Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council
October 4, 2022

CITYOF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Mayor Dave Potter, Council Members Jeff Baron,
Karen Ferlito, Bobby Richards, and Carrie Theis
Contact: 831.620.2000 www.ci.carmel.ca.us
All meetings are held in the City Council Chambers
East Side of Monte Verde Street
Between Ocean and 7th Avenues

REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, October 4, 2022
THIS MEETING IS VIA TELECONFERENCE AND IN-PERSON AT CITY HALL.

Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20 has allowed local legislative bodies to hold public meetings via teleconference and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body.

To that end, this meeting will be held via teleconference and in-person in the City Council Chambers at City Hall located on Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenue. To participate via teleconference click the following link to attend via Zoom (or copy and paste link in your browser): https://ci-carmel-caus.zoom.us/j/81367162379 Meeting ID: 813 6716 2379 Passcode: 924438 Dial in: (253) 215-8782
To participate in this meeting in-person in the City Council Chambers, the public must show proof of vaccination (including virus booster) and wear a face covering at all times. Seating will be limited and available on a first come first served basis.

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
CLOSED SESSION - 3:00 PM
A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
Title: City Administrator
B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS – Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Mayor Pro Tem Richards and City Attorney Unrepresented employee: City Administrator
Tour Time - 3:30 PM

TOUR OF INSPECTION
Prior to calling the meeting to order, the Board/Commission will conduct an on-site tour of inspection of the properties listed on the agenda and the public is welcome to join. After the tour is complete, the Board/Commission will begin the meeting in the City Council Chambers no earlier than the time noted on the agenda.

A. Mills Act - Monte Verde Street 2 northeast of 9th Avenue, Block 94, Lot 18 (Strom and Miller)
B. Mills Act - Southeast Corner of San Antonio Avenue and 4th Avenue Block HH, Lot 28 (Ludwick)
C. Mills Act - Vizcaino Avenue 12 southwest of Mountain ViewAvenue, Block 102, Lot 12 & 13 (Prentiss)

OPEN SESSION
4:30 PM

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
A. Proclamation - Childhood Cancer Awareness Week
B. Receive a presentation on street addresses to be discussed, and provide staff with direction
C. Receive a presentation on the Traffic Congestion Reduction & Parking Management Program, and provide staff with direction

PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Members of the public are entitled to speak on matters of municipal concern not on the agenda during Public Appearances. Each person's comments shall be limited to 3 minutes, or as otherwise established by the Chair.

Matters not appearing on the agenda will not receive action at this meeting and may be referred to staff. Persons are not required to provide their names, and it is helpful for speakers to state their names so they may be identified in the minutes of the meeting.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. City Administrator Announcements
B. City Attorney Announcements
C. Council Member Announcements

CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the consent agenda are routine in nature and do not require discussion or independent action. Members of the Council, Board or Commission or the public may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of Council, Board or Commission discussion and/ or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions.

1. August 1, 2022, Special Meeting Minutes, and September 13, 2022, Regular Meeting Minutes

2. August 2022 Monthly Reports

3. August 2022 Check Register Summary

4. Resolution 2022-088, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan

5. Resolution 2022-089, waiving a bid irregularity and awarding a three-year, on-call Landscape Maintenance Services contract to Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping, with a not-to-exceed fee for Fiscal Year 2022/23 of $140,000

6. Resolution 2022-090 authorizing the City Administrator to execute an agreement with Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) risk management for the term of October 15, 2022 to June 30, 2023 in an amount not to exceed the $50,000 approved in the FY22-23 budget

7. Resolution 2022-091 approving a supplemental budget appropriation to the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted budget for Discretionary Grants in the amount of $1,000 for the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
Orders of Business are agenda items that require City Council, Board or Commission discussion, debate, direction to staff, and/or action.

8. Resolution 2022-092 authorizing the City Administrator to execute a purchase agreement for the purchase of a One (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07) for a not to exceed in the amount of $880,000

9. Receive a presentation on the 2022 editions of the California Building (CBC), Residential (CRC), Energy (CEnC), Fire (CFC), Mechanical (CMC), Plumbing (CPC), Electrical (CEC), Green Building Standards (CGBSC), Historic Building (HBC), and Existing Building Codes (EBC) with local amendments to be discussed, and provide staff with direction

10. Discussion regarding potential amendments to the City's Mills Act Contract policy

11. Discussion on amending the qualifications for the Historic Resources Board Members

12. Discussion on rescinding Urgency Ordinance 2022-002 - Adopting Rules of Conduct for attending meetings of Legislative Bodies at City Facilities

PUBLIC HEARINGS

13. Introduction of Ordinance No. 2022-003 (First Reading) - Amending Municipal Code Section 2.52.630 pertaining to eligibility for new hires to use accrued vacation leave in the first year of employment

14. MA 22-204 (Prentiss): Consideration of a recommendation from the Historic Resources Board to the City Council that the City enter into a Mills Act Historical Property Contract MA 22-204 (Prentiss) with Amanda S. Prentiss and Matthew J.

Mermer for the historic “Marion Daniels Shand House” located at Vizcaino Avenue 12 southwest of Mountain ViewAvenue (APN 010-055-021)

15. MA 22-214 (Ludwick): Consideration of a recommendation from the Historic Resources Board to the City Council that the City enter into a Mills Act Historical Property Contract MA 22-214 (Ludwick) with Christopher & Adrienne Ludwick Trust for the historic “Frederick Ten Winkel House” located at the southeast corner of San Antonio Avenue and 4
th Avenue (APN 010-253-018)

16. MA 22-254 (Strom & Miller): Consideration of a recommendation from the Historic Resources Board to the City Council that the City enter into a Mills Act Historical Property Contract MA 22-254 (Strom & Miller) with Nancy Strom and Gavin Miller for the historic “Enoch A. Lewis House” located at Monte Verde Street 2 northeast of 9 th
Avenue (APN 010-193-010)

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT
This agenda was posted at City Hall, Monte Verde Street between Ocean Avenue and 7th Avenue, outside the Park Branch Library, NE corner of Mission Street and 6thAvenue, the Carmel-by-the-Sea Post Office, 5thAvenue between Dolores Street and San Carlos Street, and the City's webpage http://www.ci.carmel.ca.us in accordance with applicable legal requirements.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL RECEIVED AFTER THE POSTING OF THEAGENDA Any supplemental writings or documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda, received after the posting of the agenda will be available for public review at City Hall located on Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues during regular business hours.

SPECIAL NOTICES TO PUBLIC
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 831-620-2000 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting (28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL

PROCLAMATION

A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DECLARING OCTOBER 3-7, 2022 AS CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS WEEK

WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection report that cancer is the leading cause of death by disease among U.S. children between infancy and age 15. This tragic disease is detected in more than 16,000 of our country's young people each and every year; and WHEREAS, one in five of our nation's children loses his or her battle with cancer. Many infants, children and teens will suffer from long-term effects of comprehensive treatment, including secondary cancers.

An estimated 400,000 children and adolescents are diagnosed with cancer globally each year; and WHEREAS, founded nearly 30 years ago by Steven Firestein, a member of the philanthropic Max Factor cosmetics family, the American Cancer Fund for Children, Inc. and Kids Cancer Connection, Inc. along with Lions Clubs International are dedicated to helping these children and their families; and WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection provide a variety of vital patient psychosocial services to children undergoing cancer treatment at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford, Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula - Montage Health, Cottage Children's Medical Center, Valley Children's Healthcare and Hospital, The City of Hope National Medical Center, as well as participating hospitals throughout the country, thereby enhancing the quality of life for these children and their families; and WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection also sponsor toy distributions, family sailing programs, pet-assisted therapy, Laughternoon - Laughter is Healing, KCC Supercar Experience, positive appearance programs, educational programs and hospital celebrations in honor of a child's determination and bravery to fight the battle against childhood cancer.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Dave Potter, Mayor of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, on behalf of the City Council and the citizens of Carmel hereby declare October 3rd through 7th, 2022, as Childhood Cancer Awareness Week.
__________________________________
David Potter, Mayor
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Maxine Gullo, Ass't. City Administrator
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Receive a presentation on street addresses to be discussed, and provide staff with direction
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation on street addresses to be discussed, and provide staff with direction.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

In its 106-year history, Carmel-by-the-Sea has not implemented a formal street address system. Tradition and preservation of the City’s charm, unique look, and culture have been at the forefront of its governing body and residents’ preference in the past to reject implementing a street addressing system have maintained the absence of house street numbers until this day. Based on community feedback and the placement of street addresses on City Council’s 2022-2023 priority project list, City staff presents historical context, residents’ and Council’s approach in consideration of street addresses in the past, and reasons to reconsider the issue with changing times. At-home mail delivery for all residents in Carmel-by-the-Sea by the US Postal Service is not an action City staff will advocate for or pursue with the possible implementation of street addresses. City staff has established a line of communication with the Carmel Postmaster and plans to continue the discussion and communication of the City’s hardline stand of not wanting at-home mail delivery for Carmel-by-the-Sea and maintaining the downtown post office open and operational.

As times change, as financial institutions change their requirements for filing paperwork, as the COVID-19 pandemic spurred a turn to online ordering and delivery of essential necessities, the notion of exploring a street address system has made its way to the City Council’s 2022-2023 priority project list. The reasoning behind making this a priority item comes from the changing times and residents expressing difficulties in opening or maintaining financial accounts, securing loans, activating or changing basic utilities like wireless internet, having packages delivered to the correct house, or being “findable” in an emergency as a matter of public safety. Carmel-by-the-Sea residents provide new neighbors with workarounds and look out for each other’s packages when a new UPS or FedEx driver accidentally delivers a package to the wrong house.

The current descriptive address system, the use of unique house “names” on a sign outside of residents’ houses, and use of the US Post Office’s physical address for vendors that do not ship to PO Boxes can prove to be efficient and straightforward to many Carmel-by-the-Sea residents. The City’s proposal of exploring the idea of street addresses for its one square mile is rooted in listening to residents who have exhausted the workarounds and expressed the need to be findable in emergencies, to have an address to which they can reliably receive packages containing medical necessities, and maintain financial affairs in order.

The City administration recognizes the topics of implementing street addresses and at-home mail delivery as two separate issues with the intention of exclusively exploring consideration of the former. The local post office has a long history in Carmel-by-the-Sea as being a local hub to where residents can make a daily visit to check their PO boxes, pick up packages from the friendly faces at the counter who many residents know by name, and catch up with other neighbors making the visit that day. Carmel-by-the-Sea’s downtown post office is one of about 4,400 independent post offices in the United States that do not have carrier delivery and not a status the City wants to change.
[1] City staff plans to have a direct line of communication with Carmel’s Postmaster, J.R. Valeriano, in continuing communication of the City’s hardline stand of not wanting at-home mail delivery for Carmel-by-the-Sea and maintaining the downtown post office open and operational.

Priorities in exploring a street address development process would include the following:

Ensuring and maintaining the downtown post office in operation.

Clear stand against implementing at-home mail delivery.

Consideration of street address signs would be subject to specifically developed design standards.

Additionally, there is the possible consideration of implementing street addresses solely for purpose of being findable on a map or GPS device without exterior display of house numbers, a choice for residents to decide, or approaching the system with the expectation of design standards-approved street number signs outside every house and building in Carmel-by-the-Sea.

With the presentation of its preliminary research, City staff looks for direction from City Council to begin exploring a street address implementation process or maintain the status quo. [1] Patricia Lee Brown, “Fighting for a Carrier-Free Zone,” The New York Times, September 6, 2000.

FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Street Addresses White Paper

ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
TO: Chip Rerig, City Administrator and Maxine Gullo, Assistant City Administrator FROM: Emily Garay, Administrative Analyst
DATE: September 16, 2022
SUBJECT: Street Addresses in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea

SUMMARY
In its 106-year history, Carmel-by-the-Sea has not implemented a formal street address system.

Tradition and preservation of the City’s charm, unique look, and culture have been at the forefront of its governing body and residents’ preference in the past to reject implementing a street addressing system have maintained the absence of house street numbers until this day.

Based on community feedback and the placement of street addresses on City Council’s 2022- 2023 priority project list, City staff presents historical context, residents’ and Council’s approach in consideration of street addresses in the past, and reasons to reconsider the issue out of contemporary necessity. With the presentation of its preliminary research, City staff looks for direction from City Council on how to proceed with the topic of street addresses in Carmel-bythe-Sea.

BRIEF HISTORY TIMELINE
1888 Santiago Duckworth begins promoting “Carmel City” as a (Catholic) retreat 1892 Santiago Duckworth works with Abbie Jane Hunter to promote Carmel-by-the-Sea 1902 Partners J. Franklin Devendorf and Frank Powers form the Carmel Development Company and begin to develop Carmel-by-the-Sea
1904 The City gets its first Post Office; L.S. Slevin becomes the first Postmaster of Carmelby-the-Sea; A.F. Horn was the first mail-carrier between Carmel and Monterey 1916 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea was incorporated
1925 Postmaster asks for houses to be numbered
1925 Citizens form resolution against houses being numbered 1925 Trustees direct house numbering map to be prepared 1926 Trustees pass house numbering ordinance (Ord. 68)
1926 Postal inspector rejects idea of home mail delivery in Carmel 1940 House number ordinance repealed (by Ord. 228)
1953 Council protests potential state bill for house numbers 1953 Carmel threatens to secede from the state of California when the state considered insisting on house numbers in every community
2000 Council receives staff report and votes to table discussion on street delivery 2021 Council and staff discuss the need to start discussion and process related to assigning addresses
Attachment 1

BACKGROUND
Carmel’s Beginnings
In 1888, Santiago J. Duckworth acquired 324 acres from landowner Honor Escolle with the intention of developing Carmel City into a Catholic summer retreat.1 Duckworth had the land surveyed by Monterey city engineer, W.C. Little and a map of the City was filed in May of 1888.2 Little’s map divided 135 blocks into four tracks and Duckworth began advertising lots for sale in July of 1888 for $20.00 and $25.00 for corner lots.3 Working with San Francisco businesswoman Abbie Jane Hunter, Duckworth continued advertising the lots for sale and in 1892 Hunter mailed promotional postcards advertising the City as “Carmel-by-the-Sea” for the first time.4 By late 1892, Duckworth prioritized his political aspirations and consequently ending his involvement with the promotion and development Carmel-by-the-Sea.

Carmel Development Company
In 1901, “two far-seeing idealistic men”, James Franklin Devendorf and Frank Powers arrived in Carmel City and soon purchased Escolle and Duckworth’s land holdings in the City.5 The pair founded the Carmel Development Company in 1902, with Powers providing financial backing and legal work and Devendorf managing the company and development of the land.6 They were “lovers of natural beauty and it meant more to them to get settlers who were interested in its preservation than to seek profitable expansion.”7 Devendorf and Powers envisioned a unique community next to the Pacific Ocean, “a seaside town on Carmel Beach in the pine forest alongside Carmel Mission.”8
Devendorf and Powers have long been considered the visionaries that developed the land in Carmel-by-the-Sea and along with it built a unique make up of residents with a penchant for the outdoors and community involvement. They sought to bring in residents “of small means who were interested in the arts”, the makeup of the residency was integral to Devendorf’s vision, so much so that the company sold lots for “nothing down, pay-when-you-can” to artists and performers wanting to live in Carmel-by-the-Sea.9 After a devastating earthquake and fire in San Francisco “left a group of artists, writers, and musicians homeless…many of them decided to settle in Carmel…their coming was set the future for the development of Carmel as a cultural 1 “Carmel-by-the-Sea Historically Speaking…,” Game & Gossip Magazine, December 7, 1966, 8-10. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid.
4 Harold Gilliam, Ann Gilliam, Creating Carmel: The Enduring Vision, (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books, 1992) 16, 185–186. 5 “Unlike Most Subdivisions – Carmel Was Not Started as a Place to Make Money,” Monterey Peninsula Herald, August 27, 1949. 6 Harold Gilliam, Ann Gilliam, Creating Carmel: The Enduring Vision, (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books, 1992) 16, 185–186. 7 “Unlike Most Subdivisions – Carmel was Not started as a Place to Make Money,” Monterey Peninsula Herald, August 27, 1949. 8 James Franklin Devendorf to School Teachers of California and other Brain workers at in-door employment, Carmel-by-the-Sea, May 21, 1903. 9 “First Subdivision Map for Carmel Filed in 1902,” Monterey Peninsula Herald, June 1, 1970.

Attachment 1

community inhabited by persons of vision who wished to preserve the natural beauty of their surroundings and the unique charm of a village in a forest above a white sand beach.”10 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea was incorporated in 1916, the same year voters chose members of the City’s first governing body.11 That first governing body focused on framing laws to protect the new City of Carmel-by-the-Sea with special attention to the protection of City trees.12 Political and cultural battles between residents and a growing business presence were common for years, the need to preserve the culture and character of Carmel-by-the-Sea was a driving motivation for residents and elected trustees. In 1929, a zoning law was passed stating that “business development should forever be subordinate to the residential character of the community,” still a concept today guarded deeply by residents and the City’s governing body. 13 The uniqueness and charm of Carmel has been credited to resident and its governing body for preserving that vision of a town in a pine forest, after incorporation there was the notion that “Carmel belonged to the people…it was theirs to develop as they saw fit” with some wanting to keep Carmel “a simple village with as few earmarks of a city as possible.”14 The concept of preserving the City’s character, with that 1929 ordinance, can be lauded as the impetus for Carmel keeping residential streets free of sidewalks, street lights, no “high rise buildings to mar the outline of these pines against the sky,” forbidding of neon signs, and no street addresses or mailboxes lining the streets.15
Street Addresses
Walking down almost any street within the one-square-mile of Carmel-by-the-Sea something becomes obvious, there are no street addresses. There are no numbers on the exterior walls of houses, no displayed numbering system identifying a particular house or building. The absence of street addresses is perhaps more obvious when one attempts to have their GPS route their car to a particular house or building in Carmel-by-the-Sea. Modern GPS systems do not recognize the “descriptive” street addresses that Carmel-by-the-Sea residents use to identify their house; a mobile phone or car’s GPS will not recognize “Monte Verde 3 SE of Ocean”. Even though GPS devices do not recognize the descriptive street addresses residents use, residents and business owners often use signs to make their house or building identifiable by someone on the street.

The signs in front of houses with a particular phrase, “name” of the house, or residents’ last names are also something that becomes obvious to anyone walking a residential street in Carmelby-the-Sea. The topic of the City adopting a formal addressing system has been considered before and met with varying degrees of opinions, such as former mayor and trustee Perry Newberry 10 Marjory Lloyd, “The History of Carmel,” The Carmel Pine Cone, February 3, 1975. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 Carol Card, “Memory Lane Through The Years With Ocean Avenue,” The Carmel Pine Cone, April 8, 1949. 15 Marjory Lloyd, “The History of Carmel,” The Carmel Pine Cone, February 3, 1975.

Attachment 1

(“arguably [Carmel’s] best known, and certainly most outspoken, citizen”) firmly against numbering houses and keeping Carmel-by-the-Sea “different from every other small town.”1617 Throughout its history in consideration of street addresses Carmel-by-the-Sea residents and its governing body have responded with varied support or opposition to implementing street addresses. In 1926, City trustees passed an ordinance for house numbering of Carmel-by-the-Sea properties.1819 The ordinance made it unlawful for the owner of any real property in the City to “maintain any house, building, or structure…without posting securely…visible to passerby…a number plate showing in legible figures the number of said premises.”20 The ordinance was passed by a unanimous vote but the City did not implement or enforce the posting of house numbers, in 1940 the house number ordinance was officially repealed.21 In 2002, when the issue of mail delivery was at the center of attention, Council Member Barbara Livingston advocated to pass an ordinance to “specifically ban street addresses.”22 In its 106 year history, Carmel-by-theSea has not assigned or displayed street addresses, it is one of the more unique attributes of the City that has been considered for discussion throughout the years. The issue of street addresses was brought up again in the July 2021 City Council meeting with Council Members stating a “need to start the discussion and process relating to assigning addresses.”23 Carmel-the-Sea has not always been alone in not implementing street addresses after seemingly most of the country adopted a numbering address system. Until the early 2000’s, some rural towns in West Virginia remained without street addresses with a house numbering system only instituted in 2001 based in the concept of security and referred to as the “911 addressing system.”24 In places like McDowell County, West Virginia, residents picked up their mail at the local post office and had Amazon packages delivered to City Hall or the local bank.25 Unsurprisingly, not everyone wanted a house number assigned to their property, some residents expressed not necessarily wanting to be “found” or that they did not mind their current workarounds in not having a street address as it had become a part of everyday life.26 The need to be findable in emergencies proved a crucial aspect in implementing a house numbering system with accounts of firefighters’ “chaotic attempts to locate frantic callers who can’t give an address.”27
16 Neal Hotelling, “Perry Newberry’s final editorial is unfinished,” The Carmel Pine Cone, February 14, 2020. 17 Neal Hotelling, “For a successful, thoroughly modern city, don’t vote for Perry,” The Carmel Pine Cone, February 7, 2020. 18 Carmel-by-the-Sea, Cal., Ord. 68. 19 Ordinance 68 stated, “house numbering system for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is hereby adopted as and for the house-numbering Map Book of said City.” 20 Carmel-by-the-Sea, Cal., Ord. 68 §2. 21 Carmel-by-the-Sea, Cal., Ord. 228. 22 Kevin Howe, “Carmel Residents Adapt to Mail Delivery,” The Carmel Pine Cone, March 29, 2002. 23 Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council Regular Meeting, July 6, 2021. 24 Anton Tantner, House Numbers (London: Reaktion Books, 2005), 28. 25 Deirdre Mask, “Where the Streets Have No Name,” The Atlantic, January/February 2013. 26 Ibid. 27 Ibid.

Attachment 1

Consideration for Street Addresses
As times change, as financial and governmental institutions change their requirements for filing paperwork, as the COVID-19 pandemic spurred a turn to online ordering and delivery of essential necessities, the notion of exploring a street address system has made its way to the City Council’s 2022-2023 priority project list. The reasoning behind making this a priority item comes from the changing times and residents expressing difficulties in opening or maintaining financial accounts, securing loans, obtaining a REAL ID Driver’s license or passport, activating or changing basic utilities like wireless internet, having packages delivered to the correct house, or being “findable” in an emergency as a matter of public safety. Some Carmel-by-the-Sea residents have expressed frustration with the difficulty in establishing financial accounts or records without a traditional street address to provide to financial institutions who will not accept a PO Box as the address on record. Increased due diligence requirements for United States financial institutions post 9/11 have affected the information financial institutions are required to collect. 28 Staying in
compliance with federal law requires banks to “collect and verify customer-provided information, such as birth dates, addresses and copies of drivers’ licenses or passports.”2930 For matters not involving financial records requirements, Carmel-by-the-Sea residents provide new neighbors with workarounds and look out for each other’s packages when a new UPS or FedEx driver accidentally delivers a package to the wrong house. The current descriptive address system, the use of unique house “names” on a sign outside of residents’ houses, and use of the US Post Office’s physical address for vendors that do not ship to PO Boxes can prove to be efficient and straightforward to many Carmel-by-the-Sea residents. The City’s proposal of exploring the idea of street addresses for its one square mile is rooted in listening to residents who have exhausted the workarounds and expressed the need to be findable in emergencies, to have an address to which they can reliably receive packages containing medical necessities, and maintain financial affairs in order.

Exploring Street Addresses for Carmel-by-the-Sea, What It Means for the Local Post Office The City administration recognizes the topics of implementing street addresses and at-home mail delivery as two separate issues with the intention of exclusively exploring consideration of the former. At-home mail delivery for all residents in Carmel-by-the-Sea by the US Postal Service is not an action City staff will advocate for or pursue with the possible implementation of street addresses. The local post office has a long history in Carmel-by-the-Sea as being a local hub to where residents can make a daily visit to check their PO boxes, pick up packages from the friendly faces at the counter who many residents know by name, and catch up with other neighbors making the visit that day. Carmel-by-the-Sea’s downtown post office is one of about 4,400 independent post offices in the United States that do not have carrier delivery and not a status the City wants to change.31 City staff has established a line of communication with the Carmel Postmaster and plans to continue the discussion and communication of the City’s hardline stand 28 Richard Newman, “9/11 and Patriot Act Changed the Way You Bank”, APP, September 8, 2016, https://www.app.com/story/money/business/main-street/2016/09/08/911-patriot-act-banks/90003828/. 29 Ibid. 30 Section 312 and Section 326 of the USA PATRIOT Act required financial institutions to establish heightened due diligence and verification of identification procedures. 31 Patricia Lee Brown, “Fighting for a Carrier-Free Zone,” The New York Times, September 6, 2000.

Attachment 1

of not wanting at-home mail delivery for Carmel-by-the-Sea and maintaining the downtown post office open and operational.

Tradition Considered in Street Address Project Exploration Since Duckworth’s arrival and later Devendorf and Powers’ visionary development of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, the absence of street addresses has been intentional. Throughout its 106- year history, the City and its resident have expressed a sense of pride in the idiosyncrasies that make Carmel-by-the-Sea unique and unlike any other, at the center is often the storied absence of street addresses within the City limits. Changing the longstanding tradition is not an idea to take lightly as plenty of Carmel-by-the-Sea residents have expresses in the past, stating “we don’t like numbers on our homes, neon signs, and we like to get our mail at the post office.”32 With attention to tradition, the challenges that come with the absence of street addresses should be weighed against the changing world and the need for street addresses for ease-of-access to essential necessities and public safety issues identified by Carmel-by-the-Sea residents.

FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
Priorities in exploring a street address development process would include ensuring and maintaining the downtown post office in operation, a clear stand against implementing at-home mail delivery, and any consideration of street address signs would be subject to specifically developed design standards. Additionally, there is the possible consideration of implementing street addresses solely for purpose of being findable on a map or GPS device without exterior display of house numbers, a choice for residents to decide, or approaching the system with the expectation of design standards-approved street number signs outside every house and building in Carmel-by-the-Sea. At Council’s direction, City staff can meet with the Carmel Postmaster, research different options for a street address program, including non-traditional systems of street addressing such as Google Plus codes or varying alpha numeric addressing systems. The implementation of street addresses has been considered by City Council before and with a wide spectrum of opinions on the topic, City staff looks to Council for direction to begin exploring a street address implementation process or maintain the status quo. 32 Frank Bruno, “Whither the Carmel post office?,” The Carmel Pine Cone, July 5, 1973.

Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Receive a presentation on the Traffic Congestion Reduction & Parking Management Program, and provide staff with direction
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation on the Traffic Congestion Reduction & Parking Management Program, and provide staff with direction.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

BACKGROUND
Carmel-by-the-Sea, like many other premiere destinations, struggles to balance tourism access and the needs of permanent residents. This balance includes traffic congestion challenges and providing sufficient short term parking options. Public discourse on traffic congestion, parking, and the effects of tourism on the long-standing ideal of maintaining residential character is a recurring theme dating back many decades.

Major parking-related inflection points during the last 10 years include:

March, 2021: City Council defined traffic congestion and parking a City priority December, 2014 to July, 2015: Pilot kiosk deployment on Ocean between Junipero and Monte Verde.

November, 2013: Walker parking study (built upon a similar 1999 Walker Study)

DISCUSSION
This section outlines key aspects of the issues which may be of value for the City Council to lead the community forward. To be certain, traffic congestion and parking is controversial, complex, and difficult to address given strong community feelings. Previous actions to influence change have been short-lived followed by long periods of time where traffic congestion and limited parking is re-acknowledged as a serious issue. Particularly in the last decade, gradually increasing awareness and a sense of responsibility for the environment adds more weight to the need to do something.

Traffic Congestion and Its Relationship to Limited Parking Limited parking and parking time limits adds to vehicle movement and congestion within the business district in two major ways:
(1) Those arriving in the area must circle the area near their destination in an effort to find a parking space. While differing by day and time, circling the area in search of a parking space for 10 or more minutes is not unusual.
(2) Parking time limits require visitors and business employees/owners to frequently move their car to avoid time violations. Moving a parked car often involves making numerous passes in the business district before finding a new parking place.

Effects on Residents, Visitors and Businesses
Traffic congestion and accompanying air/noise pollution directly negatively impacts quality of life and Carmel’s historic residential village character. The parking/quality of life balance has been explored numerous times, as outlined in this report.

In each prior analysis, some in the business community have opposed paid parking, citing inconvenience to potential customers and the economic impact of visitors shortening visits based upon the existence of paid parking. Conversely, prospective customers have indicated that the search for finding parking (especially on weekends) has motivated selection of another shopping/dining destination. Feedback indicates residents also frequently avoid the business district, because it is impacted by traffic congestion and parking challenges. Parking access and related traffic generates congestion and impacts pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

As paid parking options are adopted, it is possible some visitors may decide to shop elsewhere, to avoid the cost of parking. However, this small set of visitors would likely be offset by residents and visitors encouraged by additional parking availability. The current 2-hour time parking limitation, albeit free, currently negatively impacts local businesses when residents and visiting customers manage their downtown experience within two-hour blocks of parking access. There are viable options, that have worked successfully for other jurisdictions. For example, smart phone options allow payment for additional time when needed to facilitate pleasant, worry-free shopping or dining.

Pay for parking can be linked with a resident permit program to allow Carmel residents free and convenient parking in pay-by-app areas utilizing a license plate registration process. We anticipate this will encourage residents to experience downtown without the current parking limitations.

Finally, a comprehensive management program that includes paid parking in the business district could provide an option for employee parking, which also impacts visitor and resident “drive around time” when employees reposition vehicles every two hours to avoid citation. 2014/15 Parking Experiment
Paid parking on Ocean Avenue, adopted in 2014, positively impacted availability. However, the program also generated “spillover” impacts in nearby free parking areas. While staff indicated the program met stated goals, community outcry, mostly regarding appearance of paid parking kiosks, led the City to abandon this paid parking initiative.

As an alternative to paid parking, some business leaders committed to self-monitoring employees parking impacts. Anecdotal evidence indicates this has not positively impacted parking availability. Additionally, some have suggested employees, who repeatedly exceed the two-hour limitation should be more severely impacted with higher fines and fees. Differentiating the use of a public parking space is legally and operationally challenging.

Community sentiment and program details about the 2014/15 parking program, is best derived by reading the following Carmel Pine Cone Articles and Editorials (ATTACHMENT 1):
• “Parking Workshop Set for Thursday” (10/17/2014)
• “Paid Parking Kiosks to Arrive on Ocean Avenue” (11/14/2014) • “Metered Parking to Go Live Dec. 1” (11/28/2014)
• “Give the Kiosks a Chance” (Editorial, 11/28/2014)
• “Ambassadors Hit the Streets as Paid Parking Begins” (12/5/2014) • “Paid Parking now Starts at 10 a.m.” (1/23/2015)
• “More Free Parking on Ocean Avenue for Residents” (4/10/2015) • “You can have your own opinions, but…” (Editorial, 5/1/2015) • “Chief: Parking Vouchers are not for Workers” (5/15/2015) • “Paid Parking a Success, Chief will Tell Workshop Wednesday” (6/19/2015) • “Paid Parking Results Don’t Sway Vocal Opponents” (6/26/2015) • “Parking kiosks on the way out” (7/3/2015)
• “No Need to Go Back to Square One” (Editorial, 7/3/2015) • “Council Wants Parking Kiosks Gone by Aug. 1” (7/10/2015) • “Kiosks gone, two-hour limit back on Ocean” (7/31/2015) Community and operational concerns with the 2014/15 Parking Program While the City’s previous attempt to address parking and traffic flow in the downtown was based upon thoughtful analysis and deliberation, it ultimately was abandoned for the reasons outlined herein. Evaluating past experiences should be considered when developing new parking options.

Review of local news and letters to the editor regarding the 2014/2015 Ocean Avenue program points to a few key issues which likely led to the failure of the program.

First, the number (one per block), aesthetics, and visual impact of parking payment kiosks did not meet the needs of many residents. However, as discussed in one editorial, residents might be inclined criticize appearance as a reason to oppose the program when a more visceral concern was actually paying for a community asset that was formerly offered at no cost.

Second, critics cited the inconvenience of making payment expressed primarily by business leaders who were concerned potential patrons would go elsewhere to avoid this inconvenience.

Third, people in opposition cited the “Carmel way” or keeping with tradition where locals guard and protect the quaint residential village feel. Some felt paid parking and its accompanying kiosks or meters serve to symbolize the opposite.

Fourth, late recognition of need to “take care” of employees, locals, and businesses. Rather deep into the Ocean Avenue rollout, the City made adjustments to time restrictions (for permit holders), expanded free parking areas, and offering businesses free parking vouchers. These efforts appear to have been adopted too late as momentum against the overall program had already taken root.

Fifth, the timing of the rollout was problematic. Adding paid parking as the business district entered the holiday season introduced extra complexity. Perhaps starting during a lower use period would have made some small difference.

Lastly, there were instances where the “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” perspective was expressed by those dissatisfied with paid parking. Here, it appears as though some in the community have concluded that finding a parking space and traffic congestion is not a problem. This is an understandable perspective, especially among locals who choose to venture into the business district only during low-use times or not at all. Businesses which are doing well, are also understandably inclined to not want change for fear of some unknown financial impact.

Walker Studies (summarization)
In 1999 and again in 2013, the City hired Walker Parking Consultants to conduct parking studies in the business district area (ATTACHMENTS 2 AND 3). The information from both studies is consistent, for example both studies describe:

On-street parking in the business district has very high occupancy leading to visitor frustration
Employees and business owners adding to the high occupancy and thereby exacerbate the problem
Comparison cities and their rates/policies
The 1999 report includes extensive revenue projection data (total revenue of over $2 million) and this information is not included in the 2013 report.

Key quotes from the 2013 study:

Parking challenges are more of an issue of imbalance of parking demand rather than a shortage of spaces.

The overall, peak occupancy rate of the parking system in Downtown Carmel is among the highest we have observed…throughout California.

