El Cerrito City Council
June 7, 2022

LEGEND
The following codes are utilized in Tables 12-1, 12-2 and 12-3:

Fund Source Categories
101 General Fund AD Administration
201 Gas Tax Fund CR Creeks and Trails
204 Measure J Return to Source (CCTATransportation) Fund FA Facilities (Non-Recreation) 205 Measure J Storm Drain Fund O Other Sources/Non-Secure or Unidentified
206 Measure A Swim Center Fund PK Parks & Recreation Facilities 207 Measure H Parks & Recreation Facilities ST Streets and Transportation 210 Park/Open Space-In-Lieu Fund SD Stormwater and Drainage 211 Measure A Street Improvements
212 SB 1 - Road Maint & Rehab Acct Fund/Local
Streets & Road Program Fund
301 Other Sources/Secure (Grants)-Capital
Improvement Fund
501 Integrated Waste Management Fund
Agenda Packet Page 271 of 446
188
Agenda Packet Page 272 of 446
189
Agenda Packet Page 273 of 446
190
Agenda Packet Page 274 of 446
191
Agenda Packet Page 275 of 446
192
Project Descriptions

1. Energy and Water Efficiency Program (EWEP) This program provides an ongoing mechanism for funding energy and water conservation projects in municipal facilities through an initial investment plus reinvestment of a portion of the financial savings generated through these conservation projects into current and future efficiency projects. The project completed in FY 2020-21 installed an EV charging station at the Recycling + Environmental Resource Center. The following energy and water efficiency projects will be investigated for implement: Additional upgrades related to the City Hall EV charging station; LED Streetlights for City-owned facilities; a user friendly energy management system dashboard for City Hall and the Community Center; additional satellites to hook park facilities into the City's centralized weather-based smart irrigation controls; and routine maintenance for optimal performance of City solar facilities.

2. Fire Flow Upgrade This project is intended to upgrade the existing water supply system to improve the fire flow in the area located east of Arlington Blvd. to the city limits. This upgrade will include 10,440' of new and upgraded pipe and an addition of 11 new hydrants. With this upgrade the Fire Flow in this area will achieve our 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) goal.

3. Access Modifications - Facilities (Non-Recreation) This project will implement the non-recreation facilities portion of the City's American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan Update, which was adopted in September 2009. The Public Safety Building, Library and Civic Theater were the highest ranked facilities. Other facilities include the Fire Station 72 and Corporation Yard. Specific locations and scopes of future work will be determined as funding opportunities arise. The recreation facilities were incorporated into the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan, more recently adopted by the City Council in April 2019. The City's ADA Transition Plan establishes a priority-based plan to bring facilities into compliance.

4. Library This project will develop a safe, energy efficient, 21st century library, a priority of the City for over a decade. The 2013-14 library assessment called for a one-story building of about 21,000 square feet; 60,320 books and AV media available onsite as well as access to e-content through the County Library website; 134 open access seats as well as six group study/tutoring/collaboration rooms with a total of 56 seats; 66 computers; dedicated learning space for workshops and group projects; tutoring/homework study area; and acoustically separate community meeting room that seats 125 with up-to-date AV equipment, prep kitchen and storage space. In July 2017, the City Council reaffirmed their commitment to move ahead with planning for a new library and since then staff has been evaluating potential sites and engage the community in a variety of ways to gather input about priorities for a new library, currently being considered as part of the transit-oriented development at the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station.

5. Public Safety Building This project will develop a new Public Safety Building at existing or new location. The existing Public Safety Building was built in 1960 and has not been kept up to current standards. The building also does not have sufficient space for evidence, lockers, training, and working of employees. In addition, many building and site components have experienced deferred maintenance and need rehabilitation. A new Public Safety facility will be designed to standards for an essential facility, meaning that it will remain operational under the most extreme seismic event. It will also provide for more efficient operations for both Police and Fire on an ongoing basis - both for administration and field operations. A new state-of-the-art facility could also serve as a back-up or auxiliary emergency operations center.

Agenda Packet Page 276 of 446
193

6. Public Safety Parking Lot Security & Rehabilitation This project would add a gated entrance to the Public Safety Building parking lot to secure the facility grounds, public safety vehicles and equipment.

Additionally, the project would rehabilitate the parking lot pavement which is in poor condition.

7. Corporation Yard Improvements This project includes demolition of the former Stege facility and remnants of the original Corporation Yard and construction of a new Corporation Yard following the land swap with Stege Sanitary District. The Corporation Yard facility is approximately 50-years old.

New environmental requirements make it increasingly more difficult to remain in compliance with current laws and regulations. In addition, many building and site components has experienced deferred maintenance and need rehabilitation. Per the master plan developed in 2005, the land swap with the Stege Sanitary District provided the City's Corporation Yard and recycling facility with a consolidated site. At this time, pavement rehabilitation is a priority component of the project as the pavement is in poor condition and this impacts storage areas, vehicle access, and drainage.

8. Facilities Seismic & Building Repairs (Non-Recreation) This project will implement seismic, structural and other repairs to various non-recreation facilities based on the 2004 El Cerrito Structural Facilities and Management Plan. The facilities include Library, Civic Theater, and Public Safety Building. Many of the City's facilities are out of compliance with current standards. In the event of a significant earthquake, many City facilities may not be serviceable without this project. Specific projects and scopes of work will be developed to match any future funding sources. The recreation facilities were incorporated into the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan, more recently adopted by the City Council in April 2019.

9. Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan Program This program will implement the recommendations in the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan adopted by City Council in April 2019. The Master Plan serves as a long-range planning and asset management document that provides a framework for understanding the recreational and open space assets the City owns, services it provides, risks it assumes, and financial investments it requires to maintain, repair, rehabilitate and improve these assets. It identifies nearly 200 projects that are categorized as either Immediate Work Priorities, Policy/Programs, Early Wins, Deficiencies, and Enhancements/New Projects. Funding from Measure H is identified in this project for various efforts. Implementation of other recommendations in the Master Plan for Swim Center Enhancements, Multi-Generational Recreation Facility, Hillside Natural Area, Centennial Park and Arlington Park are listed as separate projects.

10. Swim Center Enhancements The project includes various capital upgrades or enhancements to the original construction of the Swim Center. After completion of the Swim Center in 2004 and warranty work in 2005, there remained some modifications and enhancements needed to bring the Swim Center up to its highest effectiveness. In 2018, the Swim Center closed for approximately 65 days for capital renovations, mainly addressing drain repairs and necessary ADA improvements in the locker rooms and renovating the chemical rooms which had poor ventilation. Additionally, after 16 years of operation, future capital needs are anticipated to include pool plaster replacement, ADA improvements to pool stairs, ADA improvements to the parking lot, deck replacement and new pool components such as filters, pool lights, pool covers, etc.

11. Multi-Generational Recreation Facility This project includes recommendations in the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019) for a new Multi-Generational Center, in part to replace the Senior Center currently operated out of modular buildings. The space priorities for a multiAgenda Packet Page 277 of 446 194
generational center address the need for active recreation such as fitness, sports, and movement programs. The facility could also provide permanent facilities for El Cerrito’s seniors and teens by providing a home for dedicated space and programming throughout the day for specific age groups.

The specific program and project costs for this facility have not been closely defined, but the building is tentatively estimated to cost a minimum of $5 million. This does not include the costs for property acquisition if needed. Three sites have been identified as potential locations for this facility – the Casa Cerrito parcel, the western portion of Cerrito Vista Park (next to tennis courts), and expanded facilities at the existing Community Center. The Multi-Generational Recreation Facility could also share space with a future library.

12. Hillside Natural Area Improvements This project will implement recommendations in the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019), including those previously identified in the Urban Greening Plan (2015) and other needed repairs. The Hillside Natural Area (HNA), the largest open space in the City, has a number of trails that are used for recreation and emergency access and extensive native plants, oak woodland and riparian environments. The HNA presents maintenance, fire abatement, and vegetation management challenges that are beginning to be addressed as part of the City's operating budget, including use of Measure H funds for additional fire abatement and vegetation management. Repair of the fire access road at six sites in the Hillside Natural Area has been undertaken in the last year few years. These sites were significantly damaged during heavy rains in early 2017. The project was largely funded by a Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance Program grant and a California Governor’s Office California Disaster Assistance Act of Emergency Services Program grant. Five of the six sites were repaired in 2019. The sixth sites above Roger Ct required additional design was completed in Spring 2021. Other Plan recommendations, including development of a Master Plan for trail maintenance & development and native plant and forest restoration, are currently unfunded. In Spring 2022, City staff with the assistance of the Urban Forest Committee submitted a grant application to the Coastal Conservancy Wildfire Resiliency Grant Program in the amount of $145,000 for the development of this plan.

13. Centennial Park Improvements This project will implement recommendations in the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019) including those previously identified in the Urban Greening Plan (2015). In the first few years, based on estimated level of funding, the following are planned for implementation: No. 8.1 - Address additional recommendation of Phase 2 of Centennial Park Improvements Project including additional play structure, picnic area, community garden and related amenities.

14. Arlington Park Improvements This project will implement recommendations in the Parks & Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019). The Clubhouse IWP electrical work was completed in FY2021-22. In the next few years, based on estimated level of funding, the following are planned for implementation: No. 2.1 - Address Immediate Work Priorities (IWP) for repair and replacement of playground surfacing and BBQ pits. Some of the IWP items may overlap with following recommendations: No. 2.6 - Develop design and full cost estimate for Clubhouse renovation to address the 2018 Inventory & Deficiencies Assessment and 2009 ADA Transition Plan as well as Clubhouse enhanced programming, such as improved rentals for private events and adult fitness; No.

2.7 - Improve group picnic areas including replacement of tables and installation of additional features; repair and replace other park amenities including benches/seating, garbage cans, and entry sign. The current cost estimate does not include full cost of the Clubhouse Renovation beyond addressing deficiencies. Improvements will be implemented in phases as available funding allows with the first set in the next two years with the assistance of Prop 68 grant funds.

Agenda Packet Page 278 of 446
195

15. HNA Trail Entry & Signage Improvements This project will install gateway trailhead signs, trail entry signs, and trail directional markers within the Hillside Natural Area. The design and location of sign are guided by the El Cerrito Trails Signage Plan, a collaborative effort between the El Cerrito Trail Trekkers, the National Park Service, and the City of El Cerrito. These have been updated to conform with current guidelines for accessibility and best practices. The installation of trail entry steps at the Motorcycle Hill was previously completed while the wayfinding/directional signs on streets leading to the Hillside Natural Area (HNA) is a future phase given limited funding.

16. Urban Greening Program The City's Urban Greening Plan (2015) identifies needs, opportunities and strategies for creating a greener, more sustainable and livable City through increasing connectivity; creating day-to-day opportunities to gather, play and enjoy; improving existing parks and green spaces; and identifying new ways to meet the community’s need for different types of open spaces given limited resources. Based on opportunity analysis and needs assessment of potential projects, improvements were identified for 14 focus areas, and of these, four were selected as "Pilot Projects" for additional analysis and design, and assist with securing external funding. These four projects are Lower Fairmount Avenue, Blue-to-Green Connections, Centennial Park (formerly Fairmont Park) and Hillside Natural Area. The estimated costs shown are for two of the "Pilot Projects", including the Lower Fairmount Avenue and Blue-to-Green Connections. The other two "Pilot Projects", including Centennial Park and Hillside Natural Area, are included as separate CIP projects because of past and on-going efforts for these two projects. Estimated costs for the 14 focus area improvements must still be developed.

17. Urban Forest Management Program This program is for improved maintenance of existing City street trees and planting of additional City trees as recommended in the Urban Forest Management Plan (2007). In 2008, staff was awarded $160,000 from the State Resources Board's Environmental Enhancement & Mitigation Program (EEMP) for street and park tree planting. Over 1,000 trees were installed using an EEMP grant through June 2015.

18. Ohlone Greenway Improvements between Hill and Blake This project will improve the Ohlone Greenway consistent with the Greenway Master Plan (2009) includes path, landscaping, street crossing improvements and other amenities on the Ohlone and cross streets between Hill and Blake Streets. The street crossing improvements at Hill Street were implemented in 2019 as part of the Ohlone BART Station Area Access, Safety and Placemaking Improvement Project. The next phase is installation of side path and enhanced landscaping between Hill Street and Safeway entrance.

19. Ohlone Greenway Master Plan Program This program has been implemented as various projects based on the recommendations in the Ohlone Greenway Master Plan (2009) and will more recently will be implement per the Park & Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019), which updated a few recommendations. The BART-related improvements, including consolidation into mixed-use path, were completed in 2014. Other completed projects are the Ohlone Natural Area south of Fairmount Avenue (funded through a Prop 84 grant), Wayfinding Program (funded by Measure J TLC), and Ohlone BART Station Area Access, Safety and Placemaking Improvements (funded by several grants and developer contributions). In the next two years, the program includes upgrade and expansion of camera security system using development fees. Future improvements, although unfunded at this point, include additional lighting, enhanced landscaping, additional crossing improvements, community or native gardens, drinking fountains, restrooms, renovated play areas, gathering spaces and plazas, path connections to adjacent uses, interpretive exhibits and artistic elements. The area between Wall Avenue and Baxter Creek Gateway Park has been identified as a key node for improvements including lighting and green infrastructure. The area between Blake and Potrero is Agenda Packet Page 279 of 446
196
another focus area identified in previous plans for which improvements may be funded by developer contributions.

20. Creek Major Maintenance & Restoration The program is intended to provide an evaluation of major maintenance and restoration needs for creeks throughout the City. The first phase that included applying for a Stream Alteration Agreement and related permit to conduct creek maintenance was undertaken in FY 2015-16. Some of the creek work along the Ohlone Greenway has been identified in the Ohlone Greenway Master Plan and Hillside Natural Area, Urban Greening Master Plan. Other work includes repair of the creek erosion at Huber Park, as well as, other major maintenance and restoration efforts in creeks within other park areas throughout the City.

21. Annual Street Improvement Program The project includes the implementation of a variety of roadway treatments including slurry seal, microsurface, micropave, cape seal, asphalt inlay & overlay of various thicknesses, and repairs of failed pavement locations. The scope also includes installation of curb ramps in compliance with the ADA for all streets that receive an any treatment within a crosswalk area, curb, gutter, and sidewalk upgrades as needed, upgrades to traffic control and safety systems that pertain to pavement work (striping, crosswalks, bike facilities, and associated signage), and upgrades to road-related storm drainage facilities. The project will involve multiple specialty contracts such as seal coats, asphalt overlay, roadway repairs and concrete. This project also includes funding the bi-annual Pavement Management Program update and development of program annual program work plan.

22. Access Modifications - Streets & Sidewalks This project will implement the public right-of-way portion of the City's American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan Update, which was adopted in September 2009. Specific locations and scopes of work will be determined annually in conformance with the Plan and based on guidance from ADA Working Group. In general, work includes installation or reconstruction of curb ramps, repair of mid-block sidewalk locations to remove vertical and horizontal obstructions including damaged and narrow sidewalks, and installation of accessible pedestrian signals. Thanks to the passage of Senate Bill 1, this program is being expanded to include priority sidewalk repairs necessitated by street tree root damage - this is the launching of a "Sidewalk Repair Program". Note that this program is in addition to the curb ramp work required by street repaving program, however the access program may be contracted jointly with the Street Improvement/Paving Program.

23. City-Wide Signage This project is the phased replacement of old signs (identification and wayfinding) with new signage that is consistent with the City's updated identity program on San Pablo Avenue, the WCCTAC Wayfinding Program, and the El Cerrito Trails Signage Plan.

24. Del Norte TOD Infrastructure/Complete Streets Improvements The project includes planning, engineering and construction of various public infrastructure improvements to support transitoriented development in the Del Norte Area including circulation improvements; bicycle, pedestrian, and bus transit access improvements; signage; lighting; ADA improvements; improvements to adjacent streets, street crossings and signals. A package of complete streets improvements for this area was identified in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan & Complete Streets Plan, adopted by City Council in September (2014), and Active Transportation Plan (2016). Subsequently, the City has successfully applied for $11.4 million in grant and external funding for a set of the above improvements packaged as the El Cerrito del Norte TOD Complete Streets Improvements Project.

Project elements include enhanced and protected crosswalks, context-sensitive bikeways, bus boarding islands, one-way to two-way circulation improvements, and various streetscape Agenda Packet Page 280 of 446
197
enhancements around and leading to the Del Norte BART Station. The project limits include San Pablo Ave, Cutting Bl, Hill St, Eastshore Blvd, and Knott Ave near and in front of the Del Norte BART Station.

The detailed design of the project is underway with bidding for construction scheduled for Spring 2023.

25. Balra Retaining Wall Replacement The project consists of the repair or replacement of the retaining wall and creek headwall in front of 779 Balra Drive, and repair street and sidewalk damage above wall. The gradual failure of this wall is causing subsidence of the street and sidewalk above, and has created some uneven surfaces in the walking and driving paths.

26. Traffic Safety & Management Program This program funds various capital projects to improve safety for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists traveling on city streets based on safety assessment studies.

27. Wildcat Drive Repair This project would restore Wildcat Drive to its original width. The last in a series of landslides removed a section of Wildcat Drive (approximately 100 feet long and 10 feet wide) and the abutting valley gutter and embankment. Emergency work, consisting of a sheet pile retaining wall, was performed that stabilized the remaining roadway and provide two-way travel on one lane.

28. San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets This project will implement the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Complete Streets Plan, adopted by the City Council in September 2014, in the Mid-town and Downtown sections. The project consists of complete streets improvements within and around the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area which includes all of San Pablo Avenue and crossing arterials. The scope of the project improvements includes sidewalk replacement, pedestrian level lighting, crosswalks improvements (curb bulb-outs, pedestrian refuge islands, flashing lights, and enhanced signing & striping), new mid-block crosswalks, bike facility (route, lanes, and cycletrack) implementation; bus islands, street trees, landscaping and street furniture. A 35% concept plan was completed in December 2020 thanks to a Regional Measure 2, Safe Routes to Transit grant.

29. Active Transportation Program This project implements the Active Transportation Plan, adopted by the City Council in April 2016. The Plan updated the City’s Circulation Plan for Bicyclists and Pedestrians, which was adopted by the City Council in 2007 as the City’s first master plan for pedestrian and bicycle networks and improvements. The update is intended to reflect constructed projects to date, new and innovative best practices, changing demands, the State of California Active Transportation Program guidelines, and recent City plans as well as those of neighboring jurisdictions.

Detailed project concepts were developed for nine areas of the City to help secure external funding sources. Focus streets include Central Ave, Fairmount Ave, Carlson Bl, Potrero Ave, Elm St, Richmond St, Key Bl, Fairmount Av & Lincoln Ave with a current priority for east-west bikeways and pedestrian improvements around the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station Area to support existing use and planned transit-oriented development. Another priority is the Cerrito Creek Bay Trail/BART to Bay Trail Connector.

30. Richmond Street Improvements The project will rehabilitate and maintain street pavement; retrofit and install new curb ramps; install traffic signing, pavement markings and signs to enhance crosswalks and existing Class III bike facility; replace vehicle signal loop detection enhancing bike detection; and make minor utility adjustments to grade. The project will improve a large section of this arterial street between Fairmount Avenue and Blake Street pending available funding. It was initially anticipated that half of the street from centerline to curb line would be repaved as part of an EBMUD pipeline project to be completed in 2023, while the other half would be done as part of this project. However, the EBMUD pipeline project has encountered significant delays, which may require Agenda Packet Page 281 of 446
198
the City to scale back the limits of the project. City staff is considering additional enhancements for pedestrian safety and comfort based on the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Multi-modal CIP and BART's Berkeley El Cerrito Corridor Access Plan currently underway.

31. Local Roadway Safety Plan The project includes development of a data-driven plan to identify, analyze, and prioritize roadway safety improvements on local roads. Key components include: (1) hot spot/reactive multimodal collision analysis; (2) infrastructure data inventory of key safety countermeasures, such as protected turns, median refuges, and bikeways; (3) collision profile development to proactively identify potential countermeasures at similar locations without crash history; (4) systemic project list of candidate countermeasures; (5) prioritization of the countermeasure list based injury severity and community input; and (6) Enforcement, Education and Engineering recommendations.

32. Local Match for Potential Federal Stimulus Funds This program to provide funding from the City Measure A Street Improvements funds to provide a local match for a federal stimulus programs.

33. Storm Drain Program This program is for repair, rehabilitation and improvement of the City's storm drain system. Over the last several years, the program has consisted of evaluation of localized flooding at several locations throughout the City, and completion of variety of repair projects to increase inlet storm drain capacity and to repair failed pipe sections. The program includes an update to the Master Plan consisting of an inventory and assessment of the storm drain system, hydraulic modeling, and recommendations for future projects. The Master Plan Update will provide cost estimates, priorities and a funding plan for maintenance and capital improvements over the next 10 years. The preliminary cost estimate for all capital projects is reflected in the program costs. The Master Plan update is underway although continue to be delayed due to competing priorities and reduced staffing.

34. Green Infrastructure Program The City's Green Infrastructure Plan was undertaken to comply with a provision of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) under the Clean Water Act and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This plan outlines how the City will meet future pollutant load reduction milestones through the incorporation of Low Impact Design (LID) systems, such as rain gardens, on public and private streets, roads, parking lots, and building roofs. Green Infrastructure can also help recharge groundwater supplies, reduce flood risk, create new habitats and wetlands, and provide additional community benefits by creating public spaces and capturing CO2. The City’s General Plan (1999), Strategic Plan (2013), Climate Action Plan (2013), and Urban Greening Plan (2015) highlight the importance of creating a complete community that preserves existing natural assets, providing additional open space, and improving environmental quality. Only the preliminary cost estimate for at Green Infrastructure project in the Del Norte BART Station area is reflected in the program costs based on a conceptual design that was develop. Full program costs must still be identified.

Agenda Packet Page 282 of 446
199

CAPITAL OUTLAY BUDGET
Capital Outlay (9050)
All Funds
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
General Fund (101 )
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $36,458 $25,624 $0 $20,000 $0
Purchased Property Services $286,925 $34,153 $0 $50,000 $0 Property & Capital $20,870 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other Financing Uses $722,585 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $1,066,837 $59,777 $0 $0
Measure J-Return to Source Fund (204)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $13,066 $0 $0 $0 $0
Purchased Property Services $53,607 $7,548 $0 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $66,673 $7,548 $0 $0 $0
Measure J Storm Drain Fund (205)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Personnel $0 $3,329 $5,813 $0 $0
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $83,275 $116,623 $89,956 $40,000 $88,000
Purchased Property Services $0 $16,508 $332,000 $300,000 $220,000 Other Purchased Services $0 $883 $54 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $83,275 $137,343 $427,823 $340,000 $308,000 Measure A Parcel Tax Fund (206)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $3,650 $0 $0 $0 $0
Purchased Property Services $50,357 $20,686 $0 $217,366 $270,350 Other Purchased Services
Property & Capital $51,809 $55,238 $0 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $105,815 $75,924 $0 $217,366 $270,350 Measure H- Park & Rec Facilities Fund
(207)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $0 $0 $36,928 $150,337 $211,774
Supplies $0 $0 $250 $10,000 $0
Property & Capital $0 $0 $2,091 $2,000 $0
Other Financing Uses $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
Total Expenditures $0 $0 $89,269 $212,337 $261,774
Street Improvement & Maintenance
Fund (211 )
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $194,585 $161,179 $171,417 $363,080 $636,250
Purchased Property Services $434,707 $617,398 $32,094 $445,000 $638,750 Other Purchased Services $1,800 $1,811 $2,188 $1,920 $0 Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $631,092 $780,387 $205,699 $810,000 $1,275,000 Agenda Packet Page 283 of 446
200
SB1 Road Maintenance (212)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $49,419 $84,852 $44,051 $186,500 $180,000
Purchased Property Services $163,844 $20,242 $0 $262,500 $310,000 Other Purchased Services $755 $0 $0 $1,000 $1,000
Total Expenditures $214,017 $105,094 $44,051 $450,000 $491,000 Capital Improvement Fund (301 )
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Purchased Professional & Technical
Services $549,684 $89,862 $344,765 $1,702,250 $1,703,031 Purchased Property Services $3,051,667 $363,183 $602,669 $288,110 $9,424,144 Other Purchased Services $698 $18 $1,046 $0 $0
Supplies $0 $889 $592 $0 $0
Total Expenditures $3,602,050 $453,952 $949,072 $1,990,360 $11,127,175

CAPITAL OUTLAY REVENUES
Gas Tax Fund Fund (201)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Intergovernmental Revenues $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 Revenue Totals $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System Fund (202 )
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Intergovernmental Revenues $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Charge for Services $912 $53 $0 $0 $0
Revenue Totals $311,772 $318,160 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Land & Light Assessment District Fund
(203)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
LLAD Assessments $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Intergovernmental Revenues $9,452 $19,621 $11,199 $10,500 $10,500 Other Revenue $100 $1,610 $2,620 $0 $0
Revenue Totals $787,208 $802,479 $798,793 $795,474 $801,664 Measure J Return to Source Fund (204)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Transportation Taxes $479,482 $509,433 $491,221 $458,500 $482,388 Intergovernmental Revenues
Charges for Services $175 $0 $0 $0 $0
Revenue Totals $479,657 $509,433 $491,221 $458,500 $482,388 Measure J Storm Drain Fund (205)
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Parcel Taxes $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 Revenue Totals $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 Street Improvement & Maintenance
Fund (211 )
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Property and Other Taxes $1,630,826 $1,631,894 $1,881,749 $1,473,600 $1,503,072 Other Revenue $3,877 $13,174 $8,066 $5,100 $5,304
Revenue Totals $1,634,703 $1,645,068 $1,889,815 $1,478,700 $1,508,376 Agenda Packet Page 284 of 446
201
Fund: 212 SB1 Road Maintenance
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Intergovernmental Revenues $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 Revenue Totals $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 Capital Improvement Fund (301 )
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Intergovernmental Revenues $3,804,744 $565,701 $993,764 $1,804,360 $11,127,175 Other Revenue - TIF (9050) $392,217 $453,034 $47,821 $50,000 $0 Other Financing Sources (204) $492,234 $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 $40,000 Revenue Totals $4,689,194 $1,038,735 $1,061,585 $1,894,360 $11,167,175 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY EXPENDITURES $5,769,761 $1,620,025 $1,715,914 $4,020,063 $13,733,299 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY REVENUES $9,581,292 $6,048,835 $6,279,549 $6,825,059 $16,250,527 Agenda Packet Page 285 of 446
202
SECTION 13:

LONG-TERM DEBT
The City has various long- term commitments for payments to debt obligations to be repaid from various revenue sources. These obligations are discussed in this section and supported with the June 30, 2020 audited information.

REVENUE BONDS
2017 Sales Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds- Street Improvements In FY 2016-17, $8.65 million of Sales Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds were issued, refunding the outstanding portion of the Sales Tax Revenue Bond Series 2008 that was issued in June 2008. The original bond proceeds of approximately $10 million was used to finance the City’s Street Improvement Project.

