Clayton City Council
February 1, 2022

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING
* * *

CLAYTON CITY COUNCIL
* * *
TUESDAY, February 1, 2022
7:00 P.M.
*** NEW LOCATION***
This meeting is being held in accordance with AB 361, given the proclaimed state of emergency and the Contra Costa County Health Officer’s recommendation for social distancing for public meetings, which is also consistent with Cal OSHA requirements for social distancing, the City Council will be participating in meetings via phone/video conferencing. The public is invited to watch and participate via the methods listed below:

Mayor: Peter Cloven
Vice Mayor: Holly Tillman
Council Members
Jim Diaz
Jeff Wan
Carl Wolfe
• A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each public item is available for public review on the City’s website at www.claytonca.gov • Agendas are posted at: 1) City Hall, 6000 Heritage Trail; 2) Library, 6125 Clayton Road; 3) Ohm’s Bulletin Board, 1028 Diablo Street, Clayton; and 4) City Website at www.claytonca.gov • Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the Agenda Packet and regarding any public item on this Agenda is available for review on the City’s website at www.claytonca.gov
• If you have a physical impairment that requires special accommodations to participate, please call the City Clerk’s office at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting at (925) 673-7300. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Agenda February 1, 2022 Page 2
Instructions for Virtual City Council Meeting – February 1 To protect our residents, officials, and staff, and aligned with the Governor’s executive order to Shelter-at-Home, this meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing means consistent with State order that that allows the public to address the local legislative body electronically.

To follow or participate in the meeting:

1. Videoconference: to follow the meeting on-line, click here to register:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_06q0GcosRnmvy4dNOutGlw After clicking on the URL, please take a few seconds to submit your first and last name, and e-mail address then click “Register”, which will approve your registration and a new URL to join the meeting will appear.

Phone-in: Once registered, you will receive an e-mail with instructions to join the meeting telephonically, and then dial Telephone: 877 853 5257 (Toll Free)

2. using the Webinar ID and Password found in the e-mail.

E-mail Public Comments: If preferred, please e-mail public comments to the City Clerk, Ms.

Calderon at [email protected] by 5 PM on the day of the City Council meeting. All E-mail Public Comments will be forwarded to the entire City Council.

For those who choose to attend the meeting via videoconferencing or telephone shall have 3 minutes for public comments.

Location:

Videoconferencing Meeting (this meeting via teleconferencing is open to the public) To join this virtual meeting on-line click here:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_06q0GcosRnmvy4dNOutGlw To join on telephone, you must register in the URL above, which sends an e-mail to your inbox, and then dial (877) 853-5257 using the Webinar ID and Password found in the e-mail.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Agenda February 1, 2022 Page 3
* CITY COUNCIL *
February 1, 2022

1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL – Mayor Cloven.

2. MEETING PROTOCOL VIDEO– City Clerk

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – led by Councilmember Diaz.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are typically routine in nature and are considered for approval by one single motion of the City Council. Members of the Council, Audience, or Staff wishing an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purpose of public comment, question, discussion or alternative action may request so through the Mayor.
(a) Approve the minutes of the City Council’s regular meeting of January 18, 2022. (City Clerk) (View here)
(b) Approve the Financial Demands and Obligations of the City. (Finance) (View here) (c) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Clayton Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency Under AB 361. (City Manager) (View here)
(d) Adopt a Resolution Accepting the Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) Performed by JJR Construction, Inc. as Complete, Approving the Attached Notice of Completion, Directing the City Clerk to Record Same with the County Recorder and Authorizing the Payment of All Retained Funds to JJR Construction, Inc.

Except for $2,100 for Signal Loop Repair 35 Days After Recording the Notice of Completion. (City Engineer) (View here)

5. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS – None.

6. REPORTS
(a) City Manager/Staff
(b) City Council - Reports from Council liaisons to Regional Committees, Commissions and Boards.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Agenda February 1, 2022 Page 4

7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS
Members of the public may address the City Council on items within the Council’s jurisdiction, (which are not on the agenda) at this time. To assure an orderly meeting and an equal opportunity for everyone, each speaker is limited to 3 minutes, enforced at the Mayor’s discretion. In accordance with State Law, no action may take place on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. The Council may respond to statements made or questions asked, or may at its discretion request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter.

Public comment and input on Public Hearing, Action Items and other Agenda Items will be allowed when each item is considered by the City Council.

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None.

9. ACTION ITEMS
(a) Discussion and Potential Authorization to Send a Letter to the BART Board of Directors Regarding Upcoming Redistricting. (City Manager) (View here) (b) Discussion of Ten-Year General Fund Forecast. (City Manager) (View here) (c) Revenue Options and Potential Revenue Measure Next Steps. (City Manager and Finance Director) (View here)

10. CLOSED SESSION – None.

11. COUNCIL ITEMS – limited to Council requests and directives for future meetings.

12. ADJOURNMENT - the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting will be February 15, 2022. # # # # #
Agenda Item: 4(a)
____________________________________________________________________________ City Council Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 1

MINUTES
OF THE

REGULAR MEETING

CLAYTON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, January 18, 2022

1. CALL TO ORDER THE CITY COUNCIL – The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Cloven on a virtual web meeting and telephonically (877) 853-5257.

Councilmembers present: Mayor Cloven, Vice Mayor Tillman, and Councilmembers Diaz, Wan, and Wolfe. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Reina Schwartz, City Attorney Martin de los Angeles, and City Clerk/HR Manager Janet Calderon.

2. MEETING PROTOCOL VIDEO – City Clerk.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – led by Councilmember Diaz.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilmember Diaz, seconded by Councilmember Wan, to approve the Consent Calendar items 4(a) – 4(c) as submitted. (Passed 5-0). (a) Approved the minutes of the City Council’s regular meeting of January 4, 2022. (City Clerk)
(b) Approved the Financial Demands and Obligations of the City. (Finance) (c) Adopted Resolution No. 04-2022 of the City Council of the City of Clayton Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency Under AB 361. (City Manager)

5. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
(a) Certificates of Recognition to public school students for exemplifying the “Do the Right Thing” character trait of “Kindness” during the months of November and December 2021. (Mayor Cloven)
Councilmember Wolfe and Mt. Diablo Elementary School Principal Katie Sanchez and teachers Mrs. Fail and Mrs. Erickson presented certificates to Cooper Calabo and Aaron Carbaugh.

Councilmember Wolfe and Diablo View Middle School Principal Peter Fong presented certificates to Finnian Duggan and Dylan Gettrost.
____________________________________________________________________________ City Council Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 2

6. REPORTS
(a) City Manager/Staff
City Manager Reina Schwartz advised City Hall is currently closed to the public, however, staff is able to meet with the public by appointment. (b) City Council - Reports from Council liaisons to Regional Committees, Commissions and Boards.

Councilmember Wan indicated “No Report”.

Councilmember Diaz met with the 2022 Clayton Annual BBQ Cook-off Committee, met with the City Manager and met with the Police Chief.

Councilmember Wolfe met with the Mayor, met with the City Manager, met with the Community Development Director, attended the Contra Costa County Mayors’ Conference, and responded to emails and phone calls from constituents.

Vice Mayor Tillman attended the Contra Costa County Mayors’ Conference, was appointed to the Community Services Policy Committee for CalCities, attended the Young Dems of Contra Costa County forum with Ben Therriault candidate for Contra Costa County Sheriff, met with the City Manager, met with the Mayor, received a suggestion by a citizen for the installation of a light on Marsh Creek Road near the town clock, and is looking forward to meeting with the Trails and Landscaping Committee.

Mayor Cloven attended the meeting of Transportation Partnership and Cooperation for Central Contra Costa (TRANSPAC), attended the Contra Costa County Mayors’ Conference, volunteered with the Clayton Business and Community Association Holiday decoration take-down, spoke to the City Manager regarding item 9(e) on the agenda this evening, met with Councilmember Tim McGallian from the City of Concord, met with Debora Allen from the BART District, met with the City Manager, met with the Community Development Director, met with MIG regarding the Housing Element and spoke briefly about an anonymous letter received by various members the community.

7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS
Debora Allen provided a brief update on the redistricting of Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART).

Roy Correa expressed his dissatisfaction on the annual rotation of Mayor that occurred in December 2020.

Mayor Cloven closed public comment.

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None.

Agenda Item: 4(a)
____________________________________________________________________________ City Council Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 3

9. ACTION ITEMS
(a) Adopt a Resolution Adopting A Purchasing Guidelines Policy for the Purchase of Goods, Services, Supplies and Equipment. (City Manager) City Manager Schwartz presented the report.

Following questions by the City Council, Mayor Cloven opened the item to public comment; no comments were offered.

It was moved by Councilmember Diaz, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adopt Resolution No. 05-2022 establishing a new Purchasing Guidelines Policy for the purchase of goods, services, supplies and equipment, as amended relating to professional services agreements. (Passed 5-0).
(b) Adopt a Resolution Approving One-Time Essential Worker Premium Pay for City Employees and Appropriating American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funding for Implementation. (City Manager)
City Manager Schwartz presented the report.

Following questions by the City Council, Mayor Cloven opened the item to public comment; no comments were offered.

It was moved by Councilmember Diaz, seconded by Vice Mayor Tillman, to adopt Resolution No. 06-2022 Approving One-Time Essential Worker Premium Pay for City Employees and Appropriating American Rescue Plan Act Funds for Implementation. (Passed 5-0).
(c) Update on Final American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Rules and Recommending Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Criteria for the Clayton Cares Program. (City Manager) City Manager Schwartz presented the report.

Following questions by the City Council, Mayor Cloven opened the item for public comment.

Dee Vieira requested more information on how citizens and businesses can apply for the American Rescue Plan Act funding.

Pat Pannell from Clayton business “Chick Boss” thanked the City Council for the funding.

Mayor Cloven closed public comment.

It was moved by Councilmember Diaz, seconded by Councilmember Wan, to adopt Resolution No. 08-2022 Amending Program Parameters for the Clayton Cares Program. (Passed 5-0).
____________________________________________________________________________ City Council Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 4
(d) First Amendment to City Manager Employment Agreement with Reina Schwartz. (Mayor Cloven)
Mayor Cloven presented the report.

Following questions by the City Council, Mayor Cloven opened the item to public comment; no comments were offered.

It was moved by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Vice Mayor Tillman, to accept the First Amendment to City Manager Employment Agreement with Reina Schwartz. (Passed 5-0).
(e) A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Clayton Adopting the City of Clayton’s Salary Schedule Effective December 27, 2021 in Conformance with CalPERS Requirements to Provide a Publicly Available Salary Schedule. (City Manager) City Manager Schwartz presented the report.

Following questions by the City Council, Mayor Cloven opened the item to public comment; no comments were offered.