While the aesthetic requirements of the City may make the implementation of paid parking more challenging than in other cities, new technologies could help mitigate the impact.

Current parking occupancy conditions suggests that during busy periods, visitors are likely to have difficulty in finding an available parking space…resulting in a significant amount of traffic generated by visitors not driving to their destination but instead searching for an on-street parking space.

Based on our studies and experience, implementation of paid parking would reduce visitor frustration and traffic congestion.

During the busiest times in Carmel’s business district, a significant number of the parking spaces specifically designed for use by visitors are likely occupied by employees.

Having a significant number of visitor spaces occupied by long-term parkers is a common and vexing problem for popular commercial districts in California that attempt to manage parking demand solely using time restrictions.

The biggest issue is not a lack of parking spaces but an uneven distribution of the demand for parking spaces between on-street spaces (for which there is high demand) and off-street spaces (for which there is lower demand).

Despite frequent perceptions to the contrary, paid parking should be viewed as the most efficient way, and usually the only efficient way, to manage and allocate parking demand.

Parking data (source: 2013 Walker Report)
Spaces by Location and Control (in Business District) Spaces % Total On Street 1511 78%
Off-Street City Controlled* 312 16%
Off-Street Private (but available to the public)** 106 5% *Includes Vista Lobos, Sunset Center, City Hall, Harrison Park Branch Library, and Post Office parking lots **Carmel Plaza
The 1,511 on-street parking spaces break down as follows:
794 2-hour spaces
506 spaces with no limit
128 30-minute spaces
26 loading spaces
39 other spaces (e.g., library patrons, ADA spaces, buses, etc.) The City Administrator, Police Chief, and Planning Director have reviewed the Walker Reports and concur there is no reason to update or conduct another parking study. The reason for this assertion: current economic data suggests that the amount of visitors has remained strong and, functionally, the streets, number of businesses, traffic patterns, etc., have remained the same. The only change is an increase in amount of visitors. Lastly, funding another study would represent a waste of public money when the outcome of such a study is already known by staff and community leaders.

Reasons to Reengage
In the nearly eight years since the abandoned paid parking experiment of 2014/15, the problems associated with traffic congestion and limited parking in prime parking areas have continued to negatively impact the community. While definitely a “hot button” issue, sure to evoke strong feelings, enough time has passed to reflect on past program shortcomings, consider how technological advances might be able to help, and make changes to better address the criticisms of the past.

A continuing theme, lasting decades, has included the cat-and-mouse game used by employees to park in the free and convenient on-street parking. As described in the Walker report, enforcement of limited time zones is “vexing” for many communities. Employees running to their car to move when a parking enforcement officer “rounds the corner” is now common. Actual, results-oriented control of the employee parking problem by well-meaning business management is inconsistent at best. Business leaders have little ability to actually verify if an employee is parked properly or just parked in front of another nearby business.

The overarching problem with the 2014/15 parking program centered on kiosks and their mismatch with our aesthetics. New technology is smaller and may allow for many fewer or zero kiosks. In 2014, the pay-byphone option required a cumbersome app download. Now, no download is needed. Current and proven technology allows for motorists to simply take a picture of a “Q code” and then be taken to a web connection where parking duration, license plate, and payment is accomplished. With COVID, touchless food ordering via a Q-Code was commonplace. Society is now much more accustomed with this concept and paying for parking can now be accomplished in the same way.

Technology also now allows for local businesses or innkeepers, who are concerned about convenience for their VIP customers, to enter and pay for parking on their customer’s behalf—all they will need is a license number.

CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION - NEXT STEPS
In response to the current City Council priorities, staff needs clarification in the form of consensus for next steps.

Question 1: Timing of community outreach
The next phase to advance the parking/traffic congestion issue includes a series of public outreach efforts.

This public engagement is needed to thoroughly explain the need for paid parking and to design a program which is well-planned and meets the public’s expectations.

Sample public outreach timeline is attached (ATTACHMENT 5).

Question 1 Options:

1. Start immediately, expedite to get an action item to current City Council on December 6, 2022

2. Start public engagement activities in January, after the new City Council is seated, with plan to bring back an action item in May, 2023

3. Wait and seek direction from new City Council in 2023

4. Other options as directed by Council
Question 2:

As outlined in the attached “Draft Community Engagement Plan” (ATTACHMENT 4), a variety of public outreach efforts are being proposed, to include (1) informational mailing, (2) resident meetings, (3) business meetings, (4) farmers market booth, (5) restaurant/innkeepers meeting, (6) Planning Commission meeting, and a (7) City Council workshop.

Question 2 Options:

1. Consensus on the draft engagement plan

2. Modifications as needed

3. No action—present the question to future
FISCAL IMPACT:

FY 2022/23
This year’s financial impact is dependent City Council’s decision to move forward with the public outreach and parking program advancements during this fiscal year. If staff are assigned to undertake this work, there will be minimal FY 2022/23 impacts (less than $1,000 dollars for mailouts and presentation material).

However, if there is a desire to use outside consultant services for this work, costs for FY 2022/23 could be significant (specific amount would need to be derived later as part of a separate action item to City Council).

Long term
The 1999 Walker Report (ATTACHMENT 2), projected gross revenue in excess of $2 Million per year.

This projection was based on revenue from 1,049 paid parking spaces at $1/hr. A more recent projection suggests a smaller paid parking area consisting of about 718 parking spaces at $2/h would generate gross revenue of about $2.1 million dollars (this was based on occupancy percentages of Pacific Grove and Monterey). Community benefit from such revenue would be determined/defined by future City Councils.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Approved staffing Community Service Officer positions (from 1970’s, between one and five positions) (2) Funded two parking studies (1999 and 2013)
(3) Approved experimental, 6 month paid parking program (2014/15) and a 2002 “pay and display” program
(4) Established and adjusted 2 hour and 20-minute parking zones (multiple adjustments over time) (5) Established free, all-day parking at Sunset Center
(6) Expanded all-day parking on Junipero Avenue
(7) Included addressing parking/congestion as a City Council Priority/Goal on numerous occasions ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Pine Cone Information
Attachment 2) 1999 Walker Parking Consultants Report
Attachment 3) 2013 Walker Parking Consultants Report
Attachment 4) Draft Community Engagement Plan
Attachment 5) Sample Public Outreach Timeline
ATTACHMENT A—PINE CONE INFORMATION Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 1
Based on the findings of the 2013 Parking Study presented to a joint meeting of Carmel-by-theSea‟s City Council and Planning Commission on November 4, 2013, Walker Parking Consultants and City staff were directed to identify effective parking management measures for Downtown Carmel that together would result in a plan that improved the availability of (onstreet) parking spaces for visitors, with an overall emphasis of improving the visitor experience in the City. Findings from the 2013 study suggested that the most efficient way to improve parking space availability for visitors was to address the significant number of long-term (primarily business owner and employee) drivers who regularly park in these visitor spaces. To identify the appropriate measures to take to improve parking space availability, the following goals were identified:

1. Discourage long-term parking in the highest demand locations;

2. Provide reasonable flexibility for visitor parking keeping the customer service experience in mind; and

3. Implement policies to encourage long-term parking in lower demand areas; and bring underutilized privately owned parking spaces into the public system.

As part of the overall strategy for creating a parking management plan, Walker identified two types of policy measures that can help achieve the broader policy goal. They can be divided simply between “push” and “pull” efforts applied to long-term parkers parked in spaces designated for visitors. “Push” policies are focused directly on the behavior of drivers parked in the on-street spaces. They include time restrictions on parkers, pricing on-street parking spaces, and related measures used to enforce compliance of these policies and restrictions. “Pull” policies are essentially policies put in place in locations away from the on-street spaces, which encourage or incentivize long-term parkers to not park in the coveted visitor spaces, or not park at all, but instead use other means to access the downtown. “Pull” policies may take DATE: March 27, 2014
TO: Chief Michael Calhoun
ORGANIZATION: Carmel-by-the-Sea Police Department
ADDRESS: Southeast Corner of Junipero Street and 4th
Avenue
CITY/STATE: Carmel-by-the-Sea
CC:

HARD COPY TO FOLLOW: No
FROM: Turoff, Steffen
PROJECT NAME: Carmel-by-the-Sea Steps for Improved Parking Management
PROJECT NUMBER: 33-1781.00
SUBJECT: Memorandum
Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 2
the form of incentives to park in certain locations, such as relaxed or eliminated time limits and inexpensive or free parking.

Almost by definition “push” policies are punitive in nature while “pull” policies are incentives to change behavior. “Pull” policies attempt to make what initially may be an inconvenient choice into a more attractive choice. “Push” policies therefore address the issue at the source whereas “pull” policies arguably work in a more indirect fashion.

Because “push” policies are more targeted, they are nearly always more effective than “pull” policies though they require more effort to implement. “Pull” policies are generally easier or more attractive to implement than “push” policies, primarily because they rely on incentives rather than punishment of drivers who do not follow the desired policies.

The most effective policies to improve parking system performance combine “push” and “pull” policies. In some cases, the implementation of both “push” and “pull” policies are not only desirable, but necessary; in order to achieve the desired parking management goals.

City staff and council have requested that Walker present a continuum of parking management solutions, which range from the easiest/quickest/cheapest to the hardest/longest/most expensive. In order to understand the range of parking policy alternatives available, and their effectiveness, it is helpful to consider the alternatives in the context of a “push” and “pull” strategy.

NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL, AVAILABLE SPACES SOUGHT
Based on the expressed goals of the Parking Management Plan, it is helpful to quantify the approximate number of spaces needed to improve parking availability for visitors. We note that some communities have attempted to identify this number by surveying the number of employees in downtown businesses. However we have seen that such surveys can have less than productive results. We do not seek to quantify the number of total employees working in the downtown area nor do we seek to quantify the number of employees working at a given time. Rather we seek to identify the number of parked vehicles whose relocation would demonstrably improve the availability of parking spaces for visitors.

Relocating long-term vehicles is a tool. Our goal is to make spaces available for visitors; not simply relocate vehicles parked in the long term. The following tables, which come from the 2013 study, reflect parking adequacy on a street-by-street basis. We therefore note that we are not necessarily “targeting” all employee parkers with our policies. Our primary goal is to eliminate the parking deficits shown in the table below.

Table 2 shows a total parking deficit of 63 two-hour parking spaces during the peak, but using Table 3 shows greater detail, and a total parking deficit of 83 parking spaces at peak. To the extent we can relocate at least 83 long-term parkers from the commercial center of Carmel, we will have improved parking availability for visitors.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 3
Table 1: Observed Aggregate Parking Deficits in Downtown Carmel Table 2: Number of Spaces Needed to Alleviate Parking Space Deficit at Peak 2 hr 30 min 10 min Loading Other Regular Total
Torres St. 3rd Avenue Ocean 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Junipero Ave. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue 0 4 0 2 10 (7) 9
Mission St. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue (7) 1 2 0 1 0 (3)
San Carlos St. 3rd Avenue 10th Avenue (10) 3 0 5 0 (3) (5) Dolores St. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue (12) 6 0 1 0 (1) (6)
Lincoln St. 4th Avenue 8th Avenue (8) (1) 0 1 0 (1) (9) Monte Verde 4th Avenue 8th Avenue 0 (1) 0 1 0 (4) (4)
Casanova St. 4th Avenue 8th Avenue 0 0 0 0 0 10 10
Third Avenue Torres Mission 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
Fourth Avenue Torres Lincoln (2) (1) 0 0 0 (1) (4)
Fifth Avenue Torres Monte Verde (1) 0 6 0 (1) (2) 2
Sixth Avenue Torres Monte Verde (6) (1) 0 1 0 0 (6)
Ocean Junipero Casanova (8) 4 0 1 0 (2) (5)
Seventh Avenue Junipero Casanova (5) 2 0 0 0 2 (1)
Eighth Avenue Junipero Casanova (4) 0 (1) 0 0 0 (5)
(63) 16 7 12 10 (7) (25)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.

STREET FROM TO
Totals

SUPPLY ADEQUACY (DEFICIT)
2 hr 30 min 10 min Loading Other Regular Total
Torres St. 3rd Avenue Ocean
Junipero Ave. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue
Mission St. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue (7) (3)
San Carlos St. 3rd Avenue 10th Avenue (10) (3) (5)
Dolores St. 3rd Avenue 8th Avenue (12) (1) (6)
Lincoln St. 4th Avenue 8th Avenue (8) (1) (1) (9)
Monte Verde 4th Avenue 8th Avenue (1) (4) (4)
Casanova St. 4th Avenue 8th Avenue
Third Avenue Torres Mission
Fourth Avenue Torres Lincoln (2) (1) (1) (4)
Fifth Avenue Torres Monte Verde (1) (1) (2)
Sixth Avenue Torres Monte Verde (6) (1) (6)
Ocean Junipero Casanova (8) (2) (5)
Seventh Avenue Junipero Casanova (5) (1)
Eighth Avenue Junipero Casanova (4) (1) (5)
-63 -4 -1 0 -1 -14 -83
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.

SUPPLY ADEQUACY (DEFICIT)

FROM TO
Totals
STREET
Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 4

POTENTIAL UNDERUTILIZED PARKING SPACES
The number of underutilized parking spaces that could be available for employee parkers will vary significantly by day and hour. For example, the Thursday Farmer‟s Market at the Sunset Lot in particular will limit parking availability on that day. While we therefore suggest a conservative estimate of the number of parking spaces available for employee parking, we also suggest that much of the time, the number of available spaces will be greater than our conservative projection indicates.

Figure 1 on the following page shows the location of parking spaces that could be used to accommodate employee, business owner, and other long-term parkers who currently park in visitor spaces in the commercial core. Table 3 shows the number of parking spaces that could be available, by location, for this purpose. We note that a significant number of these spaces are located in the Sunset Center‟s “North” lot, parking availability in which may be skewed due to weekday data collection occurring on a Farmer‟s Market day, when many of the parking spaces may not be available for parking. We point out, however, that even if we were to remove, very conservatively, all of the Sunset North Lot spaces from the possible long-term parking pool, we are still likely to have 100+ underutilized parking spaces for long-term parkers.

Table 4 shows the number of available parking spaces observed, by time of day, along Junipero Street. However, based on the recommendations we put forth later in this memorandum, Table 5 answers the relevant question for our purposes: how many underutilized time restricted spaces along Junipero Street could be used by long-term parkers if the time restrictions were removed? The data in the table suggests that the answer is a minimum of 13 parking spaces.

The larger question is whether underutilized parking spaces exist and can be used to park long-term parkers in the commercial core. Although a relatively small percentage of available spaces exist given the total supply of spaces in the commercial core, the answer is “yes.” Based on this finding, we present recommendations to move this strategy forward.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 5
Figure 1: Selected Possible Locations for Long-term Parking Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 6
Table 3: Observed Availability of Parking Spaces in Proposed Employee Parking Areas by Time of Day Area Area Description Inventory*
1 Vista Lobos Lot 60 40 35 28 38 17 39
2 Junipero (On Street) 168 33 17 43 31 21 20
3 Ocean (On Street) 27 5 7 6 1 1 4
4 Sunset Center (North) Market‡120 98 89 53 108 11 47
5 Sunset Center (San Carlos / Middle) Lot 31 11 2 1 5 23 13 6 Sunset Center (Southwest) Lot 20 4 3 - 2 15 8
7 Sunset Center (Southeast) Lot 33 7 6 - 7 19 23
Totals 459 198 159 131 192 107 154
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2014.
* Figures exclude loading spaces, motorcycle spaces, and spaces reserved for police use. ‡ Farmers' Market in progress during 11 AM and 2 PM counts on Thursday, July 11, 2013.

Thursday, July 11, 2013 Saturday, July 13, 2013
11 AM 2 PM 5 PM 11 AM 2 PM 5 PM

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 7
Table 4: Availability of Parking Spaces in Proposed Parking Area 2, Junipero Street Location From To Side 2 hr Untimed Total
East 0 10 10 1 0 3 2 1 3
West 0 10 13 2 1 1 1 2 5
East 0 12 12 1 0 2 0 1 1
West 0 13 13 1 0 3 0 1 0
East 8 0 11 4 3 5 3 5 4
West 9 0 10 1 0 4 3 3 1
East 0 16 16 1 3 3 0 1 0
West 0 16 16 1 1 4 0 1 0
East 12 0 12 5 3 2 4 1 2
West 10 0 10 5 1 0 0 0 -2
East 17 0 17 6 2 2 7 2 1
West 17 0 17 4 2 3 9 1 2
East 5 0 5 0 0 5 0 1 2
West 6 0 6 1 1 6 2 1 1
84 77 168 33 17 43 31 21 20
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2014.

Center Island
6th Ocean
* Figures exclude loading spaces, motorcycle spaces, and spaces reserved for police use. 3rd 4th
Center Island
4th 5th
5th 6th
Center Island
Totals 7
0 0
3 0
0 2 PM 5 PM
Number of Spaces Available*
0 0
Thursday, July 11, 2013 Saturday, July 13, 2013
11 AM 2 PM 5 PM 11 AM
0 0
0 0
0 3
1 ≤30 min
Number of Spaces by Type*
Area 2
Junipero
Street

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 8
Table 5: Availability of Timed Parking Spaces in Proposed Parking, Area B, Junipero Street Location From To Side
West 3 0 1 1 1 2 2
East 11 4 3 5 3 5 4
West 10 1 0 4 3 3 1
East 12 5 3 2 4 1 2
West 10 5 1 0 0 0 (2)
East 17 6 2 2 7 2 1
West 17 4 2 3 9 1 2
East 5 0 0 5 0 1 2
West 6 1 1 6 2 1 1
91 26 13 28 29 16 13
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2014.

Totals
* Figures exclude loading spaces, motorcycle spaces, and spaces reserved for police use.

Total Timed
Restricted
Spaces*
Center Island
6th Ocean
Area 2
Junipero
Street
3rd 4th
4th 5th
5th 6th
Thursday, July 11, 2013 Saturday, July 13, 2013
11 AM 2 PM 5 PM 11 AM 2 PM 5 PM
Number of Time-restricted Spaces Available*

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 9

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the discussion above, we present the following recommendations in order of what we project would be ease of implementation. Important among these, or any recommendation regarding parking policies and recommendations is the need for regular monitoring of parking occupancies. A parking system is dynamic in many ways. Planners and economic development specialists have recently been describing municipal parking systems in terms similar to an ecosystem. Policies must be flexible and an open source of information and goals for the system should be in place. The City and stakeholders should have plans in place to measure the effectiveness of the parking program and make necessary changes to better manage parking. For example, we typically recommend monitoring parking occupancies at least once or twice per quarter (in order to take into account seasonal variations in parking patterns).

The purpose of the monitoring is to identify where parking occupancy is either too high (indicating a shortage of available spaces) or too low (indicating underutilized spaces) and make policy adjustments accordingly. Policies should be easy for the public to understand, but also flexible to adjust to the needs of the parking system, a key priority of which is ensuring parking availability. As part of the monitoring process we suggest that City staff implement a score card identifying which programs are initiated and their effectiveness.

In the remainder of this document we discuss a continuum of parking policy “pull” and “push” options in terms of ease of implementation and effectiveness. We summarize our findings in the following table. Details follow in the remainder of the report.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 10
Table 6: Summary of Parking Policy Measures
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2014
Proposed Measure Purpose
Anticipated
Level of
Effectiveness
Projected Ease
of Implementation
Projected:

Total Cost
Relative to
Effectiveness
1 Free all-day parking in the Sunset
Lot to accommodate employee
parking.
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Low High Medium
2 Eliminate time restrictions on
Junipero Street north of Fifth
Avenue to accommodate
employee parking.
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Low High Low
3 Make agreements for the use of
some private spaces for
employee use.
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Low Medium Low
4 Rewards program for employee
parkers.
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Low Low Low
5 Walk/concierge/ambassador
service
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Very Low Low Medium
6 Shuttle service for employees
(and visitors)
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Very Low Low Very High
1 - 6 Combined "Pull" Measures
"Pull" employees out
of visitor parking
spaces.

Medium Medium Medium
7 Pilot/Limited Paid Parking
Program
"Push" employees
from localized visitor
parking spaces.

High in
locations
where
implemented
Medium Very Low
8 Downtown-wide Paid Parking
"Push" employees
from visitor parking
spaces.

Very High Low to
Medium Very Low
Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 11

1. EXTEND THE ENFORCEMENT OF TIME LIMITS BEYOND THE CURRENT 6:00 PM TO AT LEAST 9:00 PM (“PUSH” POLICY)
By ending the time limit enforcement at 6:00 pm, drivers who park by 4:00 pm may park for an unlimited amount of time for the whole evening. Employees who work day shifts are effectively subject to the time limits, but employees arriving at 2:00 pm or later need only move their car once to be able to park on the street through the evening. We note that the second and third busiest occupancy counts for on-street parking spaces were the 2:00 pm and 5:00 pm occupancy counts performed on Saturday. Extending the hours of enforcement will reduce the incentive for employees to park on the street throughout the afternoon and into the evening.

The additional cost to the City of implementing this policy includes changing the existing signage infrastructure, which could likely be done using stickers rather than full replacement of signs. The cost also includes changes in the hours parking officers would be enforcing, however we note that additional hours would likely result additional citation revenue as well, which could offset the cost of the additional hours of enforcement.

Needed for implementation:
 New signage. Implementation of this measure need not require the replacement of the existing metal signage apparatus, which could be costly and time consuming. Official stickers could be placed over the existing “9:00 am to 6:00 pm” notation to indicate the hours of enforcement as necessary.
 Labor. Parking enforcement officers (“PEOs”) would be required to work later into the evening to enforce this policy. Additional PEO hours would be required. While some cities that have implemented this policy simply started enforcement later in the morning, so as not to increase the number of hours worked by enforcement staff, after review of the data, we caution that such a policy in Carmel could allow employees who arrive early in the morning to park legally until noon or beyond, impacting the availability of parking spaces during the lunch time peak.  Ordinance. In some cities, the hours of enforcement may be regulated by ordinance.

This does not appear to be the case in Carmel, per the City‟s Municipal Code 10.32.060 Limited Time Parking, however, should be confirmed by City staff.

2. PROVIDE MORE CONVENIENT AND ATTRACTIVE PARKING OPTIONS FOR EMPLOYEES (“PULL” POLICY)
We want a significant portion of the business owners and employees who currently park in visitor (two hour) spaces to park away from the commercial core in order to make more onstreet parking spaces near businesses available to visitors.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 12
In order to encourage long-term parkers to park in these peripheral locations we need to undertake measures that make these locations more attractive and to some extent counteract the inconvenience that comes with parking in these locations. These include:
 Eliminating parking fees;
 Reducing or eliminating time restrictions;
 Providing improved safety and convenience for walking/traveling to and from the parking locations;
 Providing rewards for employees who follow the desired policies.

We note that it is not necessary that we move every long-term parker out of the commercial core area. Our goal is to make one to two, two-hour parking spaces available on each block face in the commercial core.

In order to achieve this goal, we propose the following measures:

A. ELIMINATE THE FEE FOR PAID PARKING IN THE SUNSET CENTER LOT AND ALLOW FREE, ALLDAY PARKING.

The policy to charge for parking in the Sunset Center lot was an incomplete implementation of the policy recommendations made in the study that Walker performed in 2000; it was not intended to be implemented in isolation. Paid parking in the Sunset Center was recommended assuming the implementation of paid parking on the street. However, without the “push” of paid parking on the street, charging for parking in the Sunset Center became its own “push.” Combined with the relatively inconvenient location in relation to most Downtown businesses, the current policy represents not one, but two reasons for people not to park in the lot. We want to remove the disincentives and instead provide incentives (for employees) to park in this location.

Implementing paid parking in the Sunset Center lot while on-street parking remains free violates an important rule of parking management: off-street parking should generally be priced less and have fewer restrictions than on-street parking. With the possible exception of event parking in some instances, we suggest that the price of parking – and the restrictions – for parking in the Sunset Center should be less than those for parking on-street in the commercial core of the City.

Eliminating paid parking in the Sunset lot is meant to address these issues and attract more employee parkers. The policy may attract more visitor parkers as well, who would be willing to park farther away and walk a greater distance for the added convenience of not being subject to time restrictions. Such visitor parkers currently must pay for the inconvenience of walking a greater distance to shops and businesses. For free parking, it is almost certain that some visitor parkers will be willing to park at this location. We project that most or all of these parkers will be pulled from visitor spaces closer to the commercial core.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 13
Needed for Implementation:
 Removal of the existing pay station.
 Signage. Removal of or significant change to existing “pay-to-park” signage and notice of additional restrictions, such as a 24-hour time limit for parking.  Public outreach to inform employees of the new policy. In addition to announcing the change on the City‟s website and through local media, we recommend coordination with the City‟s Chamber of Commerce to inform employees of the change in policy.

B. LEASE A LIMITED NUMBER OF UNDERUTILIZED PRIVATE PARKING SPACES FOR EMPLOYEE

PARKING
The 2013 parking study focused on publicly owned parking spaces but the availability of parking spaces in some privately owned facilities was quantified and a significant number of available spaces was identified in such facilities. These are parking spaces that are not being used at the same time that visitor spaces are unavailable. To the extent it is possible, agreeable to both parties, and that the City utilizing these spaces for long-term parkers should make more spaces available for visitors, a financial arrangement between the City and the owners of off-street parking spaces would provide the incentive for owners of off-street parking spaces to participate in such a program.

Funding for the monthly leasing of parking spaces could come from revenue generated by the parking system. We point out that the amortized construction, soft and operating costs for a structured parking space in Northern California can easily exceed $250 per month, not including land costs. The City should not hesitate spending a reasonable amount per space to more efficiently use the private parking spaces in the commercial core area; doing so is far more cost effective than building additional parking and is a more efficient use of Carmel-bythe-Sea‟s limited space as well.

In some cases, designated employee parkers could be provided with access, and peripheral spaces inside the facility could be designated for employee parking. For select spaces in ungated facilities, monthly parking could be provided to a limited number of employees, whose license plates would be registered with the City‟s Parking Enforcement operation. Off-street spaces could be allocated through a lottery to employees who sign up. The cost of leasing these spaces would be covered by the City. We note that in some instances an adjustment to the City‟s zoning regulations regarding minimum parking requirements could be required to ensure that the use of private parking spaces did not violate the City code.

Needed for Implementation:
 Public outreach to property owners and then to potential (employer or employee) parkers about the existence of the new program;
 Agreement. An agreement between off-street parking owners and the City to make parking spaces available (sample attached);
Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 14
 Funding. Funding source identified to compensate the owners of off-street parking for the use of their parking spaces.
 Allocation of spaces. From the pool of employee parking identified, a determination of which employees will be allowed to use the off-street parking spaces. Determination could come from a lottery system or employers could be charged (partial) payment for use of the spaces if competition for these spaces was significant enough to merit fees.  Signage. Unless specified or required in an agreement with parking owners, signage would not be necessary for implementation of this policy. Parkers permitted to park in (designated) spaces would be identified using registered license plates.

C. ELIMINATE TIME LIMITS IN DESIGNATED ON-STREET SPACES TO ALLOW FOR ALL-DAY

PARKING BY EMPLOYEES
On-street parking spaces located away from the commercial core, and which experience lower demand for parking, can be used to park long-term parkers much like spaces in the Sunset Center or Vista Lobos surface lots. Employees who otherwise might occupy short-term parking spaces in the commercial core could park in these spaces. The parking spaces that we have identified for this purpose include parking spaces currently designated as 2-hour spaces along Junipero Street, between Third Street and Ocean Avenue, and spaces along Ocean Avenue between Monte Verde and Casanova Streets. We recommend 10-hour time limits to ensure that residents, hotel guests (who may have the option of on-site parking) or other long-term parkers do not use the spaces for long-term vehicle storage.

Table 5, earlier in the report, demonstrated the availability of these spaces.

Needed for Implementation:
 New signage. Implementation of this measure need not require the replacement of the existing metal signage apparatus, which could be costly and time consuming. Official stickers could be placed over the existing two-hour time limit to a twelve-hour time limit.  Public outreach to inform employees of the new policy. In addition to announcing the change on the City‟s website and through local media, we recommend coordination with the City‟s Chamber of Commerce to inform employees of the change in policy.

D. DEVELOP A WALK SERVICE, AMBASSADOR/CONCIERGE SERVICE OR SHUTTLE SERVICE

FOR EMPLOYEES AND OTHERS WHO PARK IN PERIPHERAL LOCATIONS The walking distance between peripheral parking locations and businesses in the center of the commercial district is a deterrent to employees parking in peripheral locations. Perceived safety issues are a deterrent as well, particularly for employees – and some visitors – who may need to return to their cars after dark. Providing a service that addresses these concerns should increase employees‟ willingness to park away from the commercial area.

Such services could include security or walking escort services, similar to those found on college campuses for students who study late at the library. An ambassador program can be Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 15
similar to a walk service. We note that uniformed ambassadors could also help direct visitors and answer questions. Further, we point out that extending the hours of time limit enforcement in the downtown area, as recommended elsewhere in this report, would result in more parking enforcement officers on the street in the evening. An ambassador position could potentially cover multiple responsibilities and accomplish the goal with regard to reducing employees‟ safety concerns associated with walking to peripheral parking locations in the evening.

A shuttle service would alleviate safety concerns as well as reduce walking time and effort to peripheral parking spaces, particularly those that require an uphill walk to reach, such as Vista Lobos. Although routing changes would occur to address employees‟ needs, it is not uncommon to experience low ridership if adjustments are not made; people‟s willingness to ride shuttles is often estimated higher than what actually occurs.

There are potentially other creative solutions. For example, pedicab service is increasingly popular in a number of cities and can serve visitors, residents and employees.

We recognize that there are costs associated with providing these services that, for multiple reasons, would not be passed on to all groups of parkers but instead should be covered by (we recommend revenue generated from parking in) the City. Fees generated from parking services would be a logical source of funding for these services as they should effectively increase the supply of available parking spaces in Downtown Carmel-by-the-Sea.

Needed for Implementation:

An initial or pilot walk service or ambassador program could begin using existing parking enforcement staff, equipment and uniforms. Based on the specific nature of a program to serve Downtown Carmel employees, procedures using cell phone service would be needed to coordinate the walk service and match employees to walk service personnel along with a data base of employees and schedules, if regularly scheduled escorts were required.

A shuttle service would likely be significantly more expensive than a walk or security service per person served. In our experience, shuttle costs typically run about $80.00 per hour. Service could likely be facilitated by Monterey/Salinas Valley Transit.

E. REWARD EMPLOYEES WHO PARK IN DESIGNATED AREAS
If we cannot price or restrict long-term parkers from parking in visitor spaces, the second best thing we can do is incentivize them to park in those locations where we prefer that they park.

The demand for employee parking in popular commercial districts is typically managed by applying a price to visitor parking spaces that is higher, on an incremental basis, than the price of employee parking spaces. The result is a price of parking that is acceptable for a visitor, who parks for just part of the day, and on an infrequent basis but a price that is unacceptable Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 16
for a long-term parker, at least on a regular basis, as the long-term parker would be subject to the price over many hours and on a daily or frequent basis.

While time limits can make long-term employee parking in visitor spaces inconvenient for employees (and visitors), as discussed in the 2013 parking study, effective enforcement can be extremely challenging, even for the best enforcement operation, determined long-term parkers can thwart the system.

In just a few cities where on-street parking is not priced, rewards have been offered to employees to park in the desired location. The policy is therefore a “pull” rather than a push measure.

The City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado is a hot springs, dining and outdoor destination in the Rocky Mountains. The town has implemented such a program, primarily to deal with parking issues during a downtown construction project. The City characterizes the program as a success. The Downtown Parking Perks program is presented to local employees on its website, shown in the figure below.

We suggest that the rewards could be proportional to the potential level of inconvenience of the location or the availability of underutilized parking spaces; for example the reward for parking in the Vista Lobos Lot could be greater than that offered for parking in the Sunset Center lots.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 17
Figure 2: Sample Employee Rewards Website (Glenwood Springs, CO) Source: http://downtownparkingperks.com/, March 19, 2014 We note that the Glenwood Springs program encourages bicycle commuting as much as it does parking in designated employee locations. We do not focus on this policy in the case of Carmel, but acknowledge that a policy which encouraged more commuting by bicycle would be helpful and desirable in mitigating parking issues. However, compared to Glenwood Springs, it may be less realistic for Carmel-by-the-Sea given the limited street access to the Village and the types of employees who work in the area.

We envision implementing such a program in Carmel as part of the larger parking enforcement operation and technology. Employees would register their vehicles‟ license plate numbers into a City data base. Parking enforcement officers would periodically scan the license plates of vehicles parked in the locations in which employee parking was encouraged.

These locations would likely include those already discussed including the Vista Lobos Lot, Sunset Center, potentially some privately owned parking spaces, and some on-street parking spaces along Junipero Street. License plate numbers would be compared with those in the Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 18
City‟s employee parker data base. License plate numbers found to match the employee license plate data base listings would be eligible for selection in a random drawing for rewards, other prizes, or potentially cash or cash equivalents.

Needed for implementation:
 Program establishment and administration. Staff time would be required to establish and administer the program on an ongoing basis, including public information and outreach, determination and allocation of rewards on a regular basis, monitoring of employee parking areas, and potentially maintenance of a related web-page, such as that highlighted in the figure above.
 Funding for the administration of the program as well as employee rewards which, in the case of the example, was contributed in part by participating local businesses.  Database of employee parkers.
 Public outreach to inform employees of the new program. In addition to announcing the change on the City‟s website and through local media, we recommend coordination with the City‟s Chamber of Commerce to inform employees.

3. PAID ON-STREET PARKING (“PUSH” POLICY)
The 2013 Parking Study recommended the implementation of paid on-street parking to increase parking space availability for visitors looking for parking spaces and potentially increase the flexibility of the current time limits, if the City chose to extend or eliminate these and use paid, hourly parking to encourage the turnover of spaces.