The cost of the initial four-year project was approximately $17 million. After use of bond proceeds, remaining project funding will come from ongoing sales tax revenues not required for debt service and other funds available for this type of work. The City continues efforts to obtain all possible Federal and State funding for street improvements, including utilizing proceeds of the bonds as matching funds for Federal and State grant funding. The bond principal and interest is payable each May 1st from 2018 through May 1, 2036.

Table 13-1
2017 Sales Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds- Street Improvements Original Issue
Amount
Balance June
30, 2020 Additions Retirements
Balance
June 30,
2021
2017 Sales Tax
Revenue
Refunding Bond $8,650,000 $7,680,000 $340,000 $7,340,000 Table 13-2
Future debt service payments on the 2017 Sales Tax Revenue Refunding Bonds – Street Improvements Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $350,000 $356,100 $706,100
2023 $360,000 $342,100 $702,100
2024 $380,000 $327,700 $707,700
2025-2036 $6,250,000 $2,214,250 $8,464,250
Total $7,340,000 $3,240,150 $10,580,150
Measure A Lease Revenue Bonds - Swim Center Project
The El Cerrito Public Financing Authority issued 2002 Lease Revenue Bonds, which consisted of $4,615,000 in bonds bearing interest at 3.00% to 4.75%. The interest is payable each August 15 and February 15. Principal is payable each August 15, through August 15, 2020. In FY 2012-13, the 2002 Lease Revenue Bonds were refinanced at a rate of 1.80% on a refunded principal amount of $2,516,500 with the first principal payment due on September 1, 2013. The interest is payable each September 1 and March 1 through September 1, 2020.

Agenda Packet Page 286 of 446
203
The bonds are secured by a pledge, security interest in, and a first and exclusive lien on all base rental payments and other payments paid by the City and received by the Authority and the monies in the funds and accounts established pursuant to the Bond Indenture of Trust. The payment of bond principal and interest is also covered by a financial guaranty insurance policy.

Table 13-3
2012 Measure A - Swim Center Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2012 Measure A- Swim Center
Lease Revenue
Refunding Bonds $2,516,500 $185,200 $185,200 $0
Table 13-4
Future scheduled annual minimum debt service requirements for the 2012 Measure A - Swim Center Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds
Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2021 $185,200 $1,815 $187,015
Total $185,200 $1,815 $187,015
2017 Certificates of Participation (2006 City Hall Lease Refinancing) In FY 2016-17, $7.04 million of Certificates of Participation (COPs) were issued to refinance the outstanding portion of the original $9.61 million El Cerrito Public Financing Authority issued 2006 Lease Revenue Bonds. The proceeds of the 2006 Bonds were primarily used for construction of a new City Hall and improvements to certain City facilities. The annual principal and interest component of the aggregate lease payment with respect to the COPs is payable each January 15th with the final payment on January 15, 2036.

The COPs are secured by a pledge, security interest in, and a first and exclusive lien on all lease payments and other payments paid by the City and received by the Authority.

Table 13-5
2017 City Hall Lease Revenue Certificates of Participation Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2017 City Hall
Lease Revenue
Refunding $7,040,000 $6,475,000 $295,000 $6,180,000
Agenda Packet Page 287 of 446
204
Table 13-6
Annual lease Payments on 2017 City Hall Lease Revenue Certificates of Participation Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $300,000 $276,763 $576,763
2023 $310,000 $267,763 $577,763
2024 $320,000 $255,363 $575,363
2025-2036 $5,250,000 $1,631,499 $6,881,499
Total $6,180,000 $2,431,387 $8,611,387
Agenda Packet Page 288 of 446
205

CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS
Solar Equipment Capital Lease
On December 5, 2012, the City entered into a capital lease agreement in the amount of $1,595,000 at

2.75% interest with Green Campus Partners to finance the purchase and installation of solar equipment on City facilities. The term of the lease provides for semi-annual principal and interest payments of $65,236 on December 1 and June 1 through December 1, 2027.

Table 13-7
Solar Equipment Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
Solar Photovoltaic
Capital Lease $1,595,300 $878,798 $107,036 $771,762
Table 13-8
Future Debt Service Payments on Solar Equipment Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $110,000 $20,472 $130,472
2023 $113,046 $17,427 $130,473
2024 $116,176 $14,296 $130,473
2025-2028 $432,539 $24,115 $456,654
Total $771,761 $76,309 $848,071
Dell Financial Services Capital Lease
On August 1,2019 and November 1, 2019, City entered into an equipment lease purchase agreement in the amount of $187,346 at 4.7% interest with Dell Financial Services to finance the purchase of computers and software. Annual principal and interest payments of $41,291 are due starting August 1, 2019 to August 1, 2023.

Table 13-9
Dell Equipment Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance June
30, 2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2020 Dell
Equipment Leases $187,346 $146,055 $33,833 $112,222
Agenda Packet Page 289 of 446
206
Table 13-10
Future Debt Service Payments on Dell Equipment Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $35,561 $5,730 $41,291
2023 $37,376 $3,914 $41,291
2024 $39,285 $2,006 $41,291
$0
Total $112,222 $11,650 $123,872
Recycling Center Capital Lease
On November 1, 2010, the City entered into a capital lease agreement in the amount of $3,500,000 at

3.88% interest with Holman Capital to finance the reconstruction of the Recycling Center. The term of the lease provided for quarterly principal and interest payments of $80,225 through October 1, 2025.

In July 2012, the Recycling Center Capital Lease was refinanced reducing the interest rate from 3.88% to

2.50%. The interest is payable each July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1 through October 1, 2025.

Table 13-11
2012 Recycling Center Refunding Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2012 Recycling
Center Facility
Revenue
Refunding Bonds $3,405,600 $1,573,800 $270,800 $1,303,000 Table 13-12
Future Debt Service Payments on 2012 Recycling Center Refunding Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $277,400 $29,148 $306,548
2023 $284,200 $22,346 $306,546
2024 $291,200 $15,376 $306,576
2025-2026 $450,200 $9,622 $459,822
Total $1,303,000 $76,492 $1,379,492
2018 Recycling Two Side Loaders Capital Lease
On January 19, 2018, the City entered into an equipment lease purchase agreement in the amount of $551,498 at 2.887% interest with Capital One Public Funding, LLC to finance the purchase of two side loaders for the recycling center. Semiannual principal and interest payments of $43,790 are due each July and January 19 through January 19, 2025.

Agenda Packet Page 290 of 446
207
Table 13-13
2018 Recycling Center Side Loaders Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2018 Recycling
Two Side Loaders
Capital Lease $551,498 $405,049 $83,620 $321,429
Table 13-14
Future Debt Service Payments on 2018 Recycling Center Side Loaders Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $78,858 $8,722 $87,580
2023 $81,158 $6,421 $87,580
2024 $83,518 $4,062 $87,580
2025 $77,895 $1,633 $79,528
Total $321,429 $20,838 $342,267
2019 Public Works and Recreation Department Vehicles Capital Lease On January 15, 2019, the City centered into an equipment lease purchase agreement in the amount of $116,121 with KS State Bank to finance the purchase of two public works trucks and one recreation van.

Semi-annual principal and interest payments of $25,758 are due each July and January 15 through January 15, 2023.

Table 13-15
2019 Public Works and Recreation Department Vehicles Capital Lease Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2019 Public Works
Trucks and
Recreation Van
Capital Lease $116,121 $69,915 $22,139 $47,776
Table 13-16
Future Debt Service Payments on 2019 Public Works and Recreation Department Vehicles Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $23,285 $2,473 $25,758
2023 $24,491 $1,267 $25,758
Total $47,776 $3,740 $51,516
2019 Recreation Paratransit Capital Lease
On June 5, 2019, the City centered into an equipment lease purchase agreement with Wells Fargo Bank in the amount of $47,667. Monthly principal and interest payments of $1,087 are due 30th of the month till June 5, 2023.

Agenda Packet Page 291 of 446
208
Table 13-17
2019 Recreation Department Paratransit Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2019 Recreation
Paratransit Van $47,667 $36,432 $11,578 $24,854
Table 13-18
Future Debt Service Payments on 2019 Recreation Paratransit Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $12,135 $909 $13,044
2023 $12,718 $326 $13,044
Total $24,853 $1,235 $26,088
2020 Recreation Department Starcraft Capital Lease
On December 8, 2019, the City centered into an equipment lease purchase agreement with Wells Fargo Bank in the amount of $67,426. Yearly principal and interest payments of $18,030 are due 8th of the year until December 8, 2022.

Table 13-19
2020 Recreation Starcraft Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance June
30, 2021
2020 Recreation
Starcraft Capital
Lease $67,426 $49,396 $15,718 $33,678
Table 13-20
Future Debt Service Payments on 2020 Recreation Starcraft Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $16,454 $1,576 $18,030
2023 $17,224 $806 $18,030
Total $33,678 $2,382 $36,060
2021 Recycling Two Rear Loaders Capital Lease
On March 24, 2021, the City entered into an equipment lease purchase agreement with McNeilus Truck and Manufacturing in the amount of $573,906 for two rear loaders for recycling center. The yearly interest rate is 3.54%. The annual principal and interest payments of $94,005.95 starts from March 30, 2022 and ends March 30, 2028 for a total of 7 payments.

Table 13-21
2021 Recycling Center Two Rear Loaders
Original Issue
Amount
Balance June
30, 2020 Additions Retirements
Balance
June 30,
2021
2021 Recycling
Center Two Rear
Loaders $0 $573,906 $573,906
Agenda Packet Page 292 of 446
209
Table 13-22
Future Debt Service Payments on the 2021 Recycling Center Two Rear Loaders Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2022 $73,679 $20,327 $94,006
2023 $76,288 $17,718 $94,006
2024 $78,991 $15,015 $94,006
2025 $81,788 $12,218 $94,006
2026 $84,685 $9,321 $94,006
2027 $87,685 $6,321 $94,006
2028 $90,790 $3,216 $94,006
2025-2028 $344,948 $31,076 $376,024
Total $573,906 $84,136 $658,042
2022 Fire Apparatus Capital Lease
On May 24, 2022, the City entered into an equipment lease purchase agreement with Capital One Public Funding in the amount of $1,145,241.25 for Fire Apparatus. The yearly interest rate is 3.339%. The annual principal and interest payment of $136,590.20 starts from May 24,2023 and ends May 24, 2032 for a total of 10 payments.

Table 13-23
2022 Fire Apparatus Capital Lease
Original Issue
Amount
Balance June
30, 2021 Additions Retirements
Balance
June 30,
2022
2022 Fire
Apparatus $1,145,241 $0 $1,145,241 $1,145,241
Table 13-24
Future Debt Service Payments on 2022 Fire Apparatus Capital Lease Fiscal Year Ending
June 30 Principal Interest Total
2023 $98,351 $38,240 $136,590
2024 $101,635 $34,956 $136,590
2025 $105,028 $31,562 $136,590
2026 $108,535 $28,055 $136,590
2027 $112,159 $24,431 $136,590
2028 $115,904 $20,686 $136,590
2029 $119,774 $16,816 $136,590
2030 $123,773 $12,817 $136,590
2031 $127,906 $8,684 $136,590
2032 $132,177 $4,413 $136,590
2025-2032 $840,228 $115,903 $956,131
Total $1,145,241 $220,661 $1,365,902
Agenda Packet Page 293 of 446
210
Changes in Long-Term Liabilities
Long-term liability activity for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 was summarized as follows:

Original
Issue
Amount
Balance
June 30,
2020 Additions Retirements
Balance
June 30,
2021
Revenue Bonds:
2012 Measure A- Swim Center Lease
Revenue Refunding Bonds $2,516,500 $185,200 $185,200 $0 2017 Sales Tax Revenue Refunding $8,650,000 $7,680,000 $340,000 $7,340,000 2017 City Hall Lease Revenue
Refunding $7,040,000 $6,475,000 $295,000 $6,180,000
Total Revenue Bond $18,206,500 $14,340,200 $0 $820,200 $13,520,000 Capital Lease Obligations:

Solar Lease $1,595,300 $878,797 $107,036 $771,761
2012 Recycling Center Facility $3,405,600 $1,573,800 $270,800 $1,303,000 2018 Recycling Two Side Loaders $551,498 $405,049 $83,620 $321,429 2019 PW and Recreation Vehicles $116,121 $69,915 $22,139 $47,776 2019 Recreation Paratransit $47,667 $36,432 $11,579 $24,853 2020 Dell Lease #1 & #2 $187,346 $146,055 $33,833 $112,222 2020 Recreation Starcraft $67,426 $49,396 $15,718 $33,678 2021 Recycling Two Rear Loaders $573,906 $573,906 $573,906 2022 Fire Apparatus $1,145,241 $0
Total Capital Lease Obligations $7,690,105 $3,159,444 $0 $544,725 $2,614,719 Deferred Debt Expense
Bond issuance costs and Bond premiums are amortized over the terms of the respective bonds using a method that approximates the effective interest method.

Agenda Packet Page 294 of 446
211
SECTION 14:

APPENDICES AND STATISTICS
APPENDIX 1: GLOSSARY OF BUDGET TERMS
APPENDIX 2: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
APPENDIX 3: EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SCHEDULE
APPENDIX 4: FINANCIAL POLICIES
APPENDIX 5: BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
APPENDIX 6: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
APPENDIX 7: NON-DEPARTMENT LINE ITEM BUDGETS
APPENDIX 8: STATE AUDITOR CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
Agenda Packet Page 295 of 446
212
APPENDIX 1

GLOSSARY OF BUDGET TERMS
AC TRANSIT—A public sector transportation agency that provides bus and other public transit services to various localities in the San Francisco East Bay Area, including El Cerrito.

ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act.

ADOPTED BUDGET—The budget document formally approved by the City Council.

ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT (ACFR)—A set of mandated government financial statements for local and state governments that demonstrates compliance with the accounting requirements established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB).

APPROPRIATION—Legal authorization granted by City Council or other policy body to make expenditures and incur obligations for a specific purpose within a specific time frame.

AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) - A 2021 federal relief package providing funding in several areas such as state and local aid, education, rental assistance, transit, stimulus payments for individuals, and other provisions.

ASSESSED VALUATION—A dollar value placed on real estate or other property by the County Assessor as a basis for levying property taxes.

AUDIT—A review of the City’s accounts by an independent auditing firm to substantiate fiscal year-end balances and ensure compliance with generally accepted standards for financial accounting and reporting.

BART—Bay Area Rapid Transit, a fixed-rail mass transportation system in the San Francisco Bay Area.

BASIS OF BUDGETING— Basis of budgeting refers to the method used for recognizing revenues and expenditures in the budget. The City uses the modified accrual basis of accounting for budgetary purposes, which is in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

BALANCED BUDGET—A budget in which revenues are equal to expenditures. Thus, neither a budget deficit nor a budget surplus exists.

BEGINNING FUND BALANCE—Fund balance available in a fund from the end of the prior year for use in the following year.

BOND PROCEEDS—The money paid to the issuer by the purchaser or underwriter of a new issue of municipal securities. These moneys are used to finance the project or purpose for which the securities were issued, and to pay certain costs of issuance as may be provided in the bond contract.

BUDGET—A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures/expenses for a given period (typically a fiscal year) and the proposed means of financing them (revenue estimates).

Upon approval by the City Council, the budget appropriation resolution is the legal basis for expenditures in the fiscal year.

BUDGET AUTHORITY—Under certain circumstances, the City Council may adjust the budgeted appropriations for reasons unforeseen at the time of the adoption of the original budget. Such amendments are made by Council resolutions. The City Manager may make transfers of appropriations within a fund.

BUSINESS LICENSE TAX—A general tax on businesses for the privilege of conducting business within the City limits. Rates are set at each city’s discretion but may not be discriminatory or confiscatory.

Agenda Packet Page 296 of 446
213
CALED—California Association for Local Economic Development.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)—Annual appropriations for capital improvement projects such as street improvements, building construction, and various kinds of major facility maintenance. Capital projects are outlined in a five-year expenditure plan, which details funding sources and expenditure amounts. They often are multi-year projects, which require funding beyond the one-year period of the annual budget.

CAPITAL OUTLAY—A budget appropriation category comprising all equipment having a unit cost of more than $500 and an estimated useful life of over one year.

CDBG—Community Development Block Grant.

CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD)—A deposit insured up to $250,000 (as of July 1, 2009) by the FDIC at a set rate for a specific period of time.

COPS—Community Oriented Policing Services. A grant program supporting community involvement offered by the U.S. Department of Justice.

COUPON—The annual rate of interest that a bond’s issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value; a certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.

CPI—Consumer Price Index. Various indices that measure inflation in various economic sectors and regions.

CRW—The City’s software system used for permits, code enforcement and business licenses.

CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES—Charges imposed to support services provided to individuals. These charges may not exceed the cost of providing the service plus overhead. The rationale behind service charges is that certain services are primarily for the benefit of individuals rather than the general public.

CURRENT YIELD—The interest paid on an investment expressed as a percentage of the current price of the security.

DEBT SERVICE—Payment of the principal and interest on an obligation resulting from the issuance of bonds, notes, or leasing arrangements.

DEFICIT—An excess of expenditures or expenses over revenues (resources).

DEPARTMENT—An organizational unit composed of divisions or programs. It is the basic unit of service responsibility encompassing a broad mandate of related activities.

DIVISION—A sub-section (or activity) within a Department that furthers the objectives of the City by providing specific services or programs.

DUI—Driving Under the Influence (of alcohol or drugs).

DISCRETIONARY REVENUE—Money that the City Council has the authority to allocate for any purpose.

Often refers to the General Fund, as opposed to Special Funds.

EBMUD—East Bay Municipal Utility District, a public utility that provides water service in El Cerrito and other cities.

ENCUMBRANCE—Funds not yet expended and are delegated or set aside in anticipation of expenditure in the form of a purchase order, contract, or other commitment, chargeable to an appropriation. These funds cease to be an encumbrance when paid.

Agenda Packet Page 297 of 446
214
ENTERPRISE FUND—A type of fund operated in a manner similar to private enterprises. Enterprise funds capture the total costs of the associated programs, including facilities and services, as well as all revenues attributable to those programs. These programs are entirely or predominantly self-supporting.

ERAF—Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund. The state enacted legislation in 1992 whereby partial responsibility of funding education was shifted to local governments, directing specified amounts of local agency property taxes be deposited into such funds to support schools.

EOY—End Of Year. The City’s fiscal year runs from July 1 through June 30, while certain programs operate on a federal fiscal year, which runs from October 1 through September 30, and other programs operate on a calendar year basis (January 1 through December 31).

EXPENDITURES—Monies spent, including current operating expenses, debt service, and capital outlays.

EXPENSE—The actual spending of funds by an enterprise fund authorized by an appropriation.

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC)—Insurance provided to customers of a subscribing bank, which guarantees deposits to a set limit ($250,000) per depositor.

FEES—A charge to cover the cost of services (e.g., building inspection fee, zoning fee, etc.).

FINES AND FORFEITURES—Revenues received and bail monies forfeited upon conviction of a misdemeanor, traffic, or municipal infraction.

FISCAL YEAR—The City’s year for accounting and budgeting purposes, which begins on July 1 and ends on June 30.

FIXED ASSETS—A tangible item of a long-term character such as land, buildings, furniture, and other equipment with a unit cost in excess of $5,000.

FRANCHISE FEES—Fees paid to a municipality from a franchisee for “rental” or as a “toll” for the use of city streets and rights-of-way. The businesses required to pay franchise fees in El Cerrito include utilities such as gas, electricity, cable television, and solid waste collection and disposal. Telephone utilities are specifically exempted from franchise fees by State law.

FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)—A measure signifying the full number of hours for one full year that a regular employee in that position would provide services. Thus, a regular, full time employee would equal

1.0 FTE. A half-time employee would equal 0.5 FTE.

FUND—An independent fiscal and accounting entity used to record all financial transactions related to the specific purpose for which the fund was created. Primary reasons for creating separate funds include allocating interest, complying with federal requirements, and maintaining separate sets of books for reporting purposes.

FUND BALANCE—The amount of financial resources available for use. Generally, this figure represents a summary of all the annual operating surpluses and deficits since the fund’s inception.

FUNDING SOURCE—Identifies the source of resources for City expenditures.

FY—Fiscal Year. See description under “Fiscal Year”.

GASOLINE TAX (GAS TAX, HIGHWAY USERS TAX)—18-cent per gallon tax on fuel used to propel a motor vehicle or aircraft. The use of these revenues is restricted to “research, planning, construction, improvement, maintenance, and operation of public streets and highways or public mass transit guide ways.” The basic means of distribution to cities is population.

GANN LIMIT (SPENDING LIMIT)—Article XIII B of the California Constitution establishes a spending limitation on government agencies within California. The spending limit is a mandated calculation of how Agenda Packet Page 298 of 446
215
much the City is allowed to expend in one fiscal year. The amounts of appropriations subject to the limit are budgeted proceeds of taxes. The total of these budgeted revenues cannot exceed the total appropriations limit. Annually, local governments may increase the appropriate limit by a factor comprised of the change in population combined with the California inflation rate as determined by the State Finance Department.

GENERAL FUND—The primary fund used to account for revenues and expenditures of the City not legally restricted as to use. This Fund is used to offset the cost of the City’s general operations.

GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND—A bond whose repayment is guaranteed by pledging all the assets and revenues of a government agency.

GENERAL FUND REVENUES—General sources of income the City collects and receives into the Treasury for public use (e.g., property tax). There are no restrictions as to the use of these monies - often referred to as Discretionary Revenue.

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE—The City’s General Plan is a master planning document for the community.

State law requires that all cities develop and update their General Plan periodically.

GOVERNANCE—The process of providing community leadership and overall direction for a City. It involves understanding the community’s desires for its future, focusing those desires into an achievable vision, and establishing specific objectives and goals in order to realize that future vision. It also involves leadership in explaining City policies to the community and gathering support for City programs.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD (GASB)—A standard-setting body, associated with the Financial Accounting Foundation, which prescribes standard accounting practices for governmental units.

GRANT—A contribution from one government unit to another, usually made for a specific purpose and time period.

INFRASTRUCTURE—Facilities on which the continuance and growth of a community depend, such as streets and roads, sewers, public buildings, parks, etc.

INTEREST RATE—The annual yield earned on an investment, expressed as a percentage.

INTERFUND TRANSFERS IN/OUT—Monies transferred from one fund to another. Such money is transferred to finance the operations of another fund or to reimburse the fund for certain expenditures/expenses.

INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT (IWM) FUND—An enterprise fund for the Integrated Waste Management services functions, including curbside recycling collection and operation of the City’s Recycling + Environmental Resource Center; supported by user fees.

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (LLAD)—A district encompassing the City of El Cerrito in which an assessment levied on residential and commercial property owners for the purpose of providing landscaping, street lights, and the maintenance of parks, street landscaping, and recreation facilities. The assessment is added to the property tax bill.

LICENSES AND PERMITS—Revenues in this category are charges designed to reimburse a city for costs of regulating the activities being licensed. These charges may not generate revenues in excess of costs.

MASTER FEE SCHEDULE—Fee schedule that includes all of the City’s user fees, charges for services, and business license tax rates updated and adopted by the City Council on an annual basis.

MEASURE A- PARCEL TAX (2000)—Revenues, approved by the voters in 2000, for the sole and exclusive purpose of providing the funds necessary for the renovation and reconstruction of the El Cerrito Swim Agenda Packet Page 299 of 446
216
Center, the rehabilitation of Canyon Trail Clubhouse and the performance of access and restroom renovations to the Harding, Huber and Poinsett Park Clubhouses.

MEASURE A- SALES TAX (2008)—A retail transactions and use tax approved by the voters in 2008.

Proceeds levied and imposed are accounted for and paid into a special fund designated for use for all aspects of street repair and maintenance including repair, reconstruction and sealing of City streets; repair, maintenance and reconstruction of curbs and ramps adjacent to City streets; crosswalk and pedestrian improvements on or adjacent to City streets; other related services such as lane line, crosswalk and bicycle lane striping and other necessary pavement markings; and other such improvements as are deemed necessary by the City Council for the benefit of the residents of the City.

MEASURE J STORM DRAIN—A measure passed by El Cerrito voters in 1993 to maintain, repair, and reconstruct the City’s storm drains. All properties in the City are assessed annually based on equivalent residential units. Funds are accounted for in the Measure J-Storm Drain Fund.

MEASURE C TRANSIT—Funds that are used for limited paratransit services, which augment the basic service provided by the BART/AC Transit Consortium. Any excess tax revenues over expenditures related to paratransit services are placed in the Measure C-Transit Reserve. Measure C was extended by Measure J in November 2004.

MEASURE J TRANSIT—Measure J was approved in November 2004, and provided for the continuation of Measure C, the half-cent transportation sales tax for an additional 25 years (see description under “Measure C Transit”, above).

MEASURE R SALES TAX—Measure R is a half-cent, general sales tax measure for seven years that was passed in November 2010 in order to maintain the current level of services in El Cerrito during the economic recession.

MEASURE WW—An East Bay Regional Parks District bond measure passed by the voters in 2008, which included funds for cities including El Cerrito for local park and recreation projects.

MTC—Metropolitan Transportation Commission. A regional agency that coordinates transportation programs and funding in the San Francisco Bay Area. The MTC formerly provided grant money for the Paratransit Program. The responsibility for providing these services was transferred to AC Transit and BART on July 1, 1997.

MOTOR VEHICLE IN-LIEU FEES—Registered vehicle owners pay a fee to the State each year in lieu of paying property taxes for their vehicle. The fee is computed as a percent of the depreciated value of their motor vehicle. Each city and county in California receives a portion of this revenue, based on population.

The State Legislature has modified the level of revenue disbursement to cities and counties in recent years.

MUNICIPAL CODE—City Council approved ordinances currently in effect. The Code defines City policy and contains the “laws” of the City.

MUNICIPAL SERVICES CORPORATION (MSC)—A nonprofit public benefit corporation formed in 1982 to benefit and support the community. Its charitable and public purposes were expanded in 2011, in accordance with Section 509(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, to include “lessening the burdens of government of the City,” by contributing to physical improvements, providing economic opportunity, stimulating economic development, assisting with redevelopment activities and programs, and combating community deterioration. The MSC provides grants in support of these purposes, undertakes development of its land holdings, and manages the Cerrito Theater for the benefit of the community.

NOTE—A written promise to pay a specified amount to a certain entity on demand or on a specified date.

Agenda Packet Page 300 of 446
217
NPDES—National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

OBJECTIVES—The expected results or achievements of a budget activity, which can be measured and achieved within a given time frame. Achievement of the objective advances the organization towards a corresponding goal.

OES—Office of Emergency Services.

OPERATING BUDGET—The annual appropriation of revenues and expenditures that define financial and programmatic activities.

OPERATING EXPENSES—The cost for personnel, materials and equipment required for a department to function.

ORDINANCE—A formal legislative enactment by the City Council. It has the full force and effect of law within City boundaries unless preempted by a higher form of law. An ordinance has a higher legal standing than a resolution.

PASS-THRU PAYMENTS—Payments made by the former El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency to the taxing entities affected by the Redevelopment Plan for the City of El Cerrito Redevelopment Project Area.

