El Cerrito City Council
August 15, 2023

in El Cerrito, the major focus of the Housing Element should be to address these inequities and ensure that the City provides a better balance in meeting housing needs at all economic levels by producing, preserving, and protecting affordable housing opportunities.

Public Participation
• It’s not clear what efforts were made specifically to include people less likely to be involved, including low income, people of color, and renters. The new AFFH requirements mandate that the City make a diligent effort to reach these populations, not just announcements on the website and in social media. If such efforts were made, they should be better described in Appendix B.
• It should be noted that Workshop #1 had only 17% renters and less than 20% of the online survey respondents were renters, while the population is 41% renters. This suggests that the outreach wasn’t effective in getting renters to participate. Further, only 15% of survey respondents live in multi-family housing, while 28% of El Cerrito’s housing stock is multi-family.
• The highest concerns cited in the surveys don’t appear to be well addressed in the plan – affordability, displacement, gentrification. Many of the actions to address these issues are not definitive and are deferred for many years (see comments below on the Housing Plan).

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
• The Fair Housing Analysis contains a tremendous amount of data, but it’s not clear that the City has also included local knowledge or direct experience of residents as part of the assessment.
• There is a lot of descriptive data, but insufficient attention paid to underlying historical and structural factors and these is little discussion of the specific policies that would be required to remove these factors.
• The analysis seems to have been used as an after the fact measure of whether the site inventory reduces segregation and increases access to opportunity, but the assessment has not been used to prioritize areas for siting in the first place. • The Draft Element would benefit from a much more explicit linkage between (a) existing patterns of segregation and disparities in opportunity and housing outcomes, (b) the underlying factors giving rise to those conditions, and (c) an explicit plan to address Agenda Packet Page 451 of 595
EBHO Comments on El Cerrito Draft Housing Element
August 29, 2022

those factors and remove barriers to yield real reductions in segregation and racial disparities.

Site Inventory
• We are concerned that the site inventory provides most of the affordable housing sites in existing areas of low income concentration. While provision of some affordable housing in low income areas that are also at risk for displacement can be an effective anti-displacement and fair housing strategy, it needs to be balanced with efforts to overcome existing barriers to housing opportunity and the continuation of exclusionary and segregated housing patterns.
• If the City is not considering rezoning to encourage a broader distribution of lower income housing opportunities, it should provide greater justification and a more concrete placed-based strategy for enhancing opportunities for lower income people in existing lower income areas.

Action Plan
• Many of the actions, particularly new ones, use language such as “evaluate,” “consider,” etc. The State Department of Housing and Community Development has been clear that this is not acceptable and can be grounds for rejection. We encourage the City to provide more concrete actions and not just studies.
• Many new programs won’t be implemented until late in the cycle, limiting their effectiveness for achieving the goals of this housing element • Policy H-1.7. We encourage the City to immediately implement by-right development of housing with at least 20 percent affordable lower income and not wait until January 2026. We would further encourage the City to adopt by right approval for 100 percent affordable housing wherever such housing is permitted as a means of implementing Policy H1-6 to provide expeditious approval.
• Program H-1A. We encourage the City to include in the Annual Progress Report an update on any parcels that were approved for development with fewer units or higher income levels than provided for in the site inventory, or when affordable housing sites are rezoned in ways that reduce capacity.
• Goal H2 (New Program Recommendation). The City should include a program to implement the demolition protections contained in SB 330, including one-for-one Agenda Packet Page 452 of 595
EBHO Comments on El Cerrito Draft Housing Element
August 29, 2022

replacement of lower income housing, a first right to return for tenants displaced by demolition, and adequate relocation assistance.
• Program H-2A. Re-evaluation of the inclusionary housing requirement should not be deferred until 2026, particularly since any project that submits a complete application for planning approvals before changes are adopted would be exempt, thus allowing a substantial amount of market-rate housing to be built with minimal affordable housing requirements.
• Program H-2C. We strongly support efforts to identify new funding sources. This program appears to be primarily aspirational. There should at least be a rough assessment of the potential revenue from the identified sources, and consideration of additional sources such as increased business taxes on rental housing. Of particular concern is the goal of establishing one new source by 2026, well into the planning period. To the extent that lack of funding is a principal barrier to meeting the need for new affordable housing, this program should have a higher priority. • Program H-2E refers to “missing middle units” which is typically a description of unit types such as 2-4 unit buildings, townhomes, and small garden apartments (see Housing Policy H-1.4 for an example). The units at El Cerrito Plaza will be in multi-family buildings and would be better described here as “moderate income” or “middle income” serving 80-120 percent of area median income.
• Program H-2J We support development of affordable housing on property owned by faith-based institutions. However, this program would not result in rezoning until December 2026, halfway through the 8-year planning period. Given the lead time to secure planning approvals, obtain financing commitments and complete construction, this timeline is unlikely to yield significant affordable housing during the term of this housing element.
• Policy H-3.3 Enforcement of the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, which permits annual rent increases of up to 10 percent, is unlikely to provide much protection against displacement, especially for lower income renters who already are cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened. The City should adopt rent stabilization policies that will more effectively keep lower income renters in their homes and prevent displacement. • Program H-3C. This program is overly vague. It contains no specific actions beyond conducting studies and evaluation, while deferring even that until late in the planning period. Lack of data has been used in the past as justification for not enacting strong tenant protection measures. While this program says that the city will review Rent Registry data annually, it also defers the actual use of that data to evaluate the Agenda Packet Page 453 of 595
EBHO Comments on El Cerrito Draft Housing Element
August 29, 2022

effectiveness of current tenant protections until 2028. Allowing another six years to pass before even considering additional tenant protection measures is not an effective anti-displacement measure; many tenants will already have been displaced by then.

We note that adoption of tenant protection measures was one of the four pillars contained in the Affordable Housing Strategy adopted in 2017. Action on several such measures was rejected in part because of a lack of date. The Housing Element should commit to once again bringing proposed policies to the City Council for consideration within the next two years. This should include annual reports to the City Council on the findings of the Rent Registry.
• Program H-3E is overly vague. To the extent the City’s stated goal is to affirmatively further fair housing by continuing to concentrate new affordable housing in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area as an anti-displacement measure, the City should provide a more specific place-based strategy that describes infrastructure projects to be implemented and demonstrates that such projects will enhance opportunity for lower income residents and not just serve to attract new market-rate investment. • Policy H-4.2 lacks specificity and does not have any corresponding implementation program. See comments above on Program H-3E.
• Program H-4C. We strongly support expansion of the use of Housing Choice Vouchers.

In addition to educational efforts, the City should consider financial incentives, such as reductions in taxes and fees, as an incentive to the use of vouchers. The City should also work with the Housing Authority to secure project-based vouchers for affordable housing developments, including supportive housing and housing for formerly unhoused people.
• Program H-4D. We support adoption of a Community (and Tenant) Opportunity to Purchase Act to provide both a right of first offer and a right of first refusal. As stated, this program is overly vague, and commits the city only to researching policies and considering adoption of an ordinance by July 2027 (halfway through the planning period).