An additional rationale for paid, on-street parking is to generate revenue to fund additional improvements to the parking system. City staff reports that the Sunset Center lot generated approximately $165,000 in the last fiscal year, which should be recovered elsewhere if paid parking is eliminated in the Sunset Center Lot. We strongly recommend to the City that, if it seeks to generate revenue from parking, that revenue is generated using the most impacted parking spaces so as to use parking pricing to better manage its parking spaces, and not spaces that experience lower demand than on-street parking spaces. A preliminary analysis, assuming $1.50 per hour for on-street parking, extended hours of enforcement and an average occupancy rate of 80% suggests that 40 - 50 paid, on-street spaces (approximately 3 block faces) could recoup lost revenue from the Sunset Lot.1

RECOMMENDATION FOR ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY

1 We note that other recommendations made to incentivize employees not to park in visitor spaces would also require funding, but we have suggested that, given the effective increase in the number of parking spaces that should result, fees generated by the parking system could be seen as a possible revenue source to fund some of these policy recommendations.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 19
The recommended policies and goals are meaningless without an implementable means by which to put these measures into place. When it comes to parking technology, policies and management, good execution is far more important than brilliant ideas. As noted earlier in this report, parking technology and smart phone capability have made great strides in recent years. Yet there is still a large amount of technology available that for a variety of reasons, may not act as anticipated or needed. There are still limitations to the technology and one must always weigh the capabilities with what at times are significant costs.

An example of this technology – and its limitations - is the occupancy sensor that can be installed inconspicuously in each on-street space. The technology allows a city to determine, and track in real time, when a parking space is occupied and the number of available spaces in any given location. However integration with revenue control systems, such as PbC (PbC) or meter technology is still challenging. Integration with in-car RFID transponders of the type used today for California‟s EZ Pass toll bridges and toll roads has not occurred on a practical level as has been recommended for use by some local stakeholders. Further, these sensors average $200 per space for purchase and installation along with an additional $15 per month per space for monitoring. They are replaced every 3 years when the batteries fail. And there have been battery and accuracy issues. Accuracy may fall between 75% and 90% although in some instances we have witnessed lower accuracy reading. To date, most cities simply cannot afford them.

Effective implementation of the policy recommendations that we put forth in this section assumes the implementation of the appropriate technology. Parking access and revenue control technology has improved significantly over the past five years and continues to advance. The City is now able to put in place some policies that previously were desirable but not implementable. Walker typically does not recommend specific technology solutions.

However, to our knowledge there is currently only one proven technology solution that is capable of putting into action the policies that we will recommend for on-street parking (enforcement). We describe this solution below:

RECOMMENDED NEW SYSTEM
Based on extensive discussions with City staff and related input from City Council and Planning Commission, the recommended parking technology and policies ideally should be able to satisfy the need to distinguish between the following parking user groups:
 Visitors. We wish to encourage reasonable turnover to ensure that the most convenient parking spaces are available for visitors;
 Long-term parkers, who may abuse short-term parking policies;  Employee/business owner parkers, for the purpose of rewarding those who park in designated long-term locations; and
 Residents of the City and nearby areas, who may receive some form of preferred parking status compared to general visitors; and
 Residents, to manage and facilitate the use of residential parking permits.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 20
As noted earlier, to the extent possible we also wish to meet the following objectives:
 Improved parking for visitors and customers of Downtown businesses;  Flexibility for visitors to stay as long as they want;  A focus on habitual offenders not visitors;
 “Carrots and Sticks” for frequent users;
 Maintenance or reduction of visual impact;
 Reduction or elimination of employee movement of vehicles for the purpose of avoiding citations while not making short-term spaces available for visitors; and  Financial neutrality.

In order to accomplish these goals, the parking technology must be capable of:
 Discouraging long-term parking in the highest demand locations;  Providing reasonable flexibility for visitor parking, keeping the customer service experience in mind;
 Implementing policies to encourage long-term parking in lower demand locations; and  Bringing underutilized privately owned parking spaces into the public system.

Based on our analysis of the challenges of the current parking operation and the identified criteria, we make the following recommendations that together would provide most of the “push” measures to increase the availability of visitor parking spaces. We specifically recommend a system that is flexible and that can manage the recommendations put forth regarding paid parking, the allocation of parking spaces, and time limits. Ultimately we recommend a system of paid parking and enforcement that would include a database of residential parking permits and employee license plate numbers.

AN INTEGRATED SOLUTION
Walker recommends the implementation of a system that would allow for:
 Paid on-street parking in the busiest locations downtown;  Automated enforcement of paid parking, permits, and time limits;  PbC payment capabilities; and
 A database of all parkers in the system.

This system was initially proposed in the 2013 Parking Study. Parking restrictions would be enforced via mobile license plate recognition (LPR) with fully integrated permit, multi-space meter, and PbC and mobile LPR software systems. The system described is similar to one recently put in place on several university campuses, including Loyola Marymount University (LMU) in Southern California. We believe that the same system will be useful in meeting the needs outlined by City Council and the Planning Commission Carmel-by-the-Sea.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 21
Walker typically recommends system capabilities and specifications but not systems themselves. However, the T2-based system at LMU is the only one on the market of which we are aware that incorporates all these capabilities. We note that since the time of the 2013 study, T2‟s capabilities with integrating multi-space meters into its system have improved through the acquisition of multi-space meter technology.2 The City currently has a much older version of vehicle-mounted license plate recognition (LPR) system of enforcement. The system we propose uses an updated LPR system with greater capabilities. With virtually all parking enforced via mobile LPR. The T2-based system is a cutting edge solution. Walker has identified only a handful of installations that have fully integrated permit, multi-space meter, and PbC and mobile LPR software systems. LMU contracted Digital Payment Technologies for pay-by-plate multi-space meters, Parkmobile USA for PbCphone payments, and Genetec (AutoVu) for mobile license plate recognition. They contracted with T2 Systems to manage their permit program.

LMU‟s system „went live‟ in the fall of 2012 and while there have been a few glitches, the system is reportedly working fairly well; the challenges reportedly have been occasional and not insurmountable. LMU was an early adapter, and as such expected these “hiccups.” The most complex part of the integration is the mobile LPR interfacing successfully with the permit, multi-space meter and PbC software.

Since the implementation of this system, similar systems have been installed at other locations.

The college town of State College, Pennsylvania has implemented a similar, comprehensive system. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania uses a different equipment brand but a multispace meterenforced system using vehicle mounted LPR systems. Texas Tech University has also had a successful implementation of a similar system to LMU‟s on its campus.

It is true that PbC will be used more frequently when it is the same people parking on a daily basis. However, increasingly the presence of QR codes or other snapshot mechanisms on signs can make PbC more user friendly to visitors.

ADDRESSING POSSIBLE AESTHETIC CONCERNS OF PAID PARKING
It was expressed to Walker that aesthetic issues were a consideration in the City‟s decision as to whether or not to implement paid, on-street parking. In order to address these concerns, we note or recommend the following:
 Signage. Signage that indicates time limits and other restrictions for street parking is abundant along downtown streets. We suggest that no new additional signs may be necessary to implement paid parking, but rather a change in the content of some existing signage.

2 T2 recently purchased multi-space meter manufacturer Digital Payment Solutions.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 22
 No single space parking meters. We recognize that a parking meter located at every parking space would likely not be acceptable in Downtown Carmel;  Pay-by-cell (PbC) option for paying for parking. Using PbC exclusively as the method to pay for parking was considered as a recommendation. Although a few cities have adopted PbC as the exclusive method of payment for paid parking in some locations, we recommend a choice of payment methods;
 Pay-by-plate multi-space meters (MSMs). As noted in the 2013 Parking Study, Walker recommends pay-by-plate mode for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, as it would require the fewest on-street multi-space meters, and also offers the most efficient enforcement system (driving rather than walking). Such a system is compatible with PbC and parking permits, both of which can be enforced using pay-by-plate methodology.  Minimization of multi-space meter visual impact. One multi-space meter can regulate as many individual parking spaces as needed, thus dramatically reducing the “visual clutter” that is sometimes associated with single space meters. The limitations on how many spaces a multi-space meter may regulate are based on the acceptable walking distances from a parking space and the number of drivers that are expected to use the multi-space meter at any given time.

Both of these demands (close proximity and number of users) can be reduced when visitors have PbC technology available.  In order to reduce visual impact multi-space meters may be able to be encased in a wood cabinet that is consistent with the design standards of Downtown Carmel. Suggestions have also been made to place multi-space meters in businesses, with signage on the outside of the business indicating the ability to pay for parking inside. These locations would need to be in businesses with operating hours that were consistent with the hours of meter enforcement.

ENFORCEMENT OF ON-STREET SPACES FOR VISITORS
Unlike previous generations of parking meters, today‟s single- and multispace meters are computerized, solar powered, and wirelessly networked so that they can process credit card transactions and provide remarkable financial reporting and audit control.

They are also self-diagnostic, enabling them to notify staff when maintenance or collection is required. Credit card acceptance reduces costly coin processing, and enables more people to pay (no more searching the car for quarters). Multi-space meters can also accept bills.

Pay-by-plate requires the customer to enter the license plate number into the meter.

Enforcement is done with a License Plate Recognition (LPR) system. Enforcement can be done with a vehicle mounted CCTV system that scans the license plates of all parked cars, or with a hand held unit, either scanning or manually entering the license plate.

Pursuant to the 2013 Parking Study, Walker recommends a multi-space, pay-by-plate parking meter system for visitor parking in the busiest areas of the Downtown. This multi-space meter system will interface well with the license plate permit system; using the recommended system, Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 23
the entire City could use license plates as a credential to enforce visitor, employee and permit parking. Virtually all parking can be enforced via mobile LPR.

The mobile LPR software can interface with permit and meter software so that all authorized license plates are accounted for. Prior to starting an enforcement session, the mobile LPR software downloads all the payment and permit data so that enforcement has up to the minute payment data. While enforcing, the payment data continues to be updated in real time.

Traditionally employees parking in the Downtown have reasoned that enforcement can‟t be everywhere, so they may challenge the system by moving their vehicle regularly and/or risking a citation. Mobile LPR enables enforcement to be conducted more frequently, causing longterm parkers to rethink the efficiency of the enforcement. Compliance will likely improve. If it does not, citations will increase.

PAY-BY-CELL (PBC)
PbC phone is an additional payment option now available, thanks to advances in wireless communication. PbC phone providers will set up a payment programs at no cost to the City, in exchange for user-paid convenience fees (usually 35 cents per transaction). Drivers register with the service provider, placing a credit card on file for payment, which enables them to use their cell phone to pay for parking. Smart phone users can use a mobile app. Cell phone users can call the vendor and enter the appropriate location code and/or their license plate number, and select the parking duration. The PbC vendor deposits the parking fees into the facility‟s established bank account, keeping the convenience fees.

Enforcement is done by viewing a web-based report of paid transactions provided by the PbC vendor, which can interface with multi-space meter payment reports and in this case, will interface with the mobile LPR software, as the license plate would be used as the identifying credential. PbC data can also be viewed on web-based enforcement handhelds.

RESIDENTIAL PERMITS, EMPLOYEE PARKING, AND PERMIT MANAGEMENT A residential parking permit program has been in place in the City of Carmel for many years.

The system is currently administered manually. Residents submit applications and receive a decal that they display, which allows residents to park twice as long as the posted time within the business district in 30 and 60 minute zones. The permit also allows for an additional one hour in the 2-hour stalls and to park on some streets that may be restricted for residents only.

The recommended system has the capability to store license plates in a data base and, through the LPR function, enforce vehicle privileges and restrictions. Once a resident registers their license plate number, whether on line, using PbC, or at a multi-space meter, a scan of the license plates at any given location will determine whether that vehicle is legally allowed to park in the location or the owner of the vehicle enjoys extended length-of-stay or free parking privileges. If paid, on-street parking is implemented, the possibility of special parking Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 24
privileges for parkers coming from adjacent jurisdictions has been discussed in order to encourage the patronizing of Carmel businesses by area residents. The recommended LPR system could store these residents‟ license plate information as well.

Earlier in the report we recommended the implementation of an incentives program that would identify employees‟ cars parked in peripheral locations (rather than in visitor spaces) and reward these employees through drawings or cash equivalent prizes. The recommended LPR system would be effective in recording employees‟ license plate numbers, which they would register.3
Walker recommends that Carmel by the Sea consider contracting with a professional permit management provider to set up and maintain its updated residential permit program. These companies specialize in permit management, sales, enforcement, citation management and collections. They will provide software that can accurately track and update multiple addresses and names for each permit holder. The firms also provide enforcement hardware and software to effectively enforce and collect citation revenue. Furthermore, they have experience with interfacing with other technologies such as mobile LPR and other technologies that will enhance the permit program and enable the expansion of transient parking on campus, as discussed below.

OPINION OF COSTS
Multi-space meters typically cost $8,000 to $11,000± per unit depending on the quantity ordered. The permit manager may also negotiate a percentage of permit and/or citation revenue. T2 would not provide specific cost information to Walker; these costs would likely be monthly charges, potentially a portion of permit and citation revenue, and depend on the specific program selected (whether continuing to focus on permits or potentially hourly parking).

Needed for implementation of downtown-wide paid parking program:

A significant advantage of the recommended paid parking system is the ability of the City to contract with one (service) provider for all equipment and services.

Multi-space meters: $9,000/unit @ 1.5 multispace meters per block face X estimated 80 block faces (20 square blocks) = $1,080,0004
Monthly fees for meters
Handheld enforcement units:$7,000 X 3 units = $21,000

3 At this point we do not recommend registering employee and business owner license plates to exclude their vehicles from downtown parking locations, recognizing that these drivers will at times have a need for short-term parking that should be allowed if they are willing to pay the hourly rate.

Additionally, we do not recommend employee-only parking locations. To the extent visitors are willing to park in peripheral locations, they should not be prohibited from doing so. 4 We recommend 2 multi space meters per block face along the City‟s longer blocks, but recognize that to reduce cost and visual impact 1 multi space meter per block face could be sufficient.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 25
Handheld monthly fees: $100/unit
AutoVu unit installed: $40,000 X 2 = $80,000
Required annual AutoVu software maintenance (SMA): $400 Optional hardware maintenance warranty (HMA) $3900. - $6500. per year depending on system
Paid parking signage: $140/new sign installed.

RECOMMENDATION FOR AN INTERMEDIATE STEP: PAID PARKING PILOT PROGRAM A pilot program would allow the City to demonstrate the effectiveness of paid parking to visitors, residents and businesses. At the November 4, 2013 presentation to a joint meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council, it was suggested that the parking spaces along the north side of Ocean Avenue adjacent to Devendorf Park would be a helpful place to create a pilot program for paid, on-street parking. The assumption was that the visible location for visitors at the gateway to the downtown was a desirable location but also that the location would not unfairly impact businesses (as there are no businesses on that block). We agree with this suggestion.

Needed for (pilot program) implementation:
 Equipment. Normally it could take two to three months to order, ship and install multispace meters, however for small pilots some manufacturers have them in stock and could have them up and running in six weeks. The limited pilot program area would not necessarily require the larger enforcement technical apparatus that a downtown-wide program may need. A downtown-wide program would ultimately be enhanced by a mobile LPR system. For a small pilot City enforcement staff could use” handhelds” on foot patrol. While some vendors will “loan” the meters assuming a purchase if they function properly, the City would pay installation and operating costs. In some cases a City may be credited these costs if the equipment is ultimately purchased, depending on quantities. As noted previously, for smaller numbers of equipment, the cost per unit is likely to be $11,000±.
 Signage. Signage notifying parkers of the requirement to pay could replace the current time limit signage.
 Public outreach to inform the public of the pilot program. In addition to announcing the change on the City‟s website and through local media, we recommend coordination with the City‟s Chamber of Commerce.
 Ambassadors. During the “roll-out” phase of the program, ambassadors on the street would be useful if not necessary to explain the program to the public. In some cases, the equipment distributor can assist with this.

Below we present four potential gross revenue scenarios for paid parking in the downtown area and the associated assumptions. We note that the projections are order of magnitude in nature and not to be used for financial documentation.

Attachment 3

MEMORANDUM

PARKING MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE 26
Table 7: Preliminary Potential Gross Revenue Scenarios
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2014
Scenario 1
12-hour
operation Scenario 2
9-hour
operation Scenario 3 $1.00/hour Scenario 4
(Pilot on Ocean
Avenue)
1,050 spaces 1,050 spaces 1,050 spaces 45 spaces
12 hours of
operation daily
9 hours of
operation
daily
9 hours of
operation
daily
9 hours of
operation daily
355 days of
operation 355 days of operation 355 days of operation 355 days of operation $1.50 hourly $1.50 hourly $ 1.00 hourly $ 1.50 hourly
50% average
occupancy
60% average
occupancy
60% average
occupancy
65% average
occupancy
$ 3,354,800 $3,019,300 $ 2,012,850 $ 140,200
P. O. Box 561, Wilton, CA 95693 866-774-3222 www.Solutions-MRG.com

ATTACHMENT D
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Draft-Community Engagement Plan
MRG Facilitator: Brian Uhler Oct 4, 2022
DRAFT Engagement Plan

TYPE/STEPS DESCRIPTION
Community Info Mailing
(To be developed based on Council’s direction)
Direct mail, one per residence
Designed to convey draft program Info
Communicates pubic meeting schedule
Brochure-style Informational Document Included
Farmers Market Booth Table with Handouts and Display
Brochure, Kiosk Demo, Pay-by-Phone Info, staff present
Web portal
Hub for Parking Info as Meetings Occur and Program Unfolds Meeting Schedule/Agenda
Reports/Data
Maps/parking space counts
Proposed kiosk locations (if any)
Technology Connections (vendor videos)
Meeting(s) with Business groups
1-Conjoining a Roundtable Meeting
2-Joint Restaurant/Inn-keepers
90 Minute Program
(Pre-meeting welcome, sign-in)
5 Minute Intro/agenda
30 Min Power Point
10 Min Show/Tell at Kiosk Sample
10 Min Map Review of Possible Parking Zones/Employee Parking 25 Min Q & A
10 Min parking Information Portal Demo
Four Face-to-face
community meetings
Location: Carpenter Hall
Timeline: Two per week
90 Minute Program
(Pre-meeting welcome, sign-in, distribute question forms) 5 Minute Intro/agenda/encourage questions (in writing)
30 Minute Power Point
10 Minute Break:
(1) Gather Questions/Review
(2) Show/Tell at Kiosk Sample
(3) Map of Proposed Parking Zones
20 Minute Verbal Responses to Pre-Loaded Questions
10 Minute Parking Information Portal Demo (see item below) Attachment 4
P. O. Box 561, Wilton, CA 95693 866-774-3222 www.Solutions-MRG.com

TYPE/STEPS DESCRIPTION
Council Parking
Program Workshop
Location: Carpenter Hall
2 ½ Hour Program
30 Min Staff Power Point (community input)
5 Min Show/Tell w/Kiosk Sample
5 Min Demo of Pay-by-phone process
10 Min Map Review Parking Zones/Employee Parking
10 Min parking Information Portal Demo (see item below) 10 Min Break
50 Min public input
30 Min City Council Discussion (and consensus building for staff) Recuring reminders in Friday VLOG Continuously
Updates in Friday letter Continuously
Active engagement with Pine Cone As needed
Regular Council Meeting
To Approve or Deny Paid Parking Program
1-Data and key points in report or presentation
2-Language for City Code (from City Attorney)
3-Associated infrastructure purchasing materials (if above passes) Implementation Plan 1-If paid parking program is approved by City Council 2-Community information on web portal and to the press
Attachment 4
DRAFT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TIMELINE Attachment 5

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Nova Romero, City Clerk
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

August 1, 2022, Special Meeting Minutes, and September 13, 2022, Regular Meeting Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Draft Minutes.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City Council routinely approves minutes of its meetings.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

None.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) August 1, 2022, CC Special Meeting Minutes Attachment 2) September 13, 2022 CC Regular Meeting Minutes

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING
Monday, August 1, 2022

OPEN SESSION
4:30 PM

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Potter called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM.

Roll Call: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Mayor Pro-Tem Richards, and Mayor Potter were present.

OPEN SESSION

CONSENT AGENDA
Item 1: Resolution 2022-063 of the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Proclaiming the Continuing Need to Meet by Teleconference Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953 (e)
Consent item #1 was pulled by Council Member Baron.

Public Comment: none.

Council Member Baron said he would like all of the City Commissioners to resume inperson meetings, and therefore will be voting no.

Motion to adopt Resolution 2022-063 by Mayor Potter, seconded by Council Member Ferlito. Roll Call Vote: Council Member Baron - no, Council Member Ferlito - yes, Council Member Theis – yes, Mayor Pro Tem Richards -yes, and Mayor Potter – yes.

Action: Resolution 2022-063 approved 4-1-0-0 (Council Member Baron voting no).

CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Brian Pierik read the closed session agenda item titles for the record.

Public Comment:

None
Item A: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) (One potential case)
Attachment 1

City Council Special Meeting Minutes
August 1, 2022
Item B: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Administrator Chip Rerig, Katy Suttorp (Burke, Williams & Sorensen), Alan Ward, Public Safety Director, Brandon Swanson, Community Planning Building Director
Employee organization: General Employees Unit, an Affiliated Unit of LiUNA; Management Employees Unit, an Affiliated Unit of LiUNA; Police Officers Association (POA)
Item C: PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
Title: City Administrator

ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned to Closed Session at 4:34 PM.

APPROVED: ATTEST:
_____________________________ _____________________________ Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 13, 2022

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Potter called the closed session meeting to order at 3:00 PM.

Roll Call: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Mayor Pro Tem Richards and Mayor Potter were present.

CLOSED SESSION - 3:00 PM
Mayor Potter read the closed session title.

Item A: PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
Title: City Administrator
Council adjourned to closed session at 3:04 PM.

OPEN SESSION - 4:30 PM

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Potter called the open session to order at 4:34 PM.

Roll Call: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Mayor Pro Tem Richards and Mayor Potter were present.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Potter led the pledge of allegiance.

EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS
Item A: Proclamation - Declaring September 2022 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Mayor Pro Tem Richards read the proclamation.

Item B: Receive a report on the status of the City Council’s Strategic Priority Projects City Administrator Chip Rerig gave a presentation on the status of the Council Strategic Priority Projects and answered questions from Council.

Public Comments:

Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

Girard Rose addressed the Council regarding the mask mandate and vaccine requirements to enter city hall. Maria Bennett inquired about purchasing an ambulance for the City and if that is still on the list of priorities. Richard Kreitman addressed the Council regarding the Scout House RFP. Tasha Witt inquired about when the Council will discuss the first draft of the cell tower Ordinance and requested a community meeting on the topic. Christy Hollenbeck requested a meeting to discuss the draft cell tower Ordinance written by citizen funded telecom attorney Andrew Campanelli. Dale Byrne inquired about a new fire engine for the City.

Council discussion followed and direction was given to staff.

PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Maria Bennett inquired about the City’s emergency evacuation plan and how the City plans to direct traffic in the event of a forest fire in Carmel.

Mike Brown requested that the City consider donating to the Carmel High Mock Trial Team, who has won at the local, state, and national level and is currently fundraising to attend the world Championship in Chicago next month.

Nancy Twomey announced that there will be a Carmel City Council candidate forum at the Women’s Club on September 21, 2022 at 7 p.m. and invited the public to attend.

Parker Logan addressed the Council regarding the parklet program.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Item A: City Administrator – Announced that the City is receiving car week feedback via an online survey. He announced that Commander Watkins graduated from the FBI academy at Quantico.

He announced that the Carmel High Homecoming Parade is Friday, and the Sand Castle Contest is this Saturday.

Item B: City Attorney - Stephen McEwen stated that there is no reportable action from Closed Session.

Item C: Council Member Ferlito - Reported that she attended an AMBAG meeting and reported that two other Cities in the County have appealed their RHNA numbers for housing, but both appeals were turned down. She invited the public to attend future AMBAG meetings to give comments. She reported that she serves on the Coast Walk Committee and they met recently to discuss a coastal walking trail that connects from one city to the next down the entire coast of California. She reported that she attended the Litter Abatement Task Force meeting which discusses the issues with illegal dumping in the area, and reported that there are more cameras around to catch illegal dumping which fortunately is not a big issue in Carmel but is in other nearby rural areas.

Council Member Baron - Announced that there is a Climate Committee meeting this Thursday to receive the draft consultant report on the effects of sea level rise on coastal resources, which will include how to educate the community on these effects as well as adaptation measures that can be implemented.

Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

Mayor Pro Tem Richards - Congratulated the Carmel High Mock Trial Team on their success. He announced that the Carmel Varsity Girls Cross Country team is ranked #2 on the central coast and the Boys team is ranked #4, and will be running at Palo Corona this week. He also mentioned that he would like a future discussion on City cell phones and the cost.

Council Member Theis – No reports
Potter – No reports

CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member Baron pulled the Special Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2022, and said the minutes need correction to the vote results on Resolution 2022-063 stating that he voted no. He requested to continue the adoption of the August 1, 2022 Minutes to October so the correction can be made. He requested to pull Item #4 and #8 for comments.

Motion by Council Member Baron to approve the remaining consent items, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Item 1 - August 2, 2022, Regular Meeting Minutes, and August 29, 2022, Special Meeting Minutes
Item 2 - July 2022 Check Register Summary
Item 3 - July Monthly Reports
Item 4 - Pulled from Consent
Item 5 - Resolution 2022-075 authorizing the City Administrator to execute a Professional Services Agreement with 4Leaf, Inc. for Project Management Services, for a not-to exceed fee of $197,780, for delivery of four Capital Improvement Projects Item 6 - Resolution 2022-076, authorizing the City Administrator to execute a Professional Services Agreement with the Carmel Area Wastewater District, for a not-to-exceed fee of $71,647, to provide Stormwater Program Vactor Truck Services Item 7 - Resolution 2022-077 rescinding Resolution 2020-056 and re-establishing the list of designated classifications and the disclosure categories of the City's Conflict of Interest Code
Item 8 - Pulled from Consent
Item 9 - Resolution 2022-080 authorizing the City Administrator to modify the job description for Police Officer
Item 10 - Resolution No. 2022-081 to designate 2022 Holiday Closure from December 27 – December 30, 2022
Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT
Minutes of August 1, 2022
Council Member Baron made a motion to continue the Minutes of August 1, 2022, with the requested correction made, seconded by Council Theis, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Item 4 - Resolution 2022-074 of the City Council of the City Of Carmel-by-the-Sea Proclaiming the Continuing Need To Meet By Teleconference Pursuant To Government Code Section 54953 (e)
Council Member Baron pulled this item and stated he will be voting no because he would like to see all of the boards and commissions return to in-person meetings. Mayor Potter questioned if the masking mandate inside of City Hall can be relaxed. City Administrator Rerig responded that the masking and vaccine requirements were put into place based on COVID-19 data from the County and the CDC’s best practices. He added that by next week since the number of cases have finally gone down, people who have received the newest Omicron vaccine booster may be able to stop wearing masks inside City Hall. Council Member Baron noted that the Council adopted an urgency Ordinance that governs the conduct for inside of City Hall, including masking and vaccination requirements, and said it would be up to the Council to make a decision about whether to amend those requirements. Mayor Potter directed staff to return in October with a discussion regarding relaxing the masking requirements and whether to repeal urgency Ordinance 2022-002.

Motion to approve Resolution 2022-074 by Council Member Theis, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, approved 4-1-0-0 (Council Member Baron voting no), with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: Council Member Baron
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Item 8 - Resolution 2022-078 authorizing the City Administrator to execute an agreement with the Monterey County Convention and Visitors Bureau for Destination Marketing for the term of July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 in an amount not to exceed $210,010 Council Member Baron said he would like some clarity on what the marketing organizations are doing to minimize the impact of car week on the village. Council Member Ferlito commented that Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

she would like to see both Visit Carmel and the Visitor’s Bureau continue to spread the same message about visitors taking care and respecting the area while visiting Carmel.

Public Comment:

Kevan Urquhart commented that better parking and traffic management is needed during car week.

Motion by Council Member Theis to approve Resolution 2022-078, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
City Administrator Rerig requested that the next 3 items regarding employee MOU’s be discussed as one item, but each Resolution be voted on separately, and Council agreed via consensus.

City Administrator Rerig gave a presentation on the 3 bargaining unit MOU’s and answered questions from Council.

Council discussion followed.

Item 12 - Adopt Resolution 2022-082 authorizing the City Administrator to execute the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Carmel by-theSea General Employees Unit, effective July 1, 2022 Motion by Mayor Potter to approve Resolution 2022-082, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Item 13 - Adopt Resolution 2022-083 authorizing the City Administrator to execute the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Carmel by-theSea Management Employees Unit, effective July 1, 2022 Motion by Mayor Potter to approve Resolution 2022-083, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

Item 14 - Adopt Resolution 2022-084 authorizing the City Administrator to execute the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Carmel-by-theSea Police Officers Association, effective July 1, 2022 Motion by Mayor Potter to approve Resolution 2022-084, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Item 15 - Resolution 2022-085 ratifying appointments to the Forest and Beach Commission and the Historic Resources Board
Mayor Potter summarized the Ad Hoc Committee’s process for selection for the vacancies on the Forest and Beach Commission and Historic Resources Board, and said the competition was very close. Mayor Pro Tem Richards agreed that it was a difficult decision to make due to the quality applicants, and thanked everyone who applied.

Council Member Baron thanked Erik Dyar and Kathryn Gualiteri for their many years of service on the Historic Resources Board, and Council Member Ferlito echoed the sentiments. She asked if the sphere of influence could be broadened to include more applicants. Mayor Potter agreed and said that this discussion would be added to next month’s agenda.

Motion by Mayor Potter to approve Resolution 2022-085, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Richards, and approved 5-0-0-0 with the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members Baron, Ferlito, Theis, Richards, and Mayor Potter NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Council took a recess at 6:15 pm, and reconvened at 6:30 PM.

Item 16 - Receive a report and provide direction on the City’s Beach Fire Management Pilot Program
City Administrator Rerig gave a brief summary of the item, and Community Planning and Building Director Swanson gave a presentation on the item. He gave background on the beach fire program, provided 2022 data, and requested direction from Council on how to move forward.

Public Comment:

Nancy Garcia, Nancy Twomey, Kevan Urquhart, Parker Logan, and Jeanne McCullough spoke in favor of beach fires.

Lynn Ross, Cindy Lloyd, Denise Sodersen, John Cromwell, Kathleen Bang, and Richard Kreitman, spoke against beach fires.

Attachment 2
City Council Minutes – September 13, 2022

Closed public comment at 7:08 PM.

Council discussion followed.

Council provided consensus direction for staff to come back with a program for propane only beach fires, and that the propane fires would be user supplied and not supplied by the City, and the program would no longer be a pilot program. Staff will return before the current pilot program expires on November 30th with an interim action for the Council to consider prior to the new propane fire only program adoption.

Future Agenda Items
Mayor Pro Tem Richards - Requested a report on cost of City employee cell phones.

Council Member Ferlito - Requested to bring back a discussion on making Carmel a non-smoking city.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Potter wished former Carmel Mayor Ken White a happy birthday, and Council adjourned at 7:29 PM.

APPROVED:
______________________________ __________________________ Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 2

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Nova Romero, City Clerk
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT: August 2022 Monthly Reports
RECOMMENDATION:

Review and receive monthly reports.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

This is a monthly series of reports:
1) City Administrator Contract Log
2) Community Planning and Building Department Reports
3) Police, Fire, and Ambulance Reports
4) Public Records Act Requests
5) Public Works Department Reports
FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

Monthly review and approval.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) City Administrator Contract Log
Attachment 2) Community Planning and Building Department Reports Attachment 3) Police, Fire, and Ambulance Reports
Attachment 4) Public Records Act Requests
Attachment 5) Public Works Report
City Administrator Contract Log
FY 2022-23
Date entered Into Contractor Contract Amount Purpose
8/12/2022 M3 ENVIRONMENTAL $24,999.00 Hazardous materials sampling Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Monthly Report

Community Planning and Building Department
AUGUST 2022 – DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT
I. PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATIONS:

In August 2022, 47 planning permit applications were received.

II. BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS:

In August 2022, 52 building permit applications were received.

III. CODE COMPLIANCE CASES:

In August 2022, 17 new code compliance cases were created.

IV. TRANSIENT RENTAL COMPLIANCE CASES:

In August 2022, 5 new code compliance cases were created.

V. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATIONS:

In August 2022, 29 encroachment permit applications were received.

VI. YEAR-TO-DATE TRENDS
Table 1 includes the following August 2022 totals: planning and building permit applications, code compliance and transient rental compliance cases, and encroachments. August 2022 totals are provided alongside August 2021 totals for comparison.

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members

SUBMITTED BY: Leah Young, Administrative Coordinator
SUBMITTED ON: September 13, 2022
APPROVED BY: Brandon Swanson, Community Planning and Building Director Attachment 2
Compared to the same time period in the year 2021, Table 1 denotes the following percentage changes in the year 2022:
• Planning Permit Applications – 13.28% increase
• Building Permit Applications – 9.19% decrease
• Code Compliance Cases – 140.58% increase
• Transient Rental Compliance Cases – 766.67% increase
• Encroachment Permit Applications – 5.79% decrease
Table 1. Permit Application Totals PLANNING BUILDING CODE

COMPLIANCE

TRANSIENT
RENTAL

COMPLIANCE

ENCROACHMENTS
2021 Totals 241 370 69 3 190
2022 Totals 273 336 166 26 179
% Difference +13.28% -9.19% +140.58% +766.67% -5.79%
Attachment 2
Page: 1 of 6
Planning Permit Report
08/01/2022 - 08/31/2022
Permit # Permit Type Project Description Address/Location Date Received Date Approved
Status
22289 Design Study Addition of 63 S.F. 2nd Fir. Bathroom above an (E) Laundry Room, Upgrade of plumbing fixtures and
appliances to high efficiency units to comply w/
MPWMD fisture unit requirements, reframing 127
S.F. of roof o/(E) Master Bdrm; Construciton of an
open timber frame trellis o/ (E) BBQ area & eyebrow
o/ West exit of Living Rm to rear yard & ancillary
Electrical, Plumbing, Framing, Roofing
Monte Verde St. 5
SW of 13th
In Review
22288 Design Study Restore historic iron gate; Hire Carmel Valley Iron. SW Corner of Guadalupe and
4th
8/30/2022 In Review
22287 Design Study Repair Damage & Dry Rot at Roof eave and Roofing, Siding, Fencing, Decking, Trellis. Upgrade interior
finishes, replace existing drywall, plumbing fixtures,
interior doors, cabinets, counter-tops, floor finishes, and stair floor and railing.

