s voters passed Measure P, a 1 percent transactions and use (sales) tax that generates $1.75 million per year5 for general city services. The measure was accompanied by advisory Measure Q, accompanied the city’s It asked, “If Measure P passes, should the revenues be used to balance the budget to maintain and enhance existing public safety services (police and fire), and provide funding to support street infrastructure improvements and provide funding to support economic development efforts designed to increase businesses, jobs and visitors to Susanville?” Both measures passed. Under Initiative 21-0042A1, the tax will expire a year after the effective date of the initiative (i.e., in December 2025).

1.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Tax Provisions Assuming a similar volume of local measures through 2024 as we saw in 2022, there will be over 200 local measures that will need to be redrafted to comply with the Initiative and placed back on the ballot for the taxes to continue after December 2025. The costs of re-drafting, re-placing and re-voting on these measures, previously legally approved by voters, will be in the tens of millions in total statewide.

2. “Exempt Charges” (fees and charges that are not taxes) and Services Threatened With regard to fees and charges adopted after January 1, 2022, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Subjects new fees and charges for a product or service to a new "actual and reasonable test."  Subjects fees and charges for entrance to local government property; and rental and sale of local government property to a new, undefined, “reasonable” test.  Allows legal challenge to any tax adopted before the effective date of the initiative and after January 1, 5 The Susanville measure also did not include a specific end date and so is included in the list and totals of those measures.

Measures in 2022 with Non-Specific Durations
Agency Name County Tax/Fee Rate
Annual
Revenue Use Sunset YES%
Watsonville Santa Cruz Measure R TrUT 1/2 cent $ 5,000,000 none 64.4% PASS Vallejo Solano Measure P TrUT 7/8 cent $ 18,000,000 none 54.7% PASS Modesto Stanislaus Measure H TrUT 1 cent $ 39,000,000 none 62.8% PASS County of Colusa Measure A TrUT 2/3 1/2 cent $ 2,400,000 EMS none 69.4% PASS Atwater Merced Measure B TrUT 2/3 same 1 cent $ 4,000,000 police/fire none 73.7% PASS Truckee Nevada Measure U TrUT 2/3 by 1/4 cent to
1/2 cent $ 3,000,000 open space / trails none 76.4% PASS Palo Alto Santa Clara Measure L UtilityTransfer 18% gas $ 7,000,000 none 77.7% PASS Santa Clara Santa Clara Measure G UtilityTransfer 5 % $ 30,000,000 none 84.2% PASS Hercules Contra Costa Measure N UUT 8% $ 3,600,000 none 69.3% PASS Carson Los Angeles Measure UU UUT 2% electr, gas $ 8,000,000 none 78.4% PASS Sebastopol Sonoma Measure N UUT 3.75% (same) $ 700,000 none 83.5% PASS

– 8 – rev January 14, 2023
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
2022. Such a lawsuit could enjoin (stop) the enactment of the tax pending the outcome of the legal challenge.
 Subjects a challenged fee to new, higher burdens of proof if legally challenged.

2.a. Value on New Local Government Fees and Charges at Risk6 Virtually every city, county, and special district must regularly (e.g., annually) adopt increases to fee rates and charges and revise rate schedules to accommodate new users and activities. Most of these would be subject to new standards and limitations under threat of legal challenge. Based on the current volume of fees and charges imposed by local agencies and increases in those fees simply to accommodate inflation, the amount of local government fee and charge revenue placed at risk is about $2 billion per year including those adopted since January 1, 2022. Of $2 billion, about $900 million (45 percent) is for special districts, $800 million (40 percent) is cities, and $300 million (15 percent) is counties.7 Major examples of affected fees and charges are:

1. Certain water, sanitary sewer, wastewater, garbage, electric, gas service fees.

2. Nuisance abatement charges - such as for weed, rubbish and general nuisance abatement to fund community safety, code enforcement, and neighborhood cleanup programs.

3. Emergency response fees - such as in connection with DUI.

4. Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport charges.

5. Business improvement district charges.

6. Fees for processing of land use and development applications such as plan check fees, use permits, design review, environmental assessment, plan amendment, subdivision map changes.