It was moved by Councilmember Wan, seconded by Councilmember Diaz, to adopt Resolution No. 07-2022 Adopting the City of Clayton’s Salary Schedule Effective December 27, 2021 in Conformance with CalPERS Requirements to Provide a Publicly Available Salary Schedule. (Passed 5-0).

10. CLOSED SESSION – None.

11. COUNCIL ITEMS
Mayor Cloven requested a future agenda item regarding the City’s position, if any, on the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Redistricting.

Councilmember Wolfe requested a future agenda item regarding the Landslide area near the school that continues to occur and possible solutions.

Councilmember Diaz complimented Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for their quick efforts in the restoration of lost power recently.

Vice Mayor Tillman announced Clayton’s librarian Karen Hansen-Smith will be retiring at the end of this month.

12. ADJOURNMENT– on call by Mayor Cloven, the City Council adjourned its meeting at 8:53 p.m.

The next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council will be February 1, 2022. # # # # #
Agenda Item: 4(a)
____________________________________________________________________________ City Council Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 5
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________
Janet Calderon, City Clerk

APPROVED BY THE CLAYTON CITY COUNCIL
______________________________________
Peter Cloven, Mayor
# # # # #
Agenda Item: 4(b)

STAFF REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JENNIFER GIANTVALLEY, ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN
DATE: 02/01/2022
SUBJECT: FINANCIAL DEMANDS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council, by minute action, approve the financial demands and obligations of the City for the purchase of services and goods in the ordinary course of operations.

Attachments:

1. Open Invoice Report, dated 1/26/22 (3 pages)

2. Open Invoice Report for CalCard dated 1/26/22 (2 pages)

3. Open Invoice Report for ARPA, dated 1/26/22 (4 pages)

4. Payroll Reconciliation Summary report PPE 01/09/22 (2 pages) Attached Report Purpose Date Amount
Open Invoice Report Accounts Payable 1/26/2022 $ 180,017.81 Open Invoice Report (CalCard) Accounts Payable 1/26/2022 $ 7,491.95 Open Invoice Report (ARPA) Accounts Payable 1/26/2022 $ 212,000.00 Payroll Reconciliation Summary Payroll, Taxes 1/14/2022 $ 95,870.64 Total Required $ 495,380.40
1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 1
Open Invoice Report
Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
All City Management Services, Inc.

All City Management Services, Inc. 2/1/2022 12/28/2021 74176 School crossing guard svcs 12/21/21-12/25/21 $772.20 $0.00 $772.20 Totals for All City Management Services, Inc.: $772.20 $0.00 $772.20 ALTEC Industries, Inc.

ALTEC Industries, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/13/2022 50909909 Service to boom truck $553.50 $0.00 $553.50 Totals for ALTEC Industries, Inc.: $553.50 $0.00 $553.50 AT&T (CalNet3)
AT&T (CalNet3) 2/1/2022 1/22/2022 17654981 Phones 12/22/21-1/21/22 $1,194.52 $0.00 $1,194.52 Totals for AT&T (CalNet3): $1,194.52 $0.00 $1,194.52
Bay Area Barricade Serv.

Bay Area Barricade Serv. 2/1/2022 1/13/2022 28058 Street signs $378.64 $0.00 $378.64 Totals for Bay Area Barricade Serv.: $378.64 $0.00 $378.64 Best Best & Kreiger LLP
Best Best & Kreiger LLP 2/1/2022 1/19/2022 924980 Legal services December 2021 $9,938.00 $0.00 $9,938.00 Best Best & Kreiger LLP 2/1/2022 1/19/2022 924981 PD Legal svcs December 2021 $655.70 $0.00 $655.70 Best Best & Kreiger LLP 2/1/2022 1/19/2022 924982 Labor/Empl Legal svcs December 2021 $103.80 $0.00 $103.80 Best Best & Kreiger LLP 2/1/2022 1/19/2022 924983 Code Enf Legal svcs December 2021 $2,252.48 $0.00 $2,252.48 Totals for Best Best & Kreiger LLP: $12,949.98 $0.00 $12,949.98 CA Department of Justice
CA Department of Justice 2/1/2022 1/6/2022 556604 Fingerprinting December 2021 $32.00 $0.00 $32.00 Totals for CA Department of Justice: $32.00 $0.00 $32.00 CalPERS Health
CalPERS Health 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 16682298 Medical February 2022 $35,660.98 $0.00 $35,660.98 Totals for CalPERS Health: $35,660.98 $0.00 $35,660.98
CCWD
CCWD 2/1/2022 1/10/2022 G series Water 11/3/21-1/5/22 $13,323.16 $0.00 $13,323.16 Totals for CCWD: $13,323.16 $0.00 $13,323.16
Cintas Corporation
Cintas Corporation 2/1/2022 1/13/2022 4107588006 PW uniforms through 1/13/22 $49.00 $0.00 $49.00 Cintas Corporation 2/1/2022 1/20/2022 4108283709 PW uniforms through 1/20/22 $49.00 $0.00 $49.00 Totals for Cintas Corporation: $98.00 $0.00 $98.00
City of Concord
City of Concord 2/1/2022 1/4/2022 91269 Dispatch svcs February 2022 $25,639.87 $0.00 $25,639.87 City of Concord 2/1/2022 1/6/2022 91271 Live scan $48.00 $0.00 $48.00 Totals for City of Concord: $25,687.87 $0.00 $25,687.87 1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 2
Open Invoice Report
Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Clayton Community Church
Clayton Community Church 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 HHrental Deposit refund Hoyer Hall $200.00 $0.00 $200.00 Totals for Clayton Community Church: $200.00 $0.00 $200.00 Comcast Business (PD)
Comcast Business (PD) 2/1/2022 1/1/2022 136755913 PD Internet December 2021 $935.42 $0.00 $935.42 Totals for Comcast Business (PD): $935.42 $0.00 $935.42 Concord Uniforms
Concord Uniforms 2/1/2022 1/17/2022 19127 PD uniforms $967.23 $0.00 $967.23 Totals for Concord Uniforms: $967.23 $0.00 $967.23
De Lage Landen Financial Services, Inc.

De Lage Landen Financial Services, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/7/2022 74990855 Late fee copier contract $54.38 $0.00 $54.38 De Lage Landen Financial Services, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/21/2022 75169151 Copier lease February 2022 $1,004.48 $0.00 $1,004.48 Totals for De Lage Landen Financial Services, Inc.: $1,058.86 $0.00 $1,058.86 Globalstar LLC
Globalstar LLC 2/1/2022 1/16/2022 26444741 Sat Phone 1/16/22-2/15/22 $110.19 $0.00 $110.19 Totals for Globalstar LLC: $110.19 $0.00 $110.19
Green Tech Roofing
Green Tech Roofing 2/1/2022 1/11/2022 BP192-2021 C&D refund $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 Totals for Green Tech Roofing: $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 Harris & Associates, Inc.