MISSION 4 SW OF
10TH
8/26/2022 In Review
22286 Historic
Evaluation
Historic Evaluation Mt. View 2 NE of
Carpenter
In Review
22285 Design Study After-the-fact authorization to install a temporary fall protection fencing at sidewalk and entry ramp. Fence
is a grape-stake style fence, 4' high and 40' long which matches the fence to north and south at adjoining
properties. Intent is to remove and replace with new
foundation and carmel stone wall when project
commences in near future.

Monte Verde 4
SW of 8th
8/25/2022 In Review
22284 Design Review New paint, exterior light fixtures & new roof. NE Corner Junipero & Ocean
8/25/2022 In Review
Page: 2 of 6
22283 Design Review New exterior paint and exterior light fixtures. Junipero 2 NW & 8th
8/25/2022 In Review
22282 Historic
Evaluation
Historic Determination Casanova 2 SW of
8th
8/23/2022 In Review
22281 Historic
Evaluation
Follow up to HE 21-007 (Sippel): want building permit
to replace old/broken windows. Historical review
required before permit issued.

San Carlos 2/3 SE
of 5th
8/22/2022 In Review
22280 Design Review Request to add exterior balconies on Buildings A & C per the provided elevation drawings. Per the photos
provided there is evidence that Building A did have
balcony(s) at one point in time. On building C the
proposed balconies are on the rear 'secondary'
elevation only..
12th and San
Antonio
8/19/2022 In Review
22279 Design Study 2 story addition to existing SFD. Add bath, 6 C.Y. export for new footings, no site grading, no tree
removal.

Pine Ridge 3 NE of
Forest
8/19/2022 In Review
22278 Design Study Demolish existing house and construct New single family residence and garage
Carmelo Street 2
SW of 11th
8/18/2022 In Review
22277 Design Review Carmel Cares is proposing to make extensive landscape improvements to the Forest Theater,
consisting of over 700 plants in four planting zones.

Design was approved by the Forest and Beach
Commission on 8/11/22.

NE Corner of
Santa Rita &
Mountain View
8/18/2022 In Review
22276 Design Study Add approximately 188sf stone paver Monte Verde 2 SE of 7th
8/17/2022 In Review
22275 Design Study Paint exterior; replace all windows (existing aluminum and some wood) with Pella lifestyle. Replace fence (all sides except garage.) Replace Carmel Stone steps
(front and back) with wood steps.

NW Corner of
Torres & 3rd
8/16/2022 In Review
Page: 3 of 6
22274 Design Study 1. Remodel and existing one-story single family dwelling with new one-story addition, new siding,
new windows, and new doors. 2. New detached
garage on the front yard setback 3. Interior remodel
replacing existing materials and modifying walls. 4.

Two tree removal, one dead tree removal, and one
stump removal on the front yard.

Monte Verde 3
NW of 11th
In Review
22273 Design Study Fence NW Corner of 8th
Ave & Lincoln St
8/16/2022 In Review
22272 Design Study Increase Deck / Roof Height. Revise walking deck elevation from 8'-2" to 8'-11.5" as measured from the
existing finished driveway.

Junipero 4th SW
of 8th
In Review
22271 Sign Install one (1) double-sided, sand-blasted wood blade sign.
5th Ave 2 NW of
San Carlos
8/12/2022 8/17/2022 Approved
22270 Historic
Evaluation
Remodel existing bathroom. Add garage. Remodel
one (1) bedroom. Add possible deck to top of garage.

Carmelo 2 NE of
8th
8/12/2022 In Review
22269 Historic
Evaluation
Phase 1 historic evaluation NE Corner of
Camino Real &
4th
8/12/2022 In Review
22268 Design Study INTERIOR REMODEL (714 SF) INCLUDING NEW

MASTER BATH, CONVERT ONE FULL BATH INTO

POWDER ROOM, RELOCATE LAUNDRY, RELOCATE

ENTRY DOOR, REMOVE AND REPLACE EXTERIOR

DOORS AND WINDOWS, REPLACE EXTERIOR SIDING

ON SEVERAL SIDES- SEE ELEVATIONS, REPLACE

EXISTING ROOFING MATERIALS WITH SAME

MATERIALS
CAMINO REAL 1

SW OF OCEAN
AVE
8/12/2022 In Review
22267 Preliminary Site
Assessment
Excavation of basement & front remodel to provide
ADU. Small rear addition to provide new stair. New
free standing single-car garage.

Casanova 10 NE of
Ocean
8/12/2022 In Review
Page: 4 of 6
22266 Reasonable
Accommodation
New balusters and a new handrail for the east stair
and front (south) deck, and Reasonable
Accommodation for a wheel chair lift to provide
access to the second-story front deck
4th Avenue 2 NE
of Monte Verde
8/12/2022 8/23/2022 Approved
22265 Preliminary Site
Assessment
Preliminary Site Assessment for a future Track 2
design study
Santa Fe 4 SE of
2nd Avenue
8/12/2022 In Review
22264 Preliminary Site
Assessment
Preliminary Site Assessment for a future Track 2
design study
Carmelo 4 SE of
12th Avenue
8/12/2022 In Review
22263 Design Study Remove concrete pavers in R.O.W. . Replace front entry gate with new, Clad (E) stucco wall with stone.

Replace (E) brick patio with sand set flagstone
Camino Real 3
NW of 8th Ave.
8/12/2022 In Review
22262 Design Study EXTEND EXISTING HOUSE BY 9 FEET TO ENCLOSE (E) WOOD DECK (231 SF). NEW WOOD DECK (160 SF).

CONVERT PART OF ADU MECHANICAL ROOM TO A
SAUNA (75 SF). NEW WOOD STAIR TO REPLACE (E)
STONE STAIR. NEW LOWER TERRACE WITH PREFAB
HOT TUB. MINOR INTERIOR REMODEL. REPLACE
WOOD SHINGLES ROOF WITH ASPHALT SHINGLES.

REPLACE (E) WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS WITH
METAL CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS. COLORS
AND FINISHES TO MATCH EXISTING.

ACACIA WAY 2 SW

OF FLANDERS
WAY
8/9/2022 In Review
22261 Historic
Evaluation
Reroof a cedar shake roof with a composite material. Casanova 3 NE of 8th
8/5/2022 In Review
22260 Design Study Authorizes for the rearrangement of the site coverage and landscaping that includes reducing site
coverage from 887 square feet to 566 square feet,
with 342 square feet permeable, 117 square feet
semi-permeable, and 108 square feet impermeable
site coverage
2nd 2 SW of
Carpenter
8/5/2022 8/18/2022 Approved
22259 Temporary Use
Permit
Authorization of Temporary Use Permit for live music
on August 18th, 2022 from 6pm to 9pm. Event not to
exceed 50 guests and to include food and wine
service and live music, one singer and one guitarist.

NEC of San Carlos
St. & 5th Ave.
8/8/2022 8/8/2022 Approved
Page: 5 of 6
22258 Design Review Plantings, irrigation, and low-level landscape lighting at 5th Avenue 2 NW of San Carlos in the ServiceCommercial (SC) District as depicted in the plans prepared by RANA Landscape Architecture, stamped
approved on September 1, 2022 and on file at the
Community Planning & Building Department, unless
modified by the conditions of approval. This approval
also authorizes a slightly revised trellis design
(previously approved under DR 22-170) three trellismounted heaters. 5th Ave 2 NW of
San Carlos
7/29/2022 9/1/2022 In Review
22257 Historic
Evaluation
Historic designation expired Camino Real 3 SE
of 4th
7/29/2022 8/19/2022 Approved
22256 Sign Installation of 2 small window signs SAN CARLOS AND

OCEAN AVE
In Review
22255 Design Study Installation of granite stone boundary to border the landscape island near 13th Ave on the Scenic
Pathway. Condition: Concrete used to set the stones
will be as minimally visible as possible to maintain a
natural look. The curb should not have an
appearance of a "concrete and stone" curb, but
rather just a "stone" curb.

Scenic & 13th 8/2/2022 In Review
22254 Mills Act
Request
Mills Act Contract Monte Verde 2 NE
of 9th Ave
8/2/2022 In Review
22253 Historic
Evaluation
Overlay exisiting redwood siding with James Harie lap
siding, blown-in insulation and paint new siding only.
2900 Santa Lucia 8/1/2022 8/22/2022 Approved
Page: 6 of 6
22252 Design Study SHEET A 1.2: ADDITION OF 3 SKYLIGHTS W/ BLACKOUT SHADES; REDUCE ROOF OVERHANG
ALONG NORTH SIDE OF HOUSE TO AVOID TREE; CUT
3' X 3' NOTCH AT ENTRY ROOF TO AVOID TREE,, AND
DELETE OPENING OF ROOF: GRIDS 3 AND A.8 TO B.5.

SHEET A2.3: REVERSE FRONT DOOR SWING; ADD
STORAGE LOFT IN GARAGE; REDUCE CANTILEVER
SECTION OF BR 1 BATH ALONG GRID LINE A FROM 2'
TO 1 '; DELETE WINDOWS 20 & 23; RELOCATE BBQ &

CABINET FROM SOUTH TO NORTH END OF LIVING
RM. DECK; INCREASE DECK 21 SF; MODIFY GLASS
GUARDRAIL LENGTH & WOOD CAP RAIL; DELETE LR
WINDOW 14; SHEETS A3.2 & 3.3: ELEVATIONS
ILLUSTRATING REVISIONS DESCRIBED ABOVE.

Casanova St 7 NW
of Ocean Ave
7/28/2022 In Review
Total Records: 38 9/8/2022
Page: 1 of 6
Building Permit Report
08/01/2022 - 08/31/2022
Permit # Date
Submitted
Date
Approved
Project Description Valuation Permit Type Property Location 220336 9/1/2022 Modifications to an existing unmanned cell siteantenna upgrade.20,000 Building Ocean 2 SW of San Carlos 220335 8/31/2022 Addition of 2nd flr bath & BBQ Trellis 90,000 Building Monte Verde 5 SW of 13th 220334 8/30/2022 8/31/2022 Rot repair, remove facia for inspection of damage.

Contact: Tim Cordrey (831) 277-1792
200 Building San Antonio 3 NE of Ocean
220333 8/29/2022 Replace deteriorating deck materials. Contact: David Castle (707) 365-0327
4,478 Building SE Corner of San Carlos &
13th
220332 8/29/2022 8/29/2022 Replace leaking water heater for Apartment B.

Contact: Marks Sewer and Drain (831) 224-8008
1,200 Plumbing NW Corner of San Carlos &
8th
220331 8/26/2022 8/26/2022 Replace left side path facing the house with permeable sand set quarry pavers. Remove the
existing carmel flagstone patio, add and compact 4"
of base rock, level, and lay permeable pavers. Add
sand on joints to stabilize, no sealant. Redo front
carmel stone patio, remove and set aside the existing
carmel flagstone, lay cement base, and reset carmel
flagstone and mortar set joints. Contact: Ricardo
Munoz (831) 402-5078
0 Exempt Work NW Corner of Dolores &
10th
220330 8/26/2022 Install new Kolbe aluminum clad windows over garage. Update all guard rails for new deck & front
porch extend new 126 permeble deck over existing
173sf lower deck.
30,000 Building 6023 San Carlos
220329 8/25/2022 Remodel & addition to an (e) 3-story single family home. Convert 563sf of ground floor level to a (n)
ADU and add 759 sf. Add 474 sf to (e) main level &
reduce (e) upper level by 275 sf. Add 16 sf to an (e) 1- car garage.
600,000 Building Casanova 4 SW of 4th
Page: 2 of 6
220328 8/25/2022 8/31/2022 Replace about 160ft of damaged water line from meter to the house with new 1in. HDPE (High Density
Polyethylene) water line. Contact: TrenchFree, Inc
(408) 726-7926
10,000 Plumbing Lincoln 4 SE of 13th
220327 8/24/2022 8/29/2022 Tear off (e) wood shake roof system down to original sheathing and haul away. Install Winterguard
waterproofing membrane. Install 2700sf of Class A
fire rated Landmark Pro shingles in color
"Shenandoah". Contact: Scudder Roofing Co (831)
384-1500
28,052 Roofing SW Corner of Junipero &
12th
220326 8/24/2022 8/24/2022 Remove (e) tar and gravel roofing and install 50 year Malarkey shingles and 3 layer torch down. Contact:

Lord Roofing (831) 917-7289
11,000 Roofing NW Corner of Monte
Verde & 9th
220325 8/23/2022 Replace 100 amp panel with new 100 amp panel, move sub panel from closet to den wall, replace
existing ceiling light fixtures in mater & guest
bathrooms with a fan/light combo with humidifier
switch, add GFI plugs in bathrooms, remove
shower/tub combo & replace with shower, replace
plumbing fixtures in kitchen and two bathrooms with
new fixtures in the same location.
32,500 Building Camino Real 3 SW of 10th
220324 8/23/2022 Replace (e) aluminum windows with new wood windows, no change to size or location. Replace (e)
kitchen cabinets, counter tops, flooring, lighting, and appliances. No change in locations. Replace (e) guest
bath vanity cabinet, counter top, sink, and flooring.

Replace (e) master bath vanity cabinet, counter top,
and flooring.
0 Exempt Work Camino Real 3 SW of 10th
220323 8/23/2022 8/23/2022 Remove old tar & gravel roof and install new 50 year Presidential on 4/12 roof slope and tar and gravel on
2/12 roof slope. Contact: Stars & Stripes Roofing
(831) 214-6218
10,000 Roofing Lincoln 3 SW of 13th
220322 785sf Accessory Dwelling Unit. Attached to new
home with DS21-362.
100,000 BP Revision San Carlos 2SW of 1st
Page: 3 of 6
220321 8/22/2022 Remove rotten redwood deck, railing, and stairs.

Replace with smaller balcony. Contact: Jeff Green
(831) 269-1377
58,000 Building Dolores 2 NE of 3rd
220320 8/22/2022 8/22/2022 Replace existing 100 amp panel with new 200 amp panel. Contact: Cate Electric (831) 594-5177
5,500 Electrical Sunset Center North Lot
220319 8/22/2022 8/22/2022 Installation of lattice fence panels 6' tall with 6x6 pressure treated posts. 85 Linear feet along south
side of property, not to enter into the front setback.

Maintain existing white picket fence in front setback.

Contact: Torres Landscape (831) 229-2273
0 Exempt Work Vizcaino 4 NE of Flanders
220318 8/22/2022 8/22/2022 Tear off (e) wood shingle roof system to original sheathing. Install self-adheared waterproof
membrane at all valley locations and roof
penetrations. Supply & install one layer of Eco chief
solar hide roof underlayment. Install 3,700 sf of
DaVinci multi width slate in a straight course at 6"
exposure to the weather. Contact: Scudder Roofing
(831) 384-1500
121,500 Roofing Camino Real 4 SW of 9th
220317 8/19/2022 8/19/2022 Paint exterior of hose in the same color as existing.

Contact: Will Bullock Painting (831) 277-8952
0 Exempt Work Vizcaino 4 NE of Flanders
220316 8/19/2022 DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING 1617 SF RESIDENCE

AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW TWO-STORY
1807 SF RESIDENCE. THE NEW RESIDENCE WILL BE 3-
BEDROOM, 2-BATHROOM WITH A LIVING ROOM,
DINING ROOM, AND KITCHEN. AN EXISTING
APPROVED ONE-STORY ADU (PERMIT #BP21-301)
WILL REMAIN IN THE REAR OF THE NEW RESIDENCE.
800,000 Building San Carlos 2 SW of 1st
220315 8/19/2022 New detached single car garage. 100,000 Building San Carlos 2 SW of 1st 220314 6/30/2022 9/2/2022 Replace handrails and posts of second floor deck, five posts total. Contact: Donna Carano (831) 747-4400
2,000 Building San Antonio 5 NE of 11th
220313 8/19/2022 8/19/2022 In-kind water heater replacement. Contact: GP Piping Inc (831) 348-0123
7,982 Plumbing Camino Real 2 NW of 12th
Page: 4 of 6
220312 8/19/2022 Sunset center North parking lot electrical panel replacement.
0 Electrical
220311 8/18/2022 8/19/2022 Remove old composition roof and replace with new Landmark black shingles. Contact: John Elber (831)
574-8277
9,000 Roofing San Carlos 3 SE of 10th
220310 8/18/2022 8/19/2022 Remove comp shingles and replace with comp shingles Landmark TL. Contact: D Cooper Roofing
(831) 455-9168
15,200 Roofing NE Corner of Santa Fe &
3rd
220309 8/18/2022 Replace 2 4'x2' existing aluminum windows with 4'x2' bronze windows. Contact: Russ Campbell (831) 238-
7040
0 Exempt Work Scenic 8 SE of Ocean
220308 8/17/2022 8/18/2022 REPAIR HEAT PUMP UNIT. Contact: Claudio Ortiz Design Group (831) 626-4146
18,000 Mechanical Torres 2 SW of 9th
220307 8/17/2022 Replace existing deck. Contact: MAS Construction (831) 214-2965
20,000 Building Lopez 6 NW of 4th
220306 8/17/2022 8/18/2022 Upgrade electrical panel. Changing from screw in fuse panel 100 amp to 200 amp panel. Contact: Larry
Mariani (209) 401-5001
1,500 Electrical NW corner of Torres & 3rd
220305 8/17/2022 Replace an 8' section of retaining wall that is 30" high with new pressure treated pilling and lateral boards.

The 6' fence above will be realigned.
0 Exempt Work Casanova 3 NE of 8th
220304 8/17/2022 8/31/2022 Dining room porch/stair replacement and termite repair. Contact: Tom McKnight Construction (530)
523-3366
8,234 Building NE Corner of Camino Real
and Ocean Ave.
220303 8/15/2022 CONVERT GARAGE/PARKING PAD AND STUDIO TO ADU. REMOVE SHOWER FROM MAIN HOUSE BATH
TOTAL REMODEL 20 S.F. (MAIN HOUSE), TOTAL
ADDITION OF STUDIO/ADU 230 S.F., TOTAL REMODEL
OF STUDIO/ADU 100 S.F.
150,000 Building SWC of Mission and 11th
220302 8/15/2022 INTERIOR REMODEL OF KITCHEN; DINING; MASTER BATH; GUEST BATH AND LAUNDRY; REPLACE
EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOORS; REPAIR EXISTING
DECK.
48,490 Building Torres 3 SE of Mountain
View
Page: 5 of 6
220301 8/12/2022 Rewiring house, installing recessed lights, switches, outlets, & adding a sub panel.
12,000 Electrical Junipero 5 NE of 2nd
220300 8/12/2022 Kitchen remodel, powder room addition, new closet configuration, master bathroom remodel, new
electrical panel, and electrical upgrades.
200,000 Building NW Corner of Mission &
3rd, Unit B3
220299 8/11/2022 8/11/2022 Addition of 30 amp 240v circuit for electrical water heater from existing main panel. Contact: Point Break
Electrical (831) 747-7503
1,700 Plumbing 8th 2 NE of Carmelo
220298 8/11/2022 8/11/2022 Remove florescent lights and install new track lights, replace a wall fan. Contact: Hernandez Custom
Builders (831) 229-9939
1,200 Electrical NW Corner of San Carlos &
8th
220297 8/11/2022 8/11/2022 Remove 40 gallon natural gas water heater and install 40 gallon electric water heater. Contact: Marina
Plumbing & Heating (831) 384-8206
5,000 Plumbing 8th 2 NE of Carmelo
220296 8/11/2022 8/11/2022 Remove carpet in loft and den. Install new hardwood floor to match existing wood floors, refinish all
existing hardwood floors. Remove existing tile
countertops in kitchen and replace with stone
countertops. Contact: Acosta Builders (831) 915-8064
0 Exempt Work SW Corner of Santa Fe &
Mountain View
220295 8/10/2022 8/10/2022 Remove carpet and install new flooring, base boards, and interior paint. Contact: Hernandez Custom
Builders (831) 229-9939
0 Exempt Work NW Corner of San Carlos &
8th
220294 8/8/2022 Remodel (e) one story house and attached garage.

Replace (e) kitchen, bathrooms, new powder room
and laundry, new windows, doors, and roofs.
400,000 Building Lincoln 2 NW of 13th
220293 8/5/2022 8/10/2022 Roof Mounted PV system using (25) LG 380s. Contact:

Premo Roofing Company (831) 235-6453
32,700 Electrical Torres 4 NE of 3rd
220292 8/4/2022 8/5/2022 Install a roof mounted 4.40KW solar PV system, 11 panels. No upgrade to main service panel. Installation
of new storage system. Contact: SolarTecture (831)
233-3004
38,884 Electrical 6 Sand & Sea
220291 8/4/2022 8/18/2022 Removal of kitchen cabinets, wallboard on two walls and insulation, installation of new insulation,
30,000 Building NE Corner of San Carlos &
8th #144
Page: 6 of 6
wallboard, cabinets and flooring. Contact: Jerry
Stepanek (831) 915-2730
220290 8/4/2022 Remodel existing 73 s.f. master bathroom, replace shower window, patch over courtyard window.
42,000 Building Casanova 7 SE of 13th
220289 8/3/2022 8/3/2022 Remove concrete slabs in the rear and the side and replace them with permeable sand-set quarry stone.

Paver installation includes adding 5 to 7 inches of
base rock and 1/2" to 3/7" bedding sand with no
sealant added to the pavers. The site coverage will be
reduced from 561 square feet to 519 square feet.
0 Exempt Work NWC Dolores & 10th
220288 8/3/2022 8/4/2022 2 new tesla powerwalls 10kW, 1 new gateway 200A.

Contact: Scudder Roofing (916) 765-2113
24,810 Electrical San Antonio 2 NW of 13th
220287 8/2/2022 8/2/2022 Clean up existing, unused 100 amp panel, remove old 30 amp and 60 amp plugs, replace with 2 quad boxes
with regular 20 amp circuits. Tie in inverter assembly
to above 60 amp breaker in unused 100 amp panel.

PacRep to supply the UL listed invert. Contact: Cate
Electric (831) 624-5361
600 Electrical NE Corner of Santa Rita &
Mountain View
220286 8/2/2022 8/2/2022 Remove under wire cabinet electrical. Disconnect and box electrical in wall. Contact: Jim Zanardi (408) 888- 3475
0 Electrical NW Corner of Monte
Verde & 5th
220285 8/1/2022 Demolition of trellis roof and stucco wall, construct new 518 SF garage, replace old generator, construct
new trellis at garage, add 90 SF of new motor court,
offset 608 SF of motor court and garage with 608 SF
of new landscaping.
225,000 Building 10 Carmel Way
Total Records: 52 9/8/2022
Page: 1 of 2
Code Compliance Report
08/01/2022 - 08/31/2022
Case # Case Type: Status Location Problem Description Date Received Date Closed 22167 Short-term Rental 1st NOV sent Mountain View 2
NW of 8th
Transient Rental 8/30/2022
22166 Planning Violation 1st NOV sent NWC of San Carlos and 6th
Unpermitted exterior change 8/30/2022
22165 Public Nuisance Closed Mission SW of 7th Loud music 8/31/2022 22164 Short-term Rental 1st NOV sent San Carlos 2 SW of 13th
Transient Rental 8/25/2022
22163 Short-term Rental Potential STR
identified
SWC Monte Verde
and Santa Lucia
Transient Rental 8/17/2022
22161 Planning/Building
Violation
1st NOV sent SE Corner of N
Casanova and
Palou
Unpermitted concrete pad, hot tub, electric 8/29/2022
22160 Property
Maintenance
Open Mission 5 SW 12th Life Safety Violations 8/26/2022 22159 Building Violation Open Mission 5 SW of
12th
unpermitted water heater installation
without permit causing immediate life
safety hazard. Owner Sasan Teymouri
notified 8/26/22 at approx. 9.35AM to
correct by 3pm or Unsafe to Occupy will be
issued and tenants will be required to
vacate. Electrical and plumbing work done
without permits.
8/26/2022
22158 Planning/Building
Violation
Open Monte Verde 2 NW
of 8th
Construction without permit 8/25/2022
22157 Skin Care Complaint Closed Ocean SE of Monte
Verde
Soliciting in sidewalk 8/16/2022 8/17/2022
Page: 2 of 2
22156 Planning Violation Open Ocean 3 SE of San
Carlos
Sign Violation 8/20/2022
22155 Planning Violation Closed Viscaino 9 SE of
Mountain View
Painting without permit/review 8/19/2022
22154 Public Nuisance Open NE Corner of Santa
Rita and 2nd
Unscreened Porta-John 8/16/2022
22153 Right of way
Violation
Open Ocean 2 SE Monte
Verde
Display Case in ROW 8/9/2022
22152 Skin Care Complaint Closed Ocean 2 NE
Dolores
Conducting business outside of business
space
8/7/2022
22145 Planning/Building
Violation
Open Scenic 3 SE of 12th Unpermitted Construction 8/4/2022 22144 Public Nuisance Closed NE Corner Scenic
and 10th
Food truck in ROW and noise 8/2/2022
Total Records: 17 9/8/2022
Page: 1 of 2
Transient Rental Report
01/01/2022 - 07/31/2022
Case # Street Status Date Received Last Status Date Date Closed 22151 Forest 1st NOV sent 7/21/2022 7/22/2022
22146 Carmelo 1st NOV sent 7/20/2022 7/20/2022
22138 Casanova Potential STR identified 7/5/2022 7/5/2022 22134 Junipero Closed 6/28/2022 8/3/2022 8/3/2022
22133 Junipero 1st NOV sent 6/27/2022 7/1/2022
22132 Valley Way Closed 6/24/2022 7/5/2022 7/5/2022
22103 Dolores Closed 5/24/2022 5/26/2022 5/26/2022
22098 Santa Rita Closed 5/25/2022 7/20/2022 7/20/2022
22097 Carmelo Closed 5/22/2022 6/21/2022 6/21/2022
22096 Mission Closed 5/22/2022 7/5/2022 7/5/2022
22091 Junipero Closed 5/15/2022 6/21/2022 6/21/2022
22090 Dolores Closed 5/15/2022 7/6/2022 7/6/2022
22070 Junipero Closed 4/12/2022 6/24/2022 6/24/2022
22068 N Carmelo Closed 4/6/2022 5/3/2022 5/3/2022
22067 N San Antonio Closed 4/5/2022 5/10/2022 5/10/2022 22063 Carmelo Closed 3/22/2022 5/15/2022 5/15/2022
22062 Casanova Closed 3/17/2022 3/17/2022 4/20/2022
22042 San Carlos Closed 2/22/2022 4/5/2022 4/5/2022
22039 Ocean Closed 2/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/4/2022
22033 Dolores Closed 2/10/2022 2/10/2022 2/10/2022
22024 Dolores Closed 2/3/2022 2/10/2022 2/11/2022
22013 Junipero Closed 2/1/2022 4/11/2022 4/11/2022
22007 Lopez Closed 1/11/2022 3/15/2022 3/15/2022
Page: 2 of 2
Total Records: 23 8/5/2022
Page: 1 of 4
Encroachment Permit Report
08/01/2022 - 08/31/2022
Permit # Permit Type Date
Submitted
Project Description Property Location Date Issued Status 220181 Temp Ench 8/31/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. CONDITIONS:

FLAGGER REQUIRED FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
2836 Santa Lucia 8/31/2022 Issued
220180 Temp Ench 8/31/2022 Sewer lateral replacement. CONDITION: PUBLIC WORKS

SUPERINTENDENT MUST BE ON SITE TO APPROVE
TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES ONCE INSTALLED.

Contact: Easy Drains Plumbing (831) 521-6882
Mission 3 NE of 8th 9/7/2022 Issued
220179 Temp Ench 8/31/2022 Sewer lateral replacement. CONDITION: PUBLIC WORKS

SUPERINTENDENT MUST BE ON SITE TO APPROVE
TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES ONCE INSTALLED.

Contact: Easy Drains Plumbing (831) 521-6882
Junipero 3 NW of 7th 9/7/2022 Issued
220178 Temp Ench 8/30/2022 Remove & replace existing asphalt driveway with new Calstone quarry stone. Contact: Noe Dorantes
Landscaping (831) 915-9580
Sand & Sea Road In Review
220177 Temp Ench 8/30/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
Dolores 2 SE of 9th 8/30/2022 Issued
220176 Temp Ench 8/26/2022 PG&E to replace pole due to stub & install new 110' underground service to applicant. Install SEC box.

Applicant to trench, backfill & install electric
substructures. PM# 35310279. Contact: PG&E (408)
478-1894
NE Corner of San
Antonio & 13th
In Review
220175 Temp Ench 8/24/2022 Replace 50' of sewer pipe 6' deep in the street. Install BWV & 2-way clean out. Contact: Chris Wilson Plumbing
& Heating (831) 393-9321
Casanova 2 NE of 8th 8/29/2022 Issued
220174 Temp Ench 8/24/2022 Short-term storage of materials in the right of way and expansion of fence to cover the area. 8/23/22 - 9/6/22.

Contact: Stoker & Allaire (831) 262-5918
Lincoln 5 SW of 10th 8/24/2022 Issued
Page: 2 of 4
220173 Temp Ench 8/24/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
Guadalupe 2 SE of
3rd
8/24/2022 Issued
220172 Temp Ench 8/19/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
SW Corner of Scenic
& Ocean
8/23/2022 Issued
220171 Temp Ench 8/18/2022 Locate existing duct & clear blocked conduit in asphalt 10' from existing SB #15. Job #A02DW3X. Contact: AT&T
(408) 807-3662
NW Corner 7th & San
Carlos
8/18/2022 Issued
220170 Temp Ench 8/18/2022 Temporary installation of 20'x8' storage container to move furniture and fixtures from house prior to
construction.

Monte Verde & Santa
Lucia
8/23/2022 Issued
220169 Temp Ench 8/17/2022 REPAIR HEAT PUMP UNIT AND PLACE ON STREET CRANE IF NEEDED TO REPAIR HEAT PUMP UNIT. Contact:

Claudio Ortiz Design Group Inc (831) 626-4146

TO BE PARKED IN

FRONT OF HOUSE ON

STREET TO BE USED

WHEN NEED TO

REPAIR HEAT PUMP
UNIT
8/18/2022 Issued
220168
220167 Temp Ench 8/17/2022 Install new pole, trim tree. PM# 35363575. Contact:

PG&E (831) 713-6019
2nd 96' NE of San
Carlos
In Review
220166 Temp Ench 8/15/2022 Center 2 boxes with meter for CalAm Job #1087.

Contact: Coastal Paving & Excavating (831) 262-1425
Ocean 2 SW of
Dolores
8/17/2022 Issued
220165 Temp Ench 8/15/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
SW Corner of Lobos &
2nd
8/15/2022 Issued
220164 Temp Ench 8/15/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
Scenic 5 SE of 13th 8/23/2022 Issued
220163 Temp Ench 8/11/2022 Excavate a 3'x3' pit in asphalt to locate gas main.

CONDITION: SUFFICIENT ROOM FOR EMERGENCY

VEHICLES AND RESIDENTS AT END OF STREET MUST BE
LEFT OPEN FOR ACCESS. Contact: West Valley
Construction (408) 640-8913
2nd Ave 60' West of
Lincoln
8/12/2022 Issued
220162 Perm Ench 8/11/2022 Addition of a ramp to the Nicolas unit to 7th avenue for exiting requirements.

Carmel Plaza - Suite
111
In Review
Page: 3 of 4
220161 Temp Ench 8/9/2022 Installation of temporary handrail placement in the public right-of-way. Installation not to exceed 1 year for fall protection at property line.

Monte Verde 4 SW of
8th
In Review
220160 Temp Ench 8/8/2022 PG&E to excavate 4'x5' bellhole for gas maintenance.

PM# 47019923. CONDITION: FINAL CONCRETE

RESTORATION MUST BE DOWELED INTO THE EXISTING
AND POURED BACK WITH "SEQUOIA SAND" CONCRETE
DYE. Contact: PG&E (408) 510-1660
SW Corner of Ocean
& Forest
8/9/2022 Issued
220159 Temp Ench 8/5/2022 Installation of granite stone boundary to border the landscape island near 13th Ave on the Scenic Pathway.

Condition: Concrete used to set the stones will be as
minimally visible as possible to maintain a natural look.

The curb should not have an appearance of a "concrete
and stone" curb, but rather just a "stone" curb.

Scenic & 13th 8/5/2022 Issued
220158 Temp Ench 8/4/2022 Excavate a 4'x4' pit to repair water leak damage.