Additional recommendations for remainder of Housing Element Process In furtherance of transparency and public participation, we offer the following suggestions for next steps in the development of the Housing Element:
• Prepare and post a summary of changes made to the draft before submitting it to the State, along with a redlined copy showing those changes. This will allow the public to Agenda Packet Page 454 of 595
EBHO Comments on El Cerrito Draft Housing Element
August 29, 2022

see the extent to which comments were or were not incorporated into the submitted draft.
• Once the State’s review is complete, hold a public hearing to consider those comments and possible responses, prior to preparing a revised draft. • Once the revised draft is completed, provide a public review and comment period of at least 30 days.

Thank you for your consideration of our comments. We look forward to continuing to work with the City to achieve its housing objectives.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey P. Levin
Policy Director
East Bay Housing Organizations
Agenda Packet Page 455 of 595
August 29, 2022
El Cerrito Planning Division
El Cerrito City Hall
10890 San Pablo Ave.

El Cerrito, CA 94530
Dear preparers of the El Cerrito 2023-2031 Housing Element, Please accept these comments regarding the 2023-2031 Housing element for El Cerrito.

For 2015-2023 El Cerrito only achieved 35% of the RHNA goals for moderate and low-income units. What policies ensure a better outcome this time? RHNA targets 767 units for moderate income and below and there may need to be another 121 replacement units, which makes 888 units with some level of affordability constraint. We have the inclusionary ordinance, but that is only about 10% of units, so getting 888 built requires a total of 8880 units which is greater than the projections for housing in El Cerrito and much more than the Specific Plan area is planning for over that time. H-2.A only expects 110 low-income and 60 moderate-income units from the inclusionary ordinance which is consistent with about 1700 new total units. Where will the rest of the affordable units come from if not the inclusionary ordinance? The Plaza BART Project will provide a big chunk, but that is a one time event (or maybe two if they eventually come back to do the same at Del Norte) but this is not a sustainable policy to consistently meet affordable housing targets. The “looking for funding” approach of H-2.D to get 270 units seems vague and speculative and may still fall short of the total number needed (170 inclusionary + 400 BART assumes ~50% moderate or lower income + 270 funding = 840). In the past we had “free” land from the redevelopment agency to offer and we still came up short on affordable housing.

Without that “free” land to offer, it seems optimistic that we can achieve a large number of new affordable units beyond inclusionary and BART without a more focused program to attract project and raise funds.

The zoning of sufficient land in H-1.1 is not enough on its own. The first 8 years of experience with the Span Pablo Avenue Specific Plan has revealed that providing welcoming zoning and streamlined entitlement will result in a large number of entitlements, but not necessarily a large number of projects actually completed. Roughly 25% of entitled units have been produced under the Specific Plan so far with many projects and blighted sites languishing in the meantime. Policy development in the Housing Element should reflect on this past experience and seek to further accelerate housing production by identifying and solving the problems that contribute to entitled projects not getting built in a timely fashion.

Some potential policies that may avoid vacant properties sitting underutilized and languishing with poor maintenance before and after entitlement, include a vacancy tax for commercial properties along San Pablo and a requirement for project applicants to provide an agreed upon temporary productive use of development sites before and after entitlement as part of the application process. It could be waived if a building permit is pulled within 6 months of Agenda Packet Page 456 of 595
entitlement, but a large fine would be imposed if they don’t meet that timing without having a temporary productive use in place already. Establishing public banking financing solutions to allow local residents to invest in local developments, (particularly affordable housing) developments could address some of the lending issues.

Recently built El Cerrito rentals are deemed “affordable” in this Housing Element, but you need at least $100k+ annual income, or roughly $50+/hour, for the household to meet that criteria. El Cerrito minimum wage is $16.37/hr, so it takes more than 3 minimum wage jobs to get an “affordable” studio apartment. This concept of affordability omits more than 40% of current residents. Also, the threshold is based on 30% of pretax income. So the fraction of post tax income taken by this “affordable” rent is higher than 30%. It is also not clear if utilities were included in the rents that were reported.

No affordability analysis for ownership housing was offered, as there was for rental housing.

Since 2010, the typical home value has increased 145 percent in El Cerrito from $413,011 to $1,013,090. Does this make sense, is it good, sustainable? What policies can avoid this? The city benefits from higher property taxes, but it doesn’t benefit the residents except those who cash in and move away, making the new residents either very wealthy or financially strained to meet housing needs. No one under 120% of median family income can afford the median house price in El Cerrito by a significant margin.

From an equity standpoint, why shouldn’t affordable housing production be possible (And identified) in other areas of El Cerrito beside the Specific Plan area? Perhaps there are innovative ADU programs that could make it possible to deed restrict affordability for an ADU in exchange for a property tax rebate (have to work on this with the County).

Under program H-2.B, make the reporting and decision making process for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund into an open public process with community input.

None of the “City programs” listed in the Chapter 6 for energy efficiency are actually substantially administered by the City. The proposal takes advantage of the work of other jurisdictions and organizations, but is not meeting the responsibility to take local action on this important topic. One program which is a local City action is the real property tax rebate for energy efficiency (H-5.1), however, this policy needs to be modified to exclude subsidizing new gas appliances, limiting the rebates to efficiency (insulation) and electrification with no rebates for gas appliances/infrastructure, in order to meet future GHG targets.

In policies H-5.2, H-5.3, H-5.6, the language based on “encourage” is quite weak and ineffective. It is important to specify meaningful action to advance energy efficiency and GHG reductions beyond merely meeting code and providing green encouragement. Please actually set a hard and fast goal for electrification and EV infrastructure policy with a near term date for accomplishment.

Agenda Packet Page 457 of 595
The GHG emissions targets listed for the existing CAP are out of date (30% below 2005 by 2035) and insufficient to meet current state goals (40% below 1990 by 2030) and carbon neutrality by 2045. Please identify appropriate targets and clear policies and timelines to meet them.

Potential policies include a citywide all-electric ordinance or at least require all-electric in the specific plan update and/or for ADUs. At a bare minimum, all-electric information could be included in the proposed outreach materials for ADU promotion (makes them more affordable to build and lowers GHG emissions). Likewise, there should be a city-wide policy to more readily allow and incentivize greywater and alternative toilet options (composting, etc.), particularly to allow ADUs without new sewer connections, making them less expensive and more sustainable.

Construction waste reduction is mentioned as a measure that has been and will continue to be undertaken, however the Mayfair modular construction activity resulted in a huge waste stream of single use plastic wrap that was landfilled after being removed from each modular unit delivered to the construction site, about 10 acres of unnecessary plastic sheeting waste in total for one building. The Plaza BART development proposes the same modular construction technique and vendor on a larger scale but there is no indication that this excessive waste problem has been resolved. Please add a local construction waste policy that prevents such reckless and unnecessary waste of materials to support modular construction that is supposed to reduce construction waste.

How are the 70 at risk affordable units determined from 63+27 (table 2-11)? El Cerrito Royale conversions should be counted because they will likely take place during the 2023-2031 housing element, even though they already expired, as 31 existing assisted occupants change.