Harris & Associates, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 51200 CIP Engineering svcs December 2021 $10,350.00 $0.00 $10,350.00 Harris & Associates, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 51201 GHAD Engineering svcs December 2021 $220.00 $0.00 $220.00 Harris & Associates, Inc. 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 51199 Engineering svcs December 2021 $10,384.15 $0.00 $10,384.15 Totals for Harris & Associates, Inc.: $20,954.15 $0.00 $20,954.15 JJR Enterprises, Inc
JJR Enterprises, Inc 2/1/2022 1/18/2022 3417067 Copier usage 12/18/21-1/17/22 $119.15 $0.00 $119.15 Totals for JJR Enterprises, Inc: $119.15 $0.00 $119.15
Roxanne Johnson
Roxanne Johnson 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 EH010822 EH deposit refund $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 Totals for Roxanne Johnson: $500.00 $0.00 $500.00
League of CA Cities East Bay Division
League of CA Cities East Bay Division 2/1/2022 1/25/2022 641083 Membership dues calendar year 2022 $6,355.00 $0.00 $6,355.00 Totals for League of CA Cities East Bay Division: $6,355.00 $0.00 $6,355.00 LEHR
LEHR 2/1/2022 1/21/2022 S169981 Outfit PD vehicle 1746 $23,104.67 $0.00 $23,104.67 1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 3
Open Invoice Report
Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Totals for LEHR: $23,104.67 $0.00 $23,104.67
MPA
MPA 2/1/2022 1/21/2022 INV002361 Medicare reimbursment STD, Oct-Dec 21 $104.40 $0.00 $104.40 MPA 2/1/2022 1/21/2022 INV002347 EAP program Q2FY22 $268.41 $0.00 $268.41 Totals for MPA: $372.81 $0.00 $372.81
Occupational Health Centers of California
Occupational Health Centers of Califor 2/1/2022 1/6/2022 74046984 Pre-employment exam $354.00 $0.00 $354.00 Totals for Occupational Health Centers of California: $354.00 $0.00 $354.00 Pacific Office Automation
Pacific Office Automation 2/1/2022 1/13/2022 218958 Copier lease pmt 58 of 60 $106.58 $0.00 $106.58 Totals for Pacific Office Automation: $106.58 $0.00 $106.58 PG&E
PG&E 2/1/2022 1/15/2022 011522 Energy 12/15/21-1/14/22 $21,875.77 $0.00 $21,875.77 PG&E 2/1/2022 1/21/2022 012122 Energy 12/20/21-1/19/22 $4,956.94 $0.00 $4,956.94 Totals for PG&E: $26,832.71 $0.00 $26,832.71
Pond M Solutions
Pond M Solutions 2/1/2022 1/1/2022 7155 Fountain maint December 2021 $650.00 $0.00 $650.00 Totals for Pond M Solutions: $650.00 $0.00 $650.00
Primepay, LLC
Primepay, LLC 2/1/2022 12/31/2021 INV-330959-1 Payroll fees December 2021 $429.00 $0.00 $429.00 Primepay, LLC 2/1/2022 11/30/2021 INV-294927-1 Payroll fees November 2021 $429.00 $0.00 $429.00 Totals for Primepay, LLC: $858.00 $0.00 $858.00
Texas Life Insurance Company
Texas Life Insurance Company 2/1/2022 1/18/2022 SMF0F1B202201170 Supplemental insurance $42.25 $0.00 $42.25 Totals for Texas Life Insurance Company: $42.25 $0.00 $42.25 Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless 2/1/2022 1/1/2022 9896293656 PW cell phones 12/2/21-1/1/22 $202.20 $0.00 $202.20 Totals for Verizon Wireless: $202.20 $0.00 $202.20
Western Exterminator
Western Exterminator 2/1/2022 1/4/2022 31563C Pest Control January 2022 $461.70 $0.00 $461.70 Totals for Western Exterminator: $461.70 $0.00 $461.70
Workers.com
Workers.com 2/1/2022 1/14/2022 131888 Seasonal workers week end 1/9/22 $4,182.04 $0.00 $4,182.04 Totals for Workers.com: $4,182.04 $0.00 $4,182.04
GRAND TOTALS: $180,017.81 $0.00 $180,017.81
1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 1
Open Invoice Report
CalCard Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
US Bank CalCard
US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Annual prime membership AMAZON PRIME* $129.41 $0.00 $129.41 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 BISON LIFE Safety Glasses, AMZN MKTP U $31.98 $0.00 $31.98 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 HOUNDSCOOP Case of 2000 Pe AMZN MK $50.01 $0.00 $50.01 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Cell phone memory APPLE.COM/BILL $0.99 $0.00 $0.99 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 DIESEL EXHAUST FLD 2 5GL AUTOZON $17.55 $0.00 $17.55 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 DIESEL EXHAUST FLD 2 5GL AUTOZON $30.73 $0.00 $30.73 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 QPR 50-LB PERMNT ASPHALT R LOWES # $87.71 $0.00 $87.71 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 QPR 50-LB PERMNT ASPHALT R LOWES # $131.57 $0.00 $131.57 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 LNX 6-IN 6TPI ES RECIP BLD LOWES #0 $258.64 $0.00 $258.64 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Grafitti clean up OUTDOOR SUPPLY CLAYTO $61.48 $0.00 $61.48 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Management class PAYPAL *REGIONALGO $950.00 $0.00 $950.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 IT AMAZON WEB SERVICES $354.50 $0.00 $354.50 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 NEW BATTERY FRANKLIN WIREL AMZ $10.86 $0.00 $10.86 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Employee recognition gift cards BHN*GIFTCARD $935.45 $0.00 $935.45 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Air purifier BLUEAIR INC $661.19 $0.00 $661.19 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 PAC Ad GRASSROOTSLAB, LLC $260.00 $0.00 $260.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Training recording LIEBERTCASS $75.00 $0.00 $75.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 IT NAMESILO $9.95 $0.00 $9.95 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 PAC Ad NEOGOV $199.00 $0.00 $199.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 All hands Meeting PANERA BREAD #60610 $269.57 $0.00 $269.57 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 All hands Meeting PANERA BREAD #60610 $120.50 $0.00 $120.50 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 All hands Meeting PANERA BREAD #60610 $25.45 $0.00 $25.45 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Storage rent PY *CENTRAL SELF STORAG $190.00 $0.00 $190.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 COVID tests SAMSCLUB.COM $152.25 $0.00 $152.25 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 PAC Ad THEPRESSNET $20.00 $0.00 $20.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 9255229137,PAUL JACOBSON VZWRLSS*AP $147.32 $0.00 $147.32 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 PAC Ad WESTERN CITY MAGAZINE $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Audio Conferencing Monthl ZOOM.US 888- $180.00 $0.00 $180.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Standard Pro Monthly ZOOM.US 888-799-966 $14.99 $0.00 $14.99 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Pads, batteries AED SUPERSTORE $239.25 $0.00 $239.25 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Shoe Covers Disposable Rec AMZN MKTP U $10.56 $0.00 $10.56 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Team building meeting HOUR COFFEE & MO $30.00 $0.00 $30.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 ID cards IMAGE SALES $167.21 $0.00 $167.21 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Less lethal munitions WPSG, INC. $127.82 $0.00 $127.82 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 DELL 24 ICM MONITOR - P241 DMI* DEL $314.92 $0.00 $314.92 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Training lunch JERSEY MIKES #1 $13.94 $0.00 $13.94 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Training lunch JERSEY MIKES #3 $14.16 $0.00 $14.16 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Zep Surface Disinfectant S AMZN MKTP US $69.58 $0.00 $69.58 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Cleaning supplies CVS/PHARMACY #06526 $46.91 $0.00 $46.91 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Cleaning supplies WALGREENS #2112 $10.09 $0.00 $10.09 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 CALENDAR,MON,RY22,8X11 OFFICE DE $12.71 $0.00 $12.71 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Website renewal PAYPAL *WEBHOSTING $47.88 $0.00 $47.88 1/26/2022 City of Clayton Open Page 2
Invoice Report
CalCard Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Postage POSTALANNEX SERVICE CENTE $72.29 $0.00 $72.29 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Trodat 5558 Numberer SP * SCHWAAB, IN $128.37 $0.00 $128.37 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 HP 30A BLACK TONER CARTRID STAPLS $60.35 $0.00 $60.35 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 MAGIC TAPE 3/4 IN X 1000 STAPLS7343 $21.90 $0.00 $21.90 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Dry gas for PAS machines INTOXIMETERS I $232.46 $0.00 $232.46 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Expedited freight for helmets PAYPAL *EXEC $60.00 $0.00 $60.00 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 PARTY ICE $32.57 $0.00 $32.57 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 Jersey Mikes training lunch McCracken 2 $27.88 $0.00 $27.88 US Bank CalCard 12/1/2021 11/22/2021 Stmt end 11/22/21 TLO monthly fee $75.00 $0.00 $75.00 Totals for US Bank CalCard: $7,491.95 $0.00 $7,491.95
GRAND TOTALS: $7,491.95 $0.00 $7,491.95
1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 1
Open Invoice Report
ARPA Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Artur Akopyan
Artur Akopyan 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Artur Akopyan: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Beauty by Teresa Song
Beauty by Teresa Song 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for Beauty by Teresa Song: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Leonard J Cantanzaro
Leonard J Cantanzaro 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Leonard J Cantanzaro: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Chick Boss
Chick Boss 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Chick Boss: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Chickadee Beverages, LLC
Chickadee Beverages, LLC 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Chickadee Beverages, LLC: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Cinco De Mayo Taqueria
Cinco De Mayo Taqueria 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Cinco De Mayo Taqueria: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Clayton Historical Society
Clayton Historical Society 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Clayton Historical Society: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Clayton Pioneer
Clayton Pioneer 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Clayton Pioneer: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Clayton Theatre Company
Clayton Theatre Company 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Clayton Theatre Company: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Clayton Valley Presbytarian Children's Ctr
Clayton Valley Presbytarian Children's C 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Clayton Valley Presbytarian Children's Ctr: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Kathrine Coakley
Kathrine Coakley 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Kathrine Coakley: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Cup O' Jo
1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 2
Open Invoice Report
ARPA Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Cup O' Jo 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Cup O' Jo: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Diablo View Construction, Inc
Diablo View Construction, Inc 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for Diablo View Construction, Inc: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Diablo View Middle School PFC
Diablo View Middle School PFC 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Diablo View Middle School PFC: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 DLF Realty, Inc
DLF Realty, Inc 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Care Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for DLF Realty, Inc: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Dry Clean USA
Dry Clean USA 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Dry Clean USA: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Ed's Mudville Grill, Inc
Ed's Mudville Grill, Inc 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Ed's Mudville Grill, Inc: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Hair by Mindy
Hair by Mindy 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Hair by Mindy: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Jenny D Lashes
Jenny D Lashes 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Jenny D Lashes: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Joyce Kelly
Joyce Kelly 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $8,500.00 $0.00 $8,500.00 Totals for Joyce Kelly: $8,500.00 $0.00 $8,500.00
Lenny's Barber Shop & Salon
Lenny's Barber Shop & Salon 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Lenny's Barber Shop & Salon: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Mathnasium of Clayton
Mathnasium of Clayton 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Mathnasium of Clayton: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Meraki Wreath Company
Meraki Wreath Company 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 3
Open Invoice Report
ARPA Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Totals for Meraki Wreath Company: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Nails Naturally
Nails Naturally 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Nails Naturally: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Rebecca Nell
Rebecca Nell 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for Rebecca Nell: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Performance Trailer Service/West Coast Hunts
Performance Trailer Service/West Coast H 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Performance Trailer Service/West Coast Hunts: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 John Postlethwaite
John Postlethwaite 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for John Postlethwaite: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Carol Putman
Carol Putman 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for Carol Putman: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Quality Food Brokers
Quality Food Brokers 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Quality Food Brokers: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Sweet Peas Floral Designs
Sweet Peas Floral Designs 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Sweet Peas Floral Designs: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 The Frontier Salon
The Frontier Salon 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for The Frontier Salon: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Shelley Thomason
Shelley Thomason 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $8,500.00 $0.00 $8,500.00 Totals for Shelley Thomason: $8,500.00 $0.00 $8,500.00
TJ Cuts Corporation
TJ Cuts Corporation 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for TJ Cuts Corporation: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 TLC Pet Grooming
TLC Pet Grooming 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA Clayton Cares Program $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 Totals for TLC Pet Grooming: $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 1/26/2022 City of Clayton Page 4
Open Invoice Report
ARPA Obligations
Vendor Name Due Date Date Invoice Number Invoice Description Balance Discount Expires On Net Amount Due Invoice Invoice Potential Discount
Valley Cleaners
Valley Cleaners 1/31/2022 1/26/2022 ARPA2 Clayton Cares Program $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Totals for Valley Cleaners: $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
GRAND TOTALS: $212,000.00 $0.00 $212,000.00
Payroll Totals
Payroll Checks Check Type Count Net Check Dir Dep Amount Net Amount Regular 30 0.00 65,321.67 65,321.67
Regular 6 3,914.39 0.00 3,914.39
Totals 36 3,914.39 65,321.67 69,236.06 ĺ 69,236.06
Payroll Checks Check Type Agency Type Count Net Check Dir Dep Amount Net Amount Agency EFSDU 1 0.00 9.23 9.23
Totals 1 0.00 9.23 9.23 ĺ 9.23
Total Net Payroll Liability 3,914.39 65,330.90 69,245.29 ĺ 69,245.29 Tax Liability
CA and Related Taxes Tax Id Rate Frequency Wage Cap Wages EE Amount ER Amount CA SDI - Employee Semi-Weekly 102,384.10 102,384.10
California SITW Semi-Weekly 100,109.10 100,109.10 5,576.82 Totals 5,576.82 0.00 ĺ 5,576.82
CASUI and Related Taxes Tax Id Rate Frequency Wage Cap Wages EE Amount ER Amount CA Edu & Training 0.001000 Quarterly 102,384.10 95,870.21 95.87 California SUI 0.020000 Quarterly 102,384.10 95,870.21 1,917.40 Totals 0.00 2,013.27 ĺ 2,013.27
FITW and Related Taxes Tax Id Rate Frequency Wage Cap Wages EE Amount ER Amount Federal Income Tax Semi-Weekly 100,109.10 100,109.10 15,114.03 Medicare Semi-Weekly 102,384.10 102,384.10 1,484.58
Medicare - Employer Semi-Weekly 102,384.10 102,384.10 1,484.57 OASDI Semi-Weekly 3,039.25 3,039.25 188.43
OASDI - Employer Semi-Weekly 3,039.25 3,039.25 188.43
Totals 16,787.04 1,673.00 ĺ 18,460.04
FUTA and Related Taxes Tax Id Rate Frequency Wage Cap Wages EE Amount ER Amount Fed Unemployment Quarterly 102,384.10 95,870.21 575.22
Totals 0.00 575.22 ĺ 575.22
Total Tax Liability 22,363.86 4,261.49 ĺ 26,625.35
Billing
Total Payroll Liability 95,870.64 ĺ 95,870.64
Payroll Summary
City of Clayton

Check Dates: 01/14/2022 to 01/14/2022
Pay Periods: 12/27/2021 to 01/09/2022
Processes: 2022011401 - 2022011402
Invoice Date Gross Discount Tax Adjustment Amount
Totals ĺ
Transfers
Type Date Source Account Amount
Dir Dep 1/13/2022 65,321.67
Tax 1/13/2022 26,625.35
Trust 1/13/2022 3,914.39
Trust Agency 1/13/2022 9.23
Totals Transfers 95,870.64 ĺ 95,870.64
Tax Deposits
Required Tax Deposits Tax Due On Amount
( Deposit made by Service Bureau ) California SITW 1/20/2022 5,576.82 ( Deposit made by Service Bureau ) Federal Income Tax 1/20/2022 18,460.04 ( Deposit made by Service Bureau ) California SUI 5/2/2022 2,013.27 ( Deposit made by Service Bureau ) Fed Unemployment 5/2/2022 575.22 Total Tax Deposits 26,625.35
Payroll Summary
City of Clayton

Check Dates: 01/14/2022 to 01/14/2022
Pay Periods: 12/27/2021 to 01/09/2022
Processes: 2022011401 - 2022011402
Agenda Item: 4(c)

AGENDA REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER
DATE: February 1, 2022
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Clayton Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency Under AB 361
___________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution of the City Council allowing for video and teleconference meetings during the COVID-19 state of emergency under AB 361.