Payments were calculated either by fiscal agreement or a statutory formula to the taxing entities from the tax increment collected by the Redevelopment Agency. Upon dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, pass-through payments to the tax entities continue to be made by the County Auditor-Controller, calculated in the same manner, prior to disbursing Redevelopment Property Tax to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency Successor Agency to make payments on the former Redevelopment Agency’s enforceable obligations.

PERS—Public Employees’ Retirement System. The State-sponsored retirement system in which most City employees participate.

PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES—Salaries and wages paid to employees.

PROGRAM REVENUES—Revenues received by a department as a result of the services or operations of that department (such as user fees), which are used to finance the related services or programs. Program Revenue is not discretionary (general-purpose) revenue.

PROPOSED BUDGET—The working document for the fiscal year under discussion.

POST—Peace Officer Standards and Training. A State reimbursement program for Police Officer Training.

PRINCIPAL—The face value or par value of a debt instrument, or the amount of capital invested in a given security.

PROPERTY TAX—All real property and tangible personal property are subject to a property tax rate of 1% of their assessed values. Since Proposition 13 was enacted in 1978, the assessed valuation of real property in the “base year” of FY 1975-1976 may increase each year by a calculated change in the cost of living, not to exceed 2%, as long as it is held by the same owner. When there is a transfer of property ownership, or when property is newly constructed, it is reappraised at its market value. The property tax is imposed on real property (land and permanently attached improvements such as buildings) and tangible personal property (movable property) located within the state. By definition, this ad valorem tax is based on the property value, as defined in law, rather than on a fixed amount or benefit.

PUBLIC SAFETY TAX (PROPOSITION 172)—This half-cent sales tax was authorized in 1994 by a vote of the people in California. Proposition 172 designated the tax be used to fund public safety activities such as police and fire services and facilities.

PURCHASE DATE—The date in which a security is purchased for settlement on that or a later date.

Agenda Packet Page 301 of 446
218
PURCHASE ORDER—Authorizes the delivery of specific goods or service and the incurrence of debt for them.

PDA—Priority Development Area. A designation of the FOCUS Program, a development and conservation strategy for the Bay Area, led by the Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The San Pablo Avenue corridor is a PDA under the Focus Program, targeted for transit-oriented, infill development.

RAD—Residential Architectural Development.

RDA—Redevelopment Agency.

RENTS—Income derived from the rental of property.

RESERVE—An account used to record a portion of the fund balance as legally segregated for a specific use, usually at a future time.

RESOLUTION—A special order of the City Council, which has a lower legal standing than an ordinance.

RESTRICTED USE FUNDS—Funds designated for use for a specific purpose.

REVENUES—Monies received or anticipated by a local government from both tax and non-tax sources during the fiscal year.

REVENUE BONDS—A type of bond usually issued to construct facilities. The bonds are repaid from revenue produced by the operation of those facilities.

SALARY SAVINGS—That percentage or dollar amount of salaries which can be expected to be unspent during the fiscal year due to vacancies or other factors.

SALES TAX—This tax is levied on goods and services at the point-of-sale. Since the State adopted the Bradley-Burns Uniform Sales and Use Tax Law, the State has consolidated the collection of sales taxes and made uniform the rate at which goods are taxed (allowing for local voter-approved increments). The sales tax rate in Contra Costa County is currently 8.5%, of which approximately 1% is returned to El Cerrito for those sales that take place in El Cerrito. In February 2008, voters approved an additional half-cent sales and use tax dedicated to funding a comprehensive street pavement repair and maintenance program. In November 2010, voters approved an additional half-cent general sales tax measure for seven years, in order to maintain the current level of services in El Cerrito during the economic recession.

SECURED TAXES—Taxes levied on real properties in the City which are "secured" by liens on the properties.

SERAF—Supplemental Education Revenue Augmentation Fund. SERAF payments were State takeaways from redevelopment agencies of about $1.7 billion in FY 2009-10 and $400 million in FY 2010-11. El Cerrito’s shares of the SERAF takeaways were about $1.7 million and $364,000, respectively.

SERVICES—Expenditures/expenses for services.

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS—This fund type collects revenues that are restricted by the City, State, or Federal government as to how the City might spend them.

STMP—Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program.

SUPPLIES AND OTHER CHARGES—Expenditures/expenses for supplies or other charges that ordinarily are consumed within a fiscal year and which are not included in inventories.

TAX RATE—The amount of tax levied expressed as a percentage of the value of the item being taxed.

Agenda Packet Page 302 of 446
219
TRAN—Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note. Notes issued in anticipation of receiving tax proceeds or other revenues at a future date.

TEA—Transportation Equity Act.

TDA—Transportation Development Act. A State program providing grants for specific transportation projects.

TOD—Transit Orientated Development.

TFCA—Transportation Fund for Clean Air.

TOT—Transient Occupancy Tax. A general tax imposed on occupants for the privilege of occupying rooms in hotels, motels, inns, or other lodging facilities for 30 days or less. The current tax rate in El Cerrito is 10%.

UNDESIGNATED FUND BALANCE—Funds which the City Council has not specifically designated for any other purpose. The City maintains an Undesignated General Fund Balance to help mitigate the effects of such unanticipated situations as the following:
a) Economic downturns
b) Loss of revenues to or imposition of additional costs by other governmental agencies c) Errors in financial forecasting
d) Natural disasters
The full policy of the City Council is shown in this document in Appendix 4, Fiscal Policies.

USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY—This revenue comes from the investment of temporarily idle public funds. Investing these funds is a responsible way to raise monies using a City’s own resources. In making investment decisions, consideration should be given to safety, liquidity, and yield, in that order. In keeping with the need for safety, the California Government Code restricts the various instruments in which the City may invest. The City of El Cerrito has a local Investment Policy.

UTILITY USERS TAX—This tax is imposed on the residential and commercial consumers of utilities— electric, gas, cable television, water, and telephone services (including cellular). The City’s current tax rate is 8%, and was ratified by the voters with the passage of Measure K in 2004. The tax is collected by the companies providing the service as part of their billing process.

VEHICLE ABATEMENT FUNDS—These funds are generated by assessing a fee per vehicle for all vehicles registered in the County. State legislation allowed the eighteen cities and County of Contra Costa to join together and form a Service Authority to oversee a fund to be used for the removal of abandoned, wrecked, and inoperable vehicles. Any excess of Vehicle Abatement revenues over expenditures related to this purpose is held in the Vehicle Abatement Reserve.

WCCTAC—West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee.

WCCUSD—West Contra Costa Unified School District.

Agenda Packet Page 303 of 446
220
APPENDIX 2

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
Located on the eastern shore of San Francisco Bay, El Cerrito is a 3.9-square-mile city blessed with a pleasant climate year-round. The hilly areas of El Cerrito provide spectacular views of San Francisco, the Bay and Golden Gate Bridges, and Mt. Tamalpais. El Cerrito is conveniently located along Interstate 80 and is less than 30 miles from two major airports, and the Silicon Valley, Berkeley, and Sacramento are within easy reach. Its extensive transportation system includes two Bay Area Rapid Transit stations. El Cerrito’s residents enjoy the tree-lined Hillside Natural Area, 102 acres of dedicated open space, as well as over 46 acres of parks, 18 acres of school recreational areas, and 38 acres of other amenities. These amenities include the Ohlone Greenway, a pleasantly landscaped linear park that runs along the length of the city and is popular with walkers, runners and bicyclists. El Cerrito is a well-educated community, with 59 percent of people 25 and over having a bachelor’s degree or higher. Its population, estimated at 25,508, has a history of civic involvement.

Agenda Packet Page 304 of 446
221

CITY OF EL CERRITO
Miscellaneous Statistics
Date of Incorporation August 23, 1917
Form of Government Council/Manager
Climate Coastal Mediterranean
Average annual rainfall 25"
Area in square miles 3.9
Population (3) 25,692
Population Ranking among California
(3)
276 out of 482
Elevation 73 feet above sea level
Location 37º55'3" N, 122º18'18" W
Number of housing units 11,012
Number of registered voters 17,439
Median household income (2) $108,294
Average age of residents(2) 42.2
Facilities and services:

Number of Full Time Employees 156
Fire protection (provided by) City of El Cerrito
Police protection (provided by) City of El Cerrito
Miles of paved streets 68 center line miles
Miles of off-street bicycle trails Ohlone Greenway—2.5 miles DMV Regional Office 1
Bay Area Rapid Transit Stations 2
Schools:

Elementary schools—Public 3
Middle schools—Public 2
High schools—Public 2
Private Schools 4
Public Utilities:

Water services (provided by) East Bay Municipal Utility District Wastewater services (provided by) Stege Sanitary District Refuse disposal (provided by) East Bay Sanitary
Recycling Services (provided by) City of El Cerrito
Culture and recreation (5):

City-owned park acreage 46 acres
Open space facilities 102 acres
Other City-maintained recreational facilities 23.3 acres School district areas 26.6 acres
Library Services (provided by) Contra Costa County
Notes:
(1) California Department of Finance, 1/1/2020 dataset
(2) United States Census Bureau, Year 2010-2019 dataset (3) United States Census Bureau, v2021
(4) Contra Costa County Elections Department
(5) City of El Cerrito General Plan
Agenda Packet Page 305 of 446
222

CITY OF EL CERRITO
DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS: PAST TEN YEARS
*(WILL BE UPDATED IN ADOPTED BUDGET DOCUMENT)*
Calendar
Year
City
Population(2)
Median
Population
Age (2)
Unemployment
Rate (3)
K-12
Public
School (4)
Contra Costa
County
Population (2)
% of
County
Population
2010 23,644 43.7 9.5% 3,076 1,049,025 2.25%
2011 23,845 43.3 8.9% 3,076 1,065,440 2.24%
2012 24,074 44.5 7.7% 3,316 1,077,548 2.23%
2013 24,323 44.4 6.5% 3,375 1,093,401 2.22%
2014 24,551 44.4 5.3% 3,483 1,108,876 2.21%
2015 24,902 43.8 4.3% 3,679 1,124,405 2.21%
2016 25,458 43.6 3.5% 3,905 1,137,268 2.24%
2017 25,468 42.7 3.1% 4,109 1,145,535 2.22%
2018 25,607 42.2 2.6% 4,190 1,150,519 2.23%
2019 25,508 42.2 2.4% 4,353 1,153,526 2.21%
Note:
(1) West Contra Costa Unified School District
(2) United States Census Bureau
(3) California Employment Development Department
(4) California Department of Education
PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS 2020 (Alphabetical Order)
Berkeley Country Club Pastime Hardware
Berkeley Zion Presbyterian Church Prospect Sierra School City of El Cerrito Romano's Macaroni Grill
El Cerrito Royale Retirement Community Ross Dress For Less Fatapple's Shields Nursing Centers
Home Depot Trader Joe's
Honda of El Cerrito Turnabout Shop
IHOP US Post Office
Marvin Gardens Real Estate Walgreens
Nation's Foods, Inc. West Contra Costa Unified School District Source: East Bay Economic Development Alliance
Agenda Packet Page 306 of 446
223
APPENDIX 3

EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SCHEDULE

BENEFIT
POLICE

EMPLOYEES

ASSOCIATION
1/1/2020 to
12/31/2024
UNITED

PROFESSIONAL

FIREFIGHTERS
LOCAL 1230
7/1/2019 to
9/30/2022

PUBLIC SAFETY

MANAGEMENT

ASSOCIATION
varies

MANAGEMENT &

CONFIDENTIAL
7/1/2021
SEIU LOCAL 1021
7/1/2020 to
6/30/2022
Flex
Benefits
Medical
Maximum of
$2,336.44 for
family medical for
7/1/22 -12/31/22
Maximum of
$2,336.44 for
family medical for
7/1/22 -12/31/22
Maximum of
$2,336.44 for
family medical for
7/1/22 -12/31/22
Maximum of
$2,336.44 for
family medical for
7/1/22 -12/31/22
Maximum of
$2,336.44 for
family medical for
7/1/22 -12/31/22
Dental
Maximum of
$140.56 for family
dental eff.
1/1/2022
Maximum of
$140.56 for family
dental eff.
1/1/2022
Maximum of
$140.56 for family
dental eff.
1/1/2022
Maximum of
$140.56 for family
dental eff.
1/1/2022
Maximum of
$140.56 for family
dental eff.
1/1/2022
Life
Insurance
Annual Salary
(max of $100,000);
rate= annual
salary/1000*0.142
Annual Salary
(max of $100,000);
rate= annual
salary/1000*0.142
Annual Salary
(max of $100,000);
rate= annual
salary/1000*0.142
Annual Salary
(max of $100,000);
rate= annual
salary/1000*0.142
Annual Salary
(max of $100,000);
rate= annual
salary/1000*0.142

STD/LTD
Insurance
60 day wait
Sworn rate= mth.
salary/100*$0.613
for 7/1/22 -
12/31/22
Sworn rate= mth.
salary/100*$0.613
for 7/1/22 -
12/31/22
Sworn rate= mth.
salary/100*$0.613
for 7/1/22 -
12/31/22

STD/LTD
Insurance
30 day wait
Non-sworn: rate =
annual
salary/100*$0.757
Rate = annual
salary/100*$0.757
Rate = annual
salary/100*$0.757
PERS Safety
"classic
members"
3% at 50, SHY, sick
leave credit; ER
rate =23.75% as of
7/1/22
3% at 50, SHY, sick
leave credit;
ER rate =23.75% as
of 7/1/22 EE=12%
3% at 50, SHY, sick
leave credit; ER
rate =23.75% as of
7/1/22
PEPRA
Safety "new
members"

2.7% at 57, 3YA,
sick leave credit;
ER rate =12.78% as
of 7/1/22

2.7% at 57, 3YA,
sick leave credit;
ER rate =12.78% as
of 7/1/22

2.7% at 57, 3YA,
sick leave credit;
ER rate =12.78% as
of 7/1/22
PERS Misc
"classic
members"
Non-Sworn 2.7%
at 55, SHY, sick
leave credit; ER
rate=14.03% as of
7/1/22

2.7% at 55, SHY,
sick leave credit;
ER rate=14.03% as
of 7/1/22

2.7% at 55, SHY,
sick leave credit;
ER rate=14.03% as
of 7/1/22
PEPRA Misc
"new
members"
Non-Sworn 2% at
62, 3YA, sick
leave credit; ER
rate=7.47% as of
7/1/22 EE=12%
2% at 62, 3YA, sick
leave credit;
ER rate=7.47% as
of 7/1/22 EE=9%
2% at 62, 3YA, sick
leave credit;
ER rate=7.47% as
of 7/1/22 EE=8%
FICA/Medic
are
Sworn - Medicare

1.45%
Non-sworn - +
FICA 6.2%
Medicare 1.45% Medicare 1.45%
FICA 6.2% of first
$147,000;
Medicare 1.45%
FICA 6.2% of first
$147,000;
Medicare 1.45%
Education
Pay
3%-AA; 4.5%-BA;

5.5%-MA 4.5%-BA; 5.5%-MA
Agenda Packet Page 307 of 446
224

BENEFIT
POLICE

EMPLOYEES

ASSOCIATION
1/1/2020 to
12/31/2024
UNITED

PROFESSIONAL

FIREFIGHTERS
LOCAL 1230
7/1/2019 to
9/30/2022

PUBLIC SAFETY

MANAGEMENT

ASSOCIATION
varies

MANAGEMENT &

CONFIDENTIAL
7/1/2021
SEIU LOCAL 1021
7/1/2020 to
6/30/2022
Longevity
Pay
Annually 3% - 5 to
9 yrs; 6% - 10
to 19 yrs; 9% at 20
yrs
Police Mgmt only
– same as PEA
$1,000 annually at
15 yrs or more
Auto/Other $300/month for
post employ. med.

Varies- Vehicle for
some
Auto allowance
suspended
Uniform
Allowance
Sworn $1000 yr;
Non-sworn $725 $725 annually Police $1000; Fire $1000
Maintenance:
$200/ yr for steel
toed shoes
Assignment
Differential
5% - detective,
admin, canine,
motor or school
resource officer
10% if 40hr staff
officer; 10%
paramedic
Fire Training Chief
10%
Holidays
11+birthday and 3
floaters; nonsworn
-1½ more days.
13+ birthday 12½ + birthday + 3
floaters
12½ + birthday + 3
floaters
12½ +birthday+2
floaters
Administrati
ve Leave
Maximum of 10
days
Mgmt - Maximum
of 10 days
Work Week
Sworn 40 hrs, 3-12
schedule;
Non-sworn 37½ or
40 hrs
Standard 56 hrs
average (24 hr
shifts); 48/96
schedule
40 hrs, except shift
Battalion
Chiefs on 56 hr
average
37½ hr/ either
9/75 or 8/75 for 2
weeks
37½ hrs/ either
9/75 or 8/75 for 2
weeks
Last Salary
Increase 1/13/22 – 2% 7/1/2021 – 3%
7/2021 BC: 3%
7/2021 Police
Mgmt: 3%;
7/2021 Police
Chief/Fire Chief:

3.8%
7/1/2019 – 3% 7/1/2021 – 3%
Next Salary
Increase See MOU See MOU See MOU See MOU See MOU
CITY MANAGER: Benefits same as Management & Confidential; CITY COUNCIL: Salary set by ordinance at $441/month since 12/3/1991 Agenda Packet Page 308 of 446
225
APPENDIX 4

FINANCIAL POLICIES
City of El Cerrito Comprehensive Financial Policy
Approved Resolution No: 2019-31: May 21, 2019
Agenda Packet Page 309 of 446
226
Agenda Packet Page 310 of 446
227
Agenda Packet Page 311 of 446
228
Agenda Packet Page 312 of 446
229
Agenda Packet Page 313 of 446
230
Agenda Packet Page 314 of 446
231
Agenda Packet Page 315 of 446
232
Agenda Packet Page 316 of 446
233
Agenda Packet Page 317 of 446
234
City of El Cerrito Investment Policy
Approved Resolution 2019-69: December 17, 2019
Agenda Packet Page 318 of 446
235
Agenda Packet Page 319 of 446
236
Agenda Packet Page 320 of 446
237
Agenda Packet Page 321 of 446
238
Agenda Packet Page 322 of 446
239
Agenda Packet Page 323 of 446
240
APPENDIX 5

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Boards, Commissions and Committees are appointed by and serve as advisors to the City Council. More than 90 residents serve the City on these advisory bodies and make a tremendously valuable contribution to the effective provision of responsive services to the community.

Each year, certain Boards, Commissions and Committees, through their staff liaisons, have made funding requests that relate to specific tasks, projects, or events. In order to provide clarity of actual expenditures as well as engage the members of the advisory bodies during the planning process, each request for funding appears within this section. The actual expenditure will be contained within the respective staff liaison departmental budget request.

ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION (7 Members)
Acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council in all matters pertaining to arts in the community. Makes recommendations to the Council concerning the resources and needs of the community on the subject of the arts, opportunities for participation of artists and performers in City-sponsored activities, and ways to encourage community involvement in the arts. Makes recommendations to the Council regarding acquisition of art by the City, public art and exterior works of art installed on public property in the City.

Oversees the City’s Arts in Public Places Program, Poet Laureate Program and El Cerrito Creative Re-Use Artist Residency (“ECCRU”) at the Recycling + Environmental Resource Center. Juries exhibits for the City Hall Gallery Space. Meets the 4th Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Current members:

Allison Cooper, George Gager, Courtney Helion, Ann Wiens, and Alan Pavlosky (2 vacancies). Staff liaison:

Alexandra Orologas (City Management).

CITIZENS' STREET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (5 Members)
Monitors expenditures of revenue collected pursuant to ECMC Chapter 4.60, the “Pothole Repair and Local Street Improvement and Maintenance Transactions and Use Tax," to determine whether such funds are expended for the purposes specified in the current Street Repair and Maintenance Expenditure Plan.

The plan is approved by the City Council; The Oversight Committee issues reports on its findings to the City Council and public at least annually. Meets 4th Monday of January and September and 2nd Monday of November. Current members: Matthew Kelly, Vanessa Hill, Kathy Fleming, and Prachi Amin (1 vacancy).

Staff liaison: Yvetteh Ortiz (Public Works).

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (5 Members)
Hears appeals submitted by any person in City civil service relative to any disciplinary action, dismissal, demotion, or alleged violation of the Municipal Code or the personnel rules, and certifies its findings and recommendations. Holds hearings and makes recommendations on any matter of personnel administration requested by the Council or the City Manager. Meets on call at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall.

Current members: Michael Fischer, Eugene Park, Dorian Peters, and Bruce Yow (1 vacancy). Staff liaison:

Alexandra Orologas (City Management).

COMMITTEE ON AGING (15 Members)
The Committee on Aging is open to any and all interested adult residents in El Cerrito. The Committee serves as an advisory body to the City Council on matters such as quality programs, services, housing Agenda Packet Page 324 of 446
241
options, and facilities for seniors; accessible public transportation and paratransit services for persons unable to use public transit facilities; and support services to assist frail older adults and their families both within and outside of their homes. Meets on the 3rd Wednesday of each month at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Buddy Akacić, Katherine Cesa, Kenneth Epley, Janet James, Carol Kehoe, Pansy Kwong, Steve Lipson, Kim Marlia, Pamela Wagner, and Bruce Yow (5 vacancies). Staff liaison: Bridget Cooney (Senior Services, Recreation).

CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE (15 Members)
The Crime Prevention Committee was formed by resolution of the City Council in 1975. Membership is composed of El Cerrito residents interested in or knowledgeable about the criminal justice system. The Committee sponsors National Night Out, Neighborhood Watch, and many crime-prevention-related seminars, programs and events. Meets the 1st Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: William Cedric Cobb, James Dologonas, Katie Fournier, George Gager, Eugene Go, and Dorothy Herzberg.(9 vacancies). Staff liaison: Sgt.Scott Cliatt (Police Department).

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (5 members)
The Design Review Board reviews new Tier II developments and major Tier III renovations of existing properties in the San Pablo Specific Plan area. They serve as the first appeal hearing body for administrative Tier I design review actions and make recommendations to the Planning Commission regarding Tier IV projects located in the Plan area. They also have final design authority for new residential developments, from duplexes to multi-family units outside of the Plan area. Their purview includes the consideration of the proposed architecture, site layout, landscaping as well as master sign programs for the purpose of encouraging quality design. In this role, they work collaboratively with applicants to refine their projects in terms of materials, finishes and landscaping. Finally, they are the approving authority for the necessary environmental documentation required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) related to projects under their review. Meets on the 1st Wednesday of each month, 7:30 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Ben Chuaqui, Wenlin Li, Andrea Lucas, and Gyanendra Singh (1 vacancy) . Staff liaison: Sean Moss (Community Development).

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (15 Members)
Advises the Council on economic development matters, makes recommendations on the annual economic development work plan, and oversees the work of subcommittees established to concentrate on creating plans for high-priority areas. The Chamber of Commerce President serves on the Economic Development Committee during his or her tenure as Chamber president. Meets on the 3rd Monday of every month, 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Christopher Bunting, Travis Campbell, Mark Figone, George Gager, Rachel Melby, Jean Shrem, Patrick Swen, Eric Wright, and Jonathan Zazove (6 Vacancies). Staff liaison: Aissia Ashoori (Community Development) ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE (15 Members)
The Environmental Quality Committee was established in FY 2007-08. The fifteen-member Environmental Quality Committee serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, staff, other boards, commissions, and committees, and the residents of the City with regard to environmental quality issues within the City of El Cerrito. The Committee recommends programs, policies, and ordinances to the City Council and promotes the City’s environmental quality efforts. The Committee also promotes and fosters public awareness, education, interest and support for environmental quality efforts, fosters volunteer opportunities, and educates El Cerrito residents regarding environmental quality and issues relating to Agenda Packet Page 325 of 446
242
environmental impacts. The Committee meets on the 2nd Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Members: Buddy Akacić, Howdy Goudey, Rebecca Milliken, Mark Miner, Eevelyn Mitchell, Elizabeth Molnar, Sean O'Connor, Paloma Pavel, Ellen Spitalnik, Sheila Tarbet, Neil Tsutsui, Dave Weinstein, and Rose Vekony (2 vacancies). Staff liaison: Will Provost (Public Works).

FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD (5 Members)
Reviews and makes recommendations on the proposed annual budget and long-term financial plan for the City and the Redevelopment Agency. Conducts an annual review of the City’s investment policies, and gives consideration to the managing of the City’s financial reserves to assure maximum returns on approved investments. Reviews the annual audit and management letter, and provides the City Council with recommended changes in financial practices. Reviews and makes recommendations on all proposed bonds or other debt instruments to be issued by the City. Meets on the 4th Tuesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Ruth Cazden, Farhad Farahmand, William Ktsanes, Dick Patterson, and Kimberly White. Staff liaison: Sandra Dalida (Finance).

HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION (7 Members)
Develops positive human relations through education, encouragement of greater respect, and understanding between people, their equal opportunity rights under the law, and the recognition of the racial, ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity of the El Cerrito community. Initiates educational and cultural programs, and promotes tolerance and mutual respect among all persons. Commission members are generally representative of the demographics of the City, considering race, religion, age, gender, ethnicity, and other factors. Meets on the 2nd Wednesday of each month, 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Buddy Akacić, Julie Conant, Walter Williams III, and W. Mina Wilson (3 vacanacies). Staff liaison: Shannon Bassi (City Management).

PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION (7 Members)
Acts in an advisory capacity on all matters pertaining to public recreation, including parks, playgrounds, landscaping, childcare, educational and enrichment courses, and entertainment. Reviews the annual budget and Master Fee Schedule of the Recreation Department and makes recommendations with respect thereto. Assists in the planning of a recreation programs for the City and promotes and stimulates public interest; and, to that end, solicits to the fullest possible extent the cooperation of interested community groups and other public and private agencies. Studies present and future needs of the City with regard to park and recreation facilities. Reviews and recommends parks and recreation facilities design plans. Reviews and recommends projects and policies as they relate to the Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan (2019) and Measure H. Generally meets on the 4th Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall or via Teleconference (Zoom). Current members: Ben Chuaqui, Avis Codron, Jennifer Kaczor, and Norman LaForce (3 vacancies). Staff liaison: Chris Jones (Recreation).

PLANNING COMMISSION (7 Members)
California’s Conservation and Planning law requires the City to establish a Planning Commission. One of its primary functions is as an advisory body to the City Council in matters relating to current and advance planning and the development of the built environment. This includes the review and stewardship of the City’s long-range planning goals, policies and programs on a broad array of issues related to land use, including concessions under state density law. In addition, this body hears and takes action on Tier IV development projects located inside the San Pablo Avenue Plan area, after receiving the recommendation of the Design Review Board. They also hear appeals of administrative decisions of the Agenda Packet Page 326 of 446
243
Zoning Administrator as well as appeals of actions made by the Design Review Board. In addition, the Commission takes action on conditional use permits, variances, development agreements and serves as the approving authority for necessary environmental documentation required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for any project under their purview. Meets on the 3rd Wednesday of each month in regular session at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall. Current members: Brendan Bloom, Erin Gillett, Daniel Hamilton, Leslie Mendez, and Joy Navarrete (2 vacancies). Staff liaison: Sean Moss (Community Development).