A total of 121 units seem to be at-risk (and the number 121 is mentioned elsewhere in the new construction replacement cost estimate and a footnote on page 7-12). Is new construction really coming in at $350k/unit for affordable housing? It seems like it must be quite a bit more than this. Weren’t Ohlone Gardens and Hana Gardens projects over $500k/unit without land costs? Options analyzed in Chapter 2, but what is the intended action preservation or replacement? If the plan is to replace the lost units with new affordable construction, 121 will need to be added to the affordable RHNA numbers. Program H-3.D appears to be mostly concerned with monitoring and notification, but doesn’t actually have a clear proposal for preserving the existing affordable units.

Please consider a demolition ordinance that will protect displacement of residents when an existing building is demolished for a new one. I know it is thought that not very many cases like this are likely in El Cerrito, but we already have the past example of the Audiss RV park that was recently demolished for the new Village 29 condos. That resulted in the displacement of at least 30-40 vulnerable low income individuals and caused at least one elderly diabled former resident to live out of his car for more than a year. Another former resident with cancer was forced to relocate during her sickness to a rental that cost 3-4 times the previous amount. A new policy should be introduced to avoid this type of displacement in the future without adequate compensation.

Agenda Packet Page 458 of 595
The survey responses were 80% from homeowners and only 215 total, resulting in a less than representative sample (only 43 renters responded).

Occupancy rates are reported as 6.4% vacant in El Cerrito versus 2.6% vacant in the Bay Area.

What accounts for this difference and what policies can be applied to reduce it? Please introduce stronger policies and programs with specific timelines and near term dates for action.

Thank you for your consideration,
Howdy Goudey
El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 459 of 595
Rachel Rosekind, Public Comment Letter
El Cerrito Draft Housing Element, August 2022
1 Date: August 31, 2022
To: El Cerrito Planning Department
Re: Housing Element Update Public Review Draft - Comment First of all, thank you for the hard work you put into drafting this comprehensive report. In providing my remarks, I understand that: (1) the RHNA allocations were/are not determined by El Cerrito staff and (2) that the element—and El Cerrito staff—are not actually tasked with ensuring that the targets are met. I have shared narrative comment and context and highlighted my discrete questions and recommendations. They are embedded among the broader themes I am trying to draw out and stress about the report and the state of our City and regional housing landscape, particularly around equity.

As we can see from the last cycle’s outcomes, the City has scaled up its housing stock…for above moderate income earners in particular, where RHNA targets have been exceeded. I was very confused by the statement that “Because of the City’s progress toward meeting its RHNA, El Cerrito is one of only 29 jurisdictions in the state that is not currently (2022) subject to the streamlined ministerial approval process (SB 35 streamlining) as indicated in HCD’s Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process (SB 35) Statewide Determination Summary, updated June 30, 2022. This determination indicates that El Cerrito has met its prorated lower- (i.e., very low- and low-) and above moderate-income RHNA as of June 1, 2022.” But Table A-1 (which shows the City’s progress toward meeting the 2015-2023 RHNA, as of December 31, 2021) and the City’s issuance of 603 building permits for housing units since the start of the Fifth RHNA Cycle in 2015 do not align with below-AMI benchmarks. Because: Of the permits issued, 522 were for above moderate-income housing, 13 were for moderate-income housing, six were for lowincome housing, and 62 were for very low-income housing. Can you please provide greater clarity on why the “pro-rated” targets are so low relative to the projected need and on how HCD approval allows for this?
Of course we need housing of all types after decades of underbuilding and underinvestment, but what we really, really need—and need now—is *not* more market rate housing, but housing for the unsheltered, the very low income, the low income, the missing middle, and other population sectors vulnerable to exploitation and displacement. Eviction moratoriums are lifting, rents are climbing precipitously, inflation is rampant, and people are being stretched and left behind. The people affected by these “market forces” do not have the luxury of doubledipping in private real estate sales, i.e., purchasing a condo or single family home in this city/region. When we look at the scale of need relative to the scale of current and projected stock (i.e., what will actually get built based on the RHNA allocations), it is clear that we need to scale up municipal advocacy, resources, and momentum to build for, shelter, and care for our neediest community members alongside the people who work in our schools, clean and repair our infrastructure, and generally perform the labor that actually makes this city, and those in every region, run.

The housing sector is one of the key areas where resource disparities and scarcities take root and ripple, as you signal in your declaration that "it is important wherever possible to reduce school-based poverty concentration and to give low-income families access to schools with lower levels of poverty and greater racial diversity" (3-35). Yes, many of our schools are more segregated now than they were in the preBrown era, and that is because our neighborhoods are increasingly more segregated as well. I would ask:

How can the housing element, the entities responsible for enacting it, and the tools developed to implement it contribute to this aspiration? When home values continue to skyrocket, not only are Agenda Packet Page 460 of 595
Rachel Rosekind, Public Comment Letter
El Cerrito Draft Housing Element, August 2022
2 lower-income folks priced out, but they are locked out of the generational wealth that provides their offspring with better opportunities. In fact, this year, half as many Black households can afford a home as last year. For years I have been concerned by the correlation between disparate home ownership rates and overrepresentation of racial/ethnic groups in low-income, lower-resourced, and homeless populations (the latter shown starkly on page 2-29 of the element). Moreover, El Cerrito’s Black population decline (by almost 50% from 2000 to 2020) aligns with rising home values/prices, the subprime mortgage crisis’s impacts on Black homeownership/foreclosures, and higher income earner household ascendancy in the city. In this regard, I am curious how the fair housing provision will translate into prioritizing units for this vulnerable population, particularly when the previous cycle shows that "moderate income" (as adjusted for CoCo County) units are the ones actually getting (over) built and the ones meant to house community members who fall below those thresholds stuck in funding/approval/permitting/construction limbo? In this vein: Is there visibility yet on how El Cerrito will benefit from or be able to leverage the Measure X Local Housing Trust Fund annual allocation? Our county’s Homeless Continuum of Care system is short hundreds of shelter beds, not to mention robust and vital permanent supportive housing opportunities. On p. 2-29, the report documents that the state requires cities to identify zones for emergency shelters. The sites inventory seems to identify some potential locations, but I did not see this lifted up in the action items and time frames, and H-2.12:
“Support efforts to provide temporary shelter and permanent and transitional housing for persons experiencing homelessness” was disappointingly weak. Our county's H3 needs cities to make efforts themselves—big ones—not just support theirs. We have witnessed a rising unhoused and unsheltered population, and last year, one community member died in front of our City public library.