BACKGROUND
Last year, the State Legislature passed and Governor Newsom signed AB 361 which continues many of the provisions related to the Brown Act that were in place under Executive Orders, which expired September 30, 2021 that allowed for video and teleconferencing during the state of emergency. Since AB 361 has been signed into law, the City can continue to meet virtually until such time as the Governor declares the State of Emergency due to COVID-19 over and measures to promote social distancing are no longer recommended.

On September 20, 2021, the Contra Costa County Health Officer issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings and strongly recommends on-line meetings. If in-person meetings need to occur, the County Health Officer recommends social distancing of six feet of separation between all attendees. The proposed resolution provides that the City Council and all subsidiary City boards and commissions may continue to hold video and teleconference meetings while the state of emergency is still in effect and physical distancing is recommended.

In order to continue to hold video and teleconference meetings, the City Council will need to review and make findings every thirty days that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person and that state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote physical distancing.

Subject: Resolution Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency Under AB 361
Date: February 1, 2022

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

Attachment:

Resolution of the City Council Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency Under AB 361
Resolution ##-2022 AB 361 February 1, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. ##-2022

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLAYTON

ALLOWING FOR VIDEO AND TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS DURING THE COVID-19 STATE OF EMERGENCY UNDER AB 361
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California proclaimed a State of Emergency for COVID-19;
WHEREAS, AB 361 was recently passed by the State Legislature and signed by Governor Newsom and went into effect immediately and allows the City to continue to meet virtually until such time as the Governor declares the State of Emergency due to COVID-19 over and measures to promote physical distancing are no longer recommended;
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021 the Contra Costa County Health Officer issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings and strongly recommends on-line meetings and if in person meetings occur then recommends physical distancing of six feet of separation between all attendees;
WHEREAS, in light of this recommendation, the City Council desires for itself and for all other City legislatives bodies that are subject to the Brown Act to continue to meet via video and/or teleconference; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to AB 361 the City Council will review the findings required to be made every 30 days.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council hereby finds on behalf of itself and all other City legislative bodies: (1) a state of emergency has been proclaimed by the Governor; (2) the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the City’s legislative bodies to meet safely in person; and (3) local officials continue to recommend measures to promote physical distancing.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council and all other City legislative bodies will continue to meet via video and/or teleconference during the COVID-19 emergency.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Clayton City Council, State of California, on this 1st day of February 2022, by the following vote.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Resolution ##-2022 AB 361 February 1, 2022

THE CITY COUNCIL OF CLAYTON,
CA
Peter Cloven, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Janet Calderon, City Clerk
Agenda Item: 4(d)

AGENDA REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Mark Nassar, City Engineer
DATE: February 1, 2022
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Accepting the Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453)Performed by JJR Construction, Inc. as Complete, Approvingthe Attached Notice of Completion, Directing the City Clerk to Record Same with the County Recorder and Authorizing the Payment of All Retained Funds to JJR Construction, Inc.Except for $2,100 for Signal Loop Repair 35 Days After Recording the Notice of Completion
___________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting the Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) performed by JJR Construction, Inc. as complete, approving the attached Notice of Completion, directing the City Clerk to record same with the County Recorder and authorizing the payment of all retained funds except for $2,100 for signal loop repair to JJR Construction 35 days after recording the Notice of Completion.

BACKGROUND
On July 20, 2021, the City Council approved the award of a construction contract to JJR Construction Inc. of Concord, California in the amount of $288,738 for the City of Clayton Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453). Clayton’s Capital Improvement Program budget for FY 2020/21 included the construction of the FY2020 Pavement Rehabilitation Project (CIP 10449). The ADA law requires that roadways receiving more than a microsurfacing or slurry seal conform to current ADA requirements. Hence, the Pavement Rehabilitation project in the budget was broken into two components: (1) bringing the roadways up to ADA standards by installing/correcting curb ramps and (2) treating the pavement. The Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) is the first of these two projects.

The project improvements include the installation of detectable warning surface (DWS) on ramps that would otherwise meet current standards based on slopes and other geometric requirements, but are out of compliance with current ADA standards, and the installation of new ramps where required. On September 21, 2021, the City Council approved Resolution 55-2021 establishing the budget for the Curb Ramp CIP (10453) at $353,888 including construction and construction management.

Resolution accepting Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP No. 10453) as complete Date: February 1, 2022

DISCUSSION
The Notice to Proceed was issued to the low-bid contractor, JJR Construction, Inc., (JJR) on September 27, 2021 and actual construction work commenced in October of 2021. There were forty-five curb ramps in the original scope of work. Eight of these original forty-five curb ramps were replaced with alternate locations that were considered more critical. In addition, two ramps, deemed also to be critical, were added, bringing the total to forty-seven curb ramps. During construction, City staff observed deteriorating conditions of sidewalks adjacent to the newly installed curb ramps and a few unsafe curb ramps that needed immediate repairs.

All these additional tasks generated a Construction Change Order (CCO) in the amount of $128,746.21 for JJR, and another additional cost of $15,810 incurred by Harris & Associates for their design and construction management activities for the project, increasing the project cost by $144,556.21 to a total of $498,444.21. On January 4, 2022, Council adopted a Resolution approving the CCO, and re-allocating $144,556.21 from the Neighborhood Pavement Preservation Project (CIP 10449) to the Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) to fund the increase in cost.

JJR completed construction of the Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) on December 10, 2021. After inspection by the City’s Project Construction Manager, the City Engineer determined that the completed project meets the project specifications. The City Engineer is recommending that City Council accept the Curb Ramp Improvement Project and order the filing of the Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPACT
The approved FY 2021/22 Capital Improvement Budget established CIP No. 10453 Curb Ramp Improvement Project with a project budget of $353,888 of which $288,738 was a construction contract with JJR. As described above, conditions in the field required a significant Construction Change Order, resulting in a final construction contract with JJR of $417,484.21.

To date the City has made payments totaling $396,610 to JJR. During construction, JJR accidentally cut a signal loop which was repaired by the Contra Costa County for a cost of $2,100. This cost will be back charged to JJR and therefore $2,100 will be deducted from the retention of $20,874. A retention of $ 18,774 will be released to JJR guaranteeing completion of the project for a total contract expenditure of $417,484.21.

With the City Council acceptance of this work and the recording of the Notice of Completion, the City will release all retained funds except the $2,100 for the signal loop repair to JJR 35 days after recordation of the Notice to Proceed as long as no claims are made against JJR Construction, Inc. by a material supplier or subcontractor.

Resolution accepting Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP No. 10453) as complete Date: February 1, 2022

CONCLUSION
CIP Project No. 10453, Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP 10453) is complete and the work performed meets the project specifications. The City Project Construction Manager inspected the completed work and determined that it meets the project specifications.

Therefore, the City Engineer recommends approval of this resolution accepting CIP Project No. 10453, the Curb Ramp Improvement Project as complete, ordering the filing of a Notice of Completion and authorizing the payment of all retained funds except for the $2,100 for the signal loop repair 35 days after filing of the notice.

Attachments: 1. Resolution [2 pp.]

2. Notice of Completion [2 pp.]
Resolution ##-2022 Curb Ramp Completion February 1, 2022 RESOLUTION NO. ##-2022

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CLAYTON CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP No. 10453) PERFORMED BY JJR CONSTRUCTION, INC. AS COMPLETE,

APPROVING THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION, DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD

SAME WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF ALL RETAINED FUNDS EXCEPT FOR $2,100 FOR SIGNAL LOOP REPAIR TO JJR CONSTRUCTION, INC. 35 DAYS AFTER RECORDING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION

THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Clayton, California
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2021 the City Council of Clayton, California did award a low-bid contract to JJR Construction, Inc. for the construction of the Clayton Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP #10453); and
WHEREAS, JJR Construction, Inc., represents that it has completed construction of the work in conformance with the project specifications and that the project is now ready for acceptance by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must accept the work as complete and order the filing of a Notice of Completion prior to release of the retained funds; and
WHEREAS, the City Construction Manager has inspected the completed work and determined that the completed work is in compliance with state requirements for conditions of curb ramps and sidewalks;
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the completed work is in compliance with the project specifications; and
WHEREAS, in its accompanying report the City Engineer recommends that the City Council adopt this Resolution accepting the Clayton Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP No. 10453) performed by JJR Construction, Inc., approving the Notice of Completion, directing the City Clerk to record same with the County Recorder and authorizing the payment of all retained funds to JJR Construction, Inc., except $2,100 for signal loop repair, 35 days after recording the Notice of Completion.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Clayton, California does hereby accept as complete, as of the date of adoption of this Resolution, accepting the Clayton Curb Ramp Improvement Project (CIP No. 10453) performed by JJR Construction, Inc., approving the Notice of Completion, directing the City Clerk to record same with the County Recorder and authorizing the payment of all retained funds except Resolution ##-2022 Curb Ramp Completion February 1, 2022 $2,100 for signal loop repair to JJR Construction, Inc. 35 days after recording the Notice of Completion.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of Clayton, California at a regular public meeting thereof held on the 1st day of February 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

THE CITY COUNCIL OF CLAYTON, CA
_________________________________
Peter Cloven, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Janet Calderon, City Clerk
Recording requested by (Section for Recorder’s Use Only) and when recorded mail to:

CITY OF CLAYTON
6000 Heritage Trail
Clayton, California 94517
Attn: Janet Calderon
[NO RECORDING FEE SHALL BE CHARGED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 6103]

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned is the Owner of a work of improvement described as Clayton Curb Ramp Improvement Project, Clayton CIP #10453, and of the real property on which the work of improvement is situated, which real property is located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California and specifically described as follows: City of Clayton, 6000 Heritage Trail, Clayton, CA 94517.