URBAN FOREST COMMITTEE (15 Members)
The Tree Committee serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, other commissions, and residents with regard to the growth, maintenance, and location of trees within the city. The Committee recommends programs, policies, and ordinances to implement and promote the City’s Street Tree and Urban Forest Management Plan and to coordinate with the Public Works staff regarding management and maintenance efforts. The Committee promotes and fosters public awareness, education, interest and support for urban forestry efforts, fosters volunteer opportunities for tree planting and watering along the City’s streets and in residential front yards, and educates El Cerrito residents regarding selecting, planting and maintaining trees. Meets 2nd Monday of each month at 7 pm in the Hillside Room at City Hall. Current Members: Cathy Bleier, Robert Hrubes, Catherine Hughes, Jennifer Kaczor, Susan Kuchinskas, Yan Linhart, and Robin Mitchell (8 vacancies). Staff liaison: Stephen Prée (Public Works).

Agenda Packet Page 327 of 446
244
APPENDIX 6
City Council Resolutions
Budget Resolutions will be inserted into this section once approved by the City Council and included within the Adopted Budget Document.

Agenda Packet Page 328 of 446
245
APPENDIX 7

NON-DEPARTMENTAL LINE ITEM BUDGETS
Agenda Packet Page 329 of 446
246
Account
Number Account Description
FY2018-19
Actual
FY2019-20
Actual
FY2020-21
Actual
FY2021-22
Amended
FY2022-23
Proposed
Fund: 101 - General Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40010 Property Tax-Cur Secured $7,711,328 $8,157,336 $8,663,387 $9,198,000 $9,845,200 40020 Property Tax-Supplemental $233,756 $220,985 $178,395 $230,000 $230,000 40030 Property Tax-Unitary $90,191 $86,828 $88,624 $85,000 $100,000 40040 Property Tax-Cur Unsec $262,466 $272,978 $283,528 $248,000 $248,000 40050 Property Tax-PY Secured -$12,044 -$14,924 -$11,100 -$16,000 -$16,000 40060 Property Tax-PY Supplemental -$9,248 -$9,170 -$8,566 -$10,000 -$10,000 40070 Property Tax-PY Unsecured $6,671 $732 $4,396 -$5,000 $0 40080 Property Tax-Homeowners' $61,566 $61,291 $61,444 $62,000 $62,000 40085 Property Tax-RPTTF Pass Through
Pmts $304,770 $290,356 $340,400 $254,000 $254,000
40090 Property Tax-RPTFF Residual Pmts $1,282,579 $774,719 $920,024 $400,000 $500,000 40110 Special Assessments $0 $0 -$3,160 $0 $0
40210 Sales Tax-1% Bradley-Burns Local
Share $3,083,029 $2,911,197 $3,062,754 $2,993,250 $2,993,250 40220 Sales Tax-1/2% Prop 172 $307,173 $355,479 $368,706 $381,867 $381,867 40230 Sales & Use Tax In-Lieu $873,025 $426,949 $604,885 $254,000 $500,000 40240 Sales Tax - District Tax $3,282,083 $3,281,098 $3,790,799 $3,555,000 $3,555,000 40410 Transient Occupancy Tax $147,550 $118,891 $126,164 $150,000 $150,000 40510 Franchise Fees $1,192,630 $1,586,508 $1,326,673 $1,200,000 $1,350,000 40515 IN KIND/PEG FEES $51,355 $51,104 $37,584 $50,000 $50,000 40610 Business License Taxes $910,104 $918,799 $924,358 $900,000 $1,100,000 40710 Real Property County Transfer Tx $1,102,563 $3,467,532 $4,419,107 $3,800,000 $4,300,000 40810 Utility Users' Tax $0 $83,455 $0 $0 $0
40811 Utility Users' Tax - Energy $1,591,708 $1,630,629 $1,891,094 $1,500,000 $1,700,000 40812 Utility Users' Tax - Water $583,060 $565,261 $650,558 $500,000 $500,000 40813 Utility Users' Tax - Telecom $1,033,124 $886,629 $902,833 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 42285 Tobacco Retailer License $3,512 $5,312 $9,746 $3,512 $6,000 43925 Penalties-BLT $15,457 $13,302 $47,617 $20,000 $20,000 44010 Interest Income $52,161 $167,572 $59,079 $40,000 $40,000 44210 Property Leases $105,103 $99,810 $99,810 $96,542 $96,542 44220 Rentals-Facilities $3,361 $3,690 $6,971 $7,426 $7,914 45020 VLF In Lieu $2,653,610 $2,817,324 $3,000,582 $3,087,000 $3,250,000 45090 Misc In-Lieu Taxes $0 $394 $397 $0 $0
45530 SB-90 Reimbursement $0 $19,634 $0 $0 $0
45535 COVID-19 Revenue $0 $0 $308,098 $0 $0
46510 Successor Agency Admin Allowance $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 48010 Real Property Sales $722,585 $0 $73,541 $0 $0
48020 Personal Property Sales $7,560 $14,985 $2,724 $0 $0 48120 Contributions & Donations $600 $0 $100 $0 $0
48970 Damage Recoveries $0 $693 $6,413 $0 $0
48990 Other Misc Revenue $31,014 -$6,152 $23,089 $0 $0
Agenda Packet Page 330 of 446
247
49140 Capital Lease Financing $116,121 $187,346 $0 $0 $0 49990.206 Operating XferIN-MEAS A $51,000 $51,000 $0 $0 $0 49990.207 Operating XferIn-MEAS H $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $0 49990.221 Operating XferIN-GRANTS $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0
49990.222 Operating Transfer in - COPS $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 49990.223 Operating Xferin-ARPA $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0
49990.501 Operating Xfer In-IWM $3,671 $3,671 $3,671 $3,671 $3,671 49991.201 Indirect Xfer In-Gas $101,000 $0 $100,000 $102,000 $106,080 49991.202 Indirect Xfer In-NPDES $75,300 $77,559 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 49991.203 Indirect Xfer In-LLAD $160,750 $160,750 $160,000 $163,200 $163,200 49991.204 Indirect Xfer In-MEAS J $63,000 $64,396 $63,000 $64,300 $66,872 49991.205 Indirect Xfer In-Storm Drain $74,000 $76,220 $74,000 $74,000 $74,000 49991.207 Indirect Xfer In-Measure H Park &
Facilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000
49991.501 Indirect Xfer In-IWM $357,150 $367,865 $378,901 $386,479 $401,938 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $29,999,712 $30,500,035 $36,466,654 $31,253,247 $33,504,534 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $29,999,712 $30,500,035 $36,466,654 $31,253,247 $33,504,534 REVENUES Total $29,999,712 $30,500,035 $36,466,654 $31,253,247 $33,504,534

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
51235 Life & LTD Insurance $0 $0 $11,357 $0 $0
52120 Legal & Financial Svcs $0 $0 $35,635 $0 $0
58992 Suspense - NSF Check $0 $0 $253 $0 $0
59300 Extraordinary Gain/(Loss) $0 $0 $1,321,189 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $1,368,434 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $1,368,434 $0 $0 Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $0 $0 $0 $58,099 $58,099
58110 Principal Payments $0 $0 $107,036 $107,518 $113,046 58120 Interest Payments $104,708 $134,625 $219,989 $150,000 $150,000 59990.701 Operating Xfer OutPENS $0 $0 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 59990.835 Operating Xfer Out-CHALL $0 $0 $580,612 $580,612 $582,763 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental $104,708 $134,625 $996,842 $981,229 $988,908 Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $36,458 $25,624 $0 $20,000 $0 53810 Construction Services $286,925 $34,153 $0 $50,000 $0 56410 Office Equipment <$10K $8,744 $0 $0 $0 $0
56710 Other Equipment <$10K $12,126 $0 $0 $0 $0
59990.231 Operating Transfer out to Fund 231 $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 59990.301 Operating Xfer Out-CIP $472,234 $0 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $1,066,838 $59,777 $0 $70,000 $0 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $1,171,547 $194,402 $996,842 $1,051,229 $988,908 EXPENSES Total $1,171,547 $194,402 $2,365,276 $1,051,229 $988,908 Fund REVENUE Total: 101 - General Fund $29,999,712 $30,500,035 $36,466,654 $31,253,247 $33,504,534 Agenda Packet Page 331 of 446
248
Fund EXPENSE Total: 101 - General Fund $1,171,547 $194,402 $2,365,276 $1,051,229 $988,908 Fund Total: 101 - General Fund $28,828,166 $30,305,634 $34,101,378 $30,202,018 $32,515,626 Fund: 201 - Gas Tax Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45310 Gas Tax (Section 2105) $136,831 $129,869 $127,127 $146,600 $154,725 45320 Gas Tax (Section 2106) $94,122 $85,859 $82,517 $93,600 $96,734 45330 Gas Tax (Section 2107) $172,080 $163,984 $158,111 $186,500 $211,171 45340 Gas Tax (Section 2107.5) $5,000 $6,000 $18,913 $6,000 $5,000 45350 Traffic Congestion Relief $28,124 $28,622 $0 $0 $0 45370 Gas Tax (Section 2103) $83,315 $175,549 $166,480 $225,000 $223,329 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 REVENUES Total $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 Fund REVENUE Total: 201 - Gas Tax Fund $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 Fund EXPENSE Total: 201 - Gas Tax Fund
Fund Total: 201 - Gas Tax Fund $519,471 $589,882 $553,148 $657,700 $690,959 Fund: 202 - Nat'l Pollut Dis Elim Sys

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45710 Nat'l Pol Disch Elim Sys $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 REVENUES Total $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Fund REVENUE Total: 202 - Nat'l Pollut Dis Elim Sys $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Fund EXPENSE Total: 202 - Nat'l Pollut Dis Elim Sys
Fund Total: 202 - Nat'l Pollut Dis Elim Sys $310,860 $318,107 $316,072 $336,400 $338,638 Fund: 203 - Land & Light Assess Distr

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40110 Special Assessments $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 REVENUES Total $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Fund REVENUE Total: 203 - Land & Light Assess Distr $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Fund EXPENSE Total: 203 - Land & Light Assess Distr
Fund Total: 203 - Land & Light Assess Distr $777,656 $781,248 $784,974 $784,974 $791,164 Fund: 204 - Measure J-Return to Source Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Agenda Packet Page 332 of 446
249
40310 Measure J-1/2% Transport $479,482 $509,433 $491,221 $458,500 $482,388 45790 Other Local Reimbursement $0 $0 $18,867 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $479,482 $509,433 $510,088 $458,500 $482,388 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $479,482 $509,433 $510,088 $458,500 $482,388 REVENUES Total $479,482 $509,433 $510,088 $458,500 $482,388

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $13,066 $0 $0 $0 $0
53810 Construction Services $53,607 $7,548 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $66,673 $7,548 $0 $0 $0 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $66,673 $7,548 $0 $0 $0 EXPENSES Total $66,673 $7,548 $0 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 204 - Measure J-Return to Source
Fund $479,482 $509,433 $510,088 $458,500 $482,388
Fund EXPENSE Total: 204 - Measure J-Return to Source
Fund $66,673 $7,548 $0 $0 $0
Fund Total: 204 - Measure J-Return to Source Fund $412,809 $501,885 $510,088 $458,500 $482,388 Fund: 205 - Measure J Storm Drain

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40150 Parcel Tax-Local Approved $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 REVENUES Total $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
51110 Regular Salaries & Wages $0 $3,109 $5,429 $0 $0
51220 FICA/Medicare $0 $220 $384 $0 $0
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $83,275 $116,623 $89,956 $40,000 $88,000 53810 Construction Services $0 $16,508 $332,000 $300,000 $220,000 54310 Legal Notices & Advertise $0 $608 $0 $0 $0
54410 Printing & Binding $0 $275 $54 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $83,275 $137,343 $427,823 $340,000 $308,000 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $83,275 $137,343 $427,823 $340,000 $308,000 EXPENSES Total $83,275 $137,343 $427,823 $340,000 $308,000 Fund REVENUE Total: 205 - Measure J Storm Drain $701,950 $704,131 $706,322 $706,325 $711,134 Fund EXPENSE Total: 205 - Measure J Storm Drain $83,275 $137,343 $427,823 $340,000 $308,000 Fund Total: 205 - Measure J Storm Drain $618,675 $566,789 $278,499 $366,325 $403,134 Fund: 206 - Measure A Parcel Tax

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40150 Parcel Tax-Local Approved $633,080 $646,806 $0 $0 $0 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $633,080 $646,806 $0 $0 $0 Agenda Packet Page 333 of 446
250
Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $633,080 $646,806 $0 $0 $0 REVENUES Total $633,080 $646,806 $0 $0 $0

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $3,650 $0 $0 $0 $0
53810 Construction Services $50,357 $20,686 $0 $217,366 $270,350 56210 Buildings & Structures $51,809 $55,238 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $105,815 $75,924 $0 $217,366 $270,350 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $105,815 $75,924 $0 $217,366 $270,350 EXPENSES Total $105,815 $75,924 $0 $217,366 $270,350
Fund REVENUE Total: 206 - Measure A Parcel Tax $633,080 $646,806 $0 $0 $0 Fund EXPENSE Total: 206 - Measure A Parcel Tax $105,815 $75,924 $0 $217,366 $270,350 Fund Total: 206 - Measure A Parcel Tax $527,265 $570,882 $0 -$217,366 -$270,350 Fund: 207 - Measure H Park & Rec Facilities

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40150 Parcel Tax-Local Approved $0 $0 $636,948 $636,948 $648,740 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $636,948 $636,948 $648,740 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $636,948 $636,948 $648,740 REVENUES Total $0 $0 $636,948 $636,948 $648,740

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
53250 Vehicle & Equip Maint Svc $0 $0 $7,887 $5,000 $0
53290 Miscellaneous R&M Svcs $0 $0 $22,867 $50,337 $0
53810 Construction Services $0 $0 $6,173 $95,000 $211,774 55530 Landscape & Park Supplies $0 $0 $250 $10,000 $0
56710 Other Equipment <$10K $0 $0 $2,091 $2,000 $0
59990.101 Operating Xfer Out-GEN $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $0 59991.101 Indirect Xfer-GEN $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $0 $0 $89,269 $212,337 $261,774 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $0 $0 $89,269 $212,337 $261,774 EXPENSES Total $0 $0 $89,269 $212,337 $261,774
Fund REVENUE Total: 207 - Measure H Park & Rec
Facilities $0 $0 $636,948 $636,948 $648,740
Fund EXPENSE Total: 207 - Measure H Park & Rec
Facilities $0 $0 $89,269 $212,337 $261,774
Fund Total: 207 - Measure H Park & Rec Facilities $0 $0 $547,679 $424,611 $386,966 Fund: 211 - Street Improvemt & Maint

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
40240 Sales Tax - District Tax $1,630,826 $1,631,894 $1,881,749 $1,473,600 $1,503,072 48990 Other Misc Revenue $3,877 $13,174 $8,066 $5,100 $5,304 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $1,634,703 $1,645,068 $1,889,815 $1,478,700 $1,508,376 Agenda Packet Page 334 of 446
251
Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $1,634,703 $1,645,068 $1,889,815 $1,478,700 $1,508,376 REVENUES Total $1,634,703 $1,645,068 $1,889,815 $1,478,700 $1,508,376

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52130 Architect/Engineering Svc $76,525 $52,521 $78,405 $207,500 $535,000 52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $118,060 $108,658 $93,012 $155,580 $101,250 53810 Construction Services $434,707 $617,398 $32,094 $445,000 $638,750 54310 Legal Notices & Advertise $870 $1,247 $1,681 $1,320 $0 54410 Printing & Binding $929 $563 $507 $600 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $631,092 $780,387 $205,699 $810,000 $1,275,000 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $631,092 $780,387 $205,699 $810,000 $1,275,000 EXPENSES Total $631,092 $780,387 $205,699 $810,000 $1,275,000 Fund REVENUE Total: 211 - Street Improvemt & Maint $1,634,703 $1,645,068 $1,889,815 $1,478,700 $1,508,376 Fund EXPENSE Total: 211 - Street Improvemt & Maint $631,092 $780,387 $205,699 $810,000 $1,275,000 Fund Total: 211 - Street Improvemt & Maint $1,003,611 $864,680 $1,684,116 $668,700 $233,376 Fund: 212 - SB1-Road Repair & Accountability

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45810 SB-1 Road Repair - Revenue $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 REVENUES Total $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $49,419 $84,852 $40,520 $186,500 $180,000 52240 Miscellaneous Services $0 $0 $3,531 $0 $0
53220 Sign & Signal Maint Svc $3,283 $0 $0 $0 $0
53810 Construction Services $160,561 $20,242 $0 $262,500 $310,000 54410 Printing & Binding $755 $0 $0 $1,000 $1,000
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $214,017 $105,094 $44,051 $450,000 $491,000 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $214,017 $105,094 $44,051 $450,000 $491,000 EXPENSES Total $214,017 $105,094 $44,051 $450,000 $491,000 Fund REVENUE Total: 212 - SB1-Road Repair &
Accountability $457,336 $440,947 $462,592 $497,600 $550,193 Fund EXPENSE Total: 212 - SB1-Road Repair &
Accountability $214,017 $105,094 $44,051 $450,000 $491,000 Fund Total: 212 - SB1-Road Repair & Accountability $243,319 $335,852 $418,541 $47,600 $59,193 Fund: 213 - Public Art Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45440 State Grant-Operating $0 $7,056 $784 $0 $0
46520.4 Orchestra Class $0 $4,893 $0 $0 $0
48130 Developer Contributions $4,591 $23,370 $0 $0 $0
Agenda Packet Page 335 of 446
252
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $4,591 $35,319 $784 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $4,591 $35,319 $784 $0 $0 REVENUES Total $4,591 $35,319 $784 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 213 - Public Art Fund $4,591 $35,319 $784 $0 $0 Fund EXPENSE Total: 213 - Public Art Fund
Fund Total: 213 - Public Art Fund $4,591 $35,319 $784 $0 $0 Fund: 221 - Grants

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
59990.101 Operating Xfer Out-GEN $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXPENSES Total $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 221 - Grants
Fund EXPENSE Total: 221 - Grants $511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund Total: 221 - Grants -$511,593 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund: 222 - C.O.P.S. Grant Fund

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
59990.101 Operating Xfer Out-GEN $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXPENSES Total $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 222 - C.O.P.S. Grant Fund
Fund EXPENSE Total: 222 - C.O.P.S. Grant Fund $551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fund Total: 222 - C.O.P.S. Grant Fund -$551,726 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fund: 223 - ARPA Grant Funding

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45410 Federal Grant-Operating $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 REVENUES Total $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
59990.101 Operating Xfer Out-GEN $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 EXPENSES Total $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 223 - ARPA Grant Funding $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 Agenda Packet Page 336 of 446
253
Fund EXPENSE Total: 223 - ARPA Grant Funding $0 $0 $3,051,028 $0 $0 Fund Total: 223 - ARPA Grant Funding $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund: 231 - City Housing Trust Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
49990.101 Operating Xfer In-GEN $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUES Total $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 231 - City Housing Trust Fund $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fund EXPENSE Total: 231 - City Housing Trust Fund
Fund Total: 231 - City Housing Trust Fund $250,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 Fund: 301 - Capital Improvement Fund

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
45430 Federal Grant-Capital $2,484,097 $282,332 $708,039 $850,000 $4,960,000 45450 State Grant-Capital $141,611 $80,000 $245,834 $272,000 $6,167,175 45460 Local Agency Grants $1,179,037 $203,369 $34,991 $682,360 $0 48120 Contributions & Donations $0 $5 $100 $0 $0
48130 Developer Contributions $185,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
49990.101 Operating Xfer In-GEN $472,234 $0 $0 $0 $0
49990.204 Operating Xfer In-Meas J Return to
Source $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 $40,000
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $4,481,978 $585,706 $1,008,964 $1,844,360 $11,167,175 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $4,481,978 $585,706 $1,008,964 $1,844,360 $11,167,175 Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
45910 Misc Intergovrnmtal Rev $0 $0 $4,900 $0 $0
48610 Transportation Impact Fees $207,217 $453,029 $15,988 $50,000 $0 48990 Other Misc Revenue $0 $0 $31,733 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $207,217 $453,029 $52,621 $50,000 $0 Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $207,217 $453,029 $52,621 $50,000 $0 REVENUES Total $4,689,194 $1,038,735 $1,061,585 $1,894,360 $11,167,175

EXPENSES
Department: 90 - Non-Departmental
Division: 50 - Capital Outlay
52190 Miscellaneous Prof Svcs $549,684 $89,862 $261,322 $1,702,250 $1,703,031 52240 Miscellaneous Services $0 $0 $83,443 $0 $0
53810 Construction Services $3,051,667 $363,183 $602,669 $288,110 $9,424,144 54310 Legal Notices & Advertise $698 $0 $848 $0 $0
54410 Printing & Binding $0 $0 $198 $0 $0
54610 Travel & Training $0 $18 $0 $0 $0
55530 Landscape & Park Supplies $0 $889 $592 $0 $0
Division Total: 50 - Capital Outlay $3,602,050 $453,952 $949,072 $1,990,360 $11,127,175 Agenda Packet Page 337 of 446
254
Department Total: 90 - Non-Departmental $3,602,050 $453,952 $949,072 $1,990,360 $11,127,175 EXPENSES Total $3,602,050 $453,952 $949,072 $1,990,360 $11,127,175 Fund REVENUE Total: 301 - Capital Improvement Fund $4,689,194 $1,038,735 $1,061,585 $1,894,360 $11,167,175 Fund EXPENSE Total: 301 - Capital Improvement Fund $3,602,050 $453,952 $949,072 $1,990,360 $11,127,175 Fund Total: 301 - Capital Improvement Fund $1,087,144 $584,783 $112,513 -$96,000 $40,000 Fund: 501 - Integrated Waste Mgmt

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
51110 Regular Salaries & Wages -$4,691 -$5,556 $20,854 $0 $0 56910 Depreciation Expense $255,874 $197,287 $143,218 $229,206 $229,206 58110 Principal Payments -$447,437 -$398,089 -$354,554 $0 $0 58120 Interest Payments $31,833 $4,375 $6,299 $0 $0
Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue -$164,422 -$201,983 -$184,183 $229,206 $229,206 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue -$164,422 -$201,983 -$184,183 $229,206 $229,206 EXPENSES Total -$164,422 -$201,983 -$184,183 $229,206 $229,206 Fund REVENUE Total: 501 - Integrated Waste Mgmt
Fund EXPENSE Total: 501 - Integrated Waste Mgmt -$164,422 -$201,983 -$184,183 $229,206 $229,206 Fund Total: 501 - Integrated Waste Mgmt $164,422 $201,983 $184,183 -$229,206 -$229,206 Fund: 601 - Vehicle/Equip Replacement

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
44240 Departmental Rental Chgs $129,000 $133,860 $0 $0 $156,000 49990.101 Operating Xfer In-GEN $26,862 $26,862 $0 $0 $0 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $155,862 $160,722 $0 $0 $156,000 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $155,862 $160,722 $0 $0 $156,000 REVENUES Total $155,862 $160,722 $0 $0 $156,000

EXPENSES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
56910 Depreciation Expense $321,177 $218,438 $134,101 $0 $0 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $321,177 $218,438 $134,101 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $321,177 $218,438 $134,101 $0 $0 EXPENSES Total $321,177 $218,438 $134,101 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 601 - Vehicle/Equip Replacement $155,862 $160,722 $0 $0 $156,000 Fund EXPENSE Total: 601 - Vehicle/Equip Replacement $321,177 $218,438 $134,101 $0 $0 Fund Total: 601 - Vehicle/Equip Replacement -$165,315 -$57,716 -$134,101 $0 $156,000 Fund: 701 - Pension Trust Sect 401-A

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
49990.101 Operating Xfer In-GEN $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 Agenda Packet Page 338 of 446
255
REVENUES Total $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000
Fund REVENUE Total: 701 - Pension Trust Sect 401-A $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 Fund EXPENSE Total: 701 - Pension Trust Sect 401-A
Fund Total: 701 - Pension Trust Sect 401-A $85,774 $89,205 $89,205 $85,000 $85,000 Fund: 834 - Finance Authority Debt Sv

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
44010 Interest Income $4,008 $2,817 $51 $0 $0
49990.206 Operating XferIN-MEAS A $360,730 $360,730 $187,014 $0 $0 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $364,738 $363,547 $187,065 $0 $0 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $364,738 $363,547 $187,065 $0 $0 REVENUES Total $364,738 $363,547 $187,065 $0 $0
Fund REVENUE Total: 834 - Finance Authority Debt Sv $364,738 $363,547 $187,065 $0 $0 Fund EXPENSE Total: 834 - Finance Authority Debt Sv
Fund Total: 834 - Finance Authority Debt Sv $364,738 $363,547 $187,065 $0 $0 Fund: 835 - City Hall Bond D/S

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
44010 Interest Income $223 $270 $0 $151 $151
49990.101 Operating Xfer In-GEN $580,660 $580,660 $580,612 $580,612 $582,763 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $580,883 $580,930 $580,612 $580,763 $582,914 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $580,883 $580,930 $580,612 $580,763 $582,914 REVENUES Total $580,883 $580,930 $580,612 $580,763 $582,914 Fund REVENUE Total: 835 - City Hall Bond D/S $580,883 $580,930 $580,612 $580,763 $582,914 Fund EXPENSE Total: 835 - City Hall Bond D/S
Fund Total: 835 - City Hall Bond D/S $580,883 $580,930 $580,612 $580,763 $582,914 Fund: 836 - Street Imp Bond D/S

REVENUES
Department: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
Division: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue
44010 Interest Income $231 $58 $0 $0 $0
49990.211 Operating XferIN-STREETS $704,400 $702,900 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 Division Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $704,631 $702,958 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 Department Total: 00 - Non-Departmental Revenue $704,631 $702,958 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 REVENUES Total $704,631 $702,958 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 Fund REVENUE Total: 836 - Street Imp Bond D/S $704,631 $702,958 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 Fund EXPENSE Total: 836 - Street Imp Bond D/S
Fund Total: 836 - Street Imp Bond D/S $704,631 $702,958 $706,300 $706,300 $707,100 REVENUE GRAND Totals: $42,350,276 $39,107,073 $48,003,193 $40,076,817 $51,924,315 EXPENSE GRAND Totals: $7,094,544 $1,771,105 $7,082,136 $5,300,498 $14,951,413 Grand Totals: $35,255,732 $37,335,968 $40,921,057 $34,776,319 $36,972,902 Agenda Packet Page 339 of 446
256
APPENDIX 8
March 2022 Corrective Action Plan Submitted to
California State Auditor
Agenda Packet Page 340 of 446

CITY OF EL CERRITO
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN – STATE AUDIT 2020-803
High Risk Issue # 1
Financial Condition and General Fund Reserves
Overview: The City Council and City staff are determined to restore the City to fiscal health, increasing the General Fund reserves, and provide appropriate levels of service with respect to revenues. City staff will continue to monitor revenues and expenditures closely and work with the City Council to determine adjustments in a timely manner, if warranted.

High Risk Area #1 -
State Auditor Recommendations
Response Corrective Action
March 2022

1. To eliminate its reliance on short- term loans, El Cerrito should address its overspending and its
revenue shortfalls as discussed
throughout this report
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – The
Administration goal is to not have
to rely on a TRAN (Tax & Revenue
Anticipation Note) in the future.