Has El Cerrito received the 2022 PIT count numbers for EC's unsheltered population? What is the funding source(s) for emergency shelter sites identified in Table 5-7? I would love to see city staffers pushing hard for extending deed restrictions and covenant terms to avoid transference to market rate units, which is almost invariably going to happen given housing scarcity and rate of demand. I very much hope that City staff will actively pursue partnerships with nonprofit housing providers and implement a robust rent subsidy/voucher program for landlords. This is something that the Council on Homelessness/H3 is also looking at. In that vein, I hope there is more coordinated effort across city-county lines to address these tragic and increasing inequities at play in our City, County, and regional housing landscape. I know that there are talented staffers in John Gioia’s office who are knowledgeable about housing issues and, others within H3 who are seeking to expand partnerships. You write that “During the Housing Element planning period, the City will evaluate the best uses of the Affordable Housing Funds to assist development projects and support new housing opportunities for lower income and vulnerable households throughout the city. In addition, staff will continue to monitor and partner with County, State and Federal programs to expand resources and capacity to residents including tenant protections" (3-69). When will this happen and how will you engage community members in this process?
I was confused by the point of including Table 4-6, which shows the numerous vacant/undeveloped lots in the Hills area where I live. How do these align with feasible development goals given that they are privately owned and there is no incentive to sell and/or build on them? And even then, given that this is a high-resource area that correlates with high income earner residence, the development would solely be affordable to those same high income/high-resourced buyers. Is there any discussion, as will be on the ballot in Berkeley in November, about taxing vacant land and/or housing? I saw numerous mentions of this in the community survey responses. There is an exorbitant amount of properties that have been uninhabited for years—why do these not elicit tax penalties for sitting empty (and paying paltry Agenda Packet Page 461 of 595
Rachel Rosekind, Public Comment Letter
El Cerrito Draft Housing Element, August 2022
3 Prop 13 taxes to boot!) during an epic housing and housing affordability crisis? If we criminalize human "vagrancy", how can we not also criminalize housing “vagrancy” during an out-and-out housing crisis? Numerous survey comments cited this glaring issue. What will be the follow-up on this? I would appreciate it if you lifted this up in your presentation to the City Council so that it can be voiced publicly and considered for a later ballot measure.

I applaud H-2.4 “Increase local funding for affordable housing in El Cerrito and work with other jurisdictions in Contra Costa County to place a countywide affordable housing bond on the ballot.” But can the timeframe be stepped up to scale with extent of need and urgency? Why will it take 3-3.5 years for a small city to evaluate, identify, and establish a local source of affordable housing? The bond measure idea has been floating around for over five years (Measure X funds are not sufficient to scale of need). Again, this offers a potent collaborative venture with Supervisor Gioia’s office.

I also applaud Program H-4.C: “The City shall collaborate with the Housing Authority on an educational campaign to educate landlords about their obligation to accept Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers under fair housing laws and to encourage landlords in high resource, single- family neighborhoods to actively participate in the HCV Program as a way to affirmatively further fair housing.” But again, I am troubled by the timeframe: why will the collaboration with the Housing Authority take until 2025? We need to move with greater urgency to scale with need, particularly as eviction moratoriums increase, food pantries are overwhelmed, and inflation/price gouging continues apace. Can this timeline be modified? Again, I know that H3 is looking at a landlord engagement campaign. I encourage Affordable Housing city staff to communicate and coordinate.

El Cerrito City staff—you can be a progressive force for change. Staff in cities of all sizes around the country are doing incredible things, and I love learning about and being inspired by them. Please identify, recruit, and coordinate with local housing and racial equity champions who can help you. This community has a lot of very smart, compassionate, networked people who are knowledgeable about and working on affordable housing and housing security issues throughout the region and nationwide.

They want to help. And, if you wish to move an inclusive and progressive agenda forward, you can show it through encouraging and extending community engagement and empowerment on these fronts.

Moreover, in the April 2022 community meeting, attendees voiced interest in a community-led housing commission. Will there be follow-up on these calls? On a broader scale, it seems that some residents are saying that community forums don’t feel like enough of a direct participatory mechanism—they are looking for more robust and direct action channels. I hope you will listen.

Thank you for taking the time to read, consider, and respond to my questions and concerns.

Warmly, Rachel Rosekind, El Cerrito Resident and local business owner Agenda Packet Page 462 of 595
Appendix C | BART TOD Housing Element Letter
Appendix C | BART TOD
Housing Element Letter
Agenda Packet Page 463 of 595
March 7, 2022
Hello,
BART is aware that all Bay Area jurisdictions are actively working on updating their Housing Elements to meet their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers, as required by the State of California. As part of the process, local governments are required to prepare an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having the potential for redevelopment. As such, cities and counties with BART stations may be considering BART land in their inventories. Building on our recent conversations about the development potential and timing of implementing transit-oriented development (TOD) projects on BART land, we wanted to reach out and confirm your community’s goals with respect to development at the station(s) in your community.

BART acknowledges that public land, including ours, can play an important role in addressing the region’s housing crisis. However, given BART’s limited staffing resources and very limited funding sources for structured parking that is often required to open up BART’s land for development, it would be challenging for BART’s TOD program to support the development of all the land that might be included in various jurisdiction’s housing elements during the planning period of 2023-2031. Understanding that including our land in a housing element does provide a good opportunity to initiate housing development with the support of the community, we would like to ensure that local jurisdictions are prepared to partner with us on addressing the barriers that may exist at a particular station.

In an effort to support our local jurisdiction partners as they go through the process of updating their Housing Elements, we encourage you to review BART’s Transit-Oriented Development Program Work Plan ( TOD Work Plan, 2020) before considering BART’s land for your 2023-2031 Housing Element as it identifies BART’s prioritized sites for TOD implementation. The TOD Work Plan incorporated input from many local agency staff on preferred timing for project initiation and the types of projects they wanted to see in BART’s station areas.

The first step in creating the TOD Work Plan was to determine how BART was tracking towards meeting the TOD program performance targets that were adopted by BART’s Board of Directors in 2016. The next step was to prioritize station areas based on three criteria:

1. Market readiness for TOD

2. Local support for TOD

3. Infrastructure needs

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
2150 Webster Street, P.O. Box 12688
Oakland, CA 94604-2688
(510) 464-6000
2022
Rebecca Saltzman

PRESIDENT
Janice Li

VICE PRESIDENT
Robert Powers

GENERAL MANAGER

DIRECTORS
Debora Allen
1ST DISTRICT
Mark Foley
2ND DISTRICT
Rebecca Saltzman
3RD DISTRICT
Robert Raburn, Ph.D.
4TH DISTRICT
John McPartland
5TH DISTRICT
Elizabeth Ames
6TH DISTRICT
Lateefah Simon
7TH DISTRICT
Janice Li
8TH DISTRICT
Bevan Dufty
9TH DISTRICT
www.bart.gov
Agenda Packet Page 464 of 595
Taking into consideration BART staff and resources, the final step was to categorize undeveloped station areas by the following timeframes for initiating development:

For station areas categorized as Near-term in BART’s TOD Work Plan, we support including the stations in your Housing Element, if that is your goal.

For station areas categorized as Mid-term in BART’s TOD Work Plan, we would like to have further discussions with you about the timing of development before it is included in Housing Element. BART will most likely not be able to initiate development at all the station areas in the Mid-term category within the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period, so further discussions with you are necessary to better understand what would need to occur to realistically develop the site. We understand that there are new rules regarding how often a site can be included in a housing element and we want to ensure that we are coordinating on the timing of development to meet both BART’s goals and those of the local jurisdiction.