That the undersigned, as Owner of the above-described property, on July 20, 2021, entered into an original contract with JJR Construction, Inc. for the construction of the above-described work of improvement.

That on December 10, 2021, the work of improvement was actually completed by JJR Construction, Inc.

That the nature of the interest of the undersigned is as a fee simple ownership of curb ramps and sidewalks in the above-described real property.

That the name and address of the undersigned Owner of the above-described property is:

City of Clayton
6000 Heritage Trail
Clayton, California 94517
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

CITY OF CLAYTON
By:

Reina J. Schwartz
Its: City Manager
Dated:
[VERIFICATION ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

VERIFICATION
I, Reina J. Schwartz, state that I am the Authorized Agent of the Owner identified in the foregoing Notice of Completion. I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on this 1st day of February 2022 at Clayton, California.

CITY OF CLAYTON
By:

Reina J. Schwartz
Its: City Manager
Agenda Item: 9(a)
1 AGENDA REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: REINA J. SCHWARTZ, CITY MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2022
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL AUTHORIZATION TO SEND A LETTER TO

THE BART BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGARDING UPCOMING

REDISTRICTING
___________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction to staff as needed.

BACKGROUND
At the City Council meeting of January 18, 2022, the Council had a member of the public speaking on Matters Not on the Agenda regarding the upcoming consideration by the BART Board of several potential redistricting maps.

DISCUSSION
The following is some summary information regarding the upcoming BART redistricting. • General Redistricting information including links to previous meetings:
https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2021/news20211105
• The mapping dashboard:
https://geoinovo1.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8d65fce587ea4f3cb77156ccf5 6e3ec8
• The Demographic Data Webmap:
https://geoinovo1.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=234ff01ccc7a 4c61997e0df5a69691d3
o When you open this Webmap link, the colored areas on the map that appear first are the existing districts. Clayton is in District 1 the red area. You can Subject: Discussion and Potential Authorization to Send a Letter to the BART Board of Directors Regarding Upcoming Redistricting
Date: February 1, 2022

_______________________________________________________________________________________ 2 zoom down to street levels on this map to see the boundaries. You can overlay this map with the new proposed plans by clicking the third icon in the top right corner in the gray bar that has the stacked boxes, and selecting any criteria you want to overlay. There are three “BART District Plans” A-C to select. Each should be reviewed separately.
• Plan C is the only plan that proposes changes to the City of Clayton and would place Clayton in a BART district with the eastern part of Contra Costa County rather than the central portion as is currently the case.
• Last public outreach meeting:

February 2, 2022
06:00 PM Pacific Time
Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82168419186
Webinar ID: 821 6841 9186
Or Telephone US: +1 669 900 6833 (Toll Free) or 888 475 4499 The current plan is that the Redistricting Committee will meet at least once (maybe more) after the last public meeting, followed by at least one meeting (perhaps more) of the full Board of Directors to hear, assess and approve a new map. While there are currently three proposed maps, there could be more developed. The public meeting above is where you can submit your comments and feedback about the plans, and you can develop and propose your own plan or a community of interest.

BART Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee:

Lateefah Simon District 7, Chair
Mark Foley District 2
Liz Ames District 6

FISCAL IMPACTS
It is unlikely that there would be any specific fiscal impact from the BART redistricting effort.

ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1: Update to BART Board on Redistricting (January 13, 2022) Attachment 2: BART Population and Demographic Data by District Redistricting
Briefing to the
Board of Directors
Presentation
January 13, 2022
Redistricting Recap
• Redistricting is the process of adjusting district
lines every 10 years after each US Census
• GEOinovo: provide demographic and mapping
services to the public and Redistricting Committee
• Goal: Create population-balanced districts based
on 2020 US Census data
Completed Tasks
• Public meetings 1, 2 and 3
• Proposed maps (Plan A, B, C) and
demographic data provided to Board of
Directors
• Technology tools demonstrated and made
available to the public
Ongoing Tasks
• Public redistricting meetings
• Update proposed maps and demographic
data based on input from the public and
Redistricting Committee
• Coordinate with the Office of the District
Secretary to provide information to the
public and Redistricting Committee
• GEOinovo incorporates redistricting best
practices passed into law via the California Fair
Maps Act
• Designed to promote transparency during the
redistricting process
• Currently applies to cities and counties – NOT
special districts – BART is a special district
California Fair Maps Act (Overview)
Listed in order of priority. Implemented to the extent practicable

1. Districts shall be geographically contiguous

2. Maintain geographic integrity of neighborhoods or
communities of interest (COI)

3. Minimize the division of cities or census designated places (CDP)

4. Districts identifiable by natural and artificial barriers

5. Geographic compactness
California Fair Maps Act (Criteria)
Public Meeting Schedule
✓ Meeting 1: November 10, 2021
✓ Meeting 2: December 15, 2021
✓ Meeting 3: January 8, 2022
• Meeting 4: January 15, 2022
• Meeting 5: January 22, 2022
• Meeting 6: February 2, 2022
• BART.gov website
• Redistricting link on the main
page
• Links to technology tools on
the redistricting page
Learn about BART Redistricting
Technology Tools
• Interactive mapping tool enables public input
for districts and communities of interest
• Geo CIM (Community Input Map) – lightweight,
survey-based tool for submitting communities
of interest
• BART Districts and Demographic Data web map