The City will continue to work with
the City Council on implementing
strategies to achieve the
GFOA recommended reserve
levels that will eliminate the need
for a TRAN.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• The City’s audited ending year totals as
per the FY 2021-22 Annual
Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR)
reflects over $4 million surplus in the
General Fund, not including American
Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding. The
City met its reduced expenditure targets
and, due to conservative projections
and a robust real estate market,
exceeded revenue targets. The surplus is
targeted for General Fund Reserves.
• The City was allocated $6.2 million from
ARPA and has received its first payment
in the amount of $3.1 million. This
funding, per the direction of the City
Council, was allocated as revenue loss
for FY 2020-21, intended to further
improve the amount of General Fund
balance. The City’s ACFR reflects this as
confirmed by our independent auditor
Badawi & Associates. The City continues
to work with consultant Management
Partners to ensure appropriate ARPA
spending and reporting.
• The FY 2020-21 audit and ACFR is
completed and the General Fund
surplus including ARPA funding resulted
in a General Fund balance of $7.1
million, meeting the GFOA
recommended reserve target of 17%
and exceeding the City’s General Fund
minimum reserve target of 10%. The
ACFR no longer designates the City as a
“going concern.”
• Because of progress in increasing
General Fund reserve levels, the City
issued a TRAN amount of $5.8 million
for FY 2021-22, which is a decrease from
previous years; with the next payment
of ARPA funding of $3.1 million in 2022,
at this time the City does not plan to
issue a TRAN for FY 2022-23.
• City management and Finance staff have
implemented stricter policies for staff to
monitor revenues and expenditures and
will continue to report monthly to City
Council on budget performance. The
City’s new Finance Director is continuing
to monitor these policies and
implement systems to ensure continued
compliance.

Agenda Packet Page 341 of 446

2. To ensure that its rising pension
costs do not jeopardize the City’s
ability to provide services to its
residents or contribute to potential
insolvency, El Cerrito should
identify and use alternative
methods of paying for the
obligation, such as establishing a
trust funded by the City or through
employee contributions that
invests amounts that can be used
to pay for future pension benefits
and reduce future pension costs
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – As a first
step, the Administration has been
focused building its reserve levels.

Establishing a Section 115 Trust
would be an extension of those
efforts. The Administration intends
to work with the City Council to
recommend establishing a Section
115 Trust or consider other
methods to fund CalPERS
obligations.
• The City Council has directed City staff
to establish a Section 115 Trust. Staff
has researched vendors and will be
working with our financial advisors to
present next steps to the City Council,
including issuing an RFP in the coming
months. The new Finance Director and
the Financial Advisory Board will
develop a recommended funding policy
for the City Council’s consideration.

Expected completion: FY 2022-23.

Responsible staff: City
Management/Finance
Department/Human Resources.
• The City Council directed staff to work
with all employee bargaining units to
negotiate increased contributions to
CalPERS. The Management/Confidential
group (which is unrepresented) is now
contributing an additional 2% as of FY
2021-22 and the Fire Chief and Police
Chief bargaining units agreed to an
increased contribution of 2% as well. At
this time, all bargaining units with the
exception of one (SEIU) contribute 3-5%
of CalPERS employer costs in addition to
the employee cost. The City is entering
negotiations with 4 bargaining units in
2022. Estimated completion: to be
determined pending negotiations.

Responsible staff: City
Management/Human Resources.

3. To ensure that its policy of
allowing individuals to remain as
members of City-sponsored health
care plans upon retirement does
not result in additional costs for the
City, El Cerrito should calculate the
subsidy it provides to those retirees
and charge them for the difference
in cost resulting from their
inclusion in the health care pool
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – The
Administration intends to work with
its benefits broker to determine the
cost of the implicit subsidy that is
provided to retirees by allowing
them to stay on the City’s plan (at
the retiree’s cost), and work with
the City Council on implementing
this subsidy fee to those respective
retirees.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• City staff worked with our benefits
broker to determine the best way to
deal with the implicit subsidy and,
working with the insurance vendors,
concluded that separating out the
retirees from the active employees as a
separate group, and calculating related
costs for each group, was the best way
for the subsidy to be recognized and
dealt with. This means that the retirees
will be paying their total share and not
the subsidized active employee cost;
which not only eliminates the subsidy
but will also in time eliminate the OPEB
liability completely. This also resulted in
a decrease from what the City had
budgeted for employee health care
costs. This was implemented during the
open enrollment window at the end of
2021 and is now in place. As of now and
going forward, the retirees are charged
their own costs in their own group and
the City only pays for the active
employee health care costs that do not
include the implicit subsidy of the
retiree health care costs.

Agenda Packet Page 342 of 446
High Risk Issue # 2
Budget Development and Monitoring
Overview: The City is committed to continuous improvement in implementing policies and procedures that conform with best practices in local government, and to provide information to the City Council and the community in order to make informed and educated decisions.

High Risk Area #2 -
State Auditor
Recommendations
Response Corrective Action
March 2022

1. El Cerrito should adopt
GFOA budgeting best
practices that specifically
include the following:
◦ Using historical
trends and analysis
as the basis for
financial projections.
◦ Expanding its
monthly revenue
and expenditure
budget updates to
include comparisons
to actual results to
minimize
overspending
◦ Establishing
procedures to
prevent, detect, and
correct deviations
from adopted
budgets during the
fiscal year to ensure
that departments do
not significantly
overspend.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation –
The Administration believes in
continuous improvement. The
Administration is committed to
implementing procedures that
hold departments accountable
in keeping with best practices.

The Administration does
adhere to GFOA Budgeting Best
Practices (such as using
historical trends analysis as the
basis for projections, monthly
updates do include comparison
to actuals) and has consistently
been awarded the GFOA
Distinguished Budget
Presentation Award.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• The City continues to follow GFOA best
practices to use historical trends and
analysis as the basis for financial
projections. Current pandemic
conditions continue to provide
uncertainty within the projections,
however staff worked with our tax
consultants and department directors
to provide a five-year General Fund
projection included in the FY 2021-22
budget document. Following the
adoption of the budget and the receipt
of ARPA funding, staff and the City
Council has worked with Management
Partners using a model to develop a
ten-year General Fund projection. This
was discussed with the City Council at
their study session in August 2021,
updated and shared with the Council in
February and March 2022, and will
continue to be updated with
information and shared with the
Council during the upcoming fiscal year
budget process and ongoing.
• On February 5, 2022, the City Council
held a priority setting session where
the priorities for the upcoming year
were discussed in the context of
beginning the FY 2022-23 budget
process.
• Departments were included in regular
reporting to the City Council, including
several presentations at the regular
Council meetings in February and
March 2022 that including reporting
activities and end-of-year projections,
and mid-year budget adjustments
were presented to and approved by
the City Council in March reflecting the
reports and discussions with the City
Council.
• City staff has continued to improve
budget reporting to City Council and
now provides expanded quarterly
updates that are presented at City
Council meetings that include a
narrative and department updates and
trends for both revenues and
expenditures. The new Finance
Director and staff will work to further
improve these reports as the Council
desires.

Agenda Packet Page 343 of 446

2. To ensure accountability in
the budget development
process, city management
should document the
assumptions and data used to
develop each department’s
projections of financial activity
for the fiscal year. This
information should be made
available to the city council
during the budget review and
approval process.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation –
The Administration plans to
provide documentation of
assumptions and data for
Department projections to the
City Council. Each Department
will continue to be required to
submit assumptions with
revenue and expense
projections as appropriate.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• City Management and the Finance
Director worked with department
directors and documented
assumptions and data resulting in
department budgets that were
included within the adopted FY 2021-
22 budget. Directors presented their
budgets directly to the City Council
during the FY 2021-22 budget
hearings. This has continued through
the fiscal year including additional
department presentations to the City
Council prior to the mid-year budget
adjustments. City Management and
Finance continue to meet with
directors regularly to review progress.

3. To ensure accountability in
monitoring the budget, city
management should present
monthly updates to the city
council on the current status
of departmental budgets and
comparisons to prior year
budgeted and actual amounts.

City management should
promptly seek approval of
proposed budget adjustments
by department when
warranted. City management
should also prepare and
provide supporting
documentation to justify any
budget increases.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation –
The Administration will consult
with the Financial Advisory
Board (FAB) to review the City’s
current Comprehensive
Financial Policy, which calls for
budgeting by Fund, to consider
the impacts of budgeting by
Department. If the FAB
recommends and the City
Council approves this policy
change, the information
provided to the City Council will
provide justification by
Department (including
revenues, expenditures, and
adjustments).
• City staff has continued to improve
budget reporting to City Council and
now provides expanded quarterly
updates that are presented at City
Council meetings that include a
narrative and department updates and
trends for both revenues and
expenditures. The new Finance
Director and staff will work to further
improve these reports as the Council
desires. Completed.
• City staff has researched financial
policies and continues to work with
the Financial Advisory Board and City
Council to determine any
recommended updates to the
Comprehensive Financial Policies that
will ensure transparent and consistent
reporting, including department
information and accountability. The
FAB has had discussions on this item at
their monthly meetings and desires to
work with the new Finance Director on
any proposed changes to the policies.

Estimated completion: FY 2021-22.

Responsible staff: Finance
Department/City Management.

4. To ensure that it fulfills its
duty to guard the fiscal health
of the city, the city council
should direct staff to provide
the information described
above and regularly review
such documents.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation – The City Council has directed staff to provide monthly and
now quarterly financial reports,
which has been done since
mid-2020. The Administration
is committed to continuing this
practice that includes the
recommendations from the
State Auditor that are
contained in this risk area.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• The City provided a monthly General
Fund report to the City Council since
2020, and during FY 2021-22 improved
and expanded the report to include a
narrative and department trends and
information, which is now provided
quarterly.

Agenda Packet Page 344 of 446

5. To ensure that departments
do not exceed their budgeted
spending authority, the city
should establish and enforce
safeguards within its financial
system that prevent
expenditure from being
incurred without appropriate
budget authorization.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation --
The current financial policy and
the adopted budget gives the
City spending authority at the
fund level, which permits
departments to balance
funding needs with available
budgeted funds within the lineitem budget. In the short term, the Administration will hold
departments accountable to
prevent the total departmental
budget being exceeded. In the
long term, departments will
continue to be required to
analyze their line item budgets
to ensure there are adequate
funds before submitting
payment requests to Finance,
and/or submit a budget
transfer request to Finance
moving funds where available
to cover the expense.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• City Management and the Finance
Director have implemented policies for
departments to monitor revenues and
expenditures and hold staff
accountable. Budget performance will
be noted in future department director
evaluations. Finance staff have been
directed to and are returning payment
requests to departments not in
compliance with these policies and
procedures and will report any
discrepancies to the Finance Director
or City Manager. Departments are
being monitored by City Management
to ensure appropriate spending within
departments as well as compliance
with the current financial policy to
ensure spending authority by fund is
not exceeded. As a result, General
Fund expenditures came in under
budget as of year-end FY 2021-22.
• City Management is now in the process
of restructuring of the Finance
Department. The Finance Supervisor
retired as of September 30, 2021 and
the Finance Director left employment
as of October 15, 2021. A new Finance
Director was hired and began her
position on March 1, 2022 and is
evaluating staff and their functions as
well as assessing the department’s
needs and workflow. A budget
manager or financial analyst position is
being considered that will specifically
focus on budgeting and financial
analysis for the City; in the interim the
department will continue to work with
Management Partners and other
consultants to assist with financial
analysis.

Agenda Packet Page 345 of 446
High Risk Issue # 3
Fiscal Recovery Plan
Overview: The City will develop and implement a Fiscal Recovery Plan that will focus on financial sustainability and accountability.

High Risk Area #3 -
State Auditor Recommendations
Response Corrective Action
March 2022

1. To ensure accountability in its fiscal
recovery process, El Cerrito should
develop and adopt a financial
recovery plan by July 2021 that
describes its goals and intended
corrective actions, prioritizes its
resources, identifies individuals
responsible for monitoring its
progress in implementing each
action, and outlines when it
anticipates completing key milestones
related to each action. City
management should also inform the
city council quarterly of its progress in
implementing the plan.

The Administration Agrees
with this Recommendation –
The Administration will expand
upon the City’s existing Fiscal
Response Plan to include the
State Auditor’s recommended
additions. This will be a living
document that will continue to
serve as the City’s roadmap to
financial stability in FY 2025-26.

The City Council will be
informed quarterly on
implementation progress.
• The City Council met on August 31, 2021
and held a study session facilitated by
local government consultant Management
Partners to discuss the City’s short-term
recovery and long-term financial
sustainability. The Fiscal Recovery and
Sustainability Plan (attached in draft form)
is continuing to be developed and is
expected to be adopted by the City
Council in the coming months, likely
during the upcoming budget process. This
process has been delayed by the severe
understaffing of the Finance Department
due to the departure of the Finance
Director and Finance Supervisor as well as
continuing challenges to citywide staffing
due to COVID-19 including the omicron
surge beginning in late 2021. However, it
should be noted that many of the items
within the plan are being implemented
and will be reviewed and updated for the
FY 2022-23 budget process in consultation
with the new Finance Director and City
Council. Estimated completion: July 2022.

Responsible staff: City Management.

Agenda Packet Page 346 of 446
High Risk Issue # 4
Reducing Costs
Overview: The City will work to ensure that expenses, particularly in personnel, are at appropriate levels within the City’s resources while allowing the City to recruit and retain a talented staff to provide services. City management will work with all bargaining units to ensure fair and reasonable compensation that is consistent with ensuring the financial sustainability of the City.

High Risk Area #4 -
State Auditor Recommendations
Response Corrective Action

1. To identify potential savings and
efficiencies, El Cerrito should
perform the following tasks:
◦ By September 2021,
conduct an analysis of the
organizational structure of
the city and assess the
functions it needs to
achieve its goals
◦ Based on the results of the
organizational structure
study, conduct an analysis
of the duties and
responsibilities assigned to
each of the city’s current
staff positions to identify
any overlapping areas of
responsibility and
inefficiencies.
◦ Using the results of its
organizational structure
study and its analysis of
duties and responsibilities,
conduct a compensation
study by comparing total
compensation for its staff
positions with
compensation paid by other
cities. Based on the results
of this study, implement
personnel and salary
changes that would result in
ongoing cost reductions
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation - A
comprehensive study of the
City’s classification and
compensation structure
(including total compensation – not just base salaries) would be beneficial to the City. However,
costs are expected to exceed
$100,000. If the City Council
directed the Administration to
allocate funding for a
comprehensive classification
and compensation study, staff
believes this cannot be
completed by September 2021.

A study of this magnitude must
be completed by an industry
expert. A Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) would have
to be developed, issued and a
subsequent selection process
would follow. In addition, the
consultant's work would take
several months of extensive
research of comparing
classifications and the intricacies
of total compensation before
the City would be provided with
preliminary findings.
• Staff has issued an RFP on February 3,
2022 and has received three responses at
the closing date of March 11, 2022. As
expected, costs are in the range of $100K
and above, with timelines of several
months to complete the study. Staff are
currently reviewing the proposals and will
provide options to the City Council
including whether or not to make budget
amendments necessary to fund the study,
or if the study should wait until the
following fiscal year. Estimated
completion: FY 2022-23. Responsible
staff: Human Resources/City
Management.

Agenda Packet Page 347 of 446

2. To better control its salary costs, El
Cerrito should end its practice of
providing city management authority
to pay certain employees over the
threshold established in its salary
ranges
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation - The
Administration would study
management compensation as
part of the classification and
compensation study
recommended by the State
Auditor.

In 2020, the Administration
suspended this practice for
Management & Confidential
employees and will consider
eliminating this when the
Management & Confidential
Resolution is updated this fiscal
year. However, this practice was
not suspended for members of
the Public Safety Management
Association (PSMA) as they are a
bargaining unit, therefore, the
City would have to engage in a
meet and confer to discuss the
possibility. The Administration
cannot unilaterally impose the
elimination of this practice to
the PSMA.
• This practice has been indefinitely
suspended for the Management and
Confidential group, with a permanent
change to be considered pending the
completion of a
classification/compensation study that will
help determine the appropriate
compensation system structure. This study
may also be used as a basis for discussions
on compensation during future
negotiations with the PSMA. Estimated
completion: FY 2022-23. Responsible
staff: Human Resources/City
Management.

3. Based on the results of its
comprehensive analysis, El Cerrito
should do the following:
◦ Freeze salary increases for
management with salaries
above those of comparable
cities until they are in line
with those salaries. For
positions with salaries
above those of comparable
cities that are represented
by bargaining units, the City
should not agree to
additional salary increases
until those positions’
salaries are in line with
salaries in comparable cities
◦ Seek to eliminate or
consolidate positions that
have overlapping
responsibilities
The Administration Partially
Agrees with this
Recommendation – The
Administration would study
management compensation as
part of the classification and
compensation study
recommended by the State
Auditor.

The Administration has already
taken action to freeze salaries,
as no unrepresented employees
have received merit increases
this fiscal year and received no
COLAs. In addition, the
Administration imposed 26 nonpaid furlough days (roughly a 10% reduction in pay) for FY
2020-21 for unrepresented
Management employees.

March 2022: This item is
completed.
• The City has frozen salary increases for
Management/Confidential since FY 2019-
20 and FY 2021-22. Because this group has
not had any increases in two fiscal years,
based on discussions with local colleagues
the salaries for this group are expected to
be well behind the market of comparable
cities at this time. The PSMA bargaining
unit declined to defer their salary
increases for FY 2021-22, however two of
the units within PSMA (Police Chief and
Fire Chief) agreed to increase their
CalPERS contribution by 2%.
• Staff will consider conducting updated
salary/benefits surveys for positions
within the Management group to confirm
that compensation is within the market of
comparable cities/agencies; however due
to limited staff resources this has not
taken place at this time.
• Considering the layoffs that have been
implemented and vacancies throughout
the organization, at this time there are no
positions that have overlapping
responsibilities; the
management/confidential positions have
had to take on the work of
vacant/eliminated positions in order to
continue to provide services to the public.

Agenda Packet Page 348 of 446

4. To reduce its fire department’s
costs, El Cerrito should develop a
timeline by July 2021 for controlling
the department’s personnel
expenditures, such as through
negotiated salary reductions or
freezes.

The Administration Partially
Agrees with this
Recommendation – The
Administration continues to look
into personnel cost reduction
options Citywide, however, the
Administration has no ability to
impose salary reductions or
freezes on the two bargaining
groups that represent sworn
members of the Fire
Department. Any proposals from
the Administration are subject
to meet and confer and there is
no obligation from the labor
groups to accept. In 2020, the
Administration negotiated an

• City Management worked with Local 1230,
who represents Fire Department
employees, to discuss the City’s current
financial situation and this
recommendation during the FY 2021-22
budget process. Local 1230 declined to
defer their salary increases for FY 2021-22.

The current MOU expires in June 2022 and
City Management will work with the City
Council with respect to its direction and
authority during negotiations for the next
MOU. Estimated completion: 2022.

Responsible staff: Human Resources/City
Management.

5. To reduce its police department’s
costs, El Cerrito should perform the
following by December 2021:
◦ Assess the services
provided by the police
department to identify
opportunities to reduce its
staffing levels
◦ Negotiate with its police
union to increase the
overtime threshold for
sworn officers to 86 hours
over 14 days to 80 hours
over 14 days.

The Administration Partially
Agrees with this
Recommendation – The
Administration continues to look
into personnel cost reduction
options Citywide, however, the
Administration has no ability to
impose salary reductions or
freezes on the two bargaining
groups that represent sworn
members of the Police
Department. Any proposals from
the Administration (including
those regarding overtime) are
subject to meet and confer and
there is no obligation from the
labor groups to accept.

In 2020, the Administration
negotiated an elimination of a
3% COLA set to take place in
January 2020 and another 3%
COLA set to take place in
January 2021. In addition, the
Police Chief has conducted
several assessments and
implemented a restructuring of
the Police Department in order
to achieve cost savings while still
maintaining critical public safety
service within the community.
• City Management worked with the El
Cerrito Police Employees Association
(PEA), who represents Police Department
employees, to discuss the City’s current
financial situation and this
recommendation during the FY 2021-22
budget process. PEA declined to defer
their salary increases for FY 2021-22. The
current MOU expires in June 2024.

Estimated completion: unknown.

Responsible staff: Human Resources/City
Management.

Agenda Packet Page 349 of 446

6. To identify all available options to
reduce its costs for its fire and police
services, El Cerrito should perform an
analysis by December 2021 to
determine whether it would be more
cost-effective to contract with nearby
fire or police departments for
services.

The Administration Does Not
Agree with this
Recommendation – The
Administration would study
public safety personnel costs as
part of the classification and
compensation study
recommended by the State
Auditor.

Per conversations with the State
Auditor, the intent of this
recommendation was for the
City to “receive a cost estimate.”
However, the Administration
believes that it is professionally
necessary that this analysis of
this magnitude must be a
comprehensive study completed
by an industry expert(s) to
extensively evaluate the detailed
service delivery impacts in
contemplating an outsourcing of
both of the City’s Public Safety
Departments. There would be
significant impacts to current
sworn employees that would
have to be to extensively
evaluated. The amount of work
necessary plus the costs
involved to complete such an
analysis is not realistic by
December 2021. After the City
Council is informed by the
classification and compensation
study, the City Council can
determine if this is an area they
would like the Administration to
study, and allocate the
appropriate resources to
complete.
• The City Council discussed this during their
study session in August 2021 and did not
direct staff to perform such an analysis at
this time. The Council remains interested
in the results of the
classification/compensation study that will
be conducted to inform their discussions
on these departments, however the
Council is not currently considering
contracting out for public safety services.

Agenda Packet Page 350 of 446
High Risk Issue # 5
Increasing Revenues

Overview: The City continues to explore all opportunities for increasing revenues through various fees within all departments, in addition to the recommendations listed. The Master Fee Schedule for FY 2021-22 is currently being developed for City Council approval in May 2021, where increases will be reviewed and considered. City staff also continuously seeks and utilizes grant opportunities to supplement revenues.

High Risk Area #5
State Auditor Recommendations
Response Corrective Action
March 2022

1. To more fully recover costs at its
swim center after the pandemic,
the city should perform the
following:
◦ Conduct an analysis to
identify the demand for
the swim center under
normal conditions at
different times –
including holidays,
weekends, and when the
public has restricted
access to neighboring
swim centers – and
determine whether
increasing single-use fees
during these hours could
better cover the costs of
operating the swim
center
◦ Establish separate singleuse fees in its master fee
schedule for nonresidents
at the swim center, in
order to increase revenue
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – The
Administration plans to conduct an
analysis during normal conditions
(not during the current pandemic).

The Administration has concerns
over the potential disproportionate
accessibility impacts to minority
and low-income communities as a
result of further increasing swim
center fees.
• As of FY 2021-22 Master Fee Schedule, fees
were increased on certain categories
including drop-in swim; passes do have a
resident/non-resident pricing structure.
• The Master Fee Schedule includes a holiday
surcharge for when the swim center is open
on a holiday, and on those days only dropins are accepted (no passes) that includes the holiday surcharge with both resident
and non-resident prices.
• Staff will conduct an analysis on swim
center demand and cost recovery once
normal operations resume and a typical
season can be conducted. Since the
pandemic is ongoing, the date of
completion cannot be estimated at this
time.
• Staff will again review current and
projected costs for the upcoming FY 2022- 23 Master Fee Schedule process, so that incremental cost increases will be
considered. Estimated completion: to be
determined. Responsible staff: Recreation
Department.

Agenda Packet Page 351 of 446

2. To more fully recover costs for
its senior services, the city should
do the following:
◦ By August 2021, assess
free and low-fee senior
activities and prepare an
analysis for the city
council that includes a
plan for recovering the
full cost of these activities
◦ Continue to seek
opportunities to sublease
its modular buildings and
move senior activities to
the city-owned
community center or
clubhouses
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – The
Administration plans to conduct an
analysis during normal conditions
(not during the current pandemic)
to appropriately understand the
current demand for service. Senior
Services have been closed for the
past year and will not likely be
reopened before August. The
Administration has racial equity
concerns that increasing fees for
Senior Services could have serious
implications for the City’s most
vulnerable residents, most of whom
are on fixed incomes.

The Administration also agrees with
the State Auditor’s
recommendation regarding
subleasing its costly modular
buildings and moving senior
activities to city-owned spaces.
• Senior services are beginning to be
reinstated and staff has consolidated
staffing and services that are now offered
at the Community Center; because staffing
has been reduced this has in turn has
reduced expenses. Currently the classes
that are being offered in this division are at
the department’s normal cost recovery
share structure and not at the free or lowfee level.
• Staff will conduct an analysis on demand
for senior services once normal operations
resume and a typical operation can be
conducted. Since the pandemic is ongoing,
the date of completion cannot be
estimated at this time.
• Staff will again review current and
projected costs for the upcoming FY 2022- 23 Master Fee Schedule process, so that incremental cost increases will be
considered. Estimated completion: to be
determined. Responsible staff: Recreation
Department.
• Staff is currently in negotiations with the
Kensington Police Protection and
Community Services District for subleasing
one of the modular buildings for the
District’s temporary use, which will offset
part of the City’s monthly charges. Details
including costs and length of use are still
being discussed at this time. If successful,
the likely timing that the District would
begin using the space and offsetting City
costs would be Summer 2022. Estimated
completion: FY 2022-23. Responsible staff:

Recreation Department/City
Management.

3. To more fully recover the costs
of the emergency medical services
it provides, El Cerrito should
conduct an analysis by July 2021 to
identify the cost to the city of
providing such services. Using this
analysis, El Cerrito should consider
the following:
◦ Determine whether it can
renegotiate its contract
with Contra Costa County
◦ Determine whether
charging fees for its
services would be costeffective considering any
additional administrative
costs it may incur
◦ Pursue other options to
generate revenue
The Administration Agrees with
this Recommendation – The
Administration has completed a
preliminary investigation on this
issue and will provide this
information in written form to the
City Council. The City can conduct a
more robust and finalized analysis if
directed by the City Council.

Regarding additional revenue
opportunities, the Administration is
currently developing an analysis
reviewing various Fire Department
fees to determine if fees align with
actual costs. Recommendations will
be brought forward to the City
Council as a part of the budget
process.
• Staff has conducted preliminary research
regarding increasing emergency fees and
will provide information to the City Council
in April, and upon direction will initiate
further analysis. This item has been delayed
due to staffing challenges resulting from
vacant Battalion Chief positions that have
just recently been filled. Estimated
completion: July 2022. Responsible staff:

Fire Department/City Management.