CONDITION: NO WORK ALLOWED FROM AUGUST 15 -
AUGUST 19. FINAL RESTORATION OF CONCRETE STREET
SHALL BE SEQUOIA SAND COLOR. Contact: West Valley
Construction (408) 640-8913
San Carlos 200' N of
6th
8/4/2022 Issued
220157 Temp Ench 8/3/2022 Encroachment for MH's and aerial placement. Traffic control plans for rod and rope, fiber placement and
splicing. AT&T Job# A02E48F.
3rd from Junipero to
Carpenter
In Review
220156 Temp Ench 8/2/2022 Long-term placement of trailer on mostly private property to store materials for upcoming bath and
kitchen remodel. Contact: R.C. Benjanin (831) 236-8437
Guadalupe 4 SE of
5th
8/9/2022 Issued
220155 Temp Ench 8/1/2022 Replace sewer lateral using pipe bursting. Contact:

Rooter King (831) 394-5315
SW Corner of Mission
& 7th
8/2/2022 Issued
220154 Driveway 8/1/2022 Replace 559 sf asphalt driveway on property and 326 sf asphalt driveway in right-of-way with new asphalt
driveway. Contact: Patrick James Construction (831)
915-8076
SE Corner of
Monterey & 2nd
In Review
220153 Temp Ench 8/1/2022 Removal of hedge, closing of sidewalk for public safety.

Contact: Gates Tree Service (831) 595-1274
NW Corner of Lincoln
& 8th
8/1/2022 Issued
Page: 4 of 4
Total Records: 29 9/8/2022

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Monthly Report
August 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Alan Ward, Public Safety Director
SUBMITTED DATE: September 20, 2022
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator

AMBULANCE REPORT
Summary of Carmel Fire Ambulance August Calls for Service

AMBULANCE PERFORMANCE MEASURE
The performance goal for Code-3 (life threatening emergency-lights & siren) ambulance calls in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea with a response time of 5 minutes or less from dispatch to arrival is 95%.

For the month of August 2022 the ambulance did not meet the performance measure. The response time was 90% with (3) code-3 calls over 5 minutes.
28 Calls for service in CBTS Average response time: 3:13 min. 27 Code 3 calls for service –Three calls were over 5:00 min. with a 3:04 min average response.
08/11/22; 4:18 pm; (5:04 min); Dolores (responded from CHOMP) 08/17/22; 2:37 pm; (6:06 min); Dolores (responded from Cypress) 08/25/22; 4:34 am; (5:20 min); Can Carlos (Early morning response)

MONTEREY FIRE REPORT
Summary of Monterey Fire August Calls for Service

FIRE PERFORMANCE MEASURE
The performance goal for Code-3 (life threatening emergency-lights & siren) fire calls with a response time of 5 minutes or less from dispatch to arrival is 95%. For the month of August 2022 the fire department did not meet the performance measure. The response time was 92% with (4) code-3 calls over 5 minutes.
60 total calls for service in CBTS Average response time: 3:36 min. 51 total Code-3 calls – There were 4 responses over 5:00 min.

Attachment 3

BEACH FIRES
There were 7 illegal beach fires recorded during the month of August 2022.

Attachment 3
22 07 Carmel Fire Activity Report 1
Incident Alarm Date Incident Number Response
Time Combined Address Cross Street Priority
300-321 Series (EMS)
Medical assist, assist EMS crew 8/1/2022 4:48 PM 220824-MNT05830 0:03:22 CARPENTER ST 4TH AVE 3 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 8/5/2022 12:28 PM 220805-MNT05359 0:02:25 JUNIPERO AVE OCEAN AVE 3 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 8/7/2022 12:30 PM 220803-MNT05325 0:03:31 FOREST RD OCEAN AVE 3 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 8/15/2022 1:56 PM 220826-MNT05886 0:05:41 11TH AVE SAN ANTONIO AVE 3 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 8/15/2022 4:52 PM 220827-MNT05911 0:03:56 5TH AVE DOLORES ST 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/1/2022 2:50 PM 220801-MNT05252 0:02:12 JUNIPERO AVE 6TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/7/2022 6:01 AM 220807-MNT05400 0:05:29 SANTA FE ST 3RD AVE 2 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/10/2022 1:21 AM 220810-MNT05464 0:04:07 FOREST RD 7TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/15/2022 4:20 PM 220801-MNT05255 0:03:31 SAN ANTONIO AVE 11TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/16/2022 1:14 PM 220805-1235-MNT 0:03:12 JUNIPERO AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/17/2022 2:36 PM 220817-MNT05651 0:02:07 DOLORES ST 7TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/18/2022 5:30 PM 220818-MNT05687 0:02:48 OCEAN AVE DEL MAR AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/18/2022 11:08 PM 220818-MNT05694 0:02:42 SAN CARLOS ST 7TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/23/2022 11:45 PM 220809-MNT05456 0:03:19 LINCOLN ST OCEAN AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/24/2022 9:06 AM 220823-MNT05816 0:03:50 2946 FRANCISCAN WAY 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/26/2022 8:09 AM 220830-MNT05989 0:04:11 CAMINO REAL ST 7TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/26/2022 12:52 PM 220806-MNT05387 0:05:15 LINCOLN ST 12TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/27/2022 12:55 PM 220826-MNT05883 0:03:18 LINCOLN ST 7TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/27/2022 3:01 PM 220808-MNT05421 0:03:51 SANTA RITA ST 2ND AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/28/2022 6:39 PM 220828-MNT05944 0:02:29 DOLORES ST 4TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/28/2022 8:27 PM 220828-MNT05947 0:01:05 JUNIPERO AVE 6TH AVE 3 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 8/29/2022 4:14 PM 220811-MNT05509 0:02:53 DOLORES ST 8TH AVE 3 22 0:03:25
322-399 Series (Rescues)
Motor vehicle accident with injuries 8/30/2022 7:13 PM 220811-MNT05514 0:04:00 2ND AVE SANTA FE ST 3 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident (MV Ped) 8/11/2022 11:55 AM 220811-MNT05505 0:02:08 SAN CARLOS ST 5TH AVE 3 2 0:03:04
400 Series (Hazardous Material)
Carbon monoxide incident 8/12/2022 7:03 AM 220828-MNT05929 0:05:39 SAN CARLOS ST 1ST AVE 3 Power line down 8/6/2022 10:55 PM 220815-MNT05600 0:06:19 MARTIN WAY SCENIC RD 3 Accident, potential accident, other 8/18/2022 8:32 PM 220821-MNT05772 0:03:17 LINCOLN ST 7TH AVE 3 Explosive, bomb removal (for bomb scare, use 721) 8/16/2022 4:51 PM 220816-MNT05635 0:02:14 5104 MONTEREY ST 2 4 0:04:22

RESPONSE SUMMARY REPORT BY INCIDENT TYPE
27060 CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Alarm Date From: 8/1/2022 To: 8/31/2022
22 07 Carmel Fire Activity Report 2
Incident Alarm Date Incident Number Response
Time Combined Address Cross Street Priority
500 & 600 Series (Service Calls)
Water problem, other 8/6/2022 12:49 PM 220827-MNT05907 0:03:18 SANTA FE ST 2ND AVE 3 Water or steam leak 8/13/2022 12:06 PM 220813-MNT05547 0:03:48 CASANOVA ST OCEAN AVE 2 Smoke or odor removal 8/6/2022 5:23 PM 220812-MNT05518 0:04:57 OCEAN AVE SCENIC RD 3 Smoke or odor removal 8/12/2022 7:53 PM 220829-MNT05970 0:02:53 LINCOLN ST 7TH AVE 3 Public service 8/8/2022 10:27 AM 220802-MNT05273 0:03:50 5TH AVE MISSION ST 3 Assist invalid 8/1/2022 6:02 PM 220801-MNT05258 0:02:03 MISSION ST 5TH AVE 3 Assist invalid 8/3/2022 10:30 PM 220825-MNT05855 0:04:39 SAN CARLOS ST 1ST AVE 3 Assist invalid 8/5/2022 12:28 PM 220812-MNT05535 0:03:00 GUADALUPE ST 6TH AVE 3 Assist invalid 8/9/2022 6:12 PM 220806-MNT05384 0:03:19 CAMINO REAL ST 9TH AVE 3 Assist invalid 8/19/2022 6:37 AM 220819-MNT05699 0:03:27 SAN CARLOS ST 4TH AVE 2 Assist invalid 8/24/2022 2:59 PM 220824-MNT05841 0:01:39 CASANOVA ST 12TH AVE 3 Assist invalid 8/24/2022 6:36 PM 220824-MNT05847 0:03:39 SAN CARLOS ST 13TH AVE 2 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/8/2022 10:17 PM 220815-MNT05607 0:03:58 CARMEL WAY 2ND AVE 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/11/2022 9:26 AM 220811-MNT05500 0:04:46 CAMINO DEL MONTE JUNIPERO AVE 2 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/11/2022 8:48 PM 220819-MNT05714 0:03:57 4TH AVE GUADALUPE ST 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/16/2022 3:21 PM 220815-MNT05605 0:03:35 MISSION ST 7TH AVE 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/21/2022 4:50 PM 220816-MNT05626 0:03:12 JUNIPERO AVE 4TH AVE 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/23/2022 10:03 AM 220823-MNT05814 0:02:15 DOLORES ST 5TH AVE 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/24/2022 8:25 PM 220824-MNT05852 0:02:00 DOLORES ST 5TH AVE 3 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8/30/2022 3:02 AM 220830-MNT05978 0:05:40 25962 MISSION ST 2 CO Investigation with no CO found 8/2/2022 7:11 AM 220807-MNT05408 0:03:41 SANTA RITA ST 3RD AVE 3 Citizen complaint 8/29/2022 4:53 PM 220829-MNT05973 0:04:26 25962 MISSION ST 2 22 0:03:33
700 Series (False Alarms)
False alarm or false call, other 8/28/2022 2:09 AM 220826-MNT05880 0:05:00 12TH AVE CASANOVA ST 3 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 8/13/2022 10:28 PM 220813-MNT05567 0:02:08 SAN CARLOS ST 5TH AVE 3 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 8/25/2022 4:33 AM 220808-MNT05434 0:04:06 SAN CARLOS ST 5TH AVE 3 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 8/19/2022 2:27 PM 220819-MNT05706 0:03:59 DOLORES ST 8TH AVE 2 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 8/12/2022 6:43 PM 220812-MNT05534 0:01:58 SAN CARLOS ST 5TH AVE 3 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 8/23/2022 11:21 AM 220816-MNT05632 0:03:41 SAN ANTONIO AVE 8TH AVE 3 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 8/25/2022 2:26 PM 220825-MNT05867 0:01:45 JUNIPERO AVE 6TH AVE 3 Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 8/11/2022 4:17 PM 220806-MNT05393 0:02:52 MISSION ST OCEAN AVE 3 Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 8/19/2022 9:28 PM 220824-MNT05832 0:03:56 13TH AVE CAMINO REAL ST 3 Medical Alarm device activation, no medical 8/26/2022 10:20 AM 220818-MNT05691 0:03:18 MONTE VERDE ST 9TH AVE 3 10 0:03:16
Code 2 Calls 9
220826-MNT05886 E15 responded, normal response time Code 3 Calls 51 220806-MNT05387 E15 responded, normal response time 60
92%
220815-MNT05600 Delay due to distance
Over 5 Minute Response Times Cause of Delay: Code 3 Responses Total # of Incidents
220828-MNT05929 E15 responded, normal response time % Under 5 Minute Response Time Request
Number Date Rec'd 10 day response date
Date
completed Requestor Records Requested Notes
2022-0006 8/22/22 jd 9/1/2022 08/22/22 jd Sadia khan CC2200393 picked up (JD) 2022-0007 8/23/22 mw 9/2/2022 see notes Brittany Costello Skin Care info responded to
requestor to get info,
has not called me back
2022-0008 8/26/22 da 9/6/2022 8/30 da Lexis Nexis CG2200358 mailed by DA 2022-0009 8/26/22 da 9/9/2022 8/30 da Lexis Nexis CA2200353 mailed by DA 2022-0010 8/26/22 da 9/6/2022 8/30 da Lexis Nexis CA2200351 mailed by DA 2022-0011 8/30/22 da 9/9/2022 8/30 DA Cary Ostrie CG2200368 denial letter mailed by DA
2022-0012 8/30/22 JD 9/9/2022 9/10 DA Aran NafisiMovaghar CC2200403 mailed by DA 2022-0013 8/29/22 jd 9/7/2022 9/2 DA Samuel Beiderwell CG2200346 denial letter mailed by DA
2022-0014 8/30/22 da 9/10/2022 8/30 DA Leonardo Antonio CC2200401 released at front
counter by DA
2022-0015 8/30/22 da 9/10/2022 9/10 da Diane Demars
CG2200158,
CG2200359,
CG2200383
mailed by DA
Carmel Police Department Records Log - August 2022
Attachment 4
2022 PRA Log - August
request
number
Date
Requested
10-day
response date records requested requestor date completed notes 2022-040 8/11/2022 8/22/2022 permit records for the property located at San Antonio NE corner of 8th, Carmel, APN 010-269-013-000 Lance Holt 8/11/2022 available online 2022-041 8/12/2022 8/23/2022 any recent communications (last 6 months) between Jeannette Witten and the city, concerning the Golden Bough project. annonymous 8/15/2022 sent records 2002-042 8/22/2022 9/1/2022
Any complaints from 2016 regarding the 4 skin care businesses on Ocean Ave: Gold Elements, Skin Frenzy, SenseLife, and Ocean Skin Care.

Brittany
Costello 8/29/2022 sent records
2022-043 8/29/2022 9/8/2022 request for all postcards turned into the city for SCTCN September 14th meeting.

Christy
Hollenbeck 8/29/2022
sent google
drive link with
postcards
received 7-1-22 -
8-22-22
2022-044 8/29/2022 9/8/2022
any contracts the City of Carmel has entered into with
BB&K/Gail Karish and Telecom Law Firm, PC /Tripp May from January1, 2021-August 29, 2022.

Christy
Hollenbeck 9/1/2022
sent BBK and
Telecom
contracts
2022-045 8/29/2022 9/8/2022
checks written in the past year to BB&K, Gail Karish, Telecom Law Firm, PC, and Tripp May from January 1, 2021-August 31, 2022
Christy
Hollenbeck 9/8/2022 sent records
2022-046 8/29/2022 9/8/2022
request the records for ALL notice of violation letters (NOV) that have been mailed, emailed, texted verbally delivered, or hand delivered for any and all code violations in carmel by the sea for the period of February 1, 2022 - August 27, 2022.

Parker Logan
deadline
extended to
9/23/22
2022-047 8/22/2022 9/1/2022
A list of planning department employees no longer working for the city going back to 2010. Please include their full name (including middle name), job title, and, if you can, any contact information you have for them.

Daniel
Dokhanian 8/31/2022
gave names and
titles of past
CPB employees
going back 3
years
Attachment 4

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Monthly Report
Public Works Department Report
August 2022
City Council Meeting of August 2, 2022
 Adopted Resolution 2022-064, adopting the Climate Action Plan and the Climate Adaptation Plan.

These Plans now move into the implementation phase with a number of initial projects underway.  Adopted Resolution 2022-068, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Ausonio, Inc. for $125,000 for Project Management services to implement nine facility renovation capital projects.  Adopted Resolution 2022-066, approving a 5-year Vehicle Maintenance Services Agreement with the City of Monterey for fleet services at well below commercial labor rates.  Adopted Resolution 2022-067, approving a FY 2022/23 Budget Amendment of $20,395 for the CalRecycle SB1383 Local Assistance Grant.
 Adopted Resolution 2022-068, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Davey Resource Group for $150,000, for preparation of the Urban Forest Management Plan funded by a Cal Fire grant.

Forest and Beach Commission Meeting of August 11, 2022
 Approved a removal permit for a City-owned pine tree blocking a Stop sign at the southeast corner of Carmelo Street and Eleventh Avenue, and required the applicant to plant one tree on adjacent property.  Approved pruning of three oak trees for home construction on Mission Street, 3 northeast of Tenth Avenue. Another oak was initially requested to be removed to accommodate the second floor of an accessory dwelling unit, but the applicant redesigned the project to allow for this tree to remain.  Approved a removal permit for four Eucalyptus trees leaning across San Carlos Street north of Fourth Avenue. Commission requested that the applicant and City share the costs of removals and replanting of four suitable replacement trees in the vicinity.
 Carmel Cares and Alan Wheat, professor of horticulture at MPC, presented the Forest Theater Landscape Renovation Project. Broken into zones of Maritime Chaparral, Coastal Scrub, and Oak Woodland, the proposed project includes over 700 plants and would be entirely funded by the Rotary, Carmel Cares, and donations. Commissioners enthusiastically supported the project contingent on a planning Design Review Study, issuance of an encroachment permit, and support from Pac Rep.  Presented draft recommendations from the Forest and Beach Commission to the Planning Commission regarding the Scenic Pathway Benches, which included: zero additional benches; if more benches are approved, prefer variety of styles with emphasis on redwood backing; place new benches on the Ocean side of the Pathway in clusters of no more than two; and request that the Bench Policy be updated and a draft reviewed by the F&B Commission. Additional recommendations included requesting a bench policy for other park sites, developing maintenance guidelines, and submitting all documentation considered by the Commission to the Planning Commission.

Climate Committee Meeting of August 18, 2022
 Meeting canceled.

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Robert M. Harary, P.E., Director of Public Works SUBMITTED ON: September 2, 2022
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
Attachment 5
Public Works Department Report – August 2022
Public Works Administration
 Maintenance Worker/Gardener Rene Aldama was promoted to Senior Maintenance Worker.  Administrative Coordinator, Yvette Oblander, returned full time to Public Works after two years.  For the third round of recruiting for Project Manager, two more candidates were offered the position, but both declined. Consideration being given to hiring an executive search firm.  Updated the City Council’s Strategic Priorities tracking matrix for 10 initiatives lead by Public Works.

Two priorities were completed since Council’s last review. Forest Theater management is well underway, and Council adopted the Climate Action and Climate Adaptation Plans.  The building/structural permit for the new, $54k lighting box truss system for Forest Theater was signed off. Minor electrical work was also completed by the City to power Pacific Repertory Theater’s propmoving rigging apparatus. Pac Rep was also notified that the City has expended its $60k obligation for initial capital investment as provided in the Lease Agreement.  Ranked Statements of Qualifications received for on-call hazardous materials testing and consulting services. Selected M3 Environmental, and a Professional Services Agreement is being prepared.  Developing a Game Plan to more proactively oversee numerous volunteers, support groups, and other local organizations. One of the next steps will be to compile a full menu of volunteer options as a page on the City’s website.

Carmel Cares
 Finished upgrading the Carmel stone edging around a landscaped island along the Scenic Pathway near Thirteenth Avenue, as approved by the Forest and Beach Commission.  Planted donated succulents in three street bump outs on Dolores Street, between Ocean and Sixth.  Installed railings at the back of the restrooms at Forest Theater.  Upgraded the map display case at Sunset Center.
 Continued planning for replacement of barrier railing along the Scenic Pathway.  Continued to improve the Scenic Pathway and Forest Theater site, and maintain Vista Lobos Park, Sunset Center grounds, and numerous landscaped medians.

Environmental Programs
 Completed negotiations and preparation of a Professional Services Agreement with 4Leaf for Project Management Services for the Police Building – Additional Scope design, construction of the prior year Annual Paving project, and planning/design of the Resilience Infrastructure Pilot Project and the Electrical Panel Upgrades. Agreement scheduled for award at September Council meeting.  Prepared a three-year contract with the Carmel Area Wastewater District to provide Vactor truck services to clean out four storm drain CDS units for a not-to-exceed fee of $71,646.  After further reviews with staff, the City Attorney’s office substantially completed the final edits on the updated Stormwater Ordinance. The proposed ordinance will next be sent to the Coastal Commission and Regional Water Quality Control Board for comments before Council’s 1st Reading later this year.  For the $175k Coastal Engineering Study/Beach Sand Survey projects, continued to negotiate the scope of work and fees for the combined consulting team of Integral Consulting for climate change impacts, Haro/Kashunich for coastal engineering, and EMC for environmental services. Also continued to research the non-competitive, $100k Local Coastal Program grant to fund Phase 2.  Ranked Statements of Qualifications received for on-call environmental consulting services. Selected Nikki Nedeff for biological services associated with the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and an Agreement is being prepared. Tentatively selected other consultants for the North Dunes Habitat Restoration Project and for other on-call environmental services.  Processed 12 commercial waivers per SB1383 requirements, and approved 10 applications, mainly due to di minimus organics generation.

Facility Maintenance
 At Sunset Center, contractor installed a fire pump pipeline to discharge weekly test flows into the sewer.

Attachment 5
Public Works Department Report – August 2022
 At Sunset Center, an electrician replaced burned-out conductors below the service meter. Until additional upgrades can be made to this electrical panel, at least one Electric Vehicle charging station in the North Lot must remain out of service.
 Replaced sodium halide bulbs around the Vista Lobos parking lot with energy-efficient LED bulbs.  Painted exterior window trim at the Harrison Memorial Library (HML) following replacement of broken window panes.
 Repaired restroom exhaust fan motors on the roof, and installed some window screens at City Hall.  Replaced the termite-damaged rear door at the Public Works Director’s office.  Replaced electrical devices for the vehicle exhaust safety system at the Fire Station.  12 new lockers were ordered by Facilities Maintenance, delivered to the Fire Station after a long delay, and assembled and installed by the firefighters.
 Initiated a list and obtaining quotes for other needed facility projects for potential mid-year budget augmentation, including Sunset Center electrical panel upgrade, repainting both restrooms at Forest Hill Park, decommissioning the dumbwaiter at Park Branch Library, fire system upgrades, and others.

Project Management (PM) for Capital Improvement Program  Notice to Proceed was issued Ausonio, Inc. to provide PM services for 9 facility renovation projects.

Key initial accomplishments included:
o City Hall Retaining Wall structural design plans were reviewed, and bid proposal documents are being prepared. Reached out to geotechnical and structural engineers for assessment. o Ausonio recommended that the following 6 projects be bundled into one project for efficiency, costeffectiveness, and to advance some projects: Sunset Center exterior paint and cottage window repairs, HML exterior/interior paint, carpeting, and generator, and City Hall roof replacement. o Reviewed qualifications and short-listed firms to provide on-call architectural services and to prepare the Facilities Condition Assessments for 4 buildings.  For the City-Wide Drainage System Repair Project, during scope of work negotiations with Neill Engineers to design this project, it was determined that an additional hydraulic analysis must be done for the Storm Drain Master Plan previously prepared by Schaaf and Wheeler. Specifically, the Plan needs to include a 20-year storm event analysis to reflect Climate Change, in addition to the 10-year storm event included in the original Plan, based on the current capacity of the drainage system.  BKF was selected to design the Concrete Street Repairs Project, including the proposed bike path along lower Ocean Avenue, and scope of work and fee negotiations are underway.  City and Wallace Group met with TAMC to discuss Complete Street options for the Ocean Avenue pedestrian/bicycle pathway, as well as a potential future project to leverage Measure X funding to apply for RSTP funding to provide a north-south bike path from Camino del Monte, along San Carlos Street, and out of the City via Rio Road.
 Wayfinding Signs: Discovered that TAMC previously hired a consultant to identify and locate the City’s signs without our knowledge nor input. Working on rectifying City-intended project with the plan generated by TAMC’s consultant for TAMC’s consideration.  Held pre-proposal meetings with two, short-listed architectural firms to prepare the Libraries Master Plan, and received their proposals on August 31st.

Street Maintenance
 Supported Car Week events, including scrubbing sidewalks, leveling tree wells, roping off Ocean Avenue median islands, setting vehicle barriers, posting no parking signs, and supporting Police.  As recommended at the July 28th meeting of the Traffic Safety Committee, installed a straight and right turn arrow on southbound Junipero Street near Seventh Avenue, and, as a pilot project, installed sidewalk crossings on Carmelo Street, just north and south of Ocean Avenue.  After decades of storing materials at the Carmel Middle School yard, relocated usable materials to the re-organized Rio Park site, recycled materials where appropriate, and discarded broken items.  Replenished beach sand around boulders near the base of the Eighth and Ninth Avenue access stairs.

Attachment 5
Public Works Department Report – August 2022
 With a large stump recently removed, installed the final segment of a storm drain pipe at the southeast corner of Santa Fe Street and Second Avenue.
 Repaired traffic signs and a number of special signs.  Replaced tires and installed a new windshield for the Carmel Cares-donated Gator. Saved roughly 50% by ordering these auto parts on Amazon.

Forestry Parks and Beach Report (Forester’s Report)
 As part of the Cal Fire grant, 108 new trees will be planted. The initial round of tree planting is planned to begin in October.
 Following City Council’s approval of their Professional Services Agreement for the Urban Forest Management Plan, Davey Resources Group requested a number of modifications to the contractual terms. Some minor changes were approved by the City Attorney’s office, but issues are ongoing.  Due to a change in personnel at PG&E, trees were removed by PG&E’s contractor without prior clearance by the City Forester as has been prior practice. This resulted in four remnant “totem pole” trees and the removal of a Cypress tree on Scenic Road. Stern conversations with PG&E’s new personnel are ongoing and resulting in mitigation for prior damage and assurance for proper City notifications going forward. The matter will be presented to the Forest & Beach Commission in October.  After a two-year hiatus due to reduced pandemic-related funding, the on-call landscape maintenance bidding documents were completed and advertised for bids. A pre-bid meeting was held in late August.  Preparation of on-call tree care services contract and bid documents are in progress.  Peter Quintanilla, a horticulture professor at MPC, planted a rare silk tree in Devendorf Park.  We had our first local contractors use an Airspade and a hydro vac on projects in town.  The HML is getting a new backflow installed so that the irrigation runs efficiently and without leaks.  The cypress on Scenic have Trentephoia, a naturally-occurring algae. The amount of it collecting on trees is concerning. We are working with Cal Fire’s pathologist to determine if corrective action is needed.
2022 Permitted Removals and Required Planting
Removals Plant
Upper
Plant
Lower
No room
for New
Tree
Meets Density
Recommendation
Total Number of Trees
Required
January 2 1 1 0 0 2
February 14 4 5 0 3 9
March 13 4 4 0 4 8
April 7 2 5 3 2 7
May 19 8 4 3 4 12
June 11 3 1 0 6 4
July 8 1 1 4 1 2
August 41 16 10 5 3 26
September
October
November
December
2022 Totals 115 39 31 10 23 70
. Private and Development Activities
Attachment 5
Public Works Department Report – August 2022
Historic Permitted Removals and Required Planting
Removal
Permits
Removal
of Upper
Removal
of Lower
Replanting
Required
Replanting
of Upper
Replanting
of Lower
Replanting
%
2012 96 20 20.83%
2013 123 60 63 59 31 29 47.97%
2014 145 64 81 49 35 20 33.79%
2016 90 37 41.11%
2017 119 50 69 43 15 28 36.13%
2018 77 37 60 20 1 18 20.62%
2019 170 107 63 116 53 63 68.24%
2020 98 57 41 93 67 26 94.90%
Permitted
removals
Removal
of upper
Removal
of lower
Replanting
Required
Replanting
of upper
Replanting
of lower
Replanting
%
Applications
processed
2021 204 81 123 135 81 54 66.18% 213
2022* 115 59 56 70 39 31 60.87% 135
*year to date
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
2013 2014 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022*
Required Replanting
Re-planting of upper Re-planting of lower * year do
City Forestry, Parks, and Beach Activities
Attachment 5
Public Works Department Report – August 2022
71 96 67
139 165 149 176 165 132 159
88 77
207
256
556 425
163
107
187
115 101
96 601
74 75
38 40
105
113
66 72
59 62
55 14
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022* City Performed Tree Work Year by Year Comparison
Removal Prunning Planting * year to date
2 1 1
10 36 36 43 60 47 42 40
8 9 58 5
5 2 5
17 18
12 9
15 14
17 20 17
33 5
4 0
6 3
3 1
0 2
3 105
164
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Task Count
Month
2022 Admistrative Tasks
Failures Inspection Plan reviews
*Fresh Desk ticketing
began with the fiscal year
Attachment 5

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Thomas Levandowski, Finance Manager
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT: August 2022 Check Register Summary
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the check register for August 2022.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The check register is produced from the City's financial system. The report groups the checks by the respective department or function. The check register includes the check number, the name of the vendor, a description of the purchase, the check issue date and the amount of the check.

Per the California Supreme Court's decision in the case of Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v.

Superior Court (Dec. 29, 2016) (2016 WL 7473802), the check register excludes the specific invoice payments for legal services incurred for pending and active investigations, pending and active litigation, as well as recently concluded matters. The Supreme Court has ruled that these specific invoices are protected under attorney-client privilege and need not be disclosed under the Public Records Act.

On the last page of the report, staff have included the contract balance for the respective vendors that were paid in August.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The check register summary for August 2022 totals $1,083,418.28.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

Council ratified the July 2022 check register at its September 13 regular meeting.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) August 2022 Check Register Summary
August 2022 Check Register
Check
No.

Vendor/Employee Transaction Description Date Amount
49532 Apr-Jun 2022 ADA Quarterly remittance 08/02/2022 32.80 49697 TID May-Jun 22 remittance - Admin fee 08/30/2022 55,023.21 49698 Remittance May-Jun CHID 08/30/2022 363,752.71
Total for Department: 000 ___ 418,808.72
49591 Mail service sorting and delivery 08/08/2022 4,560.00 49642 CHS JPA Allocation FY 2022-23 08/18/2022 17,625.00 49650 Per Capita assessment FY 22-23 08/18/2022 1,520.50 49665 City Discretionary Fund Grant FY 22-23 08/18/2022 3,000.00 49669 City Discretionary Grant Casa de Noche Buena 08/18/2022 3,000.00 Total for Department: 110 City Council 29,705.50
49528 Legal noticing 08/02/2022 300.00
49529 City Hall business cable service 08/02/2022 73.31 49531 MOM Financial system monthly fee 08/02/2022 720.79 49533 Pre-emp psych screening PD 08/02/2022 475.00
49536 Business office supplies-Admin/Finance 08/02/2022 216.03 49537 Temporary payroll assistance services 08/02/2022 4,560.00 49538 Envelopes, stationary, business card and business license printi08/02/2022 517.84 49540 Toshiba Copier lease Estudio 5506 08/02/2022 373.06 49542 Healthcare monthly Admin and Compliance Fee 08/02/2022 150.00 49576 Data and cloud storage fees 08/08/2022 828.39
49577 Telephone service citywide 08/08/2022 2,997.46
49580 Legal noticing 08/08/2022 369.00
49582 Website support:Maint, training, security 08/08/2022 700.00 49584 NovusAgenda, NovusAgenda Video streaming 08/08/2022 13,837.59 49585 Employee ID Badges 08/08/2022 44.14
49586 Records storage service 08/08/2022 970.31
49588 Business office supplies-Admin/Finance 08/08/2022 391.26 49593 Cell service fees, usage and purchases 08/08/2022 29.99 49596 Monthly cell service, usage and purchases 08/08/2022 1,464.04 49598 Cell phone usage and sales 08/08/2022 779.45
49634 Public Official Bond Premium-N Romero 08/18/2022 250.00 49636 Copy paper Business Office (Non-jamming) 08/18/2022 480.70 49638 Legal noticing 08/18/2022 510.00
49640 12 ViewSonic monitors 08/18/2022 2,360.42
49643 Agenda printing services 08/18/2022 933.46
49652 G Suite Enterprise 12 months subscription 08/18/2022 18,000.00 49655 Temporary payroll assistance services 08/18/2022 4,560.00 49658 Recuritment services, NEOGOV, On-call HR 08/18/2022 3,148.75 49659 Business office copier usage fees 08/18/2022 371.64 49662 Reimburse for moving expenses 08/18/2022 2,500.00 49668 NonNGEN internet and recurring charges 08/18/2022 644.82 Total for Department: 111 City Administration 63,557.45 49543 City Attorney-June 2022 General Services 08/02/2022 16,137.37 49543 City Attorney-June 2022 Labor Negotiations 08/02/2022 14,691.00 49690 Legal services - Human Resources 08/18/2022 92.00 Total for Department: 112 City Attorney 30,920.37
Burke,Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Sloan Sakai Yeong & Wong
Department: 112 City Attorney
Burke,Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Alan Ward
Comcast Business
Traffic Patterns
Zoom Imaging Solutions, Imc.

Netkiller, Inc.

Robert Half
CDW-Government Inc
Copies By-The-Sea
Baystar Express
Carmel Pine Cone
Verizon Wireless
Alliant Insurance Services
Sprint
T-Mobile
Iron Mountain
Office Depot, Inc.

Granicus, Inc.

Image Sales
Carmel Pine Cone
Digital Deployment
Amazon Web Services Inc
AT&T
Toshiba Financial Service
Wageworks,Inc
Robert Half
Ryan Ranch Printers
Jocelyn E. Roland Ph.D., ABPP
Office Depot, Inc.

Comcast
Corbin Willits System
Department: 111 City
Carmel Pine Cone
Carmel Residents Association
Community Human Services
Community Human Services
Monterey Bay Air Resources District
Department: 110 City Council
Peninsula Messenger LLC
Monterey County Convention & Visitors Bureau
Visit Carmel
Department: 000 ___
Division of the State Architect
1 Attachment 1
Check
No.