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Population Data by District Census Population and Race/Ethnicity data by District (Current, Plan A, Plan B, Plan C) District
Number
(Current) Total Pop Latino Latino % White White % Black Black % Native
American
Native
American
% Asian Asian %
Hawaiian
/ Pac
Islander
Hawaiian /
Pac Islander
% Other
Other
%
Two or
More
Races
Two or
More
Races %
Total 3,726,435 846,053 22.7% 1,269,436 34.1% 330,986 8.9% 26,480 0.7% 1,134,447 30.4% 26,270 0.7% 49,441 1.3% 43,322 1.2% District 1 411,484 49,305 12.0% 228,294 55.5% 11,747 2.9% 3,668 0.9% 107,569 26.1% 1,392 0.3% 6,185 1.5% 3,324 0.8% District 2 427,995 158,802 37.1% 132,654 31.0% 53,836 12.6% 4,698 1.1% 62,698 14.6% 4,185 1.0% 5,164 1.2% 5,958 1.4% District 3 402,667 77,823 19.3% 177,013 44.0% 32,306 8.0% 2,505 0.6% 100,085 24.9% 2,151 0.5% 6,246 1.6% 4,538 1.1% District 4 418,105 125,905 30.1% 98,723 23.6% 77,895 18.6% 2,720 0.7% 98,800 23.6% 3,146 0.8% 4,696 1.1% 6,220 1.5% District 5 436,744 102,430 23.5% 146,960 33.6% 24,748 5.7% 3,635 0.8% 143,981 33.0% 4,890 1.1% 5,181 1.2% 4,919 1.1% District 6 398,953 76,433 19.2% 60,997 15.3% 13,910 3.5% 1,922 0.5% 233,612 58.6% 4,505 1.1% 3,151 0.8% 4,423 1.1% District 7 442,640 134,795 30.5% 103,606 23.4% 79,349 17.9% 2,924 0.7% 104,379 23.6% 3,224 0.7% 7,451 1.7% 6,912 1.6% District 8 383,690 42,439 11.1% 149,025 38.8% 12,683 3.3% 1,577 0.4% 168,256 43.9% 1,398 0.4% 5,205 1.4% 3,107 0.8% District 9 404,157 78,121 19.3% 172,164 42.6% 24,512 6.1% 2,831 0.7% 115,067 28.5% 1,379 0.3% 6,162 1.5% 3,921 1.0% District
Number
(Plan A) Total Pop Latino Latino % White White % Black
Black
%
Native
American
Native
American
% Asian Asian %
Hawaiian
/ Pac
Islander
Hawaiian /
Pac
Islander % Other
Other
%
Two or
More
Races
Two or
More
Races %
Total 3,726,435 846,053 22.7% 1,269,436 34.1% 330,986 8.9% 26,480 0.7% 1,134,447 30.4% 26,270 0.7% 49,441 1.3% 43,322 1.2% District 1 413,965 50,980 12.3% 247,689 59.8% 11,003 2.7% 3,909 0.9% 89,259 21.6% 1,410 0.3% 6,488 1.6% 3,227 0.8% District 2 414,595 155,913 37.6% 125,143 30.2% 53,414 12.9% 4,515 1.1% 60,682 14.6% 4,115 1.0% 4,965 1.2% 5,848 1.4% District 3 414,100 62,603 15.1% 187,281 45.2% 43,126 10.4% 2,957 0.7% 102,790 24.8% 1,460 0.4% 8,133 2.0% 5,750 1.4% District 4 414,598 185,234 44.7% 52,944 12.8% 70,220 16.9% 2,330 0.6% 88,458 21.3% 6,203 1.5% 3,306 0.8% 5,903 1.4% District 5 412,675 63,372 15.4% 161,018 39.0% 22,212 5.4% 3,538 0.9% 150,981 36.6% 2,008 0.5% 5,289 1.3% 4,257 1.0% District 6 413,896 80,757 19.5% 63,718 15.4% 16,042 3.9% 1,991 0.5% 238,648 57.7% 4,799 1.2% 3,259 0.8% 4,682 1.1% District 7 414,473 121,090 29.2% 102,157 24.6% 74,373 17.9% 2,688 0.6% 98,223 23.7% 3,464 0.8% 6,182 1.5% 6,296 1.5% District 8 414,049 57,849 14.0% 133,293 32.2% 15,203 3.7% 1,634 0.4% 196,188 47.4% 1,537 0.4% 4,895 1.2% 3,450 0.8% District 9 414,084 68,255 16.5% 196,193 47.4% 25,393 6.1% 2,918 0.7% 109,218 26.4% 1,274 0.3% 6,924 1.7% 3,909 0.9% District
Number
(Plan B) Total Pop Latino Latino % White White % Black
Black
%
Native
American
Native
American
% Asian Asian %
Hawaiian
/ Pac
Islander
Hawaiian /
Pac
Islander % Other
Other
%
Two or
More
Races
Two or
More
Races %
Total 3,726,435 846,053 22.7% 1,269,436 34.1% 330,986 8.9% 26,480 0.7% 1,134,447 30.4% 26,270 0.7% 49,441 1.3% 43,322 1.2% District 1 414,010 52,919 12.8% 229,032 55.3% 12,031 2.9% 3,719 0.9% 105,329 25.4% 1,433 0.3% 6,217 1.5% 3,330 0.8% District 2 413,907 153,853 37.2% 126,738 30.6% 53,308 12.9% 4,535 1.1% 60,571 14.6% 4,101 1.0% 4,958 1.2% 5,843 1.4% District 3 413,689 77,224 18.7% 182,737 44.2% 34,167 8.3% 2,747 0.7% 103,550 25.0% 2,174 0.5% 6,395 1.5% 4,695 1.1% District 4 414,113 125,503 30.3% 96,883 23.4% 76,589 18.5% 2,686 0.6% 98,590 23.8% 3,120 0.8% 4,602 1.1% 6,140 1.5% District 5 414,236 98,808 23.9% 140,226 33.9% 22,557 5.4% 3,357 0.8% 135,511 32.7% 4,339 1.0% 4,943 1.2% 4,495 1.1% District 6 414,075 81,152 19.6% 63,477 15.3% 15,070 3.6% 2,042 0.5% 239,300 57.8% 5,058 1.2% 3,265 0.8% 4,711 1.1% District 7 414,119 131,808 31.8% 93,594 22.6% 77,665 18.8% 2,800 0.7% 91,403 22.1% 3,139 0.8% 7,017 1.7% 6,693 1.6% District 8 413,980 45,393 11.0% 164,308 39.7% 13,521 3.3% 1,749 0.4% 178,530 43.1% 1,477 0.4% 5,666 1.4% 3,336 0.8% District 9 414,306 79,393 19.2% 172,441 41.6% 26,078 6.3% 2,845 0.7% 121,663 29.4% 1,429 0.3% 6,378 1.5% 4,079 1.0% District
Number
(Plan C)
Total
Pop Latino Latino % White White % Black
Black
%
Native
American
Native
American
% Asian Asian %
Hawaiian
/ Pac
Islander
Hawaiian /
Pac
Islander % Other
Other
%
Two or
More
Races
Two or
More
Races %
Total 3,726,435 846,053 22.7% 1,269,436 34.1% 330,986 8.9% 26,480 0.7% 1,134,447 30.4% 26,270 0.7% 49,441 1.3% 43,322 1.2% District 1 414,067 63,286 15.3% 214,689 51.8% 12,921 3.1% 3,613 0.9% 108,455 26.2% 1,514 0.4% 6,206 1.5% 3,383 0.8% District 2 414,070 144,225 34.8% 137,562 33.2% 52,510 12.7% 4,695 1.1% 60,191 14.5% 4,041 1.0% 4,996 1.2% 5,850 1.4% District 3 413,957 68,108 16.5% 186,137 45.0% 31,802 7.7% 2,695 0.7% 112,542 27.2% 1,927 0.5% 6,361 1.5% 4,385 1.1% District 4 413,944 123,368 29.8% 104,449 25.2% 78,876 19.1% 2,766 0.7% 90,299 21.8% 3,012 0.7% 4,908 1.2% 6,266 1.5% District 5 414,250 109,598 26.5% 132,476 32.0% 22,375 5.4% 3,334 0.8% 132,191 31.9% 4,926 1.2% 4,688 1.1% 4,662 1.1% District 6 414,007 80,836 19.5% 63,727 15.4% 16,044 3.9% 1,991 0.5% 238,658 57.6% 4,806 1.2% 3,259 0.8% 4,686 1.1% District 7 414,046 130,548 31.5% 100,919 24.4% 75,864 18.3% 2,837 0.7% 86,709 20.9% 3,233 0.8% 7,205 1.7% 6,731 1.6% District 8 414,057 57,475 13.9% 135,377 32.7% 15,070 3.6% 1,613 0.4% 194,808 47.0% 1,508 0.4% 4,810 1.2% 3,396 0.8% District 9 414,037 68,609 16.6% 194,100 46.9% 25,524 6.2% 2,936 0.7% 110,594 26.7% 1,303 0.3% 7,008 1.7% 3,963 1.0% Census Population and Race/Ethnicity Data by Year
Year Total Pop Latino Latino % White White % Black Black % Native
American
Native
American
% Asian Asian %
Hawaiian
/ Pac
Islander
Hawaiian /
Pac
Islander % Other
Other
%
Two or
More
Races
Two or
More
Races %
1990 2,806,878 373,804 13.3% 1,577,281 56.2% 372,015 13.3% 13,839 0.5% 464,314 16.5% . 5,625 0.2% . . 2000 3,169,290 551,190 17.4% 1,479,413 46.7% 356,766 11.3% 10,974 0.3% 633,527 20.0% 15,217 0.5% 9,892 0.3% 112,311 3.5% 2010 3,364,448 717,217 21.3% 1,352,918 40.2% 324,503 9.6% 9,001 0.3% 805,054 23.9% 19,441 0.6% 9,807 0.3% 126,507 3.8% 2020 3,726,435 846,053 22.7% 1,269,436 34.1% 330,986 8.9% 26,480 0.7% 1,134,447 30.4% 26,270 0.7% 49,441 1.3% 43,322 1.2% 2025E 3,860,278 843,420 21.8% 1,418,506 36.7% 313,989 8.1% 8,978 0.2% 1,059,810 27.5% 22,816 0.6% 13,240 0.3% 179,519 4.7% 2030E 4,029,656 889,963 22.1% 1,453,509 36.1% 316,935 7.9% 9,243 0.2% 1,129,341 28.0% 24,177 0.6% 13,952 0.3% 192,536 4.8% Notes

1. Hawaiian / Pacific Islander and Two or More Races categories not available for 1990 US Decennial Census Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) by District (Current, Plan A, Plan B, Plan C) District Number
(Current) Total CVAP Other Other % Asian Asian % Black Black % White White % Latino Latino % Total 2,491,699 34,608 1.4% 674,493 27.1% 258,919 10.4% 1,124,351 45.1% 399,328 16.0% District 1 285,349 3,432 1.2% 49,821 17.5% 7,328 2.6% 198,103 69.4% 26,665 9.3% District 2 266,525 5,260 2.0% 36,275 13.6% 36,767 13.8% 119,870 45.0% 68,353 25.6% District 3 285,019 3,813 1.3% 62,273 21.8% 23,847 8.4% 155,987 54.7% 39,099 13.7% District 4 264,886 3,505 1.3% 64,880 24.5% 65,809 24.8% 83,012 31.3% 47,680 18.0% District 5 270,113 3,709 1.4% 65,959 24.4% 19,918 7.4% 134,442 49.8% 46,085 17.1% District 6 247,083 3,502 1.4% 120,457 48.8% 13,435 5.4% 63,839 25.8% 45,850 18.6% District 7 270,852 4,457 1.6% 64,410 23.8% 61,897 22.9% 86,308 31.9% 53,780 19.9% District 8 303,578 2,769 0.9% 130,941 43.1% 10,426 3.4% 132,166 43.5% 27,276 9.0% District 9 298,294 4,161 1.4% 79,477 26.6% 19,492 6.5% 150,624 50.5% 44,540 14.9% District Number
(Plan A)
Total
CVAP Other Other % Asian Asian % Black Black % White White % Latino Latino % Total 2,491,699 34,608 1.4% 674,493 27.1% 258,919 10.4% 1,124,351 45.1% 399,328 16.0% District 1 299,472 3,617 1.2% 45,775 15.3% 6,662 2.2% 215,392 71.9% 28,026 9.4% District 2 256,980 5,096 2.0% 35,272 13.7% 36,571 14.2% 113,018 44.0% 67,023 26.1% District 3 301,109 4,588 1.5% 65,845 21.9% 33,332 11.1% 163,132 54.2% 34,212 11.4% District 4 239,643 3,774 1.6% 56,163 23.4% 57,674 24.1% 50,851 21.2% 71,181 29.7% District 5 257,502 3,095 1.2% 63,047 24.5% 17,936 7.0% 143,514 55.7% 29,910 11.6% District 6 257,039 3,688 1.4% 123,428 48.0% 15,301 6.0% 66,252 25.8% 48,370 18.8% District 7 255,216 3,903 1.5% 61,899 24.3% 59,170 23.2% 84,145 33.0% 46,099 18.1% District 8 322,244 2,945 0.9% 151,707 47.1% 13,131 4.1% 118,841 36.9% 35,620 11.1% District 9 302,494 3,902 1.3% 71,357 23.6% 19,142 6.3% 169,206 55.9% 38,887 12.9% District Number
(Plan B)
Total
CVAP Other Other % Asian Asian % Black Black % White White % Latino Latino % Total 2,491,699 34,608 1.4% 674,493 27.1% 258,919 10.4% 1,124,351 45.1% 399,328 16.0% District 1 286,953 3,412 1.2% 49,708 17.3% 7,384 2.6% 198,783 69.3% 27,666 9.6% District 2 257,698 5,204 2.0% 34,927 13.6% 36,381 14.1% 114,631 44.5% 66,555 25.8% District 3 294,047 4,008 1.4% 63,804 21.7% 25,218 8.6% 161,693 55.0% 39,324 13.4% District 4 261,942 3,474 1.3% 64,637 24.7% 64,981 24.8% 81,261 31.0% 47,589 18.2% District 5 253,007 3,187 1.3% 60,284 23.8% 18,193 7.2% 127,740 50.5% 43,603 17.2% District 6 256,941 3,841 1.5% 124,095 48.3% 14,320 5.6% 66,213 25.8% 48,472 18.9% District 7 256,832 4,453 1.7% 58,058 22.6% 61,408 23.9% 80,801 31.5% 52,112 20.3% District 8 327,773 2,972 0.9% 139,053 42.4% 11,291 3.4% 145,167 44.3% 29,290 8.9% District 9 296,506 4,057 1.4% 79,927 27.0% 19,743 6.7% 148,062 49.9% 44,717 15.1% District Number
(Plan C)
Total
CVAP Other Other % Asian Asian % Black Black % White White % Latino Latino % Total 2,491,699 34,608 1.4% 674,493 27.1% 258,919 10.4% 1,124,351 45.1% 399,328 16.0% District 1 275,403 3,265 1.2% 50,906 18.5% 8,620 3.1% 182,950 66.4% 29,662 10.8% District 2 266,360 5,382 2.0% 34,253 12.9% 35,434 13.3% 126,277 47.4% 65,014 24.4% District 3 297,744 3,810 1.3% 68,893 23.1% 24,455 8.2% 165,936 55.7% 34,650 11.6% District 4 262,476 3,696 1.4% 59,624 22.7% 66,217 25.2% 87,058 33.2% 45,881 17.5% District 5 252,263 3,307 1.3% 60,197 23.9% 17,383 6.9% 121,810 48.3% 49,566 19.6% District 6 257,086 3,688 1.4% 123,438 48.0% 15,302 6.0% 66,258 25.8% 48,400 18.8% District 7 255,654 4,613 1.8% 54,124 21.2% 59,235 23.2% 86,024 33.6% 51,658 20.2% District 8 322,943 2,887 0.9% 150,574 46.6% 13,263 4.1% 121,228 37.5% 34,991 10.8% District 9 301,770 3,960 1.3% 72,484 24.0% 19,010 6.3% 166,810 55.3% 39,506 13.1% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) figures from the American Community Survey Census Population Change and Variance by District
District Number
Total Pop
(2010)
Variance
2010
Total Pop
(2020)
Variance
2020
Pop
Change Change %
Total 3,364,448 1.3% 3,726,435 14.2% 361,987 10.8%
District 1 376,019 1% 411,484 -0.6% 35,465 9.4%
District 2 374,040 0.1% 427,995 3.4% 53,955 14.4%
District 3 373,366 -0.1% 402,667 -2.7% 29,301 7.8%
District 4 375,209 0.4% 418,105 1.0% 42,896 11.4%
District 5 373,912 0.0% 436,744 5.5% 62,832 16.8%
District 6 372,666 -0.3% 398,953 -3.6% 26,287 7.1%
District 7 376,398 0.7% 442,640 6.9% 66,242 17.6%
District 8 371,384 -0.7% 383,690 -7.3% 12,306 3.3%
District 9 371,454 -0.6% 404,157 -2.4% 32,703 8.8%
Proposed
Districts Total Pop District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 District 7 District 8 District 9 Ideal /
Balance
Variance
from Ideal
Plan A 3,726,435 413,965 414,595 414,100 414,598 412,675 413,896 414,473 414,049 414,084 414,048 0.17% Plan B 3,726,435 414,010 413,907 413,689 414,113 414,236 414,075 414,119 413,980 414,306 414,048 0.15% Plan C 3,726,435 414,067 414,070 413,957 413,944 414,250 414,007 414,046 414,057 414,037 414,048 0.07% Notes