7. Document processing and duplication fees.

8. Facility use charges, parking fees, tolls.

9. Fines, penalties.

10. Fees for parks and recreation services.

2.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Fee/Charge Provisions In addition to service delays and disruptions due to fee and charge revenues placed at greater legal risk, there would be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The risk to fees and charges will make infrastructure financing more difficult and will deter new residential and commercial development. ***********
mc
6 Source: California State Controller Annual Reports of Financial Transactions concerning cities, counties and special districts, summarized with an assumed growth due to fee rate increases (not population) of 2 percent annually. 7 School fees are also affected but the amount is negligible by comparison.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 10
SUBJECT: SCHEDULING OF SPECIAL WORKSHOPS, AND SUMMER MEETINGS

OF THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS CONSIDERATION OF THE

POSSIBLE CLOSURE OF CITY HALL DURING THE CHRISTMAS AND
NEW YEAR’S HOLIDAYS
MEETING DATE: March 20, 2023
PRESENTED BY: Will Kolbow, City Manager
Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Schedule a Joint City Council and Planning Commission Land Use and Development Workshop for April 22, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.

2. Schedule the 2023/2024 Fiscal Year Budget Study Session for May 22, 2023 at 3:30 p.m.

3. Provide direction to staff pertaining to the 2023 summer meeting schedule.

4. Consider the closure of City Hall from December 25, 2023 – January 1, 2024, returning Tuesday, January 2, 2024.

5. Approve the cancellation of the January 2, 2024 Regular City Council meeting BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Summer Meeting Schedule: In the past few years Council has approved the cancellation of one or more regularly scheduled Council Meetings for the summer months of June, July and August. In 2022 the summer meeting schedule resulted in the cancellation of the first meeting in July and the second meeting in August. Staff would like to receive Council direction for modifications to the 2023 summer meeting schedule. The regular City Council meeting schedule for 2023 is as follows:

Monday, June 5
th Tuesday, July 3rd Monday, August 7th
Monday, June 19th Monday, July 17th Monday, August 21st Public Hearings will be noticed for the July 17
th meeting for the Annual Assessments of the CFD’s
LLMD, Delinquent Solid Waste and Weed Abatement. The County of Riverside’s deadline for the submittal of annual assessments is August 10, 2023, so holding the August 7, 2023 meeting is important in case there is a need to continue any of the July 17 th public hearings. Staff would
respectfully request that the Mayor and Council discuss the options and provide direction to staff. It has been customary in the last two years that the 1st meeting in July and the 2 nd meeting in August be
cancelled.

Joint City Council & Planning Commission Land Use & Development Workshop: Staff respectfully requests that the Council schedule a Joint City Council & Planning Commission Land use & Development Workshop for Saturday, April 22, 2023 with a start time of 1:00 p.m.

FY 23/24 Budget Workshop: Staff respectfully requests that the Council schedule a 2023/2024 Fiscal Year Budget Study Session for Monday, May 22, 2023 with a start time of 3:30 p.m.

Christmas/New Year’s Holiday meeting schedule: Staff is recommending that the December 18, 2023 meeting be held as scheduled and would request the cancellation of the January 2, 2024 meeting. If the City Council is in support of staff’s recommendation, the December 18, 2023 meeting would be held as scheduled and the January 2, 2024 meeting would be cancelled. If the January 2, 2024 meeting is cancelled, then the first meeting of the New Year would take place on Tuesday, January 16, 2024, as Monday January 15, 2024 is the Martin Luther King Holiday.

Consideration of City Hall closure: Staff would also respectfully request that the City Council consider the closure of City Hall from December 25, 2023 – January 1, 2024. Pursuant to the approved holiday schedule, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day fall on Sundays and Mondays this year. The Sunday holidays are “banked”, as they do not fall on a regular working day and would provide the employee with the option to use the 2 “banked” days during the closure period. December 25th and January 1st are paid holidays that the employees receive, so ultimately the employees will have 1 day that they will use either banked time, vacation time or accrued comp time during the closure, should it be approved by Council.

History has shown a minimal amount of public assistance at this time, whether it be walk-in traffic or telephone assistance. A member of the Public Works staff will be on-call during this time and available for any issue that may require attention, and as always department heads would be available through the City Manager as needed. If the closure is approved, there would be a sufficient amount of time for posting the closure on our website and social media, as well as on both the City Hall and Community Development Annex doors.