Vendor/Employee Transaction Description Date Amount
49558 Building Dept. - Gas & Oil - June Fuel 08/08/2022 111.01 49560 Building Dept. - Plan Review Svcs. 08/08/2022 402.00 49561 Planning Dept. - Financial Svcs. 08/08/2022 202.11 49562 Boot allowance - Bldg. Dept. - FY 22-23 08/08/2022 183.08 49563 Fire Inspection Plan Reviews 08/08/2022 687.50
49564 Planning Dept. - Shipping Fees, Volume Studies 08/08/2022 28.52 49565 Host compliance, short-term rental enforcement 08/08/2022 9,041.55 49567 Custom Data Report - community report, ownership 08/08/2022 100.00 49569 Office Supplies 08/08/2022 176.93
49570 Historic Context Statement Update 08/08/2022 26,100.00 49572 Online Live Webinar, including supplies/materials 08/08/2022 442.08 49574 Ergonomic office chairs 08/08/2022 2,604.19
49630 Planning Dept. - Financial Svcs. 08/18/2022 212.22 49632 Ergo Chair - Brandon S. 08/18/2022 583.45
Total for Department: 115 Community Planning & Bu 40,874.64 49525 PD: PGCopy Followers Cell Services 08/02/2022 2.70 49529 Police Dept cable services 08/02/2022 253.18
49530 Testing services for Police Dept 08/02/2022 54.00 49534 Fire Dept laundry service 08/02/2022 137.34
49535 PD Substance testing services 08/02/2022 583.00
49539 PD Evidence and fingerprinting supplies 08/02/2022 219.44 49575 Water service-PD 08/08/2022 193.00
49579 Police Dept copier usage fees 08/08/2022 150.60
49587 Police Dept auto repairs 08/08/2022 115.88
49592 PD-Document shredding services 08/08/2022 135.00
49594 PD:Digital iris services 08/08/2022 75.00
49597 FBI Training expense/meeting expense 08/08/2022 398.52 49598 Air cards for MDT's 08/08/2022 327.32
49639 Police Dept-Fuel expense 08/18/2022 5,568.23
49641 Police Dept cable services 08/18/2022 55.59
49644 PD Auto repairs 08/18/2022 2,840.58
49645 Police Dept copier lease 08/18/2022 161.70
49646 Batteries/Police Dept vehicles 08/18/2022 87.40
49647 Police Dept auto repairs 08/18/2022 96.94
49648 Dues-Chief Alan Ward 08/18/2022 300.00
49649 Fire Dept laundry service 08/18/2022 143.59
49656 PD-Document shredding services 08/18/2022 45.00
49657 PD Uniform purchases 08/18/2022 390.47
49679 Fire Dept laundry service 08/18/2022 151.72
49680 Tires for Gator 8/4/22 #1-107523 08/18/2022 110.59 49689 PD-Document shredding services 08/18/2022 225.00
49694 PD: Monthly fee for information services 08/18/2022 75.00 49700 1.Fire Dept:Cellular access/telephone calling and access 2. PD:C08/30/2022 6,465.06 49702 Ticketing Platform for PD:Hardware, software, tech support and d 08/30/2022 5,850.00 Total for Department: 116 Police 25,211.85
49581 Monthly fee:Fire Admin/Emerg Incident Mgmt 08/08/2022 236,620.21 49633 Water service Fire Dept 08/18/2022 153.93
49635 Housekeeping supplies-Fire Dept 08/18/2022 299.84 49639 Fire Dept gas expense (E15) 08/18/2022 566.62
49664 Fire Dept copier usage fees 08/18/2022 11.59
49699 Vehicle repairs June 2022 08/30/2022 14,551.18
49700 1.Fire Dept:Cellular access/telephone calling and access 2. PD:C08/30/2022 868.42 Total for Department: 117 Fire 253,071.79
City Of Monterey
County of Monterey IT Dept
Carmel Towing & Garage
Caltronics/J.J.R Enterprises. Inc
Alhambra
American Supply Company
Department: 117 Fire
City Of Monterey
County of Monterey IT Dept
United Public Safety, Inc
Same Day Shred
Transunion Risk & Alterna
Mission Linen Service
Monterey Tire Service Inc
Same Day Shred
Summit Uniforms

MCCLEOA
Mission Linen Service
Interstate All Battery Center
Lemos Service Inc
Cypress Coast Ford/Lincoln
De Lage Landen Financial
Carmel Towing & Garage
Comcast
US Bank
Verizon Wireless
Same Day Shred
T2 Systems Canada Inc.

Caltronics/J.J.R Enterprises. Inc
Lemos Service Inc
Sirchie Finger Print Labs
Alhambra
Mission Linen Service
MOGO Urgent Care
Comcast
Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula
Department: 116 Police
American Messaging
Trowbridge Enterprises
Trowbridge Enterprises
De Lage Landen Financial
Past Consultants LLC
US Bank
Monterey County Assessor
Office Depot, Inc.

FedEx
Granicus, Inc.

Duane Dauphinee
Engineered Fire Systems
CSG Consultants, Inc.

De Lage Landen Financial
Department: 115 Community
Carmel Towing & Garage
2 Attachment 1
Check
No.

Vendor/Employee Transaction Description Date Amount
49526 Medical supplies 08/02/2022 1,766.73
49541 Machine to machine activity 08/02/2022 14.04
49578 Medical supplies 08/08/2022 193.84
49581 FY 2022-23 Ambulance Administration fee 08/08/2022 1,996.96 49583 Medical director Fire Agency Provider Controlled 08/08/2022 6,500.00 49595 Amb Dept-Medical supplies 08/08/2022 2,419.00
49637 Medical supplies 08/18/2022 845.60
49639 Amb Dept gas expense (7166) 08/18/2022 1,306.22
49654 Ambulance Dept-Oxygen/hazardous materials transport service08/18/2022 181.02 49671 Ambulance Copier lease 08/18/2022 75.01
49696 Ambulance billing service 08/18/2022 5,192.97
49701 GEMT QAF 08/30/2022 5,458.70
Total for Department: 118 Ambulance 25,950.09
49544 Masks 08/02/2022 52.38
49610 Oil Water Seperator 08/18/2022 297.50
49611 Locksmith ervice for City Facilities 08/18/2022 39.83 49612 PW Uniform Service 21/22 FY 08/18/2022 708.50
49613 Annual Smart Inspection 3/17/22 #16175 08/18/2022 600.00 49614 Electrical supplies for City Facilities 08/18/2022 188.51 49615 Plumbing supplies for city facilities 08/18/2022 316.09 49616 Porta-Potties FT & Events 08/18/2022 1,062.19
49617 Acacia Way Stromdrain box. 7/18/22 #615570 08/18/2022 196.03 49618 Window cleaning service for City Facilites 08/18/2022 650.00 49619 Helath permit fees for FY 22/23 08/18/2022 1,210.00 49620 Grant Program Funding for FY22/23 08/18/2022 20,395.00 49621 PW/FM janitorial supplies cleansers/COVID 08/18/2022 571.64 49622 Garage door service for City Facilities 08/18/2022 1,432.04 49623 Plumbing repairs City facilities 08/18/2022 493.05 49624 New Boots Rene Aldama FY 22/23 per MOU 250 Max 08/18/2022 250.00 49625 Stop signs 7/12/22 #53234 08/18/2022 851.06
49626 PW Streets - Supplies 08/18/2022 274.69
49627 Tree services citywide as directed by City Forester 08/18/2022 2,340.00 49628 Forestry safety equipment and supplies 08/18/2022 1,088.62 49629 811 USA Tickets 7/26/22 #112607USB22 08/18/2022 699.31 49661 City Wide Pest Control 08/18/2022 354.00
49663 PW/FM Janitorial supplies 08/18/2022 231.94
49664 Copier Contract PUBLIC WORKS - FY22/23 08/18/2022 84.26 49666 PW Streets - Fuel for PW vehicles 08/18/2022 2,397.60 49667 PW Uniform Service 21/22 FY 08/18/2022 138.37
49670 Painting project at Carmel Fire Dept. 08/18/2022 11,090.00 49671 PW Copier monthly lease- 08/18/2022 215.67
49672 Electrical supplies for City Facilities 08/18/2022 34.13 49673 Milage reinbursement for Tree conf. 08/18/2022 191.26 49674 Set of Sweeper Curtains 8/9/22 #25526 08/18/2022 387.13 49675 Sunset Center cooling linework 08/21/22 #082122 08/18/2022 5,200.00 49676 Tree pruning at Best Western Hotel 08/18/2022 3,300.00 49678 Treetopia Confeence training-mileage 08/18/2022 191.26 49681 80 Cases of Mutt Mitts - 8/9/22 #499661 08/18/2022 5,592.73 49682 PW Streets - Vehicle Supplies 08/18/2022 298.34
49683 4 cases of NO PARKING signs. 8/5/22 #113780 08/18/2022 1,037.88 49684 Arboriculture Consulting 08/18/2022 525.00
49686 Services:Pumping oil-water separator 08/18/2022 640.00 49687 Janitorial services 08/18/2022 42,282.70
49688 Treetopia Conference training 08/18/2022 158.76
49691 Engineering for truss structure. 8/2/22 #2202-185 08/18/2022 4,600.00 49692 Esterior window painting at CH 8/3/22 #5217 08/18/2022 3,675.00 49693 Watering at MTNP- 08/18/2022 420.00
49695 PW Supplies & Material, training (Forestry & Fac) 08/18/2022 6,699.05 Total for Department: 119 Public Works 123,461.52
Tope's Tree Service Inc.

US Bank
Stages Unlimited
TNT Painting and Decorating Inc
Pureserve Building Service
Rene Aldama
Ono Consulting
PSTS, Inc.

Napa Auto Parts
National Stock Sign Company
Michael Wood
Mutt Mitt
Granite Fire Protection, Inc
John Ley's Tree Service
Eric Miller
GCS Environmental Equipment Services
De Lage Landen Financial
Edges Electrical Group
Cintas Corporation
Cypress Painting & Decorating, Inc.

Caltronics/J.J.R Enterprises. Inc
Carmel Towing & Garage
Ailing House Pest Control
American Supply Company
Tree Stuff Lockbox No 639707
Underground Service Alert Nor Cal
Scarborough Lumber & Building
Tope's Tree Service Inc.

Rene Aldama
Safeway Sign Co.

Overhead Door Co of Salinas
Poe's Plumbing & Backflow
Monterey Regional Waste Management District
Monterey Sanitary Supply
Mirage Window Cleaning
Monterey County Health Department
Golden State Portables
Martins Irrigation Supply, INC.

Edges Electrical Group
Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.

Cintas Corporation
Core Management Services, LLC
Always Under Pressure
American Lock & Key
Department: 119 Public Works
US Bank
Dept of Health Care Services-Accounting/Cashiers
De Lage Landen Financial
Wittman Enterprises, LLC
Carmel Towing & Garage
Peninsula Welding & Medical Supply, Inc.

Teleflex LLC
Bound Tree Medical LLC
City Of Monterey
Dr. James Stubblefield
Verizon Wireless
Bound Tree Medical LLC
Department: 118 Ambulance
Bound Tree Medical LLC
3 Attachment 1
Check
No.

Vendor/Employee Transaction Description Date Amount
49590 Storage Unit - Document storage 08/08/2022 307.00 Total for Department: 120 Library 307.00
49528 Calling All Crafters! ad 7/15/2022 08/02/2022 800.00 49544 Tents, soil, rock cover & A-frame sign holders 08/02/2022 1,359.07 Total for Department: 121 Community Activities 2,159.07 49527 Water service citywide 08/02/2022 13,574.86
49589 Video cameras citywide 08/08/2022 247.46
49645 Property tax/Prop tax admin fee 08/18/2022 100.55 49653 Citywide gas & electric services 08/18/2022 11,482.78 49685 General Liability, Program I 08/18/2022 1,409.20
Total for Department: 130 Non-Departmental 26,814.85
49660 Traffic Eng. Services 5/26/22 #J4030B 08/18/2022 2,388.75 49677 Engineering plans for CH retainging wall parking lot. 4/2022 #03 08/18/2022 2,540.00 49691 Forest Theater work. 7/14/22 #2022-165 08/18/2022 26,836.71 Total for Department: 311 Capital Projects 31,765.46
49651 CIP:Police Radios lease 122PS-PDRADIO 08/18/2022 10,809.97 Total for Department: 513 Veh & Equip Replacement 10,809.97 Grand Total 1,083,418.28
Schedule of Contract Payments - August
Contract Amt Paid thru Aug
$ 65,830.00 122,000.00 $
$ 236,620.21 2,839,443.00 $ Fire admin
$ 64,936.15 65,000.00 $
$ 121,024.08 160,000.00 $
$ 47,058.67 70,000.00 $
$ 26,179.00 38,840.70 $
$ 42,282.70 250,000.00 $
$ 45,167.75 50,500.00 $
$ 50,600.92 75,000.00 $
$ 21,516.25 22,820.00 $
$ 24,491.25 24,999.00 $
* FY2022-2023 Budget
Vendor
$ 24,399.08
$ 1,303.75
$ 507.75
Pen Messenger
City of Monterey *
Tope's Tree Service
West Coast Arborists
John Ley's Tree Service
J4 Systems
Pureserve *
$ 63.85
$ 38,975.92
$ 22,941.33
$ 12,661.70
$ 207,717.30
$ 5,332.25
Dudek
LSA Associates
4Leaf Inc.

Rincon
Department: 513 Veh & Equip
Motorola Solutions Credit Co. LLC
Stages Unlimited
4Leaf, Inc
Mayone Structural Engineering
Department: 311 Capital
Contract Balance
$ 56,170.00
$ 2,602,822.79
Pacific Gas & Electric
Prism Public Risk Innovation
Pacific Gas & Electric
De Lage Landen Financial
Department: 130 NonCal-Am Water Company
US Bank
Department: 121 Community
Carmel Pine Cone
Department: 120 Library
Pacific Grove Self Storage
4 Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Robert Harary, P.E, Director of Public Works APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Resolution 2022-088, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 2022-088, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

In September 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution 2019-064, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers to prepare the City's first Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) for a not-to-exceed fee of $174,910. This Capital Improvement Project was successfully completed on budget in the fall 2020.

The purpose of the SDMP was to provide an examination of flooding and drainage risks within the City limits and recommend actions necessary to accomplish appropriate level-of-service and reliability for the City’s storm drain system. The SDMP is available on the City’s website under the Public Works main page at: complete_final_sdmp_report_september_2020_small.pdf (carmel.ca.us) The Public Works Director presented the results of the SDMP to the Climate Committee in December 2020 and to the City Council in February 2021. As discussed at these meetings, a majority of the City’s existing storm drainage system was designed to handle a once in 10-year storm event, rather than a 20-year storm event that is far more common in other municipalities. Coupled with increased storm events due to Climate Change, Council and the Climate Committee requested that future drainage upgrades and repairs be sized for 20-year events while also recognizing that repairs and upgrades will require significant funding over a long period of time to minimize the potential of flooding.

At the June 7, 2022 meeting, Council adopted Resolution 2022-048, approving 25 new Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Capital Improvement Projects, including the Citywide Drainage System Repair Design, Phase II.

This project, which is part of that multi-year drainage improvement program, allocated $500,000 to continue the development of drainage system improvement plans to fix the highest and moderate priority broken pipes and bottlenecks, based on the findings of the SDMP. This funding supplements the Drainage System Repairs, Phase I project’s $100,000 carryover funds from FY 2021/22. Nearly $7.5 million will be needed to complete the highest and moderate priority repairs.

In July 2022, Council adopted Resolution 2022-058, awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Wallace Group for Project Management Services for delivery of four Capital Improvement Projects including the Drainage System Repair Design.

In April 2022, requests for Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) were advertised, from San Jose to Sacramento to San Luis Obispo, seeking qualifications from consultants covering 14 professional service areas, including civil engineering services for drainage projects. In May 2022, five SOQs were received for civil engineering services, and a selection committee consisting of the Wallace Group Project Manager, Public Works Director, and Environmental Programs Manager selected Neill Engineers as best qualified to provide drainage system design services, and Schaaf & Wheeler for storm drain master planning services.

During scope of work and contract negotiations with Neill Engineers to design the Project, it was determined that additional analyses needs to be addressed and included into the SDMP as an Addendum before the design and construction drawings of the drainage repairs could proceed.

As shown in Attachment #2, a new Professional Services Agreement was prepared and negotiated with Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the SDMP. Specifically, the scope of work includes the following key elements:
· Amend the SDMP by modeling a 20-year storm event and identifying modifications to previouslyrecommended drainage system upgrades. · Evaluate the potential of constructing a buried detention/storage tank below or nearby Devendorf Park to reduce the need to upsize piping downstream into the Mission Trail Nature Preserve stream and potentially saving millions of construction dollars. · Evaluate the option of installing additional smaller pipelines along portions of Junipero, below Rio Road and outletting into the Carmel River, and at other locations, in lieu of more costly removal of existing pipelines and installing larger pipelines along the same alignments.

The fee to provide these services is $37,625 and has the potential to save significant construction costs. A supplemental services budget of $12,375 is included to provide additional technical support during the engineering work, for a total not-to-exceed fee of $50,000. The analysis is anticipated to be completed within six weeks of a Notice to Proceed.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total budget for the Drainage System Repair Project is $600,000. Of that amount, $58,827 is allocated for Wallace Group for Project Management for this project. The proposed fee for Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the SDMP, including the Supplemental Services budget, of $50,000 leaves a remaining balance of $491,173. All fees for this Project are funded in the Capital Projects Fund, Account No. 301-311-00-43008.

While negotiations have not yet concluded with Neill Engineers, the balance appears more than adequate to design 7 or 8 of the highest priority storm drain upgrades and repairs. The end goal will be to have "shovel ready" construction plans ready as future funding becomes available. Additional funding for construction of the first few of these projects is anticipated to be requested as part of the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Program.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

In September 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution 2019-064 awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers for the SDMP project. in February 2021, the Public Works Director presented an overview of the completed SDMP to the City Council.

In June 2022, Council adopted Resolution 2022-048 approving 25 new FY 2022/23 Capital Improvement Projects, including the Citywide Drainage System Repair Design, Phase II, in the total amount, including the prior year carry-over, of $600,000. In July 2022, Council adopted Resolution 2022-058 awarding a Professional Services Agreement with Wallace Group for Project Management Services for delivery of four Capital Improvement Projects, including the Drainage System Repair Design Project.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2022-088
Attachment 2) Professional Services Agreement with Schaaf & Wheeler

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-088

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO SCHAAF & WHEELER TO AMEND THE CITY’S STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, in September 2019, the City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler to prepare the City’s first Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) for a fee of $174,910; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the SDMP was to analyze flooding risks within the City and recommend actions to accomplish appropriate level-of-service and reliability for the City’s storm drainage system, and the results of the SDMP were presented to Council and the Climate Committee in late 2020 - early 2021; and
WHEREAS, on June 7, 2022, Council adopted Resolution 2022-048 approving Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvement Projects including the Citywide Drainage System Repair Design Phase II, in the amount of $$500,000, and carried-over $100,000 of funding for the Project’s Phase I design; and
WHEREAS, in May 2022, Statements of Qualifications were received for civil engineering services for drainage projects, and an evaluation committee selected Schaaf & Wheeler as best qualified to provide storm drain master planning services; and WHEREAS, negotiations with Schaaf & Wheeler, as well as with another firm selected to design the drainage improvements for construction, revealed that the City’s SDMP should be amended for the following key reasons: a) to model a 20-year storm event in addition to the 10- year event included in the SDMP, to reflect climate change, b) to consider detention options in the vicinity of Devendorf Park to reduce the cost of upsizing the downstream piping into the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, and c) to evaluate options of installing additional, smaller pipelines in lieu of more costly removals of existing pipelines and replacements with larger pipelines; and WHEREAS, a Professional Services Agreement was developed with Schaaf & Wheeler to provide the required services, in a timely manner, for a fee, including a budget for supplemental services, not-to-exceed $50,000, and sufficient funding is available in the Capital Projects Fund.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES HEREBY:

Authorize the City Administrator to execute a Professional Services Agreement to Schaaf & Wheeler to amend the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan for a not-to-exceed fee of $50,000.

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 2022-088

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:
_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Robert Harary, P.E, Director of Public Works APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Resolution 2022-089, waiving a bid irregularity and awarding a three-year, on-call Landscape Maintenance Services contract to Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping, with a not-to-exceed fee for Fiscal Year 2022/23 of $140,000 RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 2022-089, waiving a bid irregularity and awarding a three-year, on-call Landscape Maintenance Services contract to Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping, with a not-to-exceed fee for Fiscal Year 2022/23 of $140,000.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

Following the expiration of the City’s prior landscape services contract at the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/2020, funding restrictions during the Covid-19 Pandemic resulted in the City ceasing funding for contracted landscape maintenance services throughout FY 2020/21 and FY 2021/22. Landscape maintenance was performed to the extent possible by Public Works/Forestry staff, but which also experienced staff vacancies.

During the Pandemic, Carmel Cares volunteers, including their Median Minders group, provided significant help to partially cover the gap of contracted services, and went above and beyond in improving the Scenic Pathway, Devendorf Park, Vista Lobos Park, the Forest Theater site, and the grounds around other City buildings and facilities. The Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve, Garden Club, and other volunteers also provided landscape care. Even with outstanding efforts of Carmel Cares, other volunteers, and Forestry staff, there is still more landscape maintenance work to be performed on an ongoing basis throughout the City. As the City returns to pre-pandemic funding, we can resume contracted landscape maintenance services to supplement work by staff and our partners.

Bid documents and technical specifications were prepared by Public Works, and the Contract was extensively advertised for bids. Legal announcements were placed in the Carmel Pine Cone and The Weekly, and posted on industry, public bidding, and City’s websites. In addition, courtesy calls were made to many local landscaping contractors.

Four landscape contractors attended the Pre-Bid meeting on August 31st; however, only one bid was received and announced at a public Bid Opening held on September 20, 2022.

The sole bidder is Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping. Town & Country was the City’s prior contractor before the Pandemic. Because of the on-call nature of the services, the bid proposal for this new Contract did not include a total cost, but rather fully-burdened hourly rates for the various types of on-call, as-needed services to be performed. These hourly rates include prevailing wages, administrative costs, insurance, bonds, equipment, tools, incidental landscape maintenance materials, vehicles, disposal fees, and profit.

The hourly rates ranged from $45 per hour for general labor for mowing, pruning, weeding, and basic services, $50 to $55 per hour for planting and Scenic Pathway landscaping services, and up to $65 to $75 per hour for irrigation repairs. Work in this Contract will also include: irrigation maintenance, bedding preparation, planting, turf aeration, reseeding, fertilizing, mulch installation; and removal of sand, soil, debris, and litter.

Individual Task Orders will be issued as needed for work at any of 35 job sites, including in and around all City parks, medians, open spaces, pathways, City buildings and parking lots, beach stairs, North Dunes Habitat Restoration Area, Mission Trails Nature Preserve, and along the Scenic Pathway. Public Works will have a dedicated staff member to oversee and manage this contract.

The bid proposal from Town & Country was responsive except for potentially one issue. Specifically, the bidder did not acknowledge receipt of Addendum #1 prior to the Bid Opening. Upon further review, it was discovered that the City posted Addendum #1 on the City's website in one location, but it was not properly linked to another website location. Thus, it is possible, as the bidder contends, that they did not see the Addendum posted on the City's website prior to bidding.

Furthermore, the Public Works Director’s opinion is that Addendum #1 provided only general clarifications and answers to questions asked and answered at the Pre-Bid Meeting which was attended by the bidder; thus, nothing in the Addendum would have made a difference in the hourly rates provided. We discussed this matter with Town & Country who reviewed the Addendum and confirmed, in writing, that none of the hourly rates provided change due to the Addendum. The bid documents also provides a clause that states, "The City reserves the right to reject any or all bids as the best interests of the City may dictate and, to the extent permitted by law, waive any irregularity in any bid." Therefore, it is appropriate that the City Council formally waive the bid irregularity at the time of Contract award.

FISCAL IMPACT:

In June 2022, Council adopted the FY 2022/23 Annual Operating and Capital Budget which allocated $149,000 for landscape maintenance services in the Public Works Department/Forestry Division contractual services Account No. 101-119-45-42001. This amount included up to $24,000 to reimburse Carmel Cares for their contractor who is currently performing landscaping work along the Scenic Pathway, at approximately $2,000 per month.

Assuming the City's contractor takes over this work on the Pathway in November, the City would reimburse Carmel Cares for the first four months of FY 2022/23, or approximately $8,000, leaving a balance in the Forestry budget of $141,000. The proposed contract value for Town & Country is $140,000.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

In June 2022, Council adopted the FY 2022/23 Annual Operating and Capital Budget which allocated $149,000 for landscape maintenance services in the Public Works Department/Forestry Division budget.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2022-089

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-089

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA WAIVING

A BID IRREGULARITY AND AWARDING A THREE-YEAR, ON-CALL LANDSCAPE

MAINTENANCE SERVICES CONTRACT TO TOWN & COUNTRY GARDENING & LANDSCAPING, WITH A NOT-T0-EXCEED FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 OF $140,000 WHEREAS, prior to the Covid-19 Pandemic, the City contracted for landscape maintenance services through the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/2020; however, funding was unavailable for these services during FY 2020/21 and FY 2021/22 until now; and WHEREAS, during the Pandemic, Carmel Cares, Median Minders, Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve, Garden Club, and other volunteers supported Public Works Forestry crews by maintaining the City’s landscaping and upgrading certain locations, notably the Scenic Pathway and Devendorf Park, for which the City is grateful; and WHEREAS, despite these combined best efforts, contracted landscape maintenance services are still warranted to supplement ongoing grounds care across the City; and WHEREAS, bid documents were prepared by Public Works and extensively advertised for bids; and
WHEREAS, despite four bidders attending the pre-bid meeting, only one bid, submitted by Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping, was received at the public Bid Opening held on September 20, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the bid consisted of fully-burdened hourly rates for all services anticipated under the Contract and ranged from $45 to $75 per hour, and will be the basis for individual Task Orders to be issued on an on-call, as-needed basis for work at over 35 job sites; and WHEREAS, the bid proposal did not acknowledge an Addendum; however, the Addendum was not posted by the City on the City’s website in both locations as required. Regardless, the bidder and staff subsequently agreed that the Addendum listed only general clarifications and answers to questions already answered at the pre-bid meeting and would not have changed any hourly rates in the proposal; and
WHEREAS, the City reserves the right to waive any irregularity in any bid, and WHEREAS, the FY 2022/23 operating budget for Public Works/Forestry allocated $149,000 for contracted landscape maintenance, for which approximately $8,000 will reimburse Carmel Cares for their contracted landscaping services along the Scenic Pathway during FY 2022/23, and $140,000 will be encumbered for this Contract.

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 2022-089

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES HEREBY:

Waive a bid irregularity and award a three-year, on-call Landscape Maintenance Services contract to Town & Country Gardening & Landscaping, with a not-to-exceed fee for Fiscal Year 2022/23 of $140,000.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:
_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Jane Wilson, Sr. Human Resources Analyst
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Resolution 2022-090 authorizing the City Administrator to execute an agreement with Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) risk management for the term of October 15, 2022 to June 30, 2023 in an amount not to exceed the $50,000 approved in the FY22-23 budget
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 2022-090 authorizing the City Administrator to execute an agreement with Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) risk management for the term of October 15, 2022 to June 30, 2023 in an amount not to exceed the $50,000 approved in the FY22-23 budget.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea continues to create and maintain industrial safety programs to adhere to safety standards throughout the organization. Due to Human Resources workload, the City budgeted funds in the Fiscal Year 22/23 operating budget specifically for risk management to keep the City up-to-date and in compliance with all standards. Based on a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), the City received five (5) proposals. The City selected PRISM based on their pre-screened, highly-qualified risk management consultants that have worked with multiple municipalities and have proven track record of developing and implementing successful risk management workplans. PRISM contracts with multiple risk management consultants that the City will work with to develop, fine-tune and implement safety training, tracking processes and tools for the City based on Cal/OSHA regulations. This is to ensure timely and up-to-date management of the City’s safety program with a goal to prevent and mitigate occupational hazards and comply with regulatory requirements.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted Budget includes funding for this purpose.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

None
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2022-090
Attachment 2) PRISM Agreement - Member
Attachment 3) PRISM Agreement - Consultant

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-090

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH PUBLIC

RISK INNOVATION, SOLUTIONS, AND MANAGEMENT (PRISM) RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE TERM OF OCTOBER 15, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023 IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED THE $50,000 APPROVED IN THE FY22-23 BUDGET.

WHEREAS, the City wishes to enhance their Illness and Injury Prevention Plan to include more robust employee training and usage protocols; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to expand and further implement a robust safety training matrix for each department and monitoring processes therein; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to expand Safety Committee practices and processes to create and maintain industrial safety programs; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to audit existing safety programs and expand training protocols for these programs; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter into an agreement with PRISM for services related to the City’s safety program not to exceed $50,000 that requires Council approval in accordance with the Carmel Municipal Code.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES HEREBY:

Authorize the City Administrator to execute an agreement with Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) risk management for the term of October 15, 2022 to June 30, 2023 in an amount not to exceed the $50,000 approved in the FY22-23 budget.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:
_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1
Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) Enterprise Risk Consultant Services
Member Agreement
Consultant:

Member: Assignment No.

This AGREEMENT is entered into by and between (“Member”) and the undersigned Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (“PRISM”) and governs the procurement and ongoing use of the Enterprise Risk Consultant Services (hereinafter “Program) described in this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT is effective for the term as outlined in Exhibit A (Scope of Services and Fees), pursuant to the termination provisions set forth under paragraph 6 of this AGREEMENT.

1. Scope of Services: The Consultant will provide services to Member as specified under the AGREEMENT between the Consultant and PRISM. The Consultant and Member shall determine the specific scope of work Member desires, as outlined in Exhibit A, Assignment No. .PRISM shall take no role in determining or advocating any specific scope of work for the Consultant, unless specifically requested by the Member.

2. Fees: PRISM shall be responsible for direct payment of the feesto ("Consultant") on behalf of Member receiving services. Paymentsfor servicesrendered by the Consultant under this Program shall be invoiced to PRISM with a copy to the Member. Once the Member has confirmed the invoice is accurate, PRISM will processthe invoice for payment to the Consultant. PRISM shall submit to Member an invoice for fees, costs, or expenses connected with services provided under this Program for the total cost of services accessed by Member (See Exhibit A, Assignment No. ______).

The fee shall be due and payable to PRISMon or before 30 days from the invoice date. The total invoiced amount for this Assignment shall not exceed $ without prior written approval from the Member.

3. Supplemental Engagement(s): Should Member elect to retain the Consultant separately for services that are supplemental to those provided under the AGREEMENT, Member and the Consultant shall establish a separate engagement with scope of work and deliverables to be determined at the time ofsaid engagement. Fees and/or costs for any supplemental services shall be determined at the time of engagement. These services will not be subject to oversight or administration by PRISM under the Enterprise Risk Consultant Program.

4. Independent Contractor: While performing services, the Consultant will be acting as an independent contractor and not an employee of PRISM or any Member.

Attachment 2
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Member Agreement - 2
Revision Date 8.29.22

5. Insurance and Indemnity:

5.1.a. CONSULTANT shall procure the following required insurance coverage at his/her sole cost and expense. Such insurance coverage, in the minimum limits as specified below, shall be maintained during the term of this AGREEMENT and shall name both PRISM and the Member as additional named insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT.

CONSULTANT shall maintain in force and effect the required workers’ compensation insurance, comprehensive general liability insurance, professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, and coverage required by PRISM during the term of this AGREEMENT and shall provide proof of insurance in the form and manner specified by PRISM.
i. Workers’ Compensation Insurance: CONSULTANT shall provide and maintain for all employees of CONSULTANT engaged in work under this AGREEMENT Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code Section 3700. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for Workers’ Compensation Insurance for any subcontractor who directly or indirectly provides services under this AGREEMENT. To the extent that CONSULTANT may have principals performing work under this AGREEMENT who are not covered by Workers’ Compensation insurance CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless PRISM and Member, its officers and directors from any and all liabilities for injuries or illness incurred, or claimed to be incurred by those individuals while performing work hereunder. Should CONSULTANT not have any employees,or subcontractors, CONSULTANT must certify that fact to PRISM and PRISM shall waive any requirement for Workers’ Compensation insurance under this provision.
ii. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance: Minimum coverage of $2,000,000 combined single limit to include:

Premises/Operations
Independent Contractors
Products/Completed Operations
Blanket Contractual
Broad Form Property Damage Endorsement
iii. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance: Minimum limit of $2,000,000 per occurrence.
iv. Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of coverage of $1,000,000 combined single limit including owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.

5.1.b If requested by the CONSULTANT, PRISM will provide insurance for assignments by adding the CONSULTANT as an Additional Named Insured to PRISM’s Comprehensive General Liability, Professional Liability (including Errors & Omissions), and Automobile Liability policies. If this occurs, Member will be named as an additional named insured on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT will remain responsible for providing his/her own Workers’ Compensation insurance in accordance with Attachment 2
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Member Agreement - 3
Revision Date 8.29.22
the requirements set forth above.
i. If PRISM provides insurance for assignments by adding CONSULTANT as an Additional Named Inured to PRISM’s insurance policies, PRISM shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with PRISM or CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.

5.1.c. If the CONSULTANT will be providing his/her own insurance, CONSULTANT shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify PRISM and the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with the CONSULTANT’s performance of work hereunder or his/her failure to comply with any of his/her obligations contained in the AGREEMENT, except such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of PRISM or the Member.

If the CONSULTANT will be providing his/her own insurance, PRISM shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with PRISM’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.

6. Term and Termination.

6.1. Term: The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on the Effective Date listed in Exhibit A, and will remain in full force and effect until terminated by either party in accordance with paragraphs 6.2. or 6.3.

6.2. Cancellation with Cause. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party (the “Terminating Party”) with fifteen (15) days prior written notice in the event that the other party (the “Breaching Party”) breaches any material term or condition of the AGREEMENT; provided, however, that such notice must have first identified the nature and scope of the claimed breach, affording an opportunity to the Breaching Party to cure the breach, and the Breaching Party must have failed to cure the breach within thirty (30) days of receiving such notice.

6.3. Cancellation without Cause. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party, in advance of expiration, for no reason or for any reason, other than for material breach of its terms or conditions, (collectively, “without cause”), by the Terminating Party giving the other party at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to the effective date of cancellation. If Member cancels without cause, the Consultant will cease rendering any included services on the effective date of cancellation. If the Consultant cancels without cause, the Consultant will continue, if Member desires, to perform included services for all assignments remaining open, up to the effective date of cancellation.

6.4. Should Member accessing services under this Program be dissatisfied with the Consultant, Member shall immediately notify PRISM. PRISM and Member shall discuss any deficiencies or other concerns regarding the services provided by the Consultant. If Member advises PRISM that Member wishes to terminate the services of the Consultant, then the consulting agreement shall be immediately terminated. Thetermination of the Consultant by any Member under this Program shall not affect the termination provisions as set forth between the Consultant and PRISM.