1. Population change equals the difference in population from the 2010 US Census to the 2020 US Census.

2. Variance is the percent deviation from balanced/ideal population for each District.

3. Variance for Total Population is the difference between the most and least populated District divided by the balanced/ideal District population.

4. Balanced/ideal District population equals Total Population divided by 9.

Data Sources

1. US Decennial Census 1990, 2000, 2010, 2020

2. American Community Survey

3. Readjusted California Prisoner Population (PL 94-171), California Statewide Database This report was created by GEOinovo Solutions for the BART Board of Directors meeting on January 13, 2022.

Agenda Item: 9(b)
1 AGENDA REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Reina J. Schwartz, City Manager
Katherine Korsak, Finance Director
DATE: February 1, 2022
SUBJECT: Discussion of Ten-Year General Fund Forecast
___________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation from staff on a ten-year General Fund forecast.

BACKGROUND
When the City Council heard presentations on the proposed FY2021/22 budget, staff presented information regarding upcoming financial challenges that the City would face given that historically revenues in Clayton have not grown as quickly as costs resulting in a structural imbalance in the City’s General Fund (GF). Additionally, one of the Council’s Priority Areas adopted in March 2021 was to be able to review a 10-year GF forecast to better understand the City’s long-term financial picture. This report provides the City Council with a ten-year forecast and identifies key assumptions that could affect that forecast.

DISCUSSION
Over the last ten years, the Clayton City Council has annually approved a balanced budget that leveraged maximum impact from the revenue streams received by the City. During this time, the City has continued to build its General Fund fund balance and currently has reserves in excess of the amount of one year’s expenditures.

While there have been variations across individual fiscal years, the overall growth rate of revenues has not kept pace with the overall growth rate of expenses. This means that absent any action by the City Council to dramatically increase revenues or decrease costs, the annual budget can no longer be balanced using existing sources. Table 1 at the end of this report provides some historical perspective and reflects that over the last six years, while revenues have grown at less than 2 percent per year, expenses have grown at nearly 4 percent per year.
2 Tables 2 and 3 at the end of the report show the impact of the mis-match between the growth in revenues and the growth in expenditures and the resulting erosion of fund balance if no corrective action is taken.

The projection Tables use the following base assumptions:

Category Assumed Growth Comments
Salaries/COLA PD: FY23 & FY24 –
4%; all other years 2%
Misc: FY23 – 3%; all
other years 2%
This assumption likely understates the
true increase in labor costs over time
given inflation, step increases and
other labor-related increases. Further
there will be pressure as costs for
items outside the City’s control
including health care coverage and
PERS costs.

General Operating
Expenses
4% in all years Non-labor operational increases vary
significantly over time due to general
inflation as well as fuel, electricity and
water prices.

Property Tax revenue 3.5% Average growth in property tax & property tax in-lieu of VLF 2016-2021
Sales Tax Revenue 5% Average annual growth 2015-2020 was ~10% per year, then flat in 2021.

All other revenue 2% Revenue growth for all other sources including franchise fees, business
license fees etc. is relatively flat.

Table 2 shows that without any additional revenue sources or extraordinary cost reductions, the City will have expenditures that exceed revenues by approximately $100,000 in FY2022/23, to over $1 million in FY2030/31. In order to break even over those years, costs/spending could only increase by the same amount as revenues, approximately 2.7%.

While that could be a goal to continue to balance the budget, such an assumption is not consistent with historical experience of actual cost increases. Holding cost growth to the same level as anticipated growth in our existing revenue sources would worsen the City’s competitiveness in the labor market (which is already low) and would ultimately result in significant reductions in service to the community.
3 Table 3 provides a projection that includes taking into account some of the City’s unmet needs in addition to base current expenses. While additional discussion will be needed via the annual budget process on if and when such needs could be included in the budget, it is useful to show what the impact could be of addressing unmet needs. Table 3 shows the impact if the City added funding to address approximately $500,000 in annual unmet needs including:
additional costs related to stormwater and streetlights as their dedicated assessments are insufficient to cover the costs of those services ($50,000-$100,000), additional police staffing/Lieutenant ($250,000), in-house City engineer ($50,000 additional), improved cybersecurity and IT support ($50,000), increased audit costs including single audit requirements for federal funds ($25,000), and additional street maintenance ($25,000). Under this scenario, the annual deficits begin at approximately $600,000 and increases to nearly $1.8 million in FY2030/31.

Other Revenue Sources
It should be noted that while this report focuses on the City’s General Fund and annual operating expenses, there are other funding sources that support annual operations. These sources, however, are typically restricted in their use. The most significant of these is the City’s Landscape Maintenance District, a citywide assessment of $274 per parcel that funds staff, supplies, equipment and projects associated with trails, open space and the Clayton fountain.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Financial projections are as much an art as a science and there are a multitude of factors that can affect the outcome of projections. Nonetheless, the overall trend in the City’s revenues and expenses is clear and unsustainable.

ATTACHMENTS
Table 1 – Historical General Fund Performance
Table 2 – Projected General Fund Performance – Baseline Table 3 – Projected General Fund Performance – Including Unmet Needs Estimate Agenda Item: 9(b)
4 Table 1
Historical General Fund Performance
Average
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Growth 6/30/2015 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 6/30/2018 6/30/2019 6/30/2020 6/30/2021 % Total Revenues 4,431,718 4,490,831 4,454,825 4,483,336 4,700,951 4,905,579 4,805,528 1.427% Total Operational Expenditures 3,841,826 3,945,387 4,087,088 4,301,836 4,622,330 4,599,493 4,666,962 3.945% Operational Excess (Deficit) 589,892 545,444 367,737 181,500 78,621 306,086 138,566 Extraordinary Loss - Redevelop 200,000 230,786
Use of Prior Year Excess 0 109,756 68,515 432,310 (15,053) (98,339) 194,155 Net Increase (Decrease) to Fun 389,892 204,902 299,222 (250,810) 93,674 404,425 (55,589) Fund Balance, Beginning of yea 5,148,737 5,413,157 5,618,059 5,917,281 5,666,471 5,760,145 6,164,570 Fund Balance, End of Year 5,538,629 5,618,059 5,917,281 5,666,471 5,760,145 6,164,570 6,108,981 5 Table 2
Projected General Fund Performance
Baseline
Year End Proposed Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 6/30/2021 6/30/2022 6/30/2023 6/30/2024 6/30/2025 6/30/2026 6/30/2027 6/30/2028 6/30/2029 6/30/2030 6/30/2031 Total Revenues 4,805,528 5,185,450 5,274,879 5,416,712 5,562,359 5,711,922 5,665,507 5,817,843 5,974,276 6,134,915 6,299,873 Total Operational Expenditures 4,666,962 5,177,482 5,384,581 5,599,965 5,823,963 6,056,922 6,299,199 6,551,166 6,813,213 7,085,742 7,369,171 Operational Excess (Deficit) 138,566 7,968 (109,703) (183,253) (261,604) (345,000) (633,692) (733,323) (838,937) (950,827) (1,069,298) Use of Prior Year Excess 194,155 - - - - - - - - - -
Net Increase (Decrease) to Fun (55,589) 7,968 (109,703) (183,253) (261,604) (345,000) (633,692) (733,323) (838,937) (950,827) (1,069,298) Fund Balance, Beginning of yea 6,164,570 6,108,981 6,116,949 6,007,246 5,823,994 5,562,389 5,217,390 4,583,698 3,850,374 3,011,437 2,060,610 Fund Balance, End of Year 6,108,981 6,116,949 6,007,246 5,823,994 5,562,389 5,217,390 4,583,698 3,850,374 3,011,437 2,060,610 991,312 6 Table 3
Projected General Fund Performance
Including Unmet Needs Estimate
Year End Proposed Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 6/30/2021 6/30/2022 6/30/2023 6/30/2024 6/30/2025 6/30/2026 6/30/2027 6/30/2028 6/30/2029 6/30/2030 6/30/2031 Total Revenues 4,805,528 5,185,450 5,274,879 5,416,712 5,562,359 5,711,922 5,665,507 5,817,843 5,974,276 6,134,915 6,299,873 Total Operational Expenditures 4,666,962 5,177,482 5,904,581 6,140,765 6,386,395 6,641,851 6,907,525 7,183,826 7,471,179 7,770,026 8,080,827 Operational Excess (Deficit) 138,566 7,968 (629,703) (724,053) (824,036) (929,929) (1,242,018) (1,365,983) (1,496,903) (1,635,111) (1,780,954) Use of Prior Year Excess 194,155 - - - - - - - - - -
Net Increase (Decrease) to Fun (55,589) 7,968 (629,703) (724,053) (824,036) (929,929) (1,242,018) (1,365,983) (1,496,903) (1,635,111) (1,780,954) Fund Balance, Beginning of yea 6,164,570 6,108,981 6,116,949 5,487,246 4,763,194 3,939,157 3,009,228 1,767,210 401,227 (1,095,676) (2,730,787) Fund Balance, End of Year 6,108,981 6,116,949 5,487,246 4,763,194 3,939,157 3,009,228 1,767,210 401,227 (1,095,676) (2,730,787) (4,511,741) Agenda Item: 9(c)
1 AGENDA REPORT
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Reina J. Schwartz, City Manager
Katherine Korsak, Finance Director
DATE: January 18, 2022
SUBJECT: Revenue Options and Potential Revenue Measure Next Steps ___________________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Consider potential revenue options and provide direction to staff on next steps regarding a potential tax measure for the November 8, 2022 ballot, including discussion and direction on the following or other related items:
• Type of tax
• Amount of the tax
• Nature (general or special) of the tax
• Direction to solicit for a polling and/or communications firms to assist the City.

BACKGROUND
All taxes imposed by local governments are classified as either general or special taxes. A four-fifths (4/5) vote is required of the City Council to put a revenue measure on the ballot.

A general tax is any tax levied to fund general government purposes and which goes into the local government entity's general fund. General taxes imposed by local governments must be approved by voters and, moreover, they must be put before voters during regularly scheduled general elections. General taxes require approval from a simple majority of voters—50 percent + one vote.

A special tax is any tax levied for a specific purpose, for example a public safety tax. If revenue from a tax is earmarked in a legally binding way for a service such as infrastructure, transportation, fire or police safety, or parks and recreational facilities, it is a special tax.

Special taxes imposed by local governments require a two‐thirds (66.67 percent) supermajority vote at the ballot box for approval. Special taxes passed via voter initiatives require a 50 percent + one vote at the ballot box for approval. 2 Most local agencies that have put general or special tax measures on their local ballots in recent years have used a combination of polling/research firms and public relations/communications firms to assist them in evaluating the type and amount of tax measure that might be most successful as well as assisting the local agency in preparing and producing informational materials regarding a potential measure. Public funding can never be used to campaign or advocate, but can be used to research and provide informational and educational material. It is recommended that the Council authorize the use of a polling/outreach firm to assist in developing the specifics of a ballot measure.

In terms of timing, there are some key dates for the City Council to keep in mind relative to a potential tax measure. Most of the dates listed below represent the latest date an action can be taken; considerable work will be required prior to any of these action dates in order to be prepared for the final Council actions. For a complete detailed list of election-related dates, please see Attachment 1.

Date Action
June 21, 2022 Council date to request a consolidated election with the County (City Council)
July 19, 2022 Recommended date for Council adoption of a Resolution calling for a Special Tax Measure election (consolidated with the County election)
July 25, 2022 Transmit consolidation Resolution for any Special Measure to the City Attorney for Impartial Analysis
August 1, 2022 Last date Council could adopt Ordinance required for Special Tax Measure (if needed)
City Clerk to publish Notice of Election; Synopsis of
Measure and Notice to File Arguments
August 12, 2022 Last date for City Attorney to file Impartial Analysis Last date to file primary argument for (or against) measure August 17, 2022 Deadline amending or withdrawing a local measure August 19, 2022 Deadline for rebuttal arguments (if any) November 8, 2022 Election day 2022
3 DISCUSSION
There are several ways that cities can raise tax revenue, all of which require voter approval.

Not discussed here are several types of tax measures that are not relevant to Clayton or do not relate to the need for ongoing, annual funding including transient occupancy tax (hotel tax), cannabis tax, documentary transfer tax (fixed by the County), development impact fees and municipal bonds. Additional franchise fee revenue is also not discussed as there may be limited opportunity to make changes in these areas.

Property Taxes
Currently property taxes (including the share of property tax the City receives in lieu of Vehicle License Fee revenues cities used to receive) make up 42.3 percent of the City’s General Fund revenues. General speaking, local property taxes can be assessed in two ways:
• Ad valorem taxes are based on the assessed value of the property. • Parcel taxes are taxes that are imposed as a flat tax per parcel, or are based on other factors such as frontage, square footage, or use type.

Clayton has approximately 4,000 residential parcels. A parcel tax of $100 per year per parcel would generate $400,000 in revenue; $200 per year, $800,000 in revenue, etc.

Assessment Districts
Assessment Districts are a "property tax" mechanism used by local governmental agencies in California to fund public improvements and services. Assessment Districts are established for a specific geographical area that receives a special benefit from specific public improvements and services. In other words, the charge only applies to properties receiving a benefit instead of being applied against all properties within a governmental jurisdiction, as is the case with regular property taxes.

Special benefits are defined as "a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large”. General enhancement of property value does not constitute 'special benefit’.

For example, street lighting is the improvement, not the special benefit. However, street lighting confers a "safety" benefit to properties nearby and to non‐residents driving through. In this case, the safety benefit conferred to properties nearby is special benefit, but the safety conferred on pass‐through drivers is general benefit.

The local agency is required to separate and quantify special and general benefit so that properties nearby the street lighting (in this example) are charged for just the special benefit portion. The general benefit portion must be paid from other sources and can't be charged against the properties within the Assessment District.

Revenues collected through an Assessment District are strictly limited for the improvements and services for which the Assessment District was formed. Furthermore, a district can't be formed without the participation of the property owners through a ballot procedure. Only those property owners that receive the special benefit are allowed to vote and votes may be 4 weighted, with property owners receiving more of the special benefits getting more weight, and those with less special benefits getting less weight. Assessment district taxes can be passed based on a majority vote of the affected property owners.

Assessments are charged via property tax bills. Some assessments have a term and other can go on in perpetuity and most assessments provide for an inflation factor.

Clayton has a number of Assessment Districts already in place covering street lighting, landscape maintenance and The Grove Park.

Assessment Number of Parcels Annual Per Parcel
Cost
Total Revenue
The Grove CFD
(expires/requires
renewal FY2036/37)
4,110
(4,049 residential)
$22.84/parcel resid.
varies for non-resid.
$143,774
Landscape
Maintenance District
(expires/requires
renewal FY2026/27)
4,106
(4,046 residential)
$274.46/parcel
resid.
$274.46/acre nonresid.
$1,204,883
Stormwater
Assessment
4,100 parcels $29 per single-family
parcel
$126,306
Streetlights (does
not cover current
costs)
3,482 $8.34-$43.54/parcel $125,991
Oakhurst GHAD 1,484 $12.38-$79.60/lot
depending on size
$44,894
Middle School CFD
(ends by FY2024)
1,358 $89.62-$233.30/
parcel depending on
size
$187,924
Total Restricted
Assessments
$1,833,772
It should be noted that there are another five assessment districts that have fewer than 25 parcels in each and are not included in this analysis of citywide options.

It should also be noted that in addition to funds the City receives and spends on City services, residents pay many other property-related taxes that do not benefit the City in any way. For example, a typical tax bill includes (but is not limited to) assessments for the Mount Diablo School District, BART, the Community College District, and East Bay Regional Parks District. 5 Sales Tax
Currently, sales tax revenue makes up 11.3 percent of General Fund revenues. The City can increase the sales tax collected for purchases within their jurisdiction. There is a total of 2% under the overall sales tax cap available to cities to implement local sales taxes to create additional revenue for themselves. Previously, the regional sales taxes for BART and CCTA were counted under that cap. However, SB1349 removed the BART and CCTA taxes, which were both a half‐cent each for a total of 1%, from the cap calculation. Recently, there was a Contra Costa countywide non‐transportation measure of 0.5%, approved by the voters in November which does count towards the 2% cap.

Since Clayton does not have any current local sales taxes, the City now has 1.5% capacity under the cap available for revenue development. A local “sales” tax measure would more technically be a “transactions and use tax” (TUT). The primary difference between the two is that under a true sales tax, the tax revenue distribution is based on the site of sale of the item; in the case of a TUT, the additional tax rate on large personal property purchases (such as vehicles or boats) accrues to the home location of the buyer, not the location of the seller. As such, a TUT for Clayton would capture the increment on vehicles etc. bought by Clayton residents, even though Clayton does not have any auto dealerships.

In Clayton, the current sales tax is 8.75% of which the City receives a 1% share generating approximately $520,000 in revenue annually (pre‐pandemic). Expected annual revenue for a sales tax increase would be approximately an additional $200,000 per year from a 0.25% (quarter-cent) additional sales tax, $400,000 from a 0.50% additional sales tax, etc.

Comparison of Local Sales Tax/Transactions & Use Tax Rates in Contra Costa County

10.25% 9.75% 9.25% 8.75%
+1.50% El Cerrito +1.00% Antioch +0.50% Hercules 0.0% Lafayette +1.00% Concord +0.50% Pittsburg 0.0% Danville
+1.00% Martinez +0.50% Pleasant Hill 0.0% San Ramon
+1.00% Moraga +0.50% San Pablo 0.0% Walnut Creek
+1.00% Orinda 0.0% Brentwood
+1.00% Pinole 0.0% Oakley
+1.00% Richmond 0.0% Clayton
Business License Tax
Business license taxes are imposed on all businesses that operate within the City limits, including home‐based businesses. While most business license taxes are imposed at a flat 6 rate, others may be based on gross receipts and may also be differentiated by business type.

Clayton received about $140,000 per year in business license fee revenue prior to the COVID19 pandemic. In FY2020/21, the City took in only about $90,000 in business license tax revenue.

Utility Users Tax
The utility users tax (UUT), first imposed in California in 1967, can be imposed on utility services including electricity, gas, water, sewer, telephone (including cell phones and long distance calling), sanitation, and cable television. Recently, local governments have expanded their UUTs to tax Internet, streaming, and video‐teleconferencing services.

The amount of revenue that could be raised from a UUT would depend on the utilities being taxed and the rate. As an example, Pinole – which has approximately twice the number of residents as Clayton – has an 8% UUT and collects $2M in revenue annually. The taxes are collected by the utilities and paid directly to cities. Additional analysis would need to be done to determine the amount a potential Utility Users Tax might generate. Clayton does not currently impose any UUT.

Vacancy Tax
One additional type of tax is a Vacancy tax, which is typically levied on vacant commercial parcels. For example, San Francisco passed a vacancy tax in 2020 which became effective January 1, 2022 and levies a tax if a commercial property sits vacant more than 182 days (approximately six months). The tax rate is based on the building’s frontage (facing the public right-of-way and increases each consecutive year that the property sits vacant. The rate begins at $250 per linear foot and increases to $1,000 per linear foot if the property sits vacant for three years or more. The City of Richmond in west Contra Costa County is considering a vacancy tax but it has not been approved at this time. A vacancy tax would not likely be a significant source of revenue for Clayton.

FISCAL IMPACTS
Given the financial picture over the next ten years, in order to balance the City’s budget, it may make the most sense for the City to consider a property-related tax measure such as a parcel tax. This would allow for unrestricted uses of the money to cover things such as increased public safety services, infrastructure needs, and any other necessary operational expenses to balance the annual budget. A parcel tax of $400 per year per parcel (with some proration for commercial parcels) likely would generate sufficient revenue to balance the City’s budget over the long term if it includes an automatic escalator of some sort to ensure that the City doesn’t begin to fall behind again over time.

ATTACHMENT

1. Election Timeline for November 8, 2022