For station areas categorized as Long-term in BART’s TOD Work Plan, we do not intend to develop the station area within the current Housing Element planning period of 2023-2031. BART does not recommend including our station area in your Housing Element at this time. However, the TOD Work Plan will be updated on a regular basis, and we are happy to coordinate with you if the intention is to include this site in a future Housing Element. If you still plan to include our land in the current Housing Element cycle, please let us know so that we can have further conversations about what would need to happen to initiate development.

The timing of initiating development at a particular station area may be affected by many factors, including BART’s transit operational needs and funding availability to complete the project in a timely Agenda Packet Page 465 of 595
manner. Over the next several years, BART will consider availability of local funding to support development, especially affordable housing, as a key factor in advancing projects.

Additionally, BART will be seeking projects that can be rapidly delivered through seamless coordination with local jurisdiction staff as a key factor in advancing sites to development. One example will be cooperation on finding BART parking and access solutions that maximize development on highly desirable land near station entrances by minimizing the number of structured parking stalls. In this example, creative solutions could include options such as shared, on-street parking, and district parking as well as significant investment in access infrastructure and programs to reduce overall parking demand. In the event a high level of BART parking is necessary, outside funding sources will need to be identified.

Delivering TOD projects is complex and requires productive partnerships between BART and local jurisdictions and we look forward to working with you to realize our shared goal of increasing the amount of housing near transit.

Sincerely,
________________________________________
Val Joseph Menotti
Chief Planning and Development Officer
Agenda Packet Page 466 of 595
ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF EL CERRITO 1999 GENERAL PLAN EIR (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 1999022058) AND 2014 EIR (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2014042025) AND 2022 SUBSEQUENT EIR FOR THE SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE CITY OF EL CERRITO SIXTH CYCLE (2023-2031) HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Prepared for:

City of El Cerrito
10890 San Pablo Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Contact:

Sean Moss
Planning Manager
Prepared by:

Ascent Environmental
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Contact:

Matt Gelbman, AICP
Project Manager
July 2023
20220004.01
Agenda Packet Page 467 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 1-1
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
In 1999, the City of El Cerrito (City) certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse [SCH]#99022058) for the 1999 General Plan Update. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code (PRC) § 21000, et seq.), the EIR for the 1999 General Plan (General Plan EIR) evaluated the potential environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the General Plan update.

The City is currently in the process of updating the Housing Element for the 2023 to 2031 planning period. The Housing Element is the only element that is required by law to be updated every eight years and must be reviewed by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This Housing Element is an update of the City’s previous 2015-2023 Housing Element, which was adopted by the City Council on April 21, 2015 and certified by HCD on May 18, 2015. This update will cover the 2023-2031 planning period, from January 31, 2023, to January 31, 2031.

Housing element law requires local governments to adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community, including their share of the regional housing need. Housing element law is the State’s primary strategy to increase housing supply, choice, and affordability. The law recognizes that in order for the private for-profit and non-profit sectors to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory requirements that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development.

An important part of State housing element law is the determination of the City’s ability to accommodate forecasted housing demand for all income levels, known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA quantifies the need for housing in each region statewide and is determined by HCD. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is responsible for allocating the RHNA to each city and county in its region, which includes the City of El Cerrito. On December 16, 2021, ABAG adopted the 2023-2031 RHNA Plan. Through the RHNA Plan, ABAG allocates a “fair share” by income category based on projected housing needs for each jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction is required to report to HCD on how the fair share allocation can be accommodated within the planning period. It should be noted that the RHNA projection period is June 30, 2022 – December 31, 2030, which differs slightly from the Housing Element planning period of January 31, 2023 – January 31, 2031. The allocations are intended to be used by jurisdictions when updating their housing elements as the basis for assuring that adequate sites and zoning are available to accommodate at least the number of units allocated.

Table 1 shows the RHNA assigned to the City for the 2023-2031 Housing Element. As shown in the table, ABAG allocated 1,391 new housing units to the City, which includes 334 very low-, 192 low-, 241 moderate-, and 624 above moderate-income units. For reference, El Cerrito’s 5th Cycle RHNA was 398 units total.

Table 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation, El Cerrito and San Francisco Bay Area 2023-2031 Very-Low-Income
Units Low-Income Units Moderate-Income Units Above-ModerateIncome Units Total SF Bay Area 114,442 65,892 72,712 188,130 441,176
El Cerrito 334 192 241 624 1,391
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments. 2021. Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031 (Adopted December 2021).

The Housing Element Update also evaluates other City policies and programs that advance the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code, and San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (Plan). The Plan plays a key role in supporting the State’s regional housing goals by substantially increasing housing opportunities available to the community. Beginning in 2019, staff kicked off an update to the Plan, which included preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) Agenda Packet Page 468 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
1-2 General Plan Housing Element
for the Plan area. The SEIR analysis is based upon a development capacity of 2,500 new residential units and 100,000 square feet of net new commercial space. The draft SEIR and Plan update were released on July 19, 2022, and the 45- day day public review period ended on September 2, 2022. On December 6, 2022, the City Council adopted the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update. The Plan update is an important component of the Housing Element as it created additional capacity to provide substantial sites to be included in the Housing Element sites inventory and contribute towards achieving RHNA goals.

As the lead agency under CEQA, the City has prepared this Addendum in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 to evaluate whether the proposed project’s effects were adequately examined in the previous environmental analysis in the General Plan EIR and the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan SEIR, or whether any changes trigger supplemental or subsequent review under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or 15163. This Addendum considers whether the environmental conditions that exist today have changed such that new or substantially more severe environmental impacts would occur compared to that evaluated in the General Plan EIR. As described below, no changes associated with the proposed project, and no changes in circumstances, trigger subsequent or supplemental review.

1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES
The environmental process for the General Plan involved the preparation of the following documents that are relevant to the consideration of the proposed project.
 Draft and Final EIR for the City of El Cerrito 1999 General Plan (SCH#99022058);  Draft and Final EIR for the San Pablo Specific Plan, August 2014 (SCH#2014042025).  Draft and Final SEIR for the San Pablo Specific Plan Update, December 2022 (SCH#2014042025).

1.3 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES

REGARDING AN ADDENDUM TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT
Altered conditions, changes, or additions to the description of a project that occur after certification of an EIR may require additional analysis under CEQA. The legal principles that guide decisions regarding whether additional environmental documentation is required are provided in the State CEQA Guidelines, which establish three mechanisms to address these changes: 1) a subsequent environmental impact report (SEIR), 2) a Supplement to an EIR, or 3) an Addendum to an EIR.

Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines describes the conditions under which a SEIR would be prepared. In summary, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no Subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; Agenda Packet Page 469 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 1-3
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Section 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency may choose to prepare a supplement to an EIR rather than a Subsequent EIR if:
(1) any of the conditions described above for Section 15162 would require the preparation of a SEIR; and (2) only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation.