Attachment 2
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Member Agreement - 4
Revision Date 8.29.22

7. Materials: All materials accessed and provided to a Member under this Program shall be specifically for use by the Member. No other use of these materials, except for use under this AGREEMENT, is expressly or impliedly given.

8. Data: Member shall be the owner of all information or data collected for services rendered by the Consultant, including information or data that relates to the Member(s) access to services of the Consultant, except any data that PRISM deems necessary for compensating the Consultant, audits or other purposes reasonably deemed necessary by PRISM. The Consultant shall not release any materials under this section except after prior approval of the accessing Member or as required by this AGREEMENT or by law.

9. Mutual Warranties and Disclaimer: Each party represents and warrants that it has full authority to enter into this AGREEMENT and to fully perform its obligations hereunder.

10. Governing Law. This AGREEMENT shall be governed by, and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the state of California. Any civil action or legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this AGREEMENT shall be brought in the courts of record of the State of California.

11. Arbitration. If a dispute arises out of or relates to this AGREEMENT, or the breach thereof, the parties endeavor to resolve the dispute by cooperative mutual agreement. Any controversy, claim or dispute arising out of or relating to this AGREEMENT, that cannot be resolved by the parties shall be settled solely and exclusively by binding arbitration in Sacramento, California. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the then prevailing commercial arbitration rules of JAMS/Endispute ("JAMS"), with the following exceptions if in conflict: (a) one arbitrator shall be chosen by JAMS; (b) each party to the arbitration will equally share the expenses and fees of the arbitrator, together with other expenses of the arbitration incurred or approved by the arbitrator; and (c) arbitration may proceed in the absence of any party if written notice (pursuant to the JAMS' rules and regulations) of the proceedings has been given to such party.

Each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and expenses. The parties agree to abide by all decisions and awards rendered in such proceedings. Such decisions and awards rendered by the arbitratorshall be final and conclusive. All such controversies, claims or disputes shall be settled in this manner in lieu of any action at law or equity. The arbitrator shall not have the right to award punitive damages or speculative damages to either party and shall not have the power to amend this AGREEMENT. The arbitrator shall be required to follow applicable law.

12. No Waiver. No waiver, amendment or modification of this AGREEMENT shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties.

13. Severability. If any provision of this AGREEMENT is found to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be of no force or effect; but the remainder of this AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect.

14. Entire AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT and its exhibits represent the entire understanding and agreement between the Member and PRISM, and supersedes all other negotiations, proposals, Attachment 2
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Member Agreement - 5
Revision Date 8.29.22
understandings and representations (written or oral) made by and between the Member and PRISM on the subject matter of the AGREEMENT.

Participating Member Name Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM)
Name:

Signature:

Title:

Name:

Signature:

Title:

Date: Date:

Attachment 2
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Member Agreement - 6
Revision Date 8.29.22
Exhibit A: Scope of Services and Fees
Consultant: ________________________
Member: __________________________ Assignment No.: ________________________ Effective Date: This AGREEMENT is effective on .

Start Date: ________________________________________________________________________ End Date: _________________________________________________________________________ Termination is subject to the provisions of paragraph 6 of the Member Agreement.

Fee Schedule: PRISM shall pay the Consultant at the rate of $ per hour for services performed under this AGREEMENT and payments shall not exceed $ without prior written approval from the Member. Payment will be made .

Services Provided: This is a service that will provide participating Members with the ability to contract for Consultant services through PRISM’s “Enterprise Risk Consultant” Program. The Consultant will provide the specific services contracted for by Member, which may include any of the following:

Accident Investigation
Actuarial Services
Budgets
Business Continuity
Cal/OSHA Rules & Regulations
Claims Management
Compliance
Conflict Resolution
Construction Management
Contingency Planning
Contracts/Negotiations
Crisis Management
Cyber Risk
Data Loss Prevention
Disaster Recovery
Employment Practices Liability
Ergonomics Emerging Risks
Facilities Management
Finance
Group Administration
Health and Benefits
Hedging
Human Resources
Information Technology
InsurancePolicyCoverage/Review
Insurance Requirements
Litigation Management
Program Governance
Program Implementation
Project Management
Records Management
Return – to - Work
Risk Assessment
Risk Financing
Risk Mgmt. Princ. & Practices
Risk Mitigation Risk Reporting
Safety, Loss Control/Prevention
Safety Training
Strategic Planning
Team Meetings
Technology Risk
Underwriting
Other:

A specific Scope of Work is attached to this Exhibit.

Supplemental Engagement(s): Should Member elect to retain the Consultant separately for services that are supplemental to those provided under the AGREEMENT, Member and the Consultant shall establish a separate engagement with scope of work and deliverables to be determined at the time of said engagement. Fees and/or costs for any supplemental services shall be determined at the time of engagement. These services will not be subject to oversight or administration by PRISM under the Enterprise Risk Consultant Program.

Administration: This Program for Members shall be administered directly by PRISM in accordance with the terms of PRISM’s Agreement with Consultant.

Attachment 2
HR v. 9-21-22 Page 1 of 1
PRISM Agreements #2 and #3
Attachment to Exhibit A
Scope of Work

1. Expand and implement a robust, hyperlinked safety training matrix for each department based on an existing template. Develop a process to monitor and address completions, and to perform timely updates from Cal-OSHA and other regulatory bodies. Develop process for how to use by departments.

2. Refine existing IIPP document including checklists and forms. Develop employee training and usage protocols to ensure compliance. Develop a process to monitor and address training, usage and performing timely updates from Cal-OSHA and other regulatory bodies.

Implement initial training.

3. Expand and refine Safety Committee practices and processes to create and maintain industrial safety programs, ensure City-wide department representation, and help employees and departments adhere and be accountable to safety standards. Develop a short orientation for new members. Initiate first meeting using practices, processes and orientation.

4. Audit following programs and recommend any fine-tuning. Develop a plan for how and when to undertake training of employees on programs.
• Injury & Illness Prevention Program
• Emergency Action
• Hazard Communication Program
• Blood-borne Pathogens
• Fall Protection
• Lockout Tag-out and Energy Control
• Fundamentals of Hazard Assessment
• Accident Investigation Basics
• Job Hazard Assessment (JHA) Essentials

5. Recommend solutions to any outstanding or outdated sub-programs, processes and tools found during the course of performing above-mentioned tasks. Rank in order of importance to address. Address based on level of importance and as time permits.

Attachment 2
Exhibit B: Pool Service Providers’ Bill of Rights
Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) recognizes its place as one of the premier organizations in the public entity pooling industry. We are constantly striving to achieve the goals of excellence in governance and management by conducting our official business with social responsibility that will encourage public trust.

PRISM has established standards that our business partners – pool service providers (PSP’s) – should expect in serving PRISM and its Members. The basic rights that PSP’s should expect while providing services to PRISM, include the following:
5 PSP’s should expect to be treated consistently with dignity, respect, and professionalism. 6 PSP’s should not be expected to provide gifts, perks or other benefits to Members of the Board of Directors or Committees, orstaff Members(or any person or organization associated with them) as a condition of doing business with the pool. 7 PSP’s should expect fair and equitable treatment in the procurement process. Every competitive bidding process should be open, well defined and transparent. PRISM recognizes that there is a direct cost to the PSP in preparing every service proposal. 8 PSP’s should expect to have a written service agreement with PRISM specifying all terms and conditions of the contractual relationship.
9 PSP’sshould only be expected to provide services contained within the scope of the service agreement.
10PSP’s should be paid in a timely manner for services rendered in accordance with the provisions of the service agreement.

Service Providers’ Bill of Rights Page 1 of 1
Approved June 1, 2007
Attachment 2
Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) Enterprise Risk Consultant Services
Consultant Agreement
Consultant:

Member: Assignment No.

This AGREEMENT is entered into by and between and
the undersigned Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (“PRISM”) and governs the procurement and ongoing use of the Enterprise Risk Consultant (hereinafter “Consultant”) services described in this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be effective beginning and shall terminate .

The AGREEMENT may be renewed thereafter on such terms as mutually agreed upon by the parties. This AGREEMENT provides for services under PRISM’s “Enterprise Risk Consultant” Program (hereinafter “Program”).

1. Access: PRISM Member entities eligible to access this Program include any participating entity Member, including risk pools that are Members of PRISM (hereinafter “Member or Members”). The participating Member agrees that this AGREEMENT has been negotiated on their behalf and that PRISM will be responsible for administration of the Program.

2. Services: The Consultant shall provide services to PRISM Members under PRISM’s “Enterprise Risk Consultant” Program. The Consultant and Member shall determine the specific scope of work Member desires and the resulting scope document will be attached as Exhibit A, Member Name: , Assignment No._ _ _ _ , to PRISM’s Agreement with the Member. An example of the scope document is attached hereto as Exhibit A: Scope of Services and Fees. PRISM shall take no role in determining or advocating any specific scope of work for the Consultant, unless specifically requested by Member.

3. Independent Contractor: While performing services under this Agreement, the Consultant will be acting as an independent contractor and not as an officer, agent or employee of PRISM or any individual Member. The Consultant will comply with all Federal and State laws and regulations for payment of all applicable taxes and benefits.

4. Fees and Payments:

4.1. Payments for services rendered by the Consultant under this Program shall be invoiced on a monthly basis to PRISM with a copy to the Member. Once the Member has confirmed the Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 2 Revision Date 8.29.22
invoice is accurate, PRISM will process the invoice for payment to the Consultant.

4.2. PRISM shall be responsible for direct payment of the agreed upon fee to the Consultant from fees invoiced to the Members participating under this AGREEMENT and who are accessing Consultant services under this Program.

4.3. The Consultant shall not submit any invoice to participating Members for fees, costs, or expenses of any kind connected with the services provided pursuant to this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed between PRISM, Member and the Consultant. Should any individual Member elect to retain the Consultant for services that are outside this Agreement, the Consultant and the Member shall enter into a separate engagement with scope of work to be determined by the parties to that separate and additional engagement.

5. Confidentiality:

5.1. The Consultant will treat all information received in the course of performance of this AGREEMENT as confidential. Confidential information is that information obtained solely as a result of work for an individual Member and not available in the public domain. Such information may include, but is not limited to, attorney-client or attorney work product, personnel matters, other confidential matters, including medical information, any other information provided to the Consultant in the performance of service pursuant to this AGREEMENT that Member deems confidential.

5.2. The Consultant shall not disclose or appropriate for its own use, or to the use of any third party, at any time during or subsequent to the term of this Agreement, any confidential information of the Member or PRISM, whether or not developed by the Consultant, including, but not limited to, information pertaining to, services, methods, processes, contract terms or operating procedures, except as required in connection with the Consultant’s performance of this Agreement, or as required by a government authority or California law. Should any confidential information be disclosed; the Consultant will immediately notify Member and PRISM of the nature and extent of such disclosure.

6. Term and Termination:

6.1. Term: The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on the Effective Date, and will remain in full force and effect until terminated by either party in accordance with paragraphs 6.2. and

6.3. 6.2. Cancellation with Cause. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party (the “Terminating Party”) with fifteen (15) days prior written notice in the event that the other party (the “Breaching Party”) breaches any material term or condition of the Agreement; provided, however, that such notice must have first identified the nature and scope of the claimed breach, affording an opportunity to the Breaching Party to cure the breach, and the Breaching Party must have failed to cure the breach within thirty (30) days of receiving such notice. If PRISM cancels for cause, any prepaid service fees from the effective date of cancellation to the anniversary of Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 3 Revision Date 8.29.22
the Agreement’s term shall be prorated and refunded to PRISM within thirty (30) days following the effective date of cancellation; and, if the fifteen (15) day notice period crosses over into the next term month of the Agreement, PRISM will pay the pro-rated monthly fees for the period from the next term month of the AGREEMENT to the effective date of cancellation.

6.3. Cancellation without Cause. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party, in advance of expiration, for no reason or for any reason, other than for material breach of its terms or conditions, (collectively, “without cause”), by the Terminating Party giving the other party at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to the effective date of cancellation. If PRISM cancels without cause, the Consultant will cease rendering any included services on the effective date of cancellation. If the sixty (60) day notice period does not cross over a month of the Agreement’s term, any prepaid service fees for the period of time from the effective date of cancellation to the anniversary of the Agreement’s term shall be prorated and refunded to PRISM within thirty (30) days following the effective date of cancellation; and, if the sixty (60) day notice period does cross over an anniversary date of the Agreement’s term, PRISM will pay the pro-rated monthly fees for the period from the next term month of the AGREEMENT to the effective date of cancellation, on or prior to the next term month of the Agreement. If the Consultant cancels without cause, the Consultant will continue, if Member desires, to perform included services for all assignments remaining open, up to the effective date of cancellation.

6.4. Should any Member accessing services under this Program be dissatisfied with the Consultant, Member shall immediately notify PRISM. PRISM and Member shall discuss any deficiencies or other concerns regarding the services provided by the Consultant. If Member advises PRISM that Member wishes to terminate the services of the Consultant, then the consulting assignment shall be immediately terminated. The termination of the Consultant assignment by any Member under this Program shall not affect the termination provisions as set forth above between the Consultant and PRISM.

Upon termination of this AGREEMENT and upon request, the Consultant shall provide PRISM with any data or records it has retained as part of the Program.

7. Mutual Warranties and Disclaimer:

7.1. Mutual Representations & Warranties. Each party represents and warrants that it has full authority to enter into this AGREEMENT and to fully perform its obligations hereunder.

8. Miscellaneous:

8.1. Insurance and Indemnity:

8.1.a. CONSULTANT shall procure the following required insurance coverage at his/hersole cost and expense. Certificate(s) of insurance shall be furnished to PRISM prior to this AGREEMENT becoming effective. Such insurance coverage, in the minimum limits as specified below, shall be maintained during the term of this AGREEMENT and shall name both PRISM and the Member as additional named insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 4 Revision Date 8.29.22
operations performed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT. Failure to comply with the insurance requirements shall place CONSULTANT in default. Upon request by PRISM, CONSULTANT shall provide copies of any insurance policies to PRISM within ten (10) working days. PRISM may periodically review the minimum limits of CONSULTANT’s policies for the required insurance coverage. In the event of a change in the minimum limits, CONSULTANT shall inform PRISM of such change by giving written notice to PRISM no less than sixty (60) days prior to the effective date of such change. All said policy or policies shall provide that PRISM shall be given thirty (30) days written notice prior to cancellation or expiration of the policy or material change or reduction in coverage.

The Scope of Work is incorporated into and made a part of the PRISM AGREEMENT for Services for Outside Vendors. CONSULTANT will comply with the terms and conditions of the standard AGREEMENT for Services pertaining to insurance, indemnification, documentation and performance obligations.

CONSULTANT shall maintain in force and effect the required workers’ compensation insurance, comprehensive general liability insurance, professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, coverage required by PRISM during the term of this AGREEMENT and shall provide proof of insurance in the form and manner specified by PRISM. i. Workers’ Compensation Insurance: CONSULTANT shall provide and maintain for all employees of CONSULTANT engaged in work under this AGREEMENT Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code Section 3700. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for Workers’ Compensation Insurance for any subcontractor who directly or indirectly provides services under this Agreement. To the extent that CONSULTANT may have principals performing work under this AGREEMENT who are not covered by Workers’ Compensation insurance CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless PRISM and Member, its officers and directors from any and all liabilities for injuries or illness incurred, or claimed to be incurred by those individuals while performing work hereunder. Should CONSULTANT not have any employees, or subcontractors, CONSULTANT must certify that fact to PRISM and PRISM shall waive any requirement for Workers’ Compensation insurance under this provision. ii. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance: Minimum coverage of $2,000,000 combined single limit to include:

Premises/Operations
Independent Contractors
Products/Completed
Operations Blanket
Contractual
Broad Form Property Damage Endorsement
iii. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance: Minimum limit of $2,000,000 per occurrence.

Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 5 Revision Date 8.29.22
iv. Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of coverage of
$1,000,000 combined single limit including owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.

8.1.b If requested by the CONSULTANT, PRISM will provide insurance for assignments by adding the CONSULTANT as an Additional Named Insured to PRISM’s Comprehensive General Liability, Professional Liability (including Errors & Omissions), and Automobile Liability policies. .

If this occurs, Member will be named as an additional named insured on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT.

CONSULTANT will remain responsible for providing his/her own workers’ compensation insurance in accordance with the requirements set forth above.

8.1.c
i. If PRISM provides insurance for assignments by adding CONSULTANT as an Additional Named Inured to PRISM ’s insurance policies, PRISM shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with PRISM’s or CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.
ii. If PRISM provides insurance for assignments by adding CONSULTANT as an Additional Named Inured to PRISM ’s insurance policies PRISM shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the CONSULTANT from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with PRISM ’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.

8.1.d. If the CONSULTANT will be providing his/her own insurance, CONSULTANT shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify PRISM and the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with the CONSULTANT’s performance of work hereunder or his/her failure to comply with any of his/her obligations contained in the AGREEMENT, except such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of PRISM or the Member.

If the CONSULTANT will be providing his/her own insurance, PRISM shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the Member from any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, in connection with PRISM’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.

8.2. Assignment. Neither party may assign or delegate its rights or obligations pursuant to this AGREEMENT without the prior written consent of the other, provided that such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant may not freely assign or transfer any or all rights without PRISM consent.

Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 6 Revision Date 8.29.22

8.3. Governing Law. This AGREEMENT shall be governed by, and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the state of California. Any civil action or legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this AGREEMENT shall be brought in the courts of record of the State of California.

8.4. Arbitration. If a dispute arises out of or relates to this Agreement, the breach thereof, the services rendered to the Member, or any dispute between Consultant and Member, the parties endeavor to resolve the dispute by cooperative mutual agreement. Any controversy, claim or dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement or arising or relating to any of Consultant’s work for Member that cannot be resolved by the parties shall be settled solely and exclusively by binding arbitration in Sacramento, California. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the then prevailing commercial arbitration rules of JAMS/Endispute("JAMS"), with the following exceptions if in conflict: (a) one arbitrator shall be chosen by JAMS; (b) each party to the arbitration will equally share the expenses and fees of the arbitrator, together with other expenses of the arbitration incurred or approved by the arbitrator; and (c) arbitration may proceed in the absence of any party if written notice (pursuant to the JAMS' rules and regulations) of the proceedings has been given to such party.

Each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and expenses. The parties agree to abide by all decisions and awards rendered in such proceedings. Such decisions and awards rendered by the arbitratorshall be final and conclusive. All such controversies, claims or disputes shall be settled in this manner in
lieu of any action at law or equity. The arbitrator shall not have the right to award punitive damages or speculative damages to either party and shall not have the power to amend this Agreement. The arbitrator shall be required to follow applicable law.

8.5. Force Majeure. The Consultant shall have no liability for any failure or delay in performing any of its obligations pursuant to this AGREEMENT due to, or arising out of, any act not within its control, including, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, war, riots, lightning, fire, storm, flood, explosion, interruption or delay in power supply, computer virus, governmental laws, regulations or other restraints.

8.6. No Waiver. No waiver, amendment or modification of this AGREEMENT shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties.

8.7. Severability. If any provision of this AGREEMENT is found to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be of no force or effect; but the remainder of this AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect.

8.8. Entire Agreement. This AGREEMENT and its exhibits represent the entire understanding and agreement between the Consultant and PRISM, and supersede all other negotiations, proposals, understandings and representations (written or oral) made by and between the Consultant and PRISM.

8.9. Conflict of Interest. The Consultant agrees that he/she presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in practice and might result in Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 7 Revision Date 8.29.22
unlawful activity including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, or other unlawful considerations.

8.10. Retirement Plan Compliance. The Consultant is responsible for complying with any and all legal requirements based upon Consultant’s participation in any of the following California state retirement plans, including but not limited to, CalPERS, ‘37 Act, CalSTRS or any other comparable state plan or a comparable plan of any other state, before initiating work through PRISM’s Enterprise Risk Consultant Program. The Consultant hereby agrees that by signing this Agreement, he/she is confirming his/her eligibility to participate as an independent consultant.

8.11. Notices. Any notice required to be given to the Consultant shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if any of the following have been completed: notice mailed to the Consultant, postage prepaid, and sent to the address below or personally delivered to the Consultant at such address or at such other addresses as the Consultant may designate in writing to PRISM; or emailed to the below email address.

Any notice required to be given PRISM shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if any of the following have been completed: notice mailed to PRISM, postage prepaid, and sent to the address below or personally delivered to PRISM at such address or at such other addresses as PRISM may designate in writing to the Consultant; or emailed to the below email address:

Public Risk Innovation,
Solutions, and Management
(PRISM) Attn: Rick Brush
75 Iron Point Circle, Suite 200
Folsom, CA 95630
Email: [email protected]
Consultant
Attn:

Address:
__________________________________
__________________________________
Email:

8.12. Service Providers’ Bill of Rights: PRISM hereby agrees to abide by the Pool Service Providers’ Bill of Rights as approved by the PRISM Board of Directors on June 1, 2007, and attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

For Public Risk Innovation, For
Consultant Solutions, and Management (PRISM)
Signature below:

Name: Rick Brush Name:

Title: Chief Member Services Officer Title:

Attachment 3
PRISM Enterprise Risk Consultant; Consultant Agreement - 8 Revision Date 8.29.22
Date: Date:

Attachment 3
Exhibit A: Scope of Services and Fees
Consultant: _________________________
Member: __________________________ Assignment No.

This AGREEMENT is effective on .

Start Date: ____________________________________________________________________________ End Date: ____________________________________________________________________________ Termination is subject to the provisions of paragraph 6 of the Member Agreement.

Fee Schedule: PRISM shall pay the Consultant at the rate of $ per hour for services performed under this AGREEMENT and payments shall not exceed $ without prior written approval from the Member. Payment will be made monthly.

Services Provided: This is a service that will provide participating Members with the ability to contract for Consultant services through the PRISM’s “Enterprise Risk Consultant” Program. The Consultant will provide the specific services contracted for by Member, which may include any of the following:
☐ Accident Investigation
☐ Actuarial Services
☐ Budgets
☐ Business Continuity
☐ Cal/OSHA Rules
& Regulations
☐ Claims Management
☐ Compliance
☐ Conflict Resolution
☐ Construction Mgmnt.
☐ Contingency Planning
☐ Contracts/Negotiation
s
☐ Crisis Management
☐ Cyber Risk
☐ Data Loss Prevention
☐ Disaster Recovery
☐ Employment Practices
Liability
☐ Ergonomics
☐ Emerging Risks
☐ Facilities Management
☐ Finance
☐ Group Administration
☐ Health & Benefits
☐ Hedging
☐ Human Resources
☐ Information Technology
☐ Insurance Policy Coverage/
Review Insurance Reqs.
☐ Litigation Management
☐ Program Governance
☐ Program Implementation
☐ Project Management
☐ Records Management
☐ Return – to – Work
☐ Risk Assessment
☐ Risk Financing
☐ Risk Mgmt. Princ. & Pracs.
☐ Risk Mitigation
☐ Risk Reporting
☐ Safety, Loss Control/ Prev.
☐ Safety Training
☐ Strategic
Planning / Team
Meetings
☐ Technology Risk
☐ Underwriting
☐ Other:

A specific Scope of Work is attached to this Exhibit.

Supplemental Engagement(s): Should Member elect to retain the Consultant separately for services that are supplemental to those provided under the AGREEMENT, Member and the Consultant shall establish a separate engagement with scope of work and deliverables to be determined at the time of said engagement. Fees and/or costs for any supplemental services shall be determined at the time of engagement. These services will not be subject to oversight or administration by PRISM under the Enterprise Risk Consultant Program.

Administration: This Program for Members shall be administered directly by PRISM in accordance with the terms of PRISM’s Agreement with Consultant.

Attachment 3
HR v. 9-21-22 Page 1 of 1
PRISM Agreements #2 and #3
Attachment to Exhibit A
Scope of Work

1. Expand and implement a robust, hyperlinked safety training matrix for each department based on an existing template. Develop a process to monitor and address completions, and to perform timely updates from Cal-OSHA and other regulatory bodies. Develop process for how to use by departments.

2. Refine existing IIPP document including checklists and forms. Develop employee training and usage protocols to ensure compliance. Develop a process to monitor and address training, usage and performing timely updates from Cal-OSHA and other regulatory bodies.

Implement initial training.

3. Expand and refine Safety Committee practices and processes to create and maintain industrial safety programs, ensure City-wide department representation, and help employees and departments adhere and be accountable to safety standards. Develop a short orientation for new members. Initiate first meeting using practices, processes and orientation.

4. Audit following programs and recommend any fine-tuning. Develop a plan for how and when to undertake training of employees on programs.
• Injury & Illness Prevention Program
• Emergency Action
• Hazard Communication Program
• Blood-borne Pathogens
• Fall Protection
• Lockout Tag-out and Energy Control
• Fundamentals of Hazard Assessment
• Accident Investigation Basics
• Job Hazard Assessment (JHA) Essentials

5. Recommend solutions to any outstanding or outdated sub-programs, processes and tools found during the course of performing above-mentioned tasks. Rank in order of importance to address. Address based on level of importance and as time permits.

Attachment 3
Exhibit B: Pool Service Providers’ Bill of Rights
Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) recognizes its place as one of the premier organizations in the public entity pooling industry. We are constantly striving to achieve the goals of excellence in governance and management by conducting our official business with social responsibility that will encourage public trust.

PRISM has established standards that our business partners – pool service providers (PSP’s) – should expect in serving PRISM and its Members. The basic rights that PSP’s should expect while providing services to PRISM, include the following:

1. PSP’sshould expect to be treated consistently with dignity, respect, and professionalism.

2. PSP’s should not be expected to provide gifts, perks or other benefits to Members of the Board of Directors or Committees, or staff Members (or any person or organization associated with them) as a condition of doing business with the pool.

3. PSP’s should expect fair and equitable treatment in the procurement process. Every competitive bidding process should be open, well defined and transparent. PRISM recognizes that there is a direct cost to the PSP in preparing every service proposal.

4. PSP’s should expect to have a written service agreement with PRISM specifying all terms and conditions of the contractual relationship.

5. PSP’s should only be expected to provide services contained within the scope of the service agreement.

6. PSP’s should be paid in a timely manner for services rendered in accordance with the provisions of the service agreement.

Service Providers’ Bill of Rights Page 1 of 1
Approved June 1, 2007
Attachment 3

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Nova Romero, City Clerk
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Resolution 2022-091 approving a supplemental budget appropriation to the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted budget for Discretionary Grants in the amount of $1,000 for the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 2022-091 approving a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $1,000 to the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 adopted budget for discretionary grants for the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The Lyceum Monterey County Mock Trial program is an educational program which introduces local high school students to the American legal system. Every year, Mock Trial Teams from participating local high schools are provided a case, and each team creates both a prosecution and defense argument. This year, the Carmel High School (CHS) Mock Trial Team won an unprecendented 8th straight championship at the Monterey County annual mock trial finals. The CHS Mock Trial Team then went on to win third place at the State level, and will now be competing at the October Empire World Championship in Chicago. The travel cost for the students to compete in the Empire World Championship is $35,000.

The City Council expressed a desire to support the CHS Mock Trial Team by awarding a $1,000 grant donation from the discretionary grant fund budget to help offset the travel expenses to the Chicago Championship. This Resolution will authorize the supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $1,000 to award the grant to the CHS Mock Trial Team.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Decrease of $1,000 from the general fund ending balance and increase of $1,000 to the discretionary grant fund for the FY 22-23 budget in the Community Promotions account 101-110-00-42005.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2022-091

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-091

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2022- 2023 ADOPTED BUDGET FOR DISCRETIONARY GRANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000 FOR

THE CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL TEAM
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2022-048 approving the Fiscal year 2022-2023 Adopted Budget on June 7th, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes of the accomplishments of the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team, winning their 8th Straight Championship in the Monterey County 2022 Mock Trial Finals, and their success at the State Championship; and WHEREAS, the City supports the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team in competing at the National level, in the October Empire World Championship in Chicago; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to donate $1,000 the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team to help offset the travel costs to compete at the World Championship in October.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES HEREBY:

Approves a supplemental budget appropriation to the Fiscal year 2022-2023 adopted budget for discretionary grants in the amount of $1,000 for the Carmel High School Mock Trial Team from the Council’s Community Promotions amount 101-110-00-42005.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 2022-091

_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Alan Ward, Police Chief
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Resolution 2022-092 authorizing the City Administrator to execute a purchase agreement for the purchase of a One (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07) for a not to exceed in the amount of $880,000 RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 2022-092 authorizing the City Administrator to execute a purchase agreement for the purchase of a One (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07) for a not to exceed in the amount of $880,000.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City of Carmel presently owns two fire engines that are leased to the Monterey Fire Department to use under the contract for Fire Services between the cities of Carmel and Monterey. One engine is a 2009 Pierce (with 49,000 miles on it) and is currently in front-line status. The second engine is a 2000 E-One (with 51,000 miles on it) that serves in reserve status. The Fire engine was scheduled for replacement in the FY 23/24 Capital Improvement Project schedule, however, due to increased costs rising quickly, the City is recommending to purchase the fire engine now in an effort to save at least $60,000.

Fire engine replacement cycles are driven by several factors including age, miles, and maintenance costs.

An engine typically serves well for 15 years in front-line service and can be in reserve status for an additional 10+ years. Carmel’s front-line engine is over 13 years old and has shown signs of having more significant maintenance costs. The reserve engine is 22 years old; because of its age, the reserve engine does not meet current safety and emissions standards. For these reasons it should be retired. Due to normal build time and compounded by supply-chain challenges, a new fire engine will not be delivered until about 24 months after a purchase contract is executed. In that time frame, the present two engines will have aged and incurred additional maintenance costs.

Electric Engine
Based on Council direction to look for opportunities to electrify the Carmel fleet, staff has researched electric fire engines as an alternative to a conventional diesel-powered one. Electric fire engines are new with only a handful in service worldwide. Presently, two manufacturers have products ready for ordering.

Rosenbauer, an Austrian manufacturer with production facilities in the United States, has an electric engine that has been in service in Europe and, most recently, has delivered one to the Los Angeles Fire Department. Pierce Manufacturing, a U.S. based fire apparatus manufacturer, has one engine in service in Maddison, Wisconsin, and has recently delivered one to Portland, Oregon. Both manufacturers’ engines have very little field use experience to be able to determine long-term viability.

The electric engines have comparable specifications (water tank size, pump capacity, driving range, etc.) as diesel engines that were evaluated. The units provide a diesel back-up to the battery to ensure adequate range and continued functionality on longer incidents. The technologies employed vary between the two manufacturers, but both rely on tested products in use in other large commercial vehicle applications.

Electric vehicles inherently have lower maintenance and operational costs but, because large vehicle applications are still new, there may be unknown future challenges. The large capacity batteries have an anticipated life of 10 to 15 years and likely will cost over $100,000 to replace.

Diesel Engine
Carmel’s current fire apparatus are all diesel powered. Similarly, the entire fleet used by the Monterey Fire Department is diesel powered. Current infrastructure and maintenance facilities are set up to support this fleet. A diesel engine will likely have a higher annual operations and maintenance cost than an electric engine.

Staff has obtained a quote for a conventional diesel-powered fire engine and has asked for one for an electric fire engine. Both Pierce and Rosenbauer have not provided a firm quote on the electric engine as they are just now becoming available for their sales force. Both have said that they anticipate the cost to be in the $1.7M to $1.9M range. The quote for the diesel engine based on making the purchase using a purchasing cooperative (HGAC) is as follows:

One (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07)
$ 850,936.07
100% Prepayment discount (46,303.36)
SUBTOTAL 804,632.71

9.25% Sales tax 74,428.53
California tire fee 10.50
TOTAL $ 879,071.74
If the Council were to opt to purchase the electric engine, there would be additional up-front costs to install the required charging system in the station. Staff estimates that that will be about $150,000 bringing the total cost close to $2M.

Operational costs of a diesel engine can be expected to run about $15,000 per year (initially) for maintenance and repairs and current infrastructure can support the use of one. Over the life of the engine, those costs can be expected to increase. The City of Monterey’s fleet maintenance staff, presently used by Carmel for fire apparatus repairs, are trained and equipped to provide the routine maintenance and other repair facilities are readily available for potential major repairs.

An electric engine will have reduced operational costs estimated to be $5,000 per year but will require substantial infrastructure modifications to the fire station to provide the necessary high-capacity charging system. Until more repair facilities for large electric vehicles are available, Carmel would be dependent on the manufacturer’s service facilities (located in Modesto) for maintenance of electric drive-train components.

Fleet maintenance staff would likely need additional training to provide some routine services. Some systems could involve increased future costs and the large battery will likely have to be replaced after 10 to 12 years at a substantial cost.

A 20-year projection of maintenance and operations costs that includes assumptions of increased maintenance costs in future years, annual inflation at 3%, and replacing the electric engine’s battery once during that time yields the following total cost for the 20-year period:

Electric engine - $343,300
Diesel engine - $477,800
Although the City is consistently looking for green alternatives to promote a healthier environment, the City also balances against the current infrastructure. Based that electric fire engines are new with only a handful in service worldwide on this new technology, the City is not equipped to recommend the electric fire engine.

Staff is recommending purchasing one (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07 fire engine.