Agenda Packet Page 352 of 446
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.el-cerrito.org

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 7, 2022
(Revised June 9, 2022)

PUBLIC COMMENT INDEX

1. Public Comments received
Agenda Item 6A – Marin Clean Energy Programs and Resources

1. Presentation
Agenda Item 8A – CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY/EMPLOYEE

PENSION TRUST BOARD ITEM
Proposed Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget

1. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 353 of 446
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.el-cerrito.org

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

PUBLIC COMMENT INDEX

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 7, 2022
The following Public Comments were received by 4:00 p.m. 6/7/2022, were provided directly to City Councilmembers in advance of the meeting, and were posted online as supplemental materials at www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials Public Comments – Items Not on the Agenda

1. Peter J. Pan

2. Steve Price

3. Cordell Hindler
Buddy Akacić (received at meeting)
Agenda Item 5E – Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of El Cerrito establishing a Military Equipment Use Policy

1. Sherry Drobner

2. Alissa Hauser
Agenda Item 8A – CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY/EMPLOYEE

PENSION TRUST BOARD ITEM
Proposed Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget

1. Seth Morrison

2. Nick Brooks

3. Miguel Gravelle Izaguirre

4. Ida Poberezovsky

5. Zach Weinstein

6. Jessie Papalia

7. Allison Cooper

8. Josh Rose

9. John Qua

10. Shobit

11. Danielle Waters Westbrook

12. B. Tomi Nagai-Rothe

13. Vanessa Warheit

14. Sherry Drobner
15 Zach Weinstein

4. Agenda Packet Page 354 of 446
From: Peter P
To: City Clerk
Subject: Not on Agenda, It is Time to End Eviction Moratorium Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2022 9:52:53 AM
Honorable City Council Members:

State law AB2179 extends eviction protection to the end of June for tenants who have applied for rental assistance before the end of March.

But since California has ended the state’s rent assistance program, AB2179 also specifically allows for unlawful detainer eviction after April 1st for non-payment of rent.

It is for this reason that forbinding eviction without providing rent assistance would violate the taking clause of the 5th Amendment of the United State Constitution which reads: “Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”.
“The clause is intended to uphold the principle that the government should not single out isolated individuals to bear excessive burdens, even in support of an important public good”.

El Cerrito City’s eviction moratorium beyond April 1, 2022 does just that — Taking private property for public use without just compensation because the city does not have the money nor the intention to compensate housing providers who are singled out to bear excessive burden to house deadbeat tenants.

It is time for our city to end the eviction moratorium.

Peter J. Pan
Real Estate Broker
WE APPRECIATE YOUR REFERRALS.

Agenda Packet Page 355 of 446
From: STEVEN PRICE
To: City Clerk
Subject: For the El Cerrito City Council
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2022 11:06:43 AM
Attachments: EC Strollers & Rollers on BART access 6_2_22.pdf EC Strollers and Rollers flyer.pdf
Dear El Cerrito City Clerk,
Please share the following documents with the El Cerrito City Council before the next Council meeting.

Steve Price
Agenda Packet Page 356 of 446
June 2, 2022
Dear El Cerrito City Council,
To encourage the move away from dependence on cars for local travel, we have formed a new community group to help people learn about better options. We are calling ourselves El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers. We borrowed the name from the Albany Strollers & Rollers with their enthusiastic blessing. In addition to introducing ourselves, we are writing in response to a recent petition in opposition to the removal of parking spaces at the El Cerrito Plaza BART station to make way for new housing. By encouraging El Cerritans to explore alternative modes of transportation and advocating for complete streets that are safe for all users, we hope to help obviate the need for those parking spaces at the El Cerrito Plaza BART.

El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers believes that the future of personal transportation for the Bay Area can't just be two- or three-ton cars, even if they are electric. If we do nothing more than swap internal combustion engines for electric motors, but otherwise change nothing about how we travel daily, then we have to live with the consequences: the decline of public health, increasing threats to pedestrians, undermining of community life, and the enormous financial burden on local government imposed by the infrastructure demands of automobiles.

If we are to avoid a hellish future of planetary decline, those of us who can — and that is most of us from 8 t0 80 — can and should walk and bicycle, or learn to use light-weight electric vehicles right-sized for local travel. We know that some people really do need cars at some moments, and we don't expect everyone to give up their full-size car, but we do believe that with the right planning and infrastructure most of us can shift from using them for every local trip.

Forty-two percent of travel trips in America are for two miles or less. In El Cerrito, where geographically nothing is very far from anything else—almost no one lives more than two miles from a BART station. It shouldn't be necessary to drive a freeway-grade car to get to BART, get a haircut, or pick up a prescription.

Agenda Packet Page 357 of 446
We live in a town with significant topographic challenges, yet technology is rapidly addressing this challenge. Electric bicycles are coming down in price while powered with increasing torque to carry riders easily uphill. Vespa-style electric scooters are growing in popularity, also melting away the challenges of topography with the effortless twist of a throttle. Mini-electric cars are starting to be produced and sold in America that will allow people to sit inside, protected from the elements with heating and cooling, just like the big cars. The parking requirements for all these modes is a fraction of what fullsize cars demand.

We know that there are many El Cerrito residents who expect that our streets and parking spaces needn't change to meet the frightening future of climate change as long as people switch to electric cars. We appreciate electric cars as an improvement, but it is not a panacea. It seriously underestimates the magnitude of the threat and how long it takes for drivers to commit themselves to purchasing a new car. The move to electric micromobility can happen much quicker with bigger results if we as a community embrace it.

El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers’ first public event was having a table at Bike to Wherever Day on May 20 at the Plaza BART. In two hours, we got names and contact info from 53 people. Included with this letter is the flier we handed out at Bike to Wherever Day describing El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers.

Sincerely yours,
El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers
Founders: Carrie Hobbs Schulman, Janet Byron, Laura Maurer, Steve Price, and Tess Taylor
CC: BART
Agenda Packet Page 358 of 446
Streets for people, not just for cars
Following World War II, most Americans came to consider it normal for adults to need a 2-ton car to access the things of daily life—a haircut, groceries, a hardware store, a park. In a time of climate crisis, exorbitant housing costs, expensive health care, and stagnant wages, requiring each adult to own a vehicle that costs $5,000 to $10,000 a year is neither economically sustainable nor wise for the planet.

It also diminishes community, makes our streets less safe, and excludes kids and the elderly.

Join El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers in advocating for mobility choice—streets that safely welcome sustainable, equitable, and fun alternatives to the automobile for local travel in El Cerrito.

Pedestrian
Scooter
Bicycle
Electric Moped
Neighborhood
Electric Vehicle
Car Share
Transit
Write to [email protected] to join El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers.

Agenda Packet Page 359 of 446
El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers believe that El Cerrito can be a prosperous model city with a small carbon footprint and a healthy citizenry.

Our goals include:

1. Make bike and pedestrian access to destinations in town safe, easy, and fun for people of all ages and abilities, and build community between El Cerrito and Richmond Annex. This includes designating clearly marked east-west corridors across the city, providing safe street crossings and better access to assets on both sides of San Pablo Avenue, including the Bay Trail and the Ohlone Greenway.

2. Determine and mark safe routes for kids to schools and places of interest, such as parks and the library. Imagine everyone from 8 to 80 being safe crossing town.

3. Encourage businesses to welcome customers arriving by bicycles, for example by providing more bicycle racks in town near business entrances. Remind businesses that loyal customers don’t all come by car!

4. Affirm implementation of the Complete Streets element of El Cerrito’s San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan to provide access to retail and services for car-free residents living on or near the avenue.

5. Explore/plan park streets or pedestrian-oriented streets that limit auto access.

6. Advocate for non-automobile access to the BART stations. Make sure it feels safe to arrive at BART by means other than a car.

Sign up to El Cerrito Strollers & Rollers to support a more joyful and sustainable infrastructure for us all: [email protected] Agenda Packet Page 360 of 446
From: Cordell Hindler
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments- Not on the Agenda
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2022 6:06:38 PM
Good Evening Mayor Quinto, Council Members and Staff,
I have some comments for the Record

1. For the July 19th Agenda, the Council Should invite Lavonna Martin to Provide an Update on Homelessness

2. Also to Have Sabrina Landreth to provide a Report on How COVID has Impacted Park Services Sincerely
Cordell
Agenda Packet Page 361 of 446
Some Progress in a Year with Many Challenges
[The Byline asked Paul Fadelli to
evaluate his year as May01:

Herewith, his response.]

BY PAUL FADELLI
I
N THE SIXTH grade, I ran for Student
Coui1cil at Mira Vista School in El
Cerrito when John F. Kennedy was pres-
' ident. I came in dead last. It would take
nearly six decades before I would be
Mayor of my hometown this year. What
a year it has been!
It has included a
range of problems
res u lting from
COVID-19 and its
economic and social
impacts; the constant threat of wildfires in the East Bay hills; racial tensions
and debates on police
accountability; an
unstable economy;
and El Cerrito
remaining on the top
ten list of the State
Auditor's financially
troubled cities in California. We were in
a bad financial place
in El Cerrito last
January. We ended up better-but we
still have a long way to go.

When I was sworn in a year ago, I
presented my five top prio1ities for 2021
that I would focus on. Some progress
has been made. Let me give a brief
update on the goals I mentioned.

Goal #1. Focus Primarily on the
City's Troubling Finances
This City began FY 20-21 with no
budget rese1ves, a lack of potential revenues and the need to take action to get back on track. With the Council
supp01ting the State Auditor's Report
on El Cerrito as a roadmap, this city
held public forums and Council made
very difficult decisions which resulted
in a balanced budget, a $4 million
surplus/10% reserve and no new taxes.

And this was without applying the $6
million federal relief funds we received
from the Amelican Rescue Plan. It took
public concern, dedicated staff work
and difficult budget and service cuts,
December 2021
but we are at a better fll!6E1Vf!Dme
our structural changes to get to fiscal
sustainability. JUNO 7 2022
Goal #2. Focus on Wildfire
Prevention and Ah~lilCerrito
\ This year we exparRttfcP'8tl\· fire
abatement efforts and passed a reso1 ution which designated wildfire prevention and safety as a top priority. We also passed a resolution to determine if a
regional Vegetation Management Joint
Power Authority (JPA) could benefit
El Cerrito and the East Bay in achieving
grants and improving firefighting coordination. I am also proud, that with difficult budget actions, we were able to keep Fire Station 72 open and reject
cuts to ow- fire safety budget.

Goal #3. Establish "Equity"
Considerations for Council Actions
I am very pleased that Council
agreed that we need to look at our city
actions through a new lens that allows
discussion and scrutiny to assure greater
equity in our community. In addition to
financial, environmental and legal considerations, staff and Council members ·w:ill have to also ask questions about
"equity" impacts concerning the policies and ordinances we pass. With the City Manager's assistance, Council also
agreed this goal should be broadened
to assure that our city's administrative
operations also include impo1tant equitable considerations.

BYLINE
Goal #4. Pass an Anti-Plastic
Foodware Ordinance
Like other local communities, I was
pleased that we recently passed an ordinance that will cut down on plastic waste by requiring prepared food providers to
use compostable food ware items. This
ordinance includes a lot of public outreach, information and extended deadlines so our restaw-ants will have plenty of time to implement.

Goal #5. Update
our Climate Action
Plan
In a year of needed
climate action, this
effort will have to be
continued into next
year because of an
ongoing reality we
will have to deal with
- inadequate staff
due to recent budget
cuts, furloughs and
transitions. Both city
residents and Council
members may be frustrated that a decreased
city staff won't allow
every priority to be
undertaken as soon
as they would like.

Maintaining critical services remains
our p1iority as we re-staff when funding
becomes available. Thanks to the
remaining city staff that has had a very
difficult year and still must hang in there
with many assignments.

Again, despite a year with a myiiad
of difficult problems; this has still been
a productive ye ar in El Cerrito on
several fronts. As I leave the Mayorship
in December, I plan to continue as a
Councilmember to focus on our finances
(because we must), work to assure that
the Plaza BART station development
will be of benefit to El Cerritans as a
new city center with a library, work to
address growing homelessness, build
back and improve our retail sect9r, and
work on public safety and mental health
response issues with a suppo1tive Police
Department.
•
Thank you, El Cerrito, for allowing
me to work on your behalf.

Agenda Packet Page 362 of 446
-,
El Cerrito Needs a Senior Center
All surrounding cities of the East Bay have city-sponsored senior centers.

Currently, there is no place in El Cerrito dedicated to supporting the unique needs, interests, and abilities of senior citizens. Its residents arEFte@Ne(!)the benefits one could provide and want to see a plan for provision of a Sr. Center.

We, the undersigned, call on the City of El Cerrito to make this a priority. JUNO 7 202J

SIGNATURE ADDRESS
Clty of EI Cerrito
OitvCfer:k

PHONE OR EMAIL
Agenda Packet Page 363 of 446
El Cerrito Needs a Senior Center
All surrounding cities of the East Bay have city-sponsored senior centers.

Currently, there is no place in El Cerrito dedicated to supporting the unique needs, interests, and abilities of senior citizens. Its residents are lacking in the benefits one could provide and want to see a plan for provision of a Sr. Center.

We, the undersigned, call on the City of El Cerrito to make this a priority. [C
'-,.1.f<\ .r\ h)o
(_ A C1 ~ <ol°'(

PHONE OR EMAIL
Agenda Packet Page 364 of 446
El Cerrito Needs a Senior Center
All surrounding cities of the East Bay have city-sponsored senior centers.

Currently, there is no place in El Cerrito dedicated to supporting the unique needs, interests, and abilities of senior citizens. Its residents are lacking in the benefits one could provide and want to see a plan for provision of a Sr. Center.

We, the undersigned, call on the City of El Cerrito to make this a priority.

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE OR EMAIL
Agenda Packet Page 365 of 446
El Cerrito Needs a Senior Center
All surrounding cities of the East Bay have city-sponsored senior centers.

Currently, there is no place in El Cerrito dedicated to supporting the unique needs, interests, and abilities of senior citizens. Its residents are lacking in the benefits one could provide and want to see a plan for provision of a Sr. Center.

We, the undersigned, call on the City of El Cerrito to make this a priority.

SIGNATURE ADDRESS PHONE OR EMAIL
Agenda Packet Page 366 of 446
From: Sherry Drobner
To: City Clerk; Tessa Rudnick; Lisa Motoyama; Gabe Quinto; Paul Fadelli; Janet Abelson Cc: Paul A. Keith; Karen Pinkos
Subject: Public Comment: Military Equipment Policy
Date: Saturday, June 4, 2022 3:09:42 PM
Dear Council Members,
I am very sorry that you are moving ahead with an ordinance for military weapons in our city, without greater community engagement. I am also in need of clarification of the authorization process. Can the Police Chief purchase 6 additional sub-machine guns to add to his arsenal, without City Council approval? Does this ordinance provide a blanket approval of purchase? Would the community be notified prior to this purchase? Could you please clarify? As I recall, The Police Chief purchased a drone without City Council approval. As a result, the City Council held a public hearing and developed a drone policy. This policy has never been re-evaluated publicly, as had been promised. Furthermore, I noted that the so-called Drone Logs are missing for the months since August of 2021. I also note that the logs for the months preceding August 2021 are often blank. Either the drone is not in use or whoever is in charge is not documenting the use. So, please explain why the Police Chief is asking for an additional drone.

At the last City Council meeting I believe the Police Chief discussed a community report back, but he described the engagement as a report back (end of the fiscal year) to broadly cover all police operations rather than a specific engagement on the increased militarization of our local police equipment. I am concerned about the lack of transparency and clarity on this issue. I hope that the City Council will clearly include language in the ordinance that outlines the requirement of community engagement before, not after purchase of military weapons.

I do hope that you will address some of the questions I raised at the next Council meeting so that as a member of the public I will be clear about what I assume will be your affirmative vote.

Sincerely,
Sherry Drobner
Agenda Packet Page 367 of 446
From: ASH
To: City Clerk; Tessa Rudnick; Lisa Motoyama; Gabe Quinto; Paul Fadelli; Janet Abelson; Paul A. Keith; Karen Pinkos Subject: Public Comment: Military Equipment
Date: Saturday, June 4, 2022 5:57:17 PM
Hello Council Members,
I was alarmed to hear from a neighbor that next week the City will be approving an ordinance that allows our Police Department to purchase military weapons with little to no oversight or accountability to the community. I'm surprised and concerned that the City Council is allowing this to happen.

I have been under the impression that the El Cerrito police department has been operating transparently and in partnership with the community. I also thought they prioritized forging good relationships with the residents of El Cerrito, which is why I am truly surprised that they are now seeking to become yet another over militarized police department.

If you do indeed approve this ordinance, I at least hope you will take steps to ensure there is meaningful community accountability as police use of military force escalates within our city.

Thank you for taking these concerns seriously.

Sincerely,
Alissa Hauser
Agenda Packet Page 368 of 446
From: Seth Morrison
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Saturday, June 4, 2022 9:45:24 AM
Testimony of Seth Morrison
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Hi, My name is Seth Morrison and I moved to El Cerrito 3 weeks ago and am speaking today as part of Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA.

I picked El Cerrito out of a desire to live in a progressive community that reflects my values and provides a safe and secure environment for ALL residents. I was disappointed to learn of the city’s continued increases to the police budget and am participating tonight to ask the City Council to change course by reducing the police budget and investing in alternatives that will truly increase our safety and quality of life.

As has been shown again and again, police cannot prevent bad things from happening, and they are generally unable to address harm when it does happen. By funding violence prevention, social services, mental health services, and other public health supports through the county that have the potential to address root causes rather than perpetuating cycles of harm, we can increase public safety and address real social issues in El Cerrito.

To do this, we need staff, hired through the county or city, who are able to respond to high and low-intensity emergencies who are not connected to the police department, and do not inherently bring with them the threat of violence and incarceration.

My specific asks:

For the FY 22-23 budget, reduce the El Cerrito Police Department budget by least 20% ($2.5 million), resulting in an FY 22-23 police budget of no more than $10.05 million. In each subsequent annual budget for the following three years, the Council should reduce the ECPD budget by 10%, for a total of a 50% reduction over four years. The city should:
· Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program
· Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
· Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).
· Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic
Thank you.
--
Seth Morrison
He/Him/His
Agenda Packet Page 369 of 446
From: Nick Brooks
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Saturday, June 4, 2022 12:30:51 PM
Hello, my name is Nick and I’m an El Cerrito resident.

I’m here with Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA, to express my concern over the city’s continued increases to the police budget and to ask the City Council to change course by reducing the police budget and investing in alternatives. I’m following up on my April testimony and multiple meetings our group has had with several city council members on this issue.

Specifically, we are calling on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, while ramping up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime.

Investments should include:

Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic Thank you for your time,
-
Nick Brooks
Agenda Packet Page 370 of 446
Hello, my name is Miguel Gravelle Izaguirre and I’m an El Cerrito resident.

I’m here with Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA, to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget, which makes historically large increases to the police department budget over the objections of dozens of El Cerrito residents who have emailed, called, and given public comment, as well as over 100 El Cerrito residents this year and last year who signed petitions asking the City Council to reduce the police budget.

I’m asking the City Council to change course by reducing the police budget and investing in alternatives. I’m following up on my April testimony and the multiple meetings that Fair Budget El Cerrito has had with several city councilmembers on this issue.

We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by over $700,000 and instead cut the police budget, investing that money to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

Those investments should include:
● Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year. ● Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
● Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).
● Increase staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.
● Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic For context, efforts to reduce our police budget have received a great deal of public support in recent years - including well over 100 residents signing a petition from El Cerrito Progressives last year, a large rally in 2020 during the uprisings following the death of George Floyd, and more than 100 residents who have signed a petition in support of the Fair Budget El Cerrito campaign. In April, roughly a dozen people spoke in favor of reducing the police budget, while others sent emails or provided written statements to the Council as well.

Agenda Packet Page 371 of 446
While El Cerrito may not be in the same dire financial straits we were a year ago, that is largely thanks to an unexpected surge in federal funding and property tax revenue. The proposed budget is not a sustainable way to prevent future financial mismanagement and overspending.

Even more important than the question of fiscal responsibility, is a question of what we spend our money on.
○ The proposed budget continues the pattern of the police department constituting nearly 30% of city general fund expenditures.
○ El Cerrito still has a smaller recreation department - a department that actually brings in revenue, unlike the police - than we did in 2018, both in terms of budget and staff. The budget in 2018 was $5.8 million and there were 23 staff, the proposal for this year is for $5.5 million and 18 staff. (p. 165 of proposed budget)) ○ The City Manager’s proposed budget suggests decreasing the amount of money in our Low & Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund - the amount proposed in this year’s budget is only $30,000 more than was invested in 2018 ($5.13 million in 2018 vs. 5.16 million proposed this year). (p. 57 of proposed budget) ○ Community development (which includes affordable housing) has a proposed budget of $3.1 million compared to $3.2 million for last year (p. 87 of the proposed budget).

This brings us to the fact that police don’t and can’t prevent crime. This is justified by the following data from the California Department of Justice here. To go into more detail:
● Safety is important to everyone. But police can not provide true public safety. Policing, as an institution, inherently relies on coercion, force, violence, and the threat of incarceration, and can only respond to issues like poverty and homelessness through criminalization.
● Across the country, police cause harm to Black people and other people of color. In El Cerrito, 50% of arrests are of Black people, even though Black people make up only around 5% of the total population.
● The root causes of crime are social - do people have housing, do they live in healthy and safe environments, do they have access to work that pays them well enough to live a good life? Policing addresses none of these issues.
● The vast majority of crimes that do occur in El Cerrito are property crimes, an important reminder that police do not spend the majority of their time responding to or solving incidents involving violence.
○ From 2011-2020, there were on average 9.3 times more property crimes than violent crimes reported each year in El Cerrito
○ Of those property crimes, on average 68.6% involved property valued at under $400.
○ From 2011-2020, the clearance rate (rate at which someone is charged for a crime) for violent crimes was 26.9% and 9.1% for property crimes in El Cerrito.

Agenda Packet Page 372 of 446
Now you may be asking, what are the facts in El Cerrito? - Please see 2021-2022 City Budget from 116 onward and the El Cerrito Police Department's 2020 Annual Report. Specific details include:
● The El Cerrito Police Department makes up nearly 30% of the city’s general fund expenditures. Even the California state auditor agreed, prior to this one-time surge in federal funding and the current real estate bubble, that El Cerrito needs to reduce its police budget.
○ Although we do not agree with all of their recommendations for how to reduce the budget, it is clear to anyone who looks at our budget that we are overspending on the police.
● Even with some reductions in the total number of funded positions (from 55 to 48), the actual police budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-2022 was still an increase from the year before, from $11.9 to $12.25 million. This year’s budget proposal would be an increase from $12.25 to $12.98 million, more than $700,000.
● There is no documented “crime wave” - nationally or locally. For 2020, the last year we have data available, violent crime decreased from 152 reported incidents in 2019 to 114 reported incidents in 2020. There was also a 28% decrease in property crime from 2019 to 2020. This follows the general pattern, locally and nationally, of the total number of police officers not being directly correlated with the number of crimes that occur. ○ Given this information, a massive increase in the police budget is unnecessary, inexplicable, and unconscionable.

In conclusion, as has been shown again and again across the country, police cannot prevent bad things from happening, and they are generally unable to address harm when it does happen. By funding violence prevention, social services, mental health services, and other public health supports through the county that have the potential to address root causes rather than perpetuating cycles of harm, we can increase public safety and address real social issues in El Cerrito.

Thank you for your time.

Kind regards,
Miguel Gravelle Izaguirre
Agenda Packet Page 373 of 446
From: Ida Poberezovsky
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public comment - budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 8:54:27 AM
Hello, my name is Ida and I’m an El Cerrito resident. I’m a mental health provider and educator who works with individuals who have experienced direct and indirect trauma due to policing.

I’m with Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA, and I’m writing to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget, which makes historically large increases to the police department budget over the objections of dozens of El Cerrito residents who have emailed, called, and given public comment, as well as over 100 El Cerrito residents this year and last year who signed petitions asking the City Council to reduce the police budget.

I’m asking the City Council to change course by reducing the police budget and investing in alternatives. This is a follow up on my April testimony and multiple meetings Fair Budget El Cerrito has had with several council members on this issue.

We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by $700,000 and instead cut the police budget, investing that money to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

Those investments should include:

Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.

Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

Agenda Packet Page 374 of 446
Increase staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic While El Cerrito may not be in the same dire financial straits we were a year ago, that is largely thanks to an unexpected surge in federal funding and property tax revenue. The proposed budget is not a sustainable way to prevent future financial mismanagement and overspending. Even more important than the question of fiscal responsibility, is a question of what we spend our money on.

It is profoundly disappointing to see the city that I live in and pay taxes in continue to move in the opposite direction of actionable change for the improved public safety of my community. El Cerrito residents have been and continue to ask for a decrease in the police budget and simply to be considered as valuable in these discussions as representatives of the police department. We are asking you to prioritize and increase partnership with Richmond and Contra Costa County so that we may not fall behind as the cities around us reimagine public safety and become more equitable and community-focused places to live. As we develop public safety measures that are more holistic, trauma-informed, and person-centered than those offered by police, we create a truly safer community. That means focusing on affordable housing, recreation and childcare options, meaningful work opportunities, and social justice-based outreach programs for our most marginalized community members who are in danger of being policed.

Sincerely,
Ida
Agenda Packet Page 375 of 446
Hello, my name is Zach Weinstein and I’m an El Cerrito resident and member of East Bay DSA and an organizer of the Fair Budget El Cerrito Campaign.

I’m here to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget, which would make a massive $700,000 increase to the police department budget over the objections of hundreds of El Cerrito residents who over the last two years have taken action through emails, calls, public comment, signing petitions, and rallying, all asking the City Council to reduce the police budget.

These numbers have occurred even with the added difficulty of organizing during a pandemic.

I’m following up on my April testimony, multiple meetings Fair Budget El Cerrito has had with several city Councilmembers on this issue, and emails that have been sent to every member of the council.

We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by $700,000 and instead cut the police budget, investing that money to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime Those investments should include:
● Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year. ● Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
● Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline). ● Rehiring any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic We are also asking the Council to use money saved from our proposed cuts to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Although some members of the Council have suggested that there is a crime surge in our surrounding area, they have provided no data to support such a claim in any of our meetings or email correspondence. Even if it were true, police do not even make arrests in the vast majority of crimes, let alone “solve” those crimes, and the vast majority of crimes that occur in El Cerrito are property crimes, which are largely driven by poverty, a problem that police cannot solve.

I want to also express my deep concern about the city’s budget process, the general lack of meaningful democracy in El Cerrito, and some ideas for how the city should use it’s newfound resources (which would be further bolstered by making our proposed cuts to the police department) to address this problem:

Agenda Packet Page 376 of 446
My understanding is the next fiscal year begins in July, which would mean this budget needs to be voted on this month. The fact that the proposed budget would be on the agenda for tonight was not formally publicly posted as late as the morning of Thursday, June 2nd, as far as I could tell.

I and my co-organizers asked every member of the City Council we met with and emailed to let us know if there were formal opportunities for the public to give feedback and input on the budget. We never received that information, which either means a majority of city councilmembers did not share that information with constituents who explicitly requested it on multiple occasions, or that those formal opportunities didn’t occur before this proposal was drafted. Either explanation is troubling, given the speed with which I assume this budget, which is the most important political decision this body makes every year, must be considered and voted on, and the fact that it was only published on June 3rd.

It is clear that our elected officials, and the overall body of the City Council, do not have the resources you need to govern in a transparent and open way with appropriate time and opportunity for public input. Instead, governing power is effectively vested in an unelected city manager, who proposes a $700,000 increase to the police department in the wake of multiple years of hundreds of El Cerritans demanding cuts to that department, all while maintaining austerity level budgets for other city departments like recreation.