Under Section 15164, an addendum is appropriate where a previously certified EIR has been prepared and some changes or revisions to the project are proposed, or the circumstances surrounding the project have changed, but none of the changes or revisions would result in significant new or substantially more severe environmental impacts, consistent with CEQA Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, and 15168.

Based on the criteria above and the results of the following EIR conformity evaluation, the City has determined that an addendum to the General Plan EIR and San Pablo Specific Plan SEIR is the appropriate CEQA document. The EIR conformity evaluation is intended to review relevant environmental topic areas for any changes in circumstances or the substantial new information as defined under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (stated above), as compared to the environmental impacts identified in the certified EIR prepared for the General Plan and the certified SEIR prepared for the San Pablo Specific Plan Update.

Agenda Packet Page 470 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
1-4 General Plan Housing Element
This page intentionally left blank.

Agenda Packet Page 471 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 2-5
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
In accordance with State law, the City has prepared the 2023-2031 Housing Element to ensure that the City grows in a manner that meets the housing needs of residents. As part of this update, the City is obligated under State law to develop an inventory of vacant and underutilized land suitable for residential development that can accommodate the 1,391 housing units allocated through the RHNA. The City has relied on housing capacity within the San Pablo Specific Plan Update, which was adopted in December 2022, in order to accommodate it’s housing need.

2.1.1 Assessment of Fair Housing
A new component of the Housing Element passed in 2018 as part of AB 686: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). According to AB 686, affirmatively furthering fair housing means to take “meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, which overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics” and is Federally mandated by the 1968 Fair Housing Act. The five main AFFH elements that all jurisdictions will need to incorporate into Housing Element updates are: (1) Targeted Community Outreach, (2) Assessment of Fair Housing, (3) Site Inventory, (4) Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors, and (5) Goals Policies and Actions. The City is deeply committed to undertaking actions that implement AFFH for the community.

2.1.2 Sites Inventory
Within Housing Element Chapter 4, “Sites Inventory,” the residential land sites inventory is required “to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income levels” (Government Code Section 65583.2(a)). The phrase “land suitable for residential development” in Government Code Section 65583(a)(3) includes vacant sites zoned for residential use; vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allow residential development; and underutilized sites that have zoning that allows residential development and are capable of being developed at a higher density.

Table 2 provides a summary of the City’s ability to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA. Based on the housing units in approved projects, capacity on vacant and underutilized sites, and projection of ADUs, the City has a surplus of 380 lower-income units, 461 moderate-income units, and 599 above moderate-income units. These sites are mapped and shown below in Figure 1.

Table 2: Sites Inventory Capacity Summary, El Cerrito (2023-2031) Lower1
Moderate Above-Moderate Total
Regional Housing Needs Allocation 526 241 624 1,391
Approved and Planned Projects 355 479 737 1,571
Vacant/Underutilized Sites in SPASP 494 195 341 1,030
Citywide Vacant/Underutilized Sites 0 0 136 136
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Projection 58 28 9 95
Total Capacity 906 702 1,223 2,831
Surplus (+) 380 461 599 1,440
1 Lower-income includes extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households.

Source: City of El Cerrito 2022, Ascent 2022
Agenda Packet Page 472 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
2-6 General Plan Housing Element

2.1.3 Housing Plan
Housing Element Chapter 7 establishes the goals, policies, and implementation programs in the 2023-31 Draft Housing Element that strive to produce, protect, and preserve housing. New key implementation programs that are being considered in the 2023-31 Draft Housing Element are listed below by category. The full list of policies and programs is contained in Housing Element Chapter 7.
 H1: Accelerate Housing Production
 Program H-1.A. Maintain Sites Inventory
 Program H-1.B. Promote Mixed-use Development and Amenities in San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Area  Program H-1.C. Accessory Dwelling Unit Tools and Resources  Program H-1.D. Objective Design Standards
 Program H-1.E. Zoning to Expand Housing Choice in Single-family Neighborhoods  Program H-1.F. Facilitate Development of Pipeline Projects  Program H-1.G. SB 35 Ministerial Approval Procedure
 H2: Support Affordable and Special Needs Housing
 Program H-2.A. Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance
 Program H-2.B. Affordable Housing Trust Fund Priorities  Program H-2.C. New Local Sources of Affordable Housing Funding  Program H-2.E. Develop Mixed Income Housing and Amenities on BART Lands  Program H-2.F. Coordinate Transportation Projects with Affordable Housing  Program H-2.G. Shelter and Housing Solutions for Persons Experiencing Homelessness  Program H-2.H. Zoning Amendments for Special Needs Housing  Program H-2.I. State Density Bonus
 Program H-2.J. Affordable Housing and Places of Assembly  Program H-2.K. Infrastructure Priority for Affordable Housing  H3: Conserve Exiting Housing and Precent Displacement  Program H-3.C. Tenant Protections
 H4: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
 Program H-4.B. Reasonable Accommodation Procedures
 Program H-4.C. Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program
 Program H-4.D. Community Opportunity to Purchase Act
While the City has undertaken many actions to support housing, it is important to remember that new construction is driven by market conditions and includes various economic factors such as financing/funding, land/construction costs, and feasibility. Much of the City’s new housing in the 2023-31 period would be constructed at the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station as part of a mixed-used transit-oriented development with 769 units at all income levels. In addition, the City has another 787 units in the SPASP and 15 units in other areas of the City that are planned or approved.

Agenda Packet Page 473 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 2-7

2.1.4 No Change in Allowed Residential Development Capacity Under the existing planning context, the City of El Cerrito has adequate housing capacity available. The proposed Housing Element Update would not require any amendments to the General Plan or San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, or any rezones or other zoning actions to meet the level of housing identified.

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION
El Cerrito is located in the southwest corner of Contra Costa County on the eastern shore of the San Francisco Bay.

The city encompasses approximately 3.67 square miles. El Cerrito is bounded by Albany and Kensington to the south, the Richmond Annex to the west, East Richmond Heights to the north, and Wildcat Canyon Regional Park to the east.

Interstates 80 and 580 provide regional access to the city.

Agenda Packet Page 474 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
2-8 General Plan Housing Element
This page intentionally left blank.

Agenda Packet Page 475 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 3-1
3 EIR CONFORMITY EVALUATION
As described in the Introduction, the purpose of this EIR conformity evaluation is to review environmental topic areas included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines for any changes in circumstances or the substantial new information as defined under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (stated above), as compared to the environmental impacts identified in the certified EIR (2014) and SEIR (2022) for the San Pablo Specific Plan and Update.