FISCAL IMPACT:

A budget adjustment to the Transfer Out account [101-130-00-49013] for an amount not to exceed $880,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Vehicle Equipment Fund, and a budget adjustment to both the Transfer In account [503-00-39001] and Vehicles & Fire Trucks expenditure account [503-513-00- 43005] in the Vehicle & Equipment Replacement Fund for an amount not to exceed $880,000.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2022-092

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-092

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) PIERCE MANUFACTURING, INC. ENFORCER 1500 GPM PUMPER (HGAC CONSORTIUM PURCHASE – CONTRACT FS12-19, PRODUCT CODE FS19VC07) FOR A NOT TO EXCEED IN THE AMOUNT OF $880,000 WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea presently owns two fire engines that are leased to the Monterey Fire Department to use under the contract for Fire Services between the cities of Carmel and Monterey; and
WHEREAS, the Fire engine was scheduled for replacement in the FY 23/24 Capital Improvement Project schedule, however, due to supply and demand and costs rising quickly, the City is recommending to purchase the fire engine now in an effort to save at least $60,000; and WHEREAS, Carmel’s front-line engine is over 13 years old and has shown signs of having more significant maintenance costs. The reserve engine is 22 years old; because of its age, the reserve engine does not meet current safety and emissions standards. For these reasons it should be retired; and
WHEREAS, due to normal build time and compounded by supply-chain challenges, a new fire engine will not be delivered until about 24 months after a purchase contract is executed. In that time frame, the present two engines will have aged and incurred additional maintenance costs; and
WHEREAS, based on Council direction, staff looked for opportunities to electrify the Carmel fleet, staff has researched electric fire engines as an alternative to a conventional dieselpowered one. Electric fire engines are new with only a handful in service worldwide; and WHEREAS, an electric fire engine would require substantial infrastructure modifications to the fire station to provide the necessary high-capacity charging system and the City does not have the infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, staff evaluated electric vs. diesel engine and is recommending purchasing one (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07 fire engine; and WHEREAS, budget adjustments are necessary in both the General Fund and Vehicle & Equipment Replacement Fund for the purchase of the new fire engine and Carmel Municipal Code Section 3.06.030 requires all transfers of appropriations between departments or in regards to capital items or projects be approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, authorize a budget adjustment to the Transfer Out account for an amount not to exceed $880,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Vehicle Equipment Fund to Attachment 1
Resolution No. 2022-092

purchase the one (1) Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. Enforcer 1500 GPM Pumper (HGAC Consortium Purchase – Contract FS12-19, Product Code FS19VC07 fire engine; and WHEREAS, authorize the budget adjustments to the Vehicle & Equipment Replacement Fund Transfer In account and the Vehicles & Fire Trucks expenditure account for an amount not to exceed $880,000.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMELBY-THE-SEA DOES HEREBY:

1. Authorize the City Administrator to execute the purchase agreement in an amount not to exceed $880,000.

2. Authorize a budget adjustment to the Transfer Out account [101-130-00-49013] for an amount not to exceed $880,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Vehicle Equipment Fund.

3. Authorize a budget adjustment to both the Transfer In account [503-00-39001] and Vehicles & Fire Trucks expenditure account [503-513-00-43005] in the Vehicle & Equipment Replacement Fund for an amount not to exceed $880,000.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED: ATTEST:
_________________________ _________________________
Dave Potter Nova Romero, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Jermel Laurie, Building Official
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Receive a presentation on the 2022 editions of the California Building (CBC), Residential (CRC), Energy (CEnC), Fire (CFC), Mechanical (CMC), Plumbing (CPC), Electrical (CEC), Green Building Standards (CGBSC), Historic Building (HBC), and Existing Building Codes (EBC) with local amendments to be discussed, and provide staff with direction
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation on the 2022 editions of the California Building (CBC), Residential (CRC), Energy (CEnC), Fire (CFC), Mechanical (CMC), Plumbing (CPC), Electrical (CEC), Green Building Standards (CGBSC), Historic Building (HBC), and Existing Building Codes (EBC) with local amendments to be discussed, and provide staff with direction.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The State of California, Building Standards Commission (CBSC), under CCR Title 24 establishes the minimum standards for building construction, fire safety and prevention, and public health and safety in the built environment throughout the State. The CBSC updates the Title 24 codes on a triennial cycle, with periodic updates as deemed necessary by the Commission between triennial updates. The CBSC has adopted the 2022 edition of the California Building, Residential, Fire, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Green Building, Energy, Historic Building and Existing Building Codes effective January 1, 2023. Local jurisdictions are required to begin enforcing the updated codes on that same date.

The Ordinance adopts the codes enumerated in CCR Title 24 as required by the CBSC with local amendments addressing unique conditions and circumstances in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea as described in the Ordinance in accordance with CBSC requirements.

Staff intends to schedule a public meeting for the development community prior to the first reading of the Ordinance that is scheduled for adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting on November 1, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No new revenues are anticipated as a result of this update, and no new resources are required to implement it.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

Ordinance No. 2020-001: An ordinance amending Title 15 of the Carmel Municipal Code and adopting the 2019 California building, residential, energy, fire, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, green building, historic building, and existing building standards codes with amendments.

ATTACHMENTS:

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Marnie Waffle, AiCP, Senior Planner
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Discussion regarding potential amendments to the City's Mills Act Contract policy RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation on the Mills Act Contract policy, discuss and provide staff with direction.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The Mills Act was adopted by the State of California in 1972. The City of Carmel-By-The-Sea adopted a Mills Act program as part of the Local Coastal Plan in 2004.

The Mills Act program is an agreement between the City and a property owner of a historic building whereby the property owner benefits from a reduction in property taxes while contractually assuring the City that the historic resource is rehabilitated, maintained, and preserved. Properties must be included on both the Carmel Historic Inventory and the Carmel Register of Historic Resources prior to being eligible for a Mills Act contract.

To be listed on the Carmel Historic Inventory, an assessment of historical significance must be conducted to determine whether the property is eligible. Eligible properties are those which represent at least one theme in the City’s Historic Context Statement; retain substantial integrity; are at least 50 years of age; are associated with significant events or people; embody distinctive characteristics; or yield information important to prehistory or local, state, or national history.

To be listed on the Carmel Register, a property owner must submit a request in writing and their request must be approved by the Historic Resources Board. Listing on the Register provides benefits such as waiver of on-site parking requirements; preservation of existing non-conformities; Federal rehabilitation tax credits; building permit fee reduction of 25%; and, participation in the Mills Act program.

Mills Act Policy
The City’s current policy regarding Mills Act contracts allows for up to fifteen contracts to be approved over a three-calendar year period (Attachment 1, Resolution 2016-068). The policy was reviewed by the City Council in 2020 and no changes were made at that time. Since 2011, an average of one contract per year has been approved. The highest three-calendar year period occurred between 2015-2017 and 2016-2018 when a total of 6 contracts were approved. In 2022, the City Council has approved one contract and is being asked to consider four additional contracts. The 2022 calendar year is the first time a Mills Act contract has been approved for a commercial property.

Standard Contract
In 2020, the City Attorney worked with staff to review the contract language to ensure the contract is consistent with State law and our local Mills Act program. On March 3, 2020, the City Council approved the standard contract language.

In accordance with State law, the term of the contract is 10 years. Each year on the anniversary date of the contract, one year is automatically added to the term of the contract. This creates a rolling 10-year contract that automatically renews until such time that either the City or the property owner provides a written notice of non-renewal. If the City desires to end a contract, the City must provide the property owner with written notice of non-renewal at least 60 days prior to the annual renewal date. Property owners who desire to end a contract must give written notice to the City at least 90 days prior to the annual renewal date. If a contract is not renewed, the agreement remains in effect for ten years and then expires.

Contract Renewals
It has been just over 10 years since the first Mills Act Contract was approved. Over the next few years, additional contracts will reach their 10-year anniversary. Staff is seeking policy direction from the City Council on issuing notices of nonrenewal. A few options for the Council to consider are:
1) Do nothing and allow contracts to auto-renew on an annual basis. Every 10 years property owners would prepare a new 10-year maintenance plan.
2) Issue a Notice of Nonrenewal prior to the 10
th anniversary of a Mills Act Contract (or as soon thereafter as is practical). The contract would remain in effect for 10 years from the nonrenewal date and then expire. 3) Review each contract on the 10
th anniversary and decide on a case-by-case basis whether to issue a notice of nonrenewal.

Staff recommends that the Council’s direction be formalized in an updated policy which would be brought back to the Council at a future meeting for approval.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Since a Mills Act Contract reduces an owner's 1% property tax burden, the City ultimately receives a diminished tax base from properties with Mills Act Contracts (which is set at 6% of the total property tax collected by the County). This reduction is granted in exchange for a contractual assurance that historic resources will be rehabilitated, restored, and maintained. The actual amount of reduction in property taxes varies from property to property, but is typically expected to be in the 40%-60% range.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

On June 8, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution 2010-42 approving a limit of three (3) Mills Act Contracts for residential properties within a calendar year and requiring the City Council to evaluate the program again in five years.

On September 13, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution 2016-068 limiting the number of Mills Act Contracts to fifteen (15) during any three (3) calendar year period and requiring the City Council to evaluate the program after three (3) years.

On March 3, 2020, the City Council reviewed the Mills Act policy and did not make any changes. The Council also reviewed and accepted standard contract language for Mills Act Contracts.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Resolution 2016-068
Attachment 1
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Nova Romero, City Clerk
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Discussion on amending the qualifications for the Historic Resources Board Members
RECOMMENDATION:

Discuss amending the qualifications for the Historic Resources Board Members and provide direction to staff.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The Historic Resources Board consists of five members appointed by Council, with powers and duties to administer the City’s historic preservation program. City Council has requested to review the current qualifications for members of the Historic Resources Board (HRB), and consider amending the qualifications in order to expand the pool of applicants in order to fill vacancies. Currently, the HRB has one (1) unfilled vacancy, and it has been challenging to fill the vacancy based on the current City Code's requirements for applicants.

Carmel-by-the-Sea City Code Chapter 2.74.010 (B) "Historic Resources Board" lists the qualifications for Members of the Historic Resources Board, which are as follows:

B. Board Member Qualifications.

1. Members of the Board shall have demonstrated interest in and knowledge of architectural history, architecture, archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, architecture, historic architecture, local history or fields related to historic preservation such as construction, planning, geography, landscape architecture, urban design, ethnography, fine arts, or real estate.

2. The Board shall be comprised of three professional members, consisting of one member each, from the following combined fields: (1) history, architectural history, or urban design, (2) architecture or historic architecture, and (3) archaeology, anthropology, or paleontology. The remaining two public members may represent any of the related historic preservation fields noted above.

3. All members shall be residents and electors of the City, except in the event that no resident with the requisite expertise needed for a professional member can be found. In such case one professional member appointee may reside outside the City limits but within the sphere of influence. In any event, a majority of the Board shall at all times be composed of resident-electors of the City and all public members shall at all times be resident-electors.

4. If professional members with the required expertise cannot be found, the City Council may substitute one or more additional public members with a demonstrated interest in historic preservation.

OPTION 1:

Council may consider amending the qualifications and expand the pool of applicants, to include applicants from people who live outside of Carmel-by-the-Sea, but owns a business within the City limits, and is an active member of the development community. An Ordinance would be required to amend City Code Ch.

2.74.010 (B)(3). A possible amendment could read:
“All members shall be residents and electors of the City, except in the event that no resident with the requisite expertise needed for a professional member can be found. In such case one up to two professional member appointees may either 1) reside outside the City limits but within the sphere of influence, or, 2) live outside of the sphere of influence if they own a business within the City of Carmelby-the-Sea and are active in the development community. In any event, a majority of the Board (3 Members)shall at all times be composed of resident-electors of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and all public no more than 2 members shall reside outside sphere of influence.

OPTION 2:

Council may consider amending the qualifications for HRB in some other manner, and direct staff to return with an Ordinance.

OPTION 3:

Council may choose not to amend the qualifications for HRB, and direct staff to re-open the application period for HRB until a qualified candidate is appointed.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No direct fiscal impact for this item.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

On June 1, 2021, Council adopted Ordinance 2021-001, Amending Sections 2.28.030, 2.28.060,

2.32.030, 2.36.030, 2.72.030, and 2.74.010 of the Carmel-by-the-Sea Municipal Code related to timing of Board and Commission appointments and updating the Community Activities Commission mission statement.

ATTACHMENTS:

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

ORDERS OF BUSINESS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Nova Romero, City Clerk
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Discussion on rescinding Urgency Ordinance 2022-002 - Adopting Rules of Conduct for attending meetings of Legislative Bodies at City Facilities RECOMMENDATION:

Hold a discussion on rescinding Urgency Ordinance 2022-002 - Adopting Rules of Conduct for attending meetings of Legislative Bodies at City Facilities, and provide direction to staff.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (“City”) is authorized by Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution to make and enforce all regulations and ordinances using its police powers.

The California Emergency Services Act (California Government Code Section 8550, et. seq.) defines a local emergency as "the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of a city, caused by conditions such as an epidemic, which are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of a city, and require the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat".

Section 2.64.020 of the City Municipal Code defines “emergency” as the "actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat".

Government Code section 37359 allows cities to “limit the access or use [of city-owned property] in area or time or in any reasonable manner deemed necessary” and enforce such limitations through trespass law.

In December 2019, reports began spreading worldwide about a flu-like virus first found in China that was significantly more deadly than the flu generally, with the virus becoming known as the Coronavirus (“COVID19”).

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) has confirmed thousands of cases of individuals who have severe respiratory illness caused by COVID-19, as well as deaths caused by this illness.

On or about March 4, 2020, as part of the State of California’s response to address the global COVID-19 outbreak, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for broader spread of COVID-19.

On March 6, 2020, the County Administrative Officer of Monterey County proclaimed a Local Emergency due to the threat of COVID-19 in the County.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) classified the spread of COVID-19 internationally as a global pandemic.

On March 12, 2020, the City Administrator of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, acting in his capacity as the Director of Emergency Services for the City, declared the existence of a local emergency within the City due to COVID-19.

On March 13, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-021 ratifying the City Administrator’s Proclamation of the Existence of a Local On March 13, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020- 021 ratifying the City Administrator’s Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Due to the Worldwide Spread of the Coronavirus (“COVID-19”).

In the absence of actions to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, County wide health services may become overwhelmed and unable to keep up with medical demand for care and availability of hospital or care facility capacity.

In order to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety to adopt rules of conduct at City facilities.

On February 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-001 adopting rules of conduct at City Facilities. During that meeting, City Administrator Chip Rerig advised the Council that the Urgency Ordinance would be applied only for meetings of Legislative Bodies and the proposed First Amendment to the Urgency Ordinance includes such provisions.

On April 4, 2022, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-002, amending the rules of conduct at City Facilities.

The current Rules of Conduct for Attending Meetings of Legislative Bodies at City Facilities are as follows:

Section 7. Rules of Conduct for Attending Meetings of Legislative Bodies at City Facilities. It is hereby ordered and ordained that the following rules of conduct shall apply to attendance at meetings of Legislative Bodies at City facilities, as defined herein:

7.1 City Facility. For purposes of this First Amendment to Urgency Ordinance, the term “City Facility” or “City Facilities” means City Hall and any other property owned by the City where there is a meeting held of a Legislative Body.

7.2. Legislative Body. For purposes of this First Amendment to Urgency Ordinance, the term “Legislative Body” means the City Council, Planning Commission, Forest and Beach Commission, Historic Resources Board, Harrison Memorial Library Board of Trustees, Community Activities Commission and the Building Code Board of Appeals.

7.3 Vaccination against COVID-19. No person shall be permitted to enter or remain in a City Facility at a meeting of a Legislative Body unless that person has been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The term “fully vaccinated” means the person has been vaccinated against COVID19 and received a booster. Persons shall not be permitted to enter a City Facility unless they first present proof to an authorized City employee that they are fully vaccinated.

7.4 Face Covering. No person shall be permitted to enter or remain in City Facility at a meeting of a Legislative Body unless that person wears a face covering which covers both the mouth and nose at all times. Upon request, the City will provide anyone seeking to enter City Facility to attend a meeting of a Legislative Body with a face covering if they do not have one.

7.5 If anyone is unable or unwilling to comply with the requirements of this Section 7, they may attend the meeting remotely in the manner described in the Agenda posted for the meeting.

7.6 Due to the size of the City Council chambers, and in order to maintain social distancing, 27 members of the public will be allowed in the Chamber at any one time with seats being available on a first come first served basis. All others will need to wait outside of the building for their turn to speak during public comments or they may instead attend the meeting remotely.

Discussion:

Since the adoption of Urgency Ordinance 2022-002, the Monterey County Health Department has deferred guidance on masking in Monterey County to the California Department of Public Health. The newest guidance from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) goes into effect on September 23, 2022 (attachment 1).

The new CDPH guidance, effective September 23, 2022, says:

Masking recommendations in general community settings, including public transit and transit hubs:

Earlier this year, California announced the release of the state's SMARTER Plan, the next phase of California's COVID-19 response. While state and local leaders must continue to prepare for the future, California's path forward will be predicated on individual, smarter actions, that will collectively yield better outcomes for our neighborhoods, communities, and state. Consistent with the SMARTER Plan, California is shifting its masking recommendations to a framework intended to provide information and recommendations that each Californian should consider based on the unique circumstances happening within their own community and county.

The levels included in this framework are based on CDC COVID-19 Community Levels released in March 2022 as well as consideration of metrics based on California's historical data.

Persons should use information about the current COVID-19 Community Levels (CCLs) in their county to decide which prevention behaviors to use and when (at all times or at specific times), based on their own risk for severe illness and that of members of their household, their risk tolerance, and setting-specific factors. CCLs are based on hospitalization rates, hospital bed occupancy, and COVID-19 incidence during the preceding period. At all CCLs (low, medium, and high), CDPH continues to strongly recommend that all persons:

Stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination, including all primary series doses and boosters.

If you've been exposed, wear a mask for 10 days.

Stay home when sick and know what to do if you have been infected with COVID-19, including seeking treatment early.

Test if you are sick or have been exposed to someone with COVID-19.

Improve ventilation and air quality in their setting. Wash hands regularly.

Sign up for CA Notify to receive alerts when you have been in close contact with someone who tests positive for COVID-19.

Despite what level your community may be in, masks that offer the best fit and filtration (e.g., N95s, KN95s, KF94s), are highly recommended, and remain a critical component of our multilayered approach for protection against COVID-19 infection. A series of cross-sectional surveys in the U.S. suggested that a 10% increase in self-reported mask wearing tripled the likelihood of slowing community transmission.[1]Our recently published case-control study conducted in California from February 18 to December 1, 2021 demonstrated that consistently wearing a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings reduces the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.[2] . Masks also remain a critical component for protecting those that are most vulnerable in our communities, including the unvaccinated, the immunocompromised, or those at risk for severe disease and illness.

Based on the City Council's direction, staff will return with an Ordinance rescinding Urgency Ordinance 2022-002, or, return with an Ordinance to repeal and replace Ordinance 2022-002 with updated rules of conduct for attending meetings of legislative bodies at City facilities to keep our community and members of the public safe.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No direct fiscal impact for this action.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

On March 13, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-021 ratifying the City Administrator’s Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Due to the Worldwide Spread of the Coronavirus (“COVID-19”).

On February 28, 2022, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-001 adopting rules of conduct at City Facilities. During that meeting, City Administrator Chip Rerig advised the Council that the Urgency Ordinance would be applied only for meetings of Legislative Bodies and the proposed First Amendment to the Urgency Ordinance includes such provisions.

On April 4, 2022, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-002, amending the rules of conduct at City Facilities.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) CDPH Masking Guidelines Effective 9-23-22 September 20, 2022
TO:

SUBJECT:

TOMÁS J. ARAGÓN, M.D., Dr.P.H.

State Public Health Officer & Director

GAVIN NEWSOM
Governor
State of California—Health and Human
Services Agency
California Department of
Public Health
All Californians
Guidance for the Use of Face Masks
Note: This guidance takes effect on 9/23/2022. View the current guidance effective until 9/23/2022.

Related Materials: Masking Q&A | Masking Fact Sheet (PDF) | Face Mask Tips and Resources | Face Shields Q&A (PDF) | Safe Schools for All Hub | More Home & Community Guidance | All Guidance | More Languages Updates as of September 20, 2022:

Shifts from a strong recommendation for the general population, in all indoor settings at all times to use of CDC Community Levels to help inform masking recommendations, which is consistent with August 11th CDC updated recommendations
Aligns correctional facilities with current CDC recommendations (CDC updated guidance on May 3 ) which notes that correctional facilities may make masks optional when CDC community levels are low.

Aligns recommendations for homeless shelters, emergency shelters and cooling centers to the above recommendation for correctional facilities, i.e., also shifts from requirements to masking recommendations in these settings when CDC community levels are low Updated guidance is effective September 23, 2022.

Guidance For the Use of Masks
Background
California has used science to guide our health protection strategies throughout the pandemic. Data show that because of these strategies, we have saved lives. This is due in large part to the collective efforts of Californians to get vaccinated, get boosted, and wear masks indoors.

A universal indoor masking requirement was reinstated on December 15, 2021, to add a layer of mitigation as the Omicron variant, a Variant of Concern as labeled by the World Health Organization, increased in prevalence across California, the United States, and the world and spread much more easily than the original SARS-CoV-2 virus and rd
Attachment 1
the Delta variant. Implementing the universal masking requirement in all indoor public settings during the winter season was an important tool to decrease community transmission and protect critical healthcare system capacity during the highly infectious Omicron surge. Since the peak in case rates during the Omicron surge in early January 2022, the dramatic surge in cases and hospitalizations due to the highly infectious Omicron variant has declined significantly. Californians have also become increasingly knowledgeable about how to protect themselves and their loved ones with effective masks when they may be at risk of COVID-19 exposure or transmission. Accordingly, CDPH amended this masking guidance to allow the universal indoor masking requirement to expire on February 15, 2022 as scheduled.

On March 1, 2022, the requirement for unvaccinated persons to mask in indoor public settings and businesses was replaced by a strong recommendation that all persons, regardless of vaccine status, mask in indoor public settings and businesses (examples: retail, restaurants, theaters, family entertainment centers, meetings, state and local government offices serving the public). Additionally, after March 11, 2022, the universal masking requirement for K-12 and Childcare settings terminated.

On April 20, 2022, the universal masking requirement on public transit and in transit hubs was replaced by strong recommendations that individuals in these settings continue to mask while on public transit and indoors in transit hubs to continue protecting our most vulnerable and those communities disproportionately impacted by COVID19.

Masking recommendations in general community settings, including public transit and transit hubs:

Earlier this year, California announced the release of the state's SMARTER Plan, the next phase of California's COVID-19 response. While state and local leaders must continue to prepare for the future, California's path forward will be predicated on individual, smarter actions, that will collectively yield better outcomes for our neighborhoods, communities, and state. Consistent with the SMARTER Plan, California is shifting its masking recommendations to a framework intended to provide information and recommendations that each Californian should consider based on the unique circumstances happening within their own community and county.

The levels included in this framework are based on CDC COVID-19 Community Levels released in March 2022 as well as consideration of metrics based on California's historical data.

Persons should use information about the current COVID-19 Community Levels (CCLs) in their county to decide which prevention behaviors to use and when (at all times or at specific times), based on their own risk for severe illness and that of members of their household, their risk tolerance, and setting-specific factors. CCLs are based on hospitalization rates, hospital bed occupancy, and COVID-19 incidence during the preceding period. At all CCLs (low, medium, and high), CDPH continues to strongly recommend that all persons:

Stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination, including all primary series doses and boosters.

If you've been exposed, wear a mask for 10 days.

Stay home when sick and know what to do if you have been infected with COVID-19, including seeking treatment early.

Test if you are sick or have been exposed to someone with COVID-19.

Improve ventilation and air quality in their setting.

Wash hands regularly.

Sign up for CA Notify to receive alerts when you have been in close contact with someone who tests positive for COVID-19.

Attachment 1
Despite what level your community may be in, masks that offer the best fit and filtration (e.g., N95s, KN95s, KF94s), are highly recommended, and remain a critical component of our multi-layered approach for protection against COVID-19 infection. A series of cross-sectional surveys in the U.S. suggested that a 10% increase in self-reported mask wearing tripled the likelihood of slowing community transmission.[1] Our recently published case-control study conducted in California from February 18 to December 1, 2021 demonstrated that consistently wearing a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings reduces the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.[2] . Masks also remain a critical component for protecting those that are most vulnerable in our communities, including the unvaccinated, the immunocompromised, or those at risk for severe disease and illness.

CDC COVID-19 Community Level CDPH recommended actions
Low
There is lower community spread and impact on
healthcare system of COVID-19
Everyone:

People can wear a mask based on personal preference,
informed by their own personal level of risk.

Vulnerable people*:

Consider wearing a mask in crowded indoor public
places. Ensure your mask provides the best fit and
filtration (respirators like N95s, KN95s and KN94s are
best).

If you are a vulnerable person* or live with a vulnerable person*, consider taking additional precautions.

Medium
There is medium community spread and impact on
healthcare system of COVID-19
Everyone:

Consider wearing a mask in indoor public
places. Ensure your mask provides the best fit
and filtration (respirators like N95, KN95
and KN94 are best).

Vulnerable people*:

Wearing a mask is recommended in crowded
indoor public places. Ensure your mask
provides the best fit and filtration (respirators
like N95s, KN95s and KN94s are best).

If you have household or social contact with a
vulnerable person*, wearing a mask is recommended
when indoors with them
Attachment 1
High
There is high community spread and impact on
healthcare system of COVID-19
Everyone:

Wearing a mask is recommended in indoor
public places. Ensure your mask provides the
best fit and filtration (respirators like N95, KN95
and KN94 are best).

Vulnerable people*:

Wearing a mask is strongly recommended in
indoor public places. Ensure your mask
provides the best fit and filtration (respirators
like N95s, KN95s and KN94s are best).

If you have household or social contact with a
vulnerable person*, wearing a mask is recommended
when indoors with them.
*Those that are vulnerable include the unvaccinated, those that are immunocompromised, have certain disabilities, or have underlying health conditions, and those at risk of severe illness of death if they are infected with COVID-19. Such persons should consider taking extra precautions.

Vaccination continues to remain the ultimate exit strategy out of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the percentage of Californians fully vaccinated and boosted continues to increase, we continue to have areas of the state where vaccine coverage is low, putting individuals and communities at greater risk for COVID-19. As a state, we need to remain vigilant.

Masking Requirements in Specified High-Risk Settings
The CDC COVID-19 Community Levels can also be used to define the level of recommended mitigation strategies for certain settings.

Accordingly, CDPH is updating its masking requirements in specified high-risk settings, consistent with current CDC recommendations. These changes shall become effective September 23, 2022. CDC has noted that CDC COVID-19 Community Levels do not apply in healthcare settings, such as hospitals and skilled nursing facilities. CDPH will continue to monitor the science and current CDC recommendations to ensure we continue protecting our most vulnerable populations and the workforce that delivers critical services in these settings.

In the following healthcare and long-term care indoor settings, masks are required for all individuals regardless of vaccination status. Surgical masks or higher-level respirators (e.g., N95s, KN95s, KF94s) with good fit are highly recommended.

Healthcare settings[3] (applies to all healthcare settings)* Long Term Care Settings & Adult and Senior Care Facilities[4] In the following non-healthcare indoor settings, facilities may use the CDC COVID-19 Community Levels to determine the level of masking requirements within their facility.

Homeless shelters[5], Emergency shelters[6] and cooling and heating centers[7] State and local correctional facilities and detention centers[8] 1) When the COVID-19 Community Level is low, masking may be optional:

1. Only in non-clinical areas (such as in housing units, communal dining areas, visitation areas, and in administrative areas where only staff may have access), and Attachment 1

2. When there have been no outbreaks (defined as three suspected, probable, or confirmed COVID-19 cases within a 14-day period among epidemiologically linked residents and/or staff) in the entire facility or within separated, closed subunits that do not allow for mixing of those residents or staff with the general population.

Facilities should make surgical masks or higher-level respirators (e.g., N95s, KN95s, KF94s) with good fit available at all times to any residents and staff who would like to use them based on their personal preference. 2) When the COVID-19 Community Level is medium or high, facilities must maintain or reinstate universal masking requirements for all staff and residents, regardless if there are no outbreaks within the facility.

Universal masking of all staff and residents, regardless of vaccination status and Community Level, is required in all clinical areas (or when any healthcare is being delivered), including isolation and quarantine areas, or any other areas that are covered by other specified high-risk settings. *In certain healthcare situations or settings surgical masks (or higher filtration masks) are required. In workplaces, employers and employees are subject to either the CalOSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS) or the Cal/OSHA Aerosol Transmissible Diseases (ATD) Standard and should consult those regulations for additional applicable requirements.

Additional Masking Requirements
Finally, CDPH is maintaining the requirement that businesses and venue operators, including K-12 school and childcare settings, must allow any individual to wear a mask if they desire to.

In workplaces, employers and employees are subject to either the CalOSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS) or the Cal/OSHA Aerosol Transmissible Diseases (ATD) Standard and should consult those regulations for additional applicable requirements.

Local health jurisdictions and entities may continue to implement additional requirements that go beyond this statewide guidance based on local circumstances.

These requirements and recommendations will continue to be updated as CDPH continues to assess conditions on an ongoing basis.

For additional information on the most effective types of masks and ensuring a well-fitted mask for adults, individuals should refer to CDPH Get the Most out of Masking and see CDPH Masking Guidance Frequently Asked Questions. For additional information on the most effective types of masks and ensuring a well-fitted mask for children, individuals should refer to CDPH Masks for Kids: Tips and Resources.

Guidance for Businesses, Venue Operators or Hosts
When CDC COVID-19 Community levels are medium or high, businesses, venue operators or hosts should consider:

Providing information to all patrons, guests and attendees regarding masking recommendations for all persons, regardless of vaccine status.

Providing information to all patrons, guests and attendees to consider better fit and filtration for masks [Surgical masks or higher-level respirators (e.g., N95s, KN95s, KF94s) with good fit are recommended over cloth masks].

Requiring all patrons to wear masks, especially when risk in the community may be high, or if those being served are at high-risk for severe disease or illness.

Requiring attendees who do not provide proof of vaccination to enter indoor Mega Events to continue masking during the event, especially when not actively eating or drinking.

Attachment 1
No person can be prevented from wearing a mask as a condition of participation in an activity or entry into a business.

Exemptions to masks requirements
The following individuals are exempt from wearing masks at all times:

Persons younger than two years old. Very young children must not wear a mask because of the risk of suffocation.

Persons with a medical condition, mental health condition, or disability that prevents wearing a mask. This includes persons with a medical condition for whom wearing a mask could obstruct breathing or who are unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove a mask without assistance.

Persons who are hearing impaired, or communicating with a person who is hearing impaired, where the ability to see the mouth is essential for communication.

Persons for whom wearing a mask would create a risk to the person related to their work, as determined by local, state, or federal regulators or workplace safety guidelines. [1] Rader B, White LF, Burns MR, et al. Mask-wearing and control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the USA: a crosssectional study. The Lancet Digital Health. 2021;3(3):e148–e157. [2] Andrejko KL, Pry JM, Myers JF, et al. Effectiveness of Face Mask or Respirator Use in Indoor Public Settings for Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 Infection — California, February–December 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. ePub: 4 February 2022
[3] CDC Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic
[4] CDC Nursing Homes and Long-Term Care Facilities
[5] CDC Interim Guidance for Homeless Service Providers to Plan and Respond to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
[6] CDC's Interim Guidance for General Population Disaster Shelters During the COVID-19 Pandemic [7] CDC COVID-19 and Cooling Centers
[8] CDC Interim Guidance on Management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Correctional and Detention Facilities
Originally published on November 16, 2020
California Department of Public Health
PO Box, 997377, MS 0500, Sacramento, CA 95899-7377
Department Website (cdph.ca.gov)
Attachment 1

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
Staff Report
October 4, 2022

PUBLIC HEARINGS
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Maxine Gullo, Ass't. City Administrator
APPROVED BY: Chip Rerig, City Administrator
SUBJECT:

Introduction of Ordinance No. 2022-003 (First Reading) - Amending Municipal Code Section 2.52.630 pertaining to eligibility for new hires to use accrued vacation leave in the first year of employment
RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the reading in full and introduce, on first reading, Ordinance 2022-003 Amending Municipal Code Section 2.52.630 pertaining to eligibility for new hires to use accrued vacation leave in the first year of employment.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City Council for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (City) recently approved Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with general and management employees represented by the Laborers’ International Union of North America, United Public Employees of California (LiUNA/UPEC) for the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024 at the September 13, 2022 council meeting. During the negotiation process, the City agreed to recommend that the Council amend Section 2.52.630 to permit employees in their first year of City employment to use accrued vacation. The City recently hired 31.0 new employees who would otherwise not be entitled to use accrued vacation time during the upcoming holiday closure approved by Council.

Accordingly, the City believes it is appropriate to remove the requirement of completing one year of continuous service as a condition for using accrued vacation for all City employees under Section 2.52.630.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Vacation leave usage is budgeted as standard operating costs in the operating budget.

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION:

N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1) Draft Ordinance 2022-003
IRV #4865-6302-6227 v1
07904-0027

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-003
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.52.630 REGARDING ELIGIBILITY FOR NEW

HIRES TO USE ACCRUED VACATION LEAVE IN THE FIRST YEAR OF EMPLOYMENT WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (City) recently approved Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with general and management employees represented by the Laborers’ International Union of North America, United Public Employees of California (LiUNA/UPEC) for the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; and WHEREAS, in the MOUs between the City and LiUNA/UPEC the City agreed to recommend that the Council amend Section 2.52.630 to permit employees in their first year of City employment to use accrued vacation;
WHEREAS, the City believes it is appropriate to remove the requirement of completing one year of continuous service as a condition for using accrued vacation for all City employees under Section 2.52.630;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.

1. The City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea does hereby find that the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.

2. The actions authorized by this Ordinance are consistent with the City’s General Plan, and the terms of the City’s MOUs with the groups represented by LiUNA/UPEC.

SECTION 2.

Section 2.52.630 is hereby amended to read:

An employee is eligible to use accrued vacation time starting from the first day of employment.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption by the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 4th day of October, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

Attachment 1
Ordinance No. 2022-003