El Cerrito needs to pay a living salary to Councilmembers so the positions can be full time, or at least so anyone in the city can afford to run for the position. The Council needs its own dedicated legislative staff to be able to work on amendments to the proposed budget, to put on formal hearings and other events on the budget farther in advance than June, and to more regularly communicate the ongoing business of the city to the public. Councilmembers need office phones and dedicated voicemails to provide more avenues of contact between you and your constituents. The City could easily hire 5 full time legislative staff and take all of these democratic measures with just the money that is instead going to increase the police department budget, and have plenty left over for funding a full CORE team.

Agenda Packet Page 377 of 446
From: Jessie Papalia
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 4:52:01 PM
Hello,
I am an El Cerrito resident and I would like to give public comment on the budget at tomorrow evening's City Council meeting. My written comments can be found below.

Thank you,
Jessie Papalia
Hello, my name is Jessie Papalia and I’m an El Cerrito resident, an elementary public school teacher, and a strong believer that our city's funding priorities teach children what we value and who we value in society.

I’m here with Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA, to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget. We are here today asking the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by $700,000. This is the biggest single-year increase of the El Cerrito police budget going back to at least 2018. I want to communicate a few things:

1. The proposed increase in police funding disregards the public will of the residents of El Cerrito. Efforts to reduce our police budget have received a great deal of public support in recent years - including well over 100 residents signing a petition from El Cerrito Progressives in support of decreasing the police budget last year, a large rally in 2020 during the uprisings following the death of George Floyd, and more than 100 residents who have signed a petition in support of the Fair Budget El Cerrito campaign. In April roughly a dozen people provided testimony in favor of reducing the police budget, and others have sent emails or provided written statements to the Council as well.

2. Arrest records in El Cerrito show a pattern of anti-black racism by the police. In El Cerrito, 50% of arrests are of Black people, even though Black people make up only around 5% of the total population. This fact is outrageous and highly damning of our police department.

3. The vast majority of crimes that do occur in El Cerrito are property crimes, an important reminder that El Cerrito police do not spend the majority of their time responding to or solving incidents involving violence. From 2011-2020, there were on average 9.3 times more property crimes than violent crimes reported each year in El Cerrito.

Of those property crimes, on average 68.6% involved property valued at under $400.

4. This connects directly to the bigger issue at hand: the root causes of crime are social - do people have housing, do they live in healthy and safe environments, do they have access to work that pays them well enough to live a good life? Policing addresses none of these issues.

5. Despite all of these facts, we spend nearly 30% of the city’s general fund expenditures Agenda Packet Page 378 of 446
on policing. Even the California state auditor agreed, prior to this one-time surge in federal funding and the current real estate bubble, that El Cerrito needs to reduce its police budget.

Although we do not agree with all of their recommendations for how to reduce the budget, it is clear to anyone who looks at our budget that we are overspending on police.

I support all of the Fair Budget El Cerrito demands. We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We want to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

I will reiterate again: our city's funding priorities teach children what we value and who we value in society. We demand that our funding priorities teach El Cerrito's children to value Black and non-Black members of our community equally, to value addressing root causes of human suffering rather than reacting to surface-level symptoms, and to value the creation of a safe, nurturing, affordable, and supportive city for all community members.

Thank you for your time.

Jessie Papalia
Agenda Packet Page 379 of 446
From: Allison Cooper
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 6:28:01 PM
For public comment on the proposed 2022-2023 budget at the June 7, 2022, El Cerrito City Council meeting:

My name is Allison Cooper, and I'm writing today with concerns from many parts of my identity and life experiences to support the demands of the East Bay DSA's Fair Budget El Cerrito campaign (which I have included below).

First, as an El Cerrito resident, I'm very concerned to see that the proposed budget contains a significant increase in policing costs, without investing in the community services we need to make our community safer. The solutions proposed by the Fair Budget El Cerrito campaign will improve safety in our community better than an increased police presence ever could.

As someone who has had loved ones in law enforcement, I'm aware of how policing can be an extremely difficult, stressful and scary job; I want to support and reduce the burden on these individuals by funding alternatives instead of investing further in a system that today puts individuals in law enforcement in unfairly dangerous situations and asks them to do more than any human should or possibly can do.

As a woman in a society overrun with gendered violence, I'm painfully aware of how our model for policing is unable to prevent or even reduce the types of violence that makes me feel unsafe walking alone at night, and can even make these situations worse.

As a supporter of our community's Black organizers and the mass movements represented in the uprisings of 2020, I aim to join their call for an end to the violence that policing causes to Black, Indigenous and other communities of color.

As an engaged member of our community, I've spoken with many fellow city residents about this in the past year, and am constantly inspired and heartened by the community's support for alternatives to policing and new solutions to community safety — and this proposal appears to be in direct opposition to this sentiment.

As a (relatively) young person, I want to see the change we need happen so that I have more hope for the future. As a creative, I believe we can do better than to continue investing in policing as a one-size-fits-all for diverse problems, and are capable of imagining new ways of doing this.

Finally, as someone with proud East Bay roots, I want to do what I can to further the beautiful values that our region has famously pushed for to help our nation progress toward a better future. Instead of overinvesting in a system proven again and again to be broken while furthering the systemic underfunding of city social services, El Cerrito can serve as a leader for better ways of keeping each other safe — with more effective, more inclusive, more proactive programs.

Thank you for your time and your work for El Cerrito,
Agenda Packet Page 380 of 446
Allison
As always, my comments here are as a private individual and not in any way connected to my capacity being involved in other City groups.

The demands of Fair Budget El Cerrito:

Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.

Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

Increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic.

Agenda Packet Page 381 of 446
From: Josh Rose
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 6:55:09 PM
Hello, my name is Josh Rose and I’m an El Cerrito resident.

I am writing to express my concern over a City of El Cerrito Draft Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-

23. I urge the El Cerrito City Council Members to invest in El Cerrito services that improve the quality of life and safety of El Cerrito residents in different ways than have been proposed in the City of El Cerrito Draft Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

I would like to see El Cerrito invest in the following:
- Increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department. - Increase funding for landscaping and lighting and other tangible improvements to the city's infrastructure, especially along the Ohlone Greenway and other public spaces and roadways. - Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.
- Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
- Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline). - Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic I ask the City Council to reject a proposal to increase police funding by $700,000 and instead invest that money in the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing, which have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

Thanks for your time.

Regards,
Josh
Agenda Packet Page 382 of 446
From: John Qua
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 7:50:09 PM
Hello,
I'd like to submit testimony for tomorrow's City Council meeting and reserve a spot to speak quickly. I have included my written testimony below. My name is John Qua and I live at El Cerrito.

Best,
John
Hello, my name is John Qua and I’m an El Cerrito resident.

I’m here with Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget, which makes historically large increases to the police department budget over the objections of dozens of El Cerrito residents who have emailed, called, and given public comment, as well as over 100 El Cerrito residents this year and last year who signed petitions asking the City Council to reduce the police budget.

Im following up on my April testimony and multiple meetings Fair Budget El Cerrito has had with several city councilmembers on this issue.

We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by $700,000 and instead cut the police budget, investing that money to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

The El Cerrito Police Department makes up nearly 30% of the city’s general fund expenditures. Even the California state auditor agreed, prior to this one-time surge in federal funding and the current real estate bubble, that El Cerrito needs to reduce its police budget. The root causes of crime are social - do people have housing, do they live in healthy and safe environments, do they have access to work that pays them well enough to live a good life? Policing addresses none of these issues.

Agenda Packet Page 383 of 446
From: FishCrimes
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 7:51:18 PM
Hi, I’m Shobit, an El Cerrito resident, and I’m with Fair Budget for El Cerrito, an EBDSA campaign and the Speak Out Socialists. I’m here to express my concern over the city manager’s proposed budget, which makes historically large increases to the police department budget over the objections of dozens of El Cerrito residents who have emailed, called, and given public comment, as well as over 100 El Cerrito residents this year and last year who signed petitions asking the City Council to reduce the police budget.

I'm following up on my April testimony and multiple meetings Fair Budget El Cerrito has had with several city councilmembers on this issue.

We have called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposal to increase police funding by $700,000 and instead cut the police budget, investing that money to ramp up investments in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years.

I am here to express my support with the demands made by the Fair Budget for El Cerrito campaign.

Policing is an intrinsically reactive measure, and I think we would see a lot more success going after the causes instead of the symptoms. Some symptoms that are better jobs for social workers, such as poverty, mental illness crises, and homelessness have also been unnecessarily criminalized and handed to the police. These people don’t need the threat of being locked up or fined, oftentimes they need help.

This seems harder to justify still after we saw a 25% decrease in violent crime and a 27% decrease in property crime in the last released annual report.

As has been shown again and again across the country, police cannot prevent bad things from happening, and they are generally unable to address harm when it does happen. By funding violence prevention, social services, mental health services, and other public health supports through the county that have the potential to address root causes rather than perpetuating cycles of harm, we can increase public safety and address real social issues in El Cerrito.

Agenda Packet Page 384 of 446
From: Danielle Westbrook
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 8:11:34 PM
Dear Mayor Quinto; Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama; council members Abelson, Fadelli and Rudnick; and fellow El Cerritans:

I am writing to you today, as a resident of El Cerrito, to provide public comment on the proposed El Cerrito budget and to follow-up on my April 19 public testimony to the City Council.

As members of Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign of East Bay DSA, myself and many others have written and are attending your June 07, 2022 council meeting to express our concern over the City Manager’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2022-23. The City Manager is proposing a historically large increase to the police department budget, disregarding over 100 El Cerrito residents who signed petitions asking City Council to reduce the police budget and the dozens of El Cerrito residents who have emailed, called and given public comment.

As noted in April, Fair Budget El Cerrito has called on the El Cerrito City Council to pass a police budget for fiscal year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years. We ask the City Council to reject the City Manager’s proposed $700,000 increase to police funding and instead cut the police budget; we further ask that the city better invest in programs that actually provide safety and address root causes of crime and need, alongside also increasing investments in the recreation department, community development, street and park lighting, and affordable housing.

Non-police El Cerrito investments should include:

Funding two full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partnering with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.

Allocation of both funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives.

Actively and directly building a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

Funding for more and brighter street and park lighting.

Increasing investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Rehiring any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the pandemic.

While El Cerrito may not be in dire financial straits this year, that is thanks to an unexpected surge in federal funding and property tax revenue. The proposed budget does not sufficiently address or prevent future financial mismanagement and overspending, issues called out by the California State Auditor in their 2021 public letter and report on El Cerrito.

The proposed budget also continues the pattern of the police department constituting nearly Agenda Packet Page 385 of 446
30% of city general fund expenditures, while programs like the recreation department remain underfunded and below 2018 funding levels. The City Manager’s proposed budget suggests decreasing the amount of money in our Low & Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund; the amount proposed in this year’s budget is only $30,000 more than was invested in 2018, and yet the need for affordable housing has grown even greater. Further, community development (which includes affordable housing) has a proposed budget of $3.1 million compared to $3.2 million for last year.

As myself and many others noted in April: While safety is a shared value, the present policing system does not deliver safety. Policing, as an institution, inherently relies on coercion, force, violence, and the threat of incarceration, and can only respond to issues like poverty and homelessness through criminalization. Across the country, police cause harm to Black people and other people of color. In El Cerrito, recent statistics reveal that 50% of arrests are of Black people, even though Black people make up only around 5% of the total population. And further, the majority of crimes that occur in El Cerrito are property crimes and non-violent.

The City Manager’s proposed budget does not adequately reflect the needs and values of El Cerrito residents; it does not recognize that the present policing system fails to deliver safety; nor does it address the financial mismanagement and overspending noted by the California State Auditor.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Danielle Watters Westbrook
Agenda Packet Page 386 of 446
From: T Nagai-Rothe
To: Gabe Quinto; Janet Abelson; Paul Fadelli; Lisa Motoyama; Tessa Rudnick Cc: City Clerk
Subject: For the June 7, 2022 City Council Meeting
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:35:02 PM
Dear Mayor Quinto and City Council Members,
I am really perplexed about the rationale for a $700,000 increase in the ECPD budget to $12.25 million for FY 2021-2022, and how El Cerrito residents woulf directly benefit. El Cerrito has so many needs unrelated to the police. My grandkids use the pool and Recreation Center - not the police department. My grandkids use the library - not the police department.

For 2020, the last year we have data available, violent crime decreased from 152 reported incidents in 2019 to 114 reported incidents in 2020. There was also a 28% decrease in property crime from 2019 to 2020.

Yet the ECPD represents 24.1% of the budget, and the Recreation Department represents 9.1% of the budget.

Since the Recreation Department has not had its budget cut reversed the budget allocation should go to Recreation to restore staffing to 2018 levels. The Recreation Department is also a revenue generator while the ECPD is not.

I’m also not sure whether the library position that was cut has been restored. That should be a priority before the police department.

In my opinion a large police presence doesn’t make me or my grandkids safer or better supported in the community. We need social service support such as:

Two social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement). This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.

A partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

I was heartened to hear the city council consider, on April 19, using the Cannabis Operating Permit Community Benefit funds for CORE services. Yet as everyone agreed, CORE services are just a first response to support unhoused residents. El Cerrito needs to also:

Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives that include projects to Agenda Packet Page 387 of 446
address homelessness — or create its own reimagining public safety initiative El Cerrito is fortunate that it has a relatively small number of unhoused neighbors. I trust that a strategic and focused effort can make a big difference.

Sincerely,
Tomi
B. Tomi Nagai-Rothe
she/her/hers
on unceded land of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan (Ohlone) Agenda Packet Page 388 of 446
From: Vanessa Warheit
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Budget
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:49:23 PM
Dear City Councilmembers,
I am writing to comment on the city's proposed budget for FY 2022-23. I am very concerned that this budgeting process has not taken into account input you have received from the community, asking for our money to fund a different set of priorities.

In particular, I am alarmed at the city manager's proposal to increase the police budget. I have testified before, both here and to the Financial Advisory Board, about wanting to reduce our city's police budget. I support the demands of Fair Budget El Cerrito; I am one of the dozens of El Cerrito residents who have expressed our conviction -- backed up by the data -- that more policing does nothing to increase public safety. If we really want a safe city, we need to invest in the things that will actually prevent crime in the first place.

The vast majority of crime in our city is property crime. I got a taste of this firsthand last month, when my bicycle was stolen from my garage. The police officer who came to take the report was courteous and professional -- but he didn't need to be carrying the taser, body armor, loaded firearm, and handcuffs that were strapped all over his body. He could have arrived on an electric bicycle in a pair of shorts, without any armor, and I'd honestly have felt a lot better -- especially if I'd known that the money we didn't spend on the car, the weapons, and the military paraphernalia had instead been spent on drug treatment and social services to help keep people from needing to steal bicycles to begin with.

Spending 30% of our budget on the police force won't bring my bike back. Readjusting our priorities might prevent the thief from stealing someone else's.

I am also appalled that our city, which rightfully declared a climate emergency three years ago, is today seriously considering purchasing more fossil-fueled vehicles for the police force.

How can you do this, at a time when the auto industry is decisively turning toward electrification, when almost a quarter of cars purchased in the Bay Area last year were electric, when the scientific community has made it clear we need to cut our emissions in half in the next seven years to avert a climate catastrophe that threatens everything we love? EVs are faster, and cleaner, they're on par in cost, and far cheaper to fuel and to maintain than gas cars.

This proposed purchase would not only be a colossal waste of taxpayer money, it would directly contravene our city's mission to "create an environmentally sustainable future" and would make a mockery of your climate declarations.

Our city created this beautiful civic building to be an example of sustainable design. I urge you to extend that vision and leadership to our city's fleets as well.

Lastly - perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see in the budget any reference to funding from the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. I hope the city is planning to apply for funding from the hundreds of billions set aside for local safe streets and infrastructure improvements, via the California Department of Transportation.

Next year, I urge you to implement a participatory budgeting process, to engage the Agenda Packet Page 389 of 446
community in a systematic way to ensure the budget accurately reflects the will of the people.

In the meantime, please take a closer look at this budget, and listen to us, your constituents, when prioritizing where to spend our precious dollars. Let's make our budget reflect the values of our beautiful city, and pay for the things we know that will make it safer, cleaner, and better.

Thank you.
--
Vanessa Warheit
Phone:

Support my campaign for El Cerrito City Council
Emerge CA Class of '21
pronouns: she, her, hers
Agenda Packet Page 390 of 446
From: Sherry Drobner
To: City Clerk; Gabe Quinto; Paul Fadelli; Lisa Motoyama; Tessa Rudnick; Janet Abelson Subject: Public Comment
Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 11:25:40 PM
Dear City Council Members,
I signed the petition issued by the Fair Budget El Cerrito campaign. I have grown disheartened by the lack of Council action to think outside the box about public safety. I wonder if any member of the council has taken the time to study alternative solutions? Where is the equity in subsidizing the police department and offering no services for those at risk of eviction or on the street? Those who are not being protected by policing, or feel comfortable with our current "public safety" model are invisible to our city council.

Sincerely,
Sherry Drobner
Agenda Packet Page 391 of 446
From: Karen Pinkos
To: Alexandra Orologas; Holly Charléty; Paul A. Keith; Sandra Dalida Subject: Fwd: petition from El Cerrito residents on FY"22-"23 budget Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 8:01:49 AM
Attachments: Fair Budget El Cerrito Petition 6.7.22 (1).pdf FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Zach Weinstein
Date: June 7, 2022 at 7:55:54 AM PDT
To: Lisa Motoyama <[email protected]>, Paul Fadelli <[email protected]>, Tessa Rudnick <[email protected]>, Gabe Quinto <[email protected]>, Janet Abelson <[email protected]cerrito.ca.us>, Karen Pinkos <[email protected]> Cc: Miguel Gravelle >, Yari Greaney
>
Subject: petition from El Cerrito residents on FY'22-'23 budget Good morning El Cerrito City Councilmembers and City Manager Pinkos, Fair Budget El Cerrito, a campaign organized and led by El Cerrito members of the East Bay Democratic Socialists of America (East Bay DSA), has collected over 100 petition signatures from El Cerrito residents in support of reducing the police budget and increasing funding for social services (see attached document).This continues a pattern of large numbers of El Cerrito residents coming together in recent years to demand reductions to our city's police budget.

Our campaign is calling on the city to reject the $700,000 increase to the police budget, as well as the following:

Fund 2 full-time social workers through Contra Costa County’s CORE program (Coordinated Outreach, Referral, & Engagement), and fully partner with the CORE program. This is estimated by CORE staff to cost the city only $250,000 a year.

Allocate funding and staff time to explore a partnership with Richmond on their current Reimagining Public Safety initiatives
Actively and directly build a partnership between the City of El Cerrito and the A3 Contra Costa Community Crisis Initiative (the Contra Costa County mental health hotline).

Increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Rehire any SEIU member city staff who were laid off or fired during the Agenda Packet Page 392 of 446
pandemic.

We are also asking the Council to use money saved from our proposed cuts to increase investments in programs like the recreation department, community development, and affordable housing that have stagnated or shrunk in the last 5 years, including by increasing staffing and budget levels to at least 2018 levels in the recreation department.

Pass a police budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 that is 20% smaller than the budget for 2021-2022, and to continue cutting the police budget by 10% each of the next 3 years.

We will be giving public comment to this effect at tonight's meeting on the budget.
-Zach Weinstein
Agenda Packet Page 393 of 446
Dear El Cerrito City Council and Manager,
We, the undersigned El Cerrito residents, call on the City of El Cerrito to redirect funds away from the police department, and increase funding for resources and services that meet community needs.

First Name Last Name City Zip
Chris McClintock El Cerrito 94530
Michael Dalebout El Cerrito 94530
Allison Cooper El Cerrito 94530
Nick Brooks El Cerrito 94530
Nick Galloro El Cerrito 94530
Aaron Isenstadt El Cerrito 94530
Jessie Papalia El Cerrito 94530
John Qua El Cerrito 94530
Zach Weinstein El Cerrito 94530
Yari Greaney El Cerrito 94530
Miguel Gravelle-Izaguirre El Cerrito 94530
Michael Campos-Quinn El Cerrito 94530
Jenny Heffernon El Cerrito 94530
Manny El Cerrito 94530
Sandra Guzman El Cerrito 94530
Carlo Ohivito El Cerrito 94530
Virginia Cambor El Cerrito 94530
Lisa Graves El Cerrito 94530
Jun Wu El Cerrito 94530
Gong Cheng El Cerrito 94530
Carol Darden El Cerrito 94530
Aaron Darden El Cerrito 94530
Sharaya Long El Cerrito 94530
Josh Rose El Cerrito 94530
Agenda Packet Page 394 of 446
Danielle Watters Westbrook El Cerrito 94530
Derik Hillard El Cerrito 94530
Danielle Hudi Brenman El Cerrito 94530
Colin Sutter El Cerrito 94530
Higino Padilla El Cerrito 94530
Katy Young El Cerrito 94530
Zaphiel Miller El Cerrito 94530
Lara Roman-Lopez El Cerrito 94530
Ruth Brewer El Cerrito 94530
Adam Russell El Cerrito 94530
Jesus Morales El Cerrito 94530
Silvia Morales El Cerrito 94530
Liting Shang El Cerrito 94530
Karin Rosman El Cerrito 94530
Tom Adams El Cerrito 94530
Ted Mezzel El Cerrito 94530
Ronnie Polonsky El Cerrito 94530
Lynda Frank El Cerrito 94530
Stephen DeLuca El Cerrito 94530
Jeremy Troy El Cerrito 94530
Kiyomoba Hiroka El Cerrito 94530
Isidora Aldenale El Cerrito 94530
Daisuke Tagala El Cerrito 94530
Alexis Mazzoli El Cerrito 94530
Heather Hamilton El Cerrito 94530
Pramag Ramjan El Cerrito 94530
April E-E El Cerrito
Juliet Smith El Cerrito 94530
Chelsea Lipscomb El Cerrito 94530
Agenda Packet Page 395 of 446
Elba Huamani El Cerrito 94530
Barbara Birch El Cerrito 94530
Maiko Hara El Cerrito 94530
Shobit Singh El Cerrito 94530
Saiyun Singh El Cerrito 94530
Alex Mahonga El Cerrito 94530
Ronnie Polonsky El Cerrito 94530
Tim Laidman Laidman El Cerrito 94530
Rosemary
Zappulla Zappulla El Cerrito 94530
Leslie DiBenedetto Adams El Cerrito 94530
Melissa Welter El Cerrito 94530
Brenda Jeanne Courtney El Cerrito 94530
Vanessa Warheit El Cerrito 94530
Pamela Fox El Cerrito 94530
Justine Briohes El Cerrito 94530
Prasa Martin El Cerrito 94530
Kohinoor Joshi El Cerrito 94530
Jessie Clort-Morris El Cerrito 94530
Darlene Woodard El Cerrito 94530
Dolma Tso El Cerrito 94530
Selene Fabiano El Cerrito 94530
Melissa Knight El Cerrito 94530
Rocio M El Cerrito 94530
Jordan T El Cerrito 94530
Alexis L El Cerrito 94530
Greta M El Cerrito 94530
Alana Jean El Cerrito 94530
Daniel Foster El Cerrito 94530
Jasmine Elise El Cerrito 94530
Agenda Packet Page 396 of 446
Jason Harris El Cerrito 94530
Vitor O El Cerrito 94530
Patrick Lazano El Cerrito 94530
Palden Gurnung El Cerrito 94530
Erneste Falcon El Cerrito 94530
Johnel Jones El Cerrito 94530
Francisco Yamozoke El Cerrito 94530
Matthew Smith El Cerrito 94530
Raziya Robinson El Cerrito 94530
Anh Dao-Shah El Cerrito 94530
Courtney Stead El Cerrito 94530
Kyle Buetzow El Cerrito 94530
Ida Poderezovsky El Cerrito 94530
David Wilhoite El Cerrito 94530
Pamela Davis El Cerrito 94530
Amei Papitto El Cerrito 94530
Emily Chao El Cerrito 94530
Seth Morrison El Cerrito 94530
Maré Odomo El Cerrito 94530
Mark Pickus El Cerrito 94530
S. Drobner El Cerrito 94530
Amit Singh El Cerrito 94530
Joshua Rizzolo El Cerrito 94530
Agenda Packet Page 397 of 446
MCE
Empowering Our Clean Energy Future
1 Agenda Item No. 6.A.

Agenda Packet Page 398 of 446
How Climate Change Impacts Us All
Rising Temperatures
2020 Extreme Heat Storm
Extreme Weather
Wildfires, sea level rise,
drought
Health Impacts
Longer allergen season,
higher rates of asthma and
Lyme Disease
Flooding Fires Smog
2 Agenda Packet Page 399 of 446
MCE’s MISSION
Confront the climate crisis by eliminating fossil fuel
greenhouse gas emissions, producing renewable
energy, and creating equitable community benefits.

Agenda Packet Page 400 of 446
How MCE Service Works
Enabling
Legislation:

AB 117, 2002
4 Agenda Packet Page 401 of 446
37 Member Communities
5 4 Bay Area
Counties
~580,000
Accounts
1 million +
Customers
Agenda Packet Page 402 of 446
Choice Is Power
MCE
Default Service
Old
Default Service
31%
Renewable
PG&E
60%
Renewable
MCE
Light Green
100%
Renewable
MCE
Deep Green
MCE
Opt Up Choice
6 Agenda Packet Page 403 of 446
El Cerrito and MCE
7 Agenda Packet Page 404 of 446
El Cerrito & MCE
• El Cerrito has the highest Deep Green participation
rates across Contra Costa County
• Over 9,100 Metric Tons of CO2 reduced since 2015
• Businesses achieved over 147, 600 kWh in savings
through MCE energy efficiency programs
• Distributed over $21,000 in rebates for energy
residential efficiency upgrades, electric vehicle
(EV) charging, and income-qualified EV rebates
• El Cerrito is participating in MCE’s electric vehicle (EV) charging program via Recycling Center
• MCE is a member of the El Cerrito Chamber of
Commerce, attended Bike to Work day, and is
sponsoring the 4
th of July Event 8
Agenda Packet Page 405 of 446
Community Programs
9 Agenda Packet Page 406 of 446
Residential Programs
Income-Qualified
EV Rebates
COVID Relief
Resources
Energy Efficiency
upgrades
$3,500 per vehicle
Stacks with other incentives
MCE Cares bill credit
Discount programs and resource
webpages
Water Heater, Gas Furnace, Attic
Insulation, Heat Pump, Duct
Sealing and Pipe Installation
10 Agenda Packet Page 407 of 446
Business Programs
EV Charging
Program
Strategic Energy
Management
Peak Flex
Demand Response
1,000+ ports installed
$3,000 rebates for workplace
and multifamily properties
Expert Coaching, Potential
Energy Savings of 3-15%,
Reduced Maintenance Costs
Payment for daily energy use
reduction or shifting during peak
hours (4–9 pm from June 1st thru
September 30th)
11 Agenda Packet Page 408 of 446
Bill Relief Resources for the
Community
Additonal support
to customers:
• CARE
• FERA
• LIHEAP
• Medical Baseline
• AMP
• MCE Cares Credit
Agenda Packet Page 409 of 446
MCE Impact Across California
Eliminated
over
700K
metric tons
of GHGs
=
108,000
cars off the
road for an
entire year
Default
service
is
60%
renewable
since 2017
and
95%
carbon-free
by 2023
MCE
customers
have saved
over
$68M
since 2010
Committed
over
$2.1B
to build
new CA
renewable
projects
49 MW
new
renewable
projects
built in our
service
area
13 Agenda Packet Page 410 of 446
Thank You!
mceCleanEnergy.org
[email protected]
@mceCleanEnergy
14 Agenda Packet Page 411 of 446
Addendum
15 Agenda Packet Page 412 of 446
Residential Cost Comparison
MCE Light Green
60%

RENEWABLE
MCE Deep Green
100%

RENEWABLE
Electric
Generation
$93.27
$57.25
$14.01
$93.27
$14.01
PG&E Electric
Delivery
Added
PG&E Fees
$62.60
$164.53 $169.88 Average Total
Monthly Cost
PG&E
31%

RENEWABLE
$93.27
-
$80.71
$173.98
100% California Solar and Wind
16 Agenda Packet Page 413 of 446
CCAs in
California
17 Agenda Packet Page 414 of 446
California
California Emissions by Economic Sector 2019
Access to
Clean Energy
Adoption of
Clean
Transportation
18 Agriculture
8%
Commercial and
Residential
11%
Industry
21%
Electricity
14%
Transportation
40%
Other
7%
Agenda Packet Page 415 of 446
Local Control
30 Board Members. Elected officials. No tax dollars.