Implementation of the project would be subject to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted as part of the Final SEIR. As discussed below the project would not result in any new impacts or severity of impacts previously identified; therefore the project would not require amending the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The following discussion contains an analysis of the potential project impacts in relation to impacts identified in the approved General Plan EIR and the 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Specific Plan and Update.
 Aesthetics. The General Plan EIR anticipated that development under the 1999 General Plan would have lessthan-significant impacts related to visual resources and light/glare impacts with implementation of General Plan policies. The San Pablo Specific Plan SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to light and glare with implementation of mitigation measures (related to BART parking structures) and significant and unavoidable impacts related to scenic vistas despite implementation of mitigation measures (requiring individual project evaluation for effects to important views). The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, aesthetic impacts would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Agriculture/Forestry. An Initial Study was prepared to determine the scope of the 1999 General Plan EIR; agricultural and forestry resources were fully evaluated in the Initial Study, which found that implementation of the General Plan EIR would not result in significant impacts to these resources. Implementation of the proposed housing element would not change the land identified for development under the General Plan; therefore, it would not change the conclusion of the Initial Study or result in new or more severe significant impacts related to these resources.
 Air Quality. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of the 1999 General Plan would result in less-thansignificant impacts associated with construction emissions and potential increases in CO from vehicle traffic. The General Plan EIR concluded that other emissions associated with additional vehicle trips and cumulative air quality impacts would be significant and unavoidable after implementation of proposed General Plan policies. The 2022 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update SEIR identified less-than-significant impacts (after implementation of mitigation measures) associated with construction emissions and emissions of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). The 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR identified less-than-significant impacts (with implementation of mitigation measures) with respect to odors. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, air quality impacts would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Biological Resources. The 1999 General Plan EIR concludes that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to wildlife habitat and special-status species. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update identify less-than-significant impacts (with implementation of mitigation measures) related to impacts on specialAgenda Packet Page 476 of 595 EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
3-2 General Plan Housing Element
status species, riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities and wetlands, and nesting birds. Implementation of the proposed Housing Element Update would not change the land identified for development under the General Plan or San Pablo Specific Plan and does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts to biological resources would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Cultural Resources. The 1999 General Plan EIR concludes that, with implementation of General Plan policies, impacts related to historical and cultural resources, including cumulative impacts, would be less than significant.

The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update identified mitigation measures that would lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the SEIR, although not to a level of insignificance. However, the 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR concluded that impacts associated with destruction/degradation of historic resources and disturbance of buried archaeological resources, including human remains would remain significant and unavoidable. Impacts to cultural resources typically result from construction. Implementation of the proposed housing element would not change the land identified for development under the General Plan or San Pablo Specific Plan; therefore, no new or more severe impacts related to cultural resources would result.
 Tribal Cultural Resources. The 1999 General Plan EIR was certified prior to the enactment of AB 52 in 2015, which added a new environmental resource area to CEQA called “Tribal Cultural Resources”; consequently, the 1999 General Plan EIR did not include an impact evaluation of Tribal Cultural Resources. The 2022 SEIR for the San Pablo Specific concludes that impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation. Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources typically result from construction.

Implementation of the proposed Housing Element would not change the land identified for development under the General Plan or San Pablo Specific Plan; therefore, no new or more severe impacts related to Tribal Cultural Resources would result.
 Energy. The 1999 General Plan EIR concludes that impacts related to energy are less-than-significant with implementation of General Plan policies. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in impacts related to energy.

The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, energy-related impacts would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Geology/Soils. The 1999 General Plan EIR evaluated potential impacts related to seismic ground shaking and landslide risk/slope instability, including cumulative impacts, and concluded that implementation of General Plan policies would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with potential ground instability and potential for disturbance of paleontological resources. Implementation of the proposed Housing Element Update would not change the land identified for development under the General Plan or San Pablo Specific Plan and does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts to geology and paleontological resources would not be more severe Agenda Packet Page 477 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 3-3
than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The 1999 General Plan EIR was certified prior to AB 32, the “Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” and does not include an analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or any impacts related to climate change. (It should be noted that the issue of climate change and the greenhouse effect were known at the time of the certification of the EIR.) The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with GHG emissions. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, GHG-related impacts would not be more severe than would have been identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and that were identified in the 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts.  Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The 1999 General Plan EIR indicated that, with implementation of General Plan policies, there would be less than significant impacts related to exposure of construction workers and/or the public to hazardous materials during and/or following redevelopment or use, storage, disposal, or improper management of hazardous materials. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with: hazardous materials transport, use, or disposal; risk of upset or accidents; hazardous materials near schools, exposure of existing hazardous materials contamination; potential asbestos and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) exposure; potential lead-based paint exposure; and effects on emergency response and evacuation. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Hydrology/Water Quality. The 1999 General Plan EIR indicated that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development facilitated by the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to degradation of water quality in nearby surface water bodies; increased stormwater runoff and potential flooding; and potential contribution to cumulative increases in urban pollutants in storm water runoff. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with:
construction and post-construction water quality impacts; effects of contaminated site runoff on water quality in the local storm drainage system; effects on groundwater recharge and groundwater management; and risk of flooding. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts related to hydrology and water quality would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Land Use and Planning. The 1999 General Plan EIR determined that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would have less than significant impacts related to changes in density scale and character that would change the existing physical arrangement of the area; incompatible land uses; and disruption of an established community. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan Agenda Packet Page 478 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
3-4 General Plan Housing Element
would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with effects on the physical arrangement of the community, as well as consistency with policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment and would not conflict with other general plan policies. For these reasons, land-use-related impacts would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Mineral Resources. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts related to mineral resources would not be more severe than the level of impact associated with the 1999 General Plan and San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new or more severe significant impact associated with the proposed project.
 Noise. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of the 1999 General Plan would result in less-thansignificant impacts associated with the exposure of future land uses to noise levels greater than those considered normally satisfactory, as well as temporary increases in noise levels during construction periods. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that, with implementation of mitigation measures, development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with: exposure of residential land uses to noise levels from traffic and BART that exceed standards, as well as noise impacts associated with commercial development. The 2022 SEIR for the Specific Plan identified significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction-related noise and vibration after implementation of identified mitigation measures. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, noise-related impacts would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Population and Housing. The 1999 General Plan EIR indicated that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to: inducement of substantial growth or a concentration of population; displacement of a large number of people; as well as substantial increases in population relative to projected growth in surrounding areas. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with population growth, housing displacement, and temporary employment. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. Furthermore, the Housing Element is designed to facilitate housing and meet the City’s housing needs. For these reasons, impacts associated with population and housing would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Public Services and Recreation The 1999 General Plan EIR indicated that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to: increase in demand for street maintenance beyond the ability to meet the need; increase in demand for fire protection beyond the existing capacity of the fire department and potential interference with emergency response services; Agenda Packet Page 479 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 3-5
increase in demand for police service beyond existing capacity; removal of parklands or open space; new demand for recreation resources; as well as new demand for other city facilities. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with: increase in fire protection/emergency medical service demands; increase in police service demands; impacts on public schools; impacts on parks and recreation facilities; as well as impacts on other public facilities. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment.

For these reasons, impacts on public services and recreation would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Transportation and Traffic. The 1999 General Plan EIR determined that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to: potential increase in transit trips and additional demand for parking. The 1999 General Plan EIR was certified prior to the effective date of SB 743 in 2020, which removed operational level of service (LOS) evaluations as an appropriate methodology under CEQA and replaced it with vehicle miles traveled (VMT) evaluation. The 1999 General Plan EIR included an LOS evaluation and did not include a VMT evaluation. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts on bicycle and pedestrian facilities; transit; emergency access; hazards due to design features or incompatible uses; conflicts with local or regional policies or programs surrounding active transportation and transit; and effects on VMT. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts related to transportation and traffic would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.  Utilities and Service Systems. The 1999 General Plan EIR determined that, with implementation of General Plan policies, development under the General Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to: increases in demand for water; generation of wastewater flows that could increase demand for wastewater treatment; increased stormwater flows; increased waste generation; as well as generation of demand for electricity, gas, or telecommunications beyond the existing capacity of service providers. The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with: water supply; water, wastewater, and storm drainage infrastructure; and solid waste service. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts on public utilities would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.
 Wildfire. Although the 1999 General Plan EIR was certified prior to the addition of “Wildfire” as a topic in the Appendix G Checklist, the EIR does include discussions related to wildfire risk in the impact analysis associated with demand for fire protection (Impact 4.7.7). The 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update concluded that development under the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts associated with wildfire because the specific plan area is not located within the vicinity of a wildfire hazard area. The proposed Housing Element Update does not include any increase in development capacity beyond what is identified in the 1999 General Plan and 2022 San Pablo Specific Plan Update. In addition, the goals, policies, and programs in the Housing Element Updates have been reviewed and implementation would Agenda Packet Page 480 of 595
EIR Conformity Evaluation Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
3-6 General Plan Housing Element
not result in any substantial adverse physical changes to the environment. For these reasons, impacts related to wildfire would not be more severe than identified in the 1999 General Plan EIR and 2014 and 2022 EIR and SEIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and Update, and there would be no new significant impacts beyond those evaluated in those EIRs.

Agenda Packet Page 481 of 595
Ascent Environmental EIR Conformity Evaluation
City of El Cerrito
General Plan Housing Element 3-7
This page intentionally left blank.

Agenda Packet Page 482 of 595
Agenda Packet Page 483 of 595
Ascent Environmental List of Preparers and Persons Consulted Union City
General Plan Housing and Safety Elements 4-1
4 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED

4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS
City Staff
Melanie Mintz ........................................................................................................................................Community Development Director Sean Moss ...............................................................................................................................................................................Planning Manager Aissia Ashoori...........................................................................................................................................................Senior Program Manager Diego Romero.........................................................................................................................................................................Associate Planner Ascent Environmental
Mike Parker, AICP .............................................................................................................................................................. Principal-in-Charge Chelsey Payne, AICP .......................................................................................................................Urban Design and Planning Director Matthew Gelbman, AICP.......................................................................................................................................................Project Manager Agenda Packet Page 484 of 595
List of Preparers and Persons Consulted Ascent Environmental City of El Cerrito
4-2 General Plan Housing Element
This page intentionally left blank.

Agenda Packet Page 485 of 595
Ascent Environmental References
Union City
General Plan Housing and Safety Elements 5-1
5 REFERENCES
Association of Bay Area Governments. 2022 (March). Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031. Available: https://abag.ca.gov/tools-resources/digitallibrary/finalrhnaallocationreport2023-2031-approved0pdf. Accessed: September 2022.

ABAG. See Association of Bay Area Governments.

City of El Cerrito. 1999 (April). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of El Cerrito General Plan Update (SCH#99022058.

City of El Cerrito. 2022 (July). Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update (SCH#2014042025). Available: http://www.el-cerrito.org/DocumentCenter/View/17515/Draft-SEIR---SPASP-Update.

Accessed: April 2023.

City of El Cerrito. 2014 (June). Draft Environmental Impact Report San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update (SCH#2014042025). Available: https://www.el-cerrito.org/DocumentCenter/View/3728/SPA-Specific-Plan-Draft-EIR.

Accessed: April 2023.

Agenda Packet Page 486 of 595
References Ascent Environmental
City of El Cerrito
5-2 General Plan Housing Element
This page intentionally left blank.

Agenda Packet Page 487 of 595
Planning Commission Resolution PC2023-04

A RESOLUTION OF EL CERRITO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE CITY OF EL CERRITO SIXTH CYCLE (2023-2031) HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW.

WHEREAS, State law requires cities to revise the housing elements of their General Plans periodically and Bay Area housing elements are due by January 31, 2023, for the 2023 to 2031 planning period; and WHEREAS, the legislature recently adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years”; and
WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of El Cerrito (City) regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 1,391 housing units, comprised of 334 very- very-low income units, 192 low-income units, 241 moderate-income units, and 624 above moderate-income units; and WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, El Cerrito has prepared Housing Element Update 2023-2031 (the Housing Element); and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., the Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the El Cerrito General Plan was updated in 1999, and updated in 2015 with the Housing Element General Plan EIR (Addendum) was prepared for the Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution 2014-50, certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Pablo Specific Plan to promote new high-density and mixed use in transit-oriented development for all income levels; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution 2014-51, adopting a General Plan Amendment for the San Pablo Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2014-06, rezoning properties within the San Pablo Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 2022-90, amending the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan certifying the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR); and WHEREAS, the City has prepared the Housing Element in accordance with State Housing Element Law; and; WHEREAS, State law requires that the City take meaningful steps to promote and affirmatively further fair housing (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(5)); and
WHEREAS, State law requires that the City make zoning available for all types of housing, including multifamily housing (Gov. Code Sections 65583.2 and 65583(c)); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element must be adopted to comply with State law, accommodate the RHNA, affirmatively further fair housing, and facilitate and encourage a variety of housing types for all income levels, including multifamily housing (Gov. Code Sections 65583.2 and 65583(c)); and
Agenda Packet Page 488 of 595
WHEREAS, the City conducted extensive community outreach regarding the Housing Element over the last 18 months using a variety of approaches, including two virtual workshops, a web-based survey in three languages, posting of flyers at various civic locations as well as faith-based organizations, and notices were sent to all interested parties when revisions to the Housing Element were posted to the website; and
WHEREAS, on August 16, 2023, the City Council provided input on the draft Housing Element; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on September 16, 2022 the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2022, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the City revised the Housing Element based on the comments received from HCD; and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2023, the City posted a second revised draft Housing Element and annotated response letter to HCD on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2023, the City submitted a revised draft Housing Element and response letter to HCD for its review; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2023, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the revised draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on June 8, 2023, the City posted a third revised draft Housing Element and annotated response letter to HCD on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2023, the City submitted the draft Housing Element and response letter to HCD for its review; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2023, the City posted an Errata to the City’s website showing additional revisions, and submitted the revisions to HCD for review on July 27, 2023; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to the 1999 El Cerrito General Plan EIR, the 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR, and the 2022 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan SEIR has been prepared for the 2023-2031 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the El Cerrito Planning Commission held a duly and properly noticed public hearing on July 27, 2023, to solicit public comments and review and consider the El Cerrito Housing Element; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission hereby finds that, based on substantial evidence in the record:

1. The proposed General Plan amendment is in the public interest because the amendment will further the goals and policies of the General Plan to promote a mix of housing types and affordability throughout the city that meets the needs of existing and future residents.

Agenda Packet Page 489 of 595

2. The proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element is internally consistent and is consistent with the remainder of the retains the General