Solano County Marin County
Contra Costa County Napa County
Agenda Packet Page 416 of 446
2020 Electricity Content

PG&E MCE
Light Green
MCE
Deep Green
Renewable (%)
3 3
1 15
8 Bioenergy
Geothermal
Small Hydro
Solar
Wind
Large Hydro
Natural Gas
Nuclear
Unspecified/Other
31% 61% 100%
2 6
3 23
27 0
0 0
50 50
10 16
43 0
36 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
20 Agenda Packet Page 417 of 446
Rooftop Solar Customers
Net Energy Metering
(NEM)
Monthly surplus generation
credited at retail rate
Surplus annual generation
is credited at twice the
wholesale rate
Billing: Monthly charges
and credits for generation
60% or 100% renewable
energy service when you
use energy from the grid
Monthly surplus generation
credited at retail rate
Surplus annual generation
is credited at the
wholesale rate
Billing: Annual true-up
31% renewable energy
service when you use
energy from the grid
21 Agenda Packet Page 418 of 446
FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

PROPOSED BUDGET

CITY OF EL CERRITO

EL CERRITO PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY

EL CERRITO EMPLOYEE PENSION TRUST BOARD
City Council Meeting
June 7, 2022
Agenda Item No. 8.A.

Agenda Packet Page 419 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

Budget Process
•February 5, 2022: City Council Workshop: Goals and
Priority Setting
•March 1, 2022: FY 2021-22 Midyear Budget Amendments
•March – May 2022: Based on Council priorities, City
Departments prepare budgets for all departments and all funds, update CIP, confirm personnel expenditures
•May 17, 2022: Master Fee Schedule adopted by City Council •May 24, 2022: Budget Workshop: Preliminary Budget and
Department Budgets (Joint meeting with FAB)
•June 3, 2022: Draft Proposed Budget Document published •June 7, 2022: First FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget Hearing Agenda Packet Page 420 of 446
3 FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

Focus
Achieve Long-term
Financial Sustainability
General Fund Reserve
Fiscal Response Plan
Constant Monitoring
of Financial Position
Fiscal Discipline
Agenda Packet Page 421 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

City Council Priorities – Overview
•Implement City Council Direction with focus on financial sustainability
•Implement workplan of “Must Do” tasks and projects in
progress
•Continue current priorities and strategic goals
•Strategically restore services and staffing
•Maintain fiscal discipline with a budget focus of financial sustainability
4 Agenda Packet Page 422 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

City Council Priorities – Tasks and Projects
•Strategic Goals – Still in place
• Day to day operations, services,
programs
•Continue to respond to State Auditor
recommendations
• Classification and Compensation Study
• Financial Sustainability Plan
•BART Plaza Development
• Library
• Parking/Transportation Demand
Management Program
•Implement SB 1383
•General Plan Housing Element
• Safety Element
•SPASP Update
•July 4 Festival
•Labor Negotiations – Fire 1230, SEIU, PSMA
•Fill Key vacant positions
•Various CIP and Maintenance Projects
• Equipment and maintenance needs
•Climate Emergency
• Climate Action Plan Update
•Wildfire Prevention and Safety
• Vegetation Management
• Updating Emergency and Evacuation
Plans
•Community benefit contributions from
cannabis businesses
•Plans adopted by Council (SPASP, Affordable
Housing, Economic Development, Park and
Recreation Master Plan, Complete Streets,
Transportation, Urban Greening, etc.)
5 Agenda Packet Page 423 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

City Organization
Residents of
El Cerrito
City Council
Boards and
Commissions City Attorney City Manager
City
Management
Community
Development Fire Finance Police Public Works Recreation 6 Agenda Packet Page 424 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget:

Proposed Staffing
Department FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22 FY 2022-23 City Council 5 5 5 5 5
City Management 11.5 11.5 10 9 10
Finance Department 6 6 6 6 6
Community Development 14 14 15 14 15
Police Department 58 58 55 48 48
Fire Department 37 37 37 37 37
Public Works Department 25.2 25.2 25 24.2 25.2
Recreation Department 23 23 21 18 19
Total 179.7 179.7 174 161.2 165.2
Agenda Packet Page 425 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Revenues- All Funds
Revenue Category FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Proposed
FY 2022-23
Proposed
Taxes
Property Taxes $11,034,598 $13,308,665 $14,939,640 $14,246,000 $15,513,200 Sales Taxes $9,176,136 $8,606,616 $9,708,892 $8,657,717 $8,933,189 Utility Users Taxes $3,207,892 $3,165,974 $3,444,484 $3,100,000 $3,300,000 Local Parcel Taxes $2,112,686 $2,132,185 $2,125,084 $2,128,247 $2,151,038 Franchise Taxes $1,243,985 $1,637,613 $1,364,257 $1,250,000 $1,400,000 Business License Taxes $910,104 $918,799 $924,358 $900,000 $1,100,000 Other Taxes $778,705 $813,043 $787,231 $760,000 $791,388 Total Taxes $28,464,105 $30,582,896 $33,293,947 $31,041,964 $33,188,815 Licenses & Permits $775,876 $784,982 $656,881 $1,136,112 $893,864 Fines and Forfeitures $218,684 $226,597 $177,525 $140,000 $140,000 Use of Money and Property $750,983 $1,007,292 $380,984 $354,119 $590,607 Intergovernmental Revenues $12,326,295 $8,892,254 $13,762,454 $11,715,471 $21,587,824 Charges for Services $8,670,289 $8,101,862 $7,964,110 $9,352,783 $9,817,172 Other Revenues $1,393,711 $611,601 $300,803 $397,400 $308,804 Total Other Revenues before $24,135,838 $19,624,587 $23,242,756 $23,095,885 $33,338,271 Interfund Transfers $4,484,202 $2,617,178 $5,572,731 $2,364,562 $2,390,644 Total $57,084,145 $52,824,661 $62,109,434 $56,502,411 $68,917,730 Agenda Packet Page 426 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Revenues - All Funds
9 Taxes, 48.2%
Licenses & Permits,

1.3%
Fines and Forefeitures, 0.2%
Use of Money and Property, 0.9%
Intergovernmental
Revenues, 19%
Charges for
Services, 14.2%
Interfund Transfers,

3.5% Other Revenues,

0.4%
Agenda Packet Page 427 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Expenditures - All Funds
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
Salary & Benefits $26,658,356 $26,514,526 $24,952,749 $25,198,222 $27,189,898 PERS - Normal cost $2,347,062 $2,568,791 $2,666,119 $2,710,560 $2,774,150 PERS - Unfunded Liability $3,733,974 $4,367,588 $4,863,463 $5,523,830 $6,189,563 Total Pension Costs $6,081,036 $6,936,378 $7,529,581 $8,234,390 $8,963,713 Total Personnel Costs $32,739,391 $33,450,904 $32,482,330 $33,432,612 $36,153,611 Professional Services $5,604,799 $4,413,877 $3,783,521 $7,726,168 $7,838,719 Purchased Property
Services $6,980,441 $4,237,216 $4,037,809 $5,697,493 $15,219,211 Other Services $1,927,639 $1,942,210 $1,729,638 $3,093,653 $3,121,786 Supplies $908,426 $906,636 $591,644 $936,511 $1,106,208 Property & Capital $4,300,026 $1,027,578 $2,574,261 $690,054 $1,017,563 Financing Costs $2,318,147 $2,369,451 $2,250,100 $2,592,042 $2,730,887 Transfer Out $4,484,202 $2,617,178 $5,572,731 $2,364,562 $2,385,644 Total Expenditures $59,263,070 $50,965,049 $53,022,034 $56,533,095 $69,573,629 Agenda Packet Page 428 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Expenditures by Department -All Funds
11 FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
City Management $4,504,441 $4,675,656 $3,915,041 $5,004,568 $5,163,006 Finance $1,544,090 $1,634,682 $1,386,245 $1,570,459 $1,678,897 Police $12,121,188 $12,316,964 $11,637,058 $12,434,718 $13,170,634 Fire $11,257,758 $11,196,922 $12,168,376 $12,948,202 $13,346,883 Public Works $5,970,106 $6,195,395 $5,680,136 $7,034,838 $7,875,285 Community Development $2,523,792 $2,576,638 $2,631,280 $3,876,296 $3,784,168 Recreation $5,989,940 $5,652,095 $4,112,140 $4,937,886 $6,029,720 Debt Service $2,003,674 $2,063,770 $1,952,308 $2,092,297 $2,226,887 Capital Outlay $8,863,880 $2,035,750 $3,966,719 $4,269,269 $13,912,505 Total Before Transfers $54,778,869 $48,347,871 $47,449,303 $54,168,533 $67,187,985 Transfers $4,484,202 $2,617,178 $5,572,731 $2,364,562 $2,385,644 Total Expenditures $59,263,070 $50,965,049 $53,022,034 $56,533,095 $69,573,629 Agenda Packet Page 429 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Spending by Department
All Funds
Capital Outlay,

20.0%
City Management,

7.4%
Community
Development,

5.4%
Debt Service, 3.2%
Finance, 2.4%
Fire, 19.2%
Police, 18.9%
Public Works,

11.3%
Recreation, 8.7% Transfer , 3.4%
Agenda Packet Page 430 of 446
Projected at
June 30, 2022 Revenues Expenditures Net Change
Est. Balance at
June 30, 2023
General Fund (101) $7,724,131 $45,677,116 $44,865,113 $812,003 $8,536,134 Special Revenue Funds
Gas Tax (201) $244,106 $690,959 $653,033 $37,926 $282,032 National Pollu. & Disch. Elimination (202) $175,537 $338,638 $409,602 ($70,964) $104,573 Landscape and Lighting Assessment (203) $86,918 $801,664 $865,991 ($64,327) $22,591 Measure J Return to Source (204) $330,065 $482,388 $437,802 $44,586 $374,651 Measure J Storm Drain (205) $542,736 $711,134 $796,739 ($85,605) $457,131 Measure H Parcel Tax (207) $52,807 $648,740 $704,536 ($55,796) ($2,989) Asset Seizure (208) $309,263 $309,263
Vehicle Abatement (209) $404,141 $30,000 $30,900 ($900) $403,241 Street Improvements (211) $1,968,975 $1,508,376 $2,096,680 ($588,304) $1,380,671 SB1-Road Repair & Account (212) $615,076 $550,193 $703,232 ($153,039) $462,037 Public Art (213) $54,838 $0 $100,000 ($100,000) ($45,162) Paratransit (214) $237,308 $170,000 $163,862 $6,138 $243,446 Federal, State and Local Grants (221) ($72,095) $395,511 $395,511 $0 ($72,095) C.O.P.S. Grant (222) $194,412 $150,000 $153,000 ($3,000) $191,412 Municipal Services Corp (230) $41,631 $0 $41,631
City Housing Trust (231) $2,835,000 $0 $2,835,000
Low & Moderate Income Housing (232) $5,205,049 $164,800 $207,528 ($42,728) $5,162,321 Total Special Revenue Funds $13,331,444 $6,642,403 $7,988,766 ($1,346,363) $11,985,081 Capital Projects Funds
Capital Improvements (301) $380,732 $11,167,175 $11,127,175 $40,000 $420,732 Total Capital Projects Funds $380,732 $11,167,175 $11,127,175 $40,000 $420,732 Debt Service Funds
Financing Authority Measure A (834) $199,923 $0 $199,923 Civic Center (835) $3,280 $582,914 $582,763 $151 $3,431 Street Improvement (836) $396 $707,100 $707,100 $0 $396 Total Debt Service Funds $203,599 $1,290,014 $1,289,863 $151 $203,750 Internal Service Funds
Vehicle /Equipment Replacement (601) $375,644 $156,000 $136,591 $19,409 $395,053 Enterprise Fund
Integrated Waste Management (501) $2,967,268 $3,900,022 $4,081,121 ($181,099) $2,786,169 Fiduciary Fund
Employees' Pension Trust (701) $0 $85,000 $85,000 $0 $0 Total Funds $24,982,818 $68,917,730 $69,573,629 ($655,899) $24,326,919 FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget Projected Fund Balances
Agenda Packet Page 431 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget -General Fund Revenues
Revenue Category
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
Taxes
Property Taxes $9,932,035 $9,841,133 $10,520,532 $10,446,000 $11,213,200 Sales Taxes $7,545,310 $6,974,723 $7,827,143 $7,184,117 $7,430,117 Utility Tax $3,207,892 $3,165,974 $3,444,484 $3,100,000 $3,300,000 Real Property Transfer Tax $1,102,563 $3,467,532 $4,419,107 $3,800,000 $4,300,000 Franchise Taxes $1,243,985 $1,637,613 $1,364,257 $1,250,000 $1,400,000 Business License Tax $910,104 $918,799 $924,358 $900,000 $1,100,000 Other Tax $149,485 $121,701 $126,644 $151,500 $151,500
Total Taxes $24,091,373 $26,127,475 $28,626,526 $26,831,617 $28,894,817 Licenses & Permits $775,876 $784,982 $656,881 $1,136,112 $893,864 Fines and Forfeitures $218,684 $226,597 $177,525 $140,000 $140,000 Use of Money and Property $504,024 $652,410 $333,801 $353,968 $434,456 Intergovernmental Revenues $6,744,665 $6,728,510 $8,164,612 $7,808,900 $8,270,048 Charges for Services $6,088,002 $4,747,619 $4,181,218 $5,483,000 $5,932,150 Other Revenues $982,785 $118,334 $238,712 $175,000 $136,000 Interfund Transfers $1,983,190 $836,821 $3,989,600 $952,650 $975,781 Total $41,388,597 $40,222,747 $46,368,874 $42,881,247 $45,677,116 Agenda Packet Page 432 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Revenues
Total Taxes, 63.3%
Licenses & Permits,

2.0%
Fines and
Forfeitures, 0.3%
Use of Money and
Property, 1.0%
Intergovernmental
Revenues, 19%
Charges for Services,

13.0%
Other Revenues,

0.3%
Agenda Packet Page 433 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Expenditures
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
Personnel $29,862,092 $30,383,014 $29,727,625 $30,405,915 $32,778,862 Professional Services $4,487,191 $3,701,623 $2,906,149 $4,636,007 $4,421,343 Purchased Property Services $2,300,287 $2,151,924 $1,600,111 $2,176,979 $2,297,704 Other Services $1,840,614 $1,805,567 $1,640,747 $2,935,029 $2,950,883 Supplies $726,354 $605,956 $408,862 $629,277 $773,131
Property & Capital $422,240 $413,328 $1,573,151 $323,278 $443,147 Financing Costs $478,198 $535,665 $585,967 $528,281 $532,280 Other Financing Uses $1,415,882 $696,727 $669,817 $665,612 $667,763 Total $41,532,857 $40,293,805 $39,112,429 $42,300,378 $44,865,113 Agenda Packet Page 434 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Expenditures
Personnel
73%
Professional Services
10%
Purchased Property
Services
5%
Other Services
7%
Supplies
2%
Property & Capital
1%
Financing Costs 1% Other Financing Uses
1%
Agenda Packet Page 435 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Expenditures By Department
Department
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
City Management $4,399,101 $4,567,604 $3,825,700 $4,826,058 $4,973,867 Finance $1,444,991 $1,538,823 $1,295,815 $1,483,709 $1,578,897 Police $12,121,461 $12,199,388 $11,629,196 $12,250,818 $12,986,734 Fire $11,257,758 $11,182,413 $12,168,376 $12,948,202 $13,346,883 Public Works $1,972,347 $1,860,308 $1,448,080 $1,995,485 $2,285,220 Community Development $2,522,098 $2,505,481 $2,532,671 $3,273,257 $3,181,129 Recreation $5,794,027 $5,351,137 $3,827,511 $4,501,001 $5,553,392 Transfers $1,415,882 $696,727 $669,817 $665,612 $667,763 Capital Outlay $344,253 $59,777 $1,321,189 $70,000 $0
Debt Service $260,939 $332,147 $394,074 $286,236 $291,228 Total $41,532,857 $40,293,805 $39,112,429 $42,300,378 $44,865,113 Agenda Packet Page 436 of 446
Proposed FY 2022-23 Budget: Department Highlights
• All Departments:
•Assumes COLA for all employees
• City Administration:
•Restoration of one position in the City Manager's office, to assist with public information, community engagement,
support for emergency services, and other City Management initiatives
•Increase in professional services funding for the BART Library project and grant writing services
•Annual cost for increased Library hours at the El Cerrito Library
•Costs for the 2022 General Election
• Community Development:
•Additional funding for consulting and contract services to supplement vacant positions as well as specific
development-related services that will be recovered by
development-related revenues
•Continued technology upgrades to enhance services to the public
• Finance:
•An account technician position is proposed to be reclassified to an Accountant I position to enhance service and provide increased support to the Department
• Fire:
•Additional funding for training and updated equipment for personnel
• Police:
•Renegotiated contract with City of Richmond for dispatch services that is based on a proportional cost for the
operation of their dispatch communications center
•Upgrades to equipment including body worn cameras and
patrol vehicles
•Pilot program for uniform cleaning services
• Public Works:
•Restoration of some costs to the General Fund for landscape maintenance and utilities that had been previously funded as eligible expenses within the Measure H fund
•Reallocation of Management Analyst to be 50% funded by the General Fund, allowing this position to expand workload to include Climate Action activities
• Recreation:
•Restoration of programming to achieve pre-pandemic levels •Restoration of the Fourth of July/World One festival, which had been canceled for the past two years due to the
pandemic, utilizing the generous fundraising effort to offset costs of the festival from the General Fund
•Facilitating transfer of lease of one of the former Midtown Activity Center portables to the Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District for temporary use
•Restoring Senior Services activities above the core services that had been in place due to the pandemic
Agenda Packet Page 437 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Expenses by Department
City Management,

11.1%
Finance, 3.5%
Police, 28.9%
Fire, 29.7%
Public Works, 5.1%
Community
Development, 7.1%
Recreation, 12.4%
Transfers, 1.5%
Debt Service, 0.6%
Agenda Packet Page 438 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget –General Fund History
$41,388,597
$40,222,747
$46,365,714
$42,881,247
$45,677,116
$41,532,857
$40,293,805
$39,112,429
$42,300,378
$44,865,113
Actual Actual Actual Amended Proposed
FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22 FY 2022-21
General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Totals
Revenues Expenditures
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed
Revenues $41,388,597 $40,222,747 $46,365,714 $42,881,247 $45,677,116 Expenditures $41,532,857 $40,293,805 $39,112,429 $42,300,378 $44,865,113 Agenda Packet Page 439 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
General Fund Overview
General Fund Summary
FY 2018-19
Actual
FY 2019-20
Actual
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Amended
FY 2022-23
Proposed*
Beginning Restricted Fund Balance $2,321,077 $1,650,928 $1,667,511 $25,694 $55,000 Beginning Unassigned Fund Balance -$2,233,507 -$1,707,620 -$1,777,532 $7,117,570 $7,669,133 Total Beginning Fund Balance $87,570 -$38,963 -$110,021 $7,143,264 $7,724,133 Total Revenues $41,388,597 $40,222,747 $46,365,714 $42,881,247 $45,677,116 Personnel $29,862,092 $30,383,014 $29,727,625 $30,405,915 $32,778,862 Non-Personnel $11,670,765 $9,910,791 $9,384,804 $11,894,463 $12,086,251 Total Expenses $41,532,857 $40,293,805 $39,112,429 $42,300,378 $44,865,113 Annual Surplus/(Deficit) -$144,259 -$71,058 $7,253,285 $580,869 $812,003 Ending Total Fund Balance -$56,689 -$110,021 $7,143,264 $7,724,133 $8,536,136 Ending Reserve Percent -0.14% -0.27% 18.26% 18.26% 19.03% *FY 2022-23 does not include ARPA funding – will be adjusted at FY 2021-22 year-end audit Agenda Packet Page 440 of 446
Current
Amended
Proposed
Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Inflation
FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22 FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 Factor Tax Revenues
Property Tax $9,841 $10,521 $10,446 $11,213 $11,662 $12,128 $12,613 $13,118 4% Sales & Use Tax 3,694 4,033 3,629 3,875 3,953 4,032 4,112 4,195 2% Transactions & Use Tax 3,281 3,791 3,555 3,555 3,626 3,699 3,773 3,848 2% Utility Users Tax 3,166 3,670 3,100 3,300 3,399 3,501 3,606 3,714 3% Business License Tax 1,007 925 977 1,100 1,133 1,167 1,202 1,238 3% Transient Occupancy Tax 119 126 150 150 155 159 164 169 3% Property Transfer Tax 3,468 4,419 3,800 4,300 4,429 4,562 4,699 4,840 3% Franchise Payments/Tax 1,638 1,138 1,250 1,400 1,442 1,485 1,530 1,576 3% Total Taxes $26,213 $28,623 $26,907 $28,893 $29,798 $30,733 $31,699 $32,697 Other Revenues
Vehicle License Fee (VLT) $2,821 $3,002 $3,089 $3,250 $3,348 $3,448 $3,551 $3,658 3% Intergovernmental 3,394 4,854 4,546 5,020 5,171 5,326 5,486 5,650 3% Fines & Forfeitures 227 178 140 140 144 149 153 158 3%
Comm Develop/Planning Fees 1,464 1,341 1,993 1,977 2,036 2,097 2,160 2,225 3% Park & Recreation Fees 3,841 3,151 4,231 4,877 5,023 5,174 5,329 5,489 3% Other Fees/Charges/Rentals 175 175 157 118 122 125 129 133 3% Interest Earnings 168 59 40 40 40 40 40 40 0%
Other Revenue 1,084 993 826 386 398 410 422 434 3%
Transfers In 837 3,990 4,003 976 1,005 1,035 1,066 1,098 3% Total Other Revenues $14,009 $17,742 $19,024 $16,784 $17,286 $17,803 $18,336 $18,885 Total Revenues $40,223 $46,366 $45,931 $45,677 $47,084 $48,536 $50,035 $51,582 Revenue Growth 15.3% -0.9% -0.6% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1%
Personnel
Salaries/Add-Pays/Incentives $15,660 $14,499 $15,337 $16,476 $16,971 $17,480 $18,004 $18,544 3% Overtime/Part-time 3,327 3,190 2,985 3,268 3,366 3,467 3,571 3,678 3% Retirement (UAL+ normal cont) 6,392 6,955 7,660 8,282 8,531 8,787 9,050 9,322 3% Medical Benefits 2,694 2,657 2,680 2,764 2,847 2,933 3,021 3,111 3% Other Benefits 2,309 2,427 1,744 1,989 2,048 2,110 2,173 2,238 3% Total Personnel $30,383 $29,728 $30,406 $32,779 $33,762 $34,775 $35,818 $36,893 Non-Personnel Operations
Purchased Professional & Tech Svs $3,702 $2,906 $4,636 $4,421 $4,554 $4,691 $4,831 $4,976 3% Purchased Property Services 2,152 1,600 2,177 2,298 2,367 2,438 2,511 2,586 3% Other Purchased Services 1,806 1,641 2,935 2,951 3,039 3,131 3,225 3,321 3% Supplies 606 409 629 773 796 820 845 870 3%
Property & Capital 413 252 323 443 456 470 484 499 3%
Financing Costs 536 586 528 532 548 565 582 599 3%
Other Financing Uses/Transfer Out 697 1,991 666 668 688 708 730 752 3% Total Non-Personnel Operations $9,911 $9,385 $11,894 $12,086 $12,449 $12,822 $13,207 $13,603 Total Expenditures $40,294 $39,112 $42,300 $44,865 $46,211 $47,597 $49,025 $50,496 Expenditure Growth -99.9% -2.9% 8.2% 6.1% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% Annual Net Revenue (Expense) (71) 7,253 3,689 812 873 939 1,010 1,086 Beginning Fund Balance 1 (110) 7,143 10,832 11,644 12,517 13,456 14,466 Ending Fund Balance ($70) $7,143 $10,833 $11,644 $12,517 $13,456 $14,466 $15,552 Balance as % of Total Expense -0.2% 18.3% 25.6% 26.0% 27.1% 28.3% 29.5% 30.8% FY 2022-23
Proposed
Budget:

General Fund
Five Year
Forecast Detail
Agenda Packet Page 441 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget: General Fund Projections
Agenda Packet Page 442 of 446
FY 2022-23
Proposed Budget
Capital Improvement
Program Funds
Agenda Packet Page 443 of 446
One-time Projects/Expenditures
•Staff is recommending three one-time projects that will be undertaken this fiscal year that would be proposed to utilize fund balance, including:
•Classification and Compensation Study - $200,000
•General Plan Safety Element - $175,000 (estimate)
•Climate Action Plan update - $85,000 (estimate)
•For each of these projects, instead of including the expenses within the Proposed FY 2022-23 Budget, staff will separately bring the contracts for these items to the City Council and request a separate appropriation from General Fund balance to fund the projects
•The estimated cost of the three projects in total would have an impact of $460,000 to the General Fund balance
•General Fund balance is estimated to be $10,773,262 as of the end of FY 2021-22
Agenda Packet Page 444 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Next Steps
• Questions, Comments, Direction
• FAB Meeting June 16, 2022
• Finalize budget document
• Regular City Council Meeting June 21, 2022
• Additional Special Meetings as needed
• Adoption of Budget by June 30, 2022
27 Agenda Packet Page 445 of 446
FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Special thanks to…..
• Residents and businesses of El Cerrito for their
engagement
• City Council for their leadership and diligence
• Financial Advisory Board for their review and feedback • City Staff for their hard work and commitment
• Executive Team for their leadership and dedication
• Sandra, Lucy, Holly, Alex, Maggie, Chris B. for their work on the budget document
28 Agenda Packet Page 446 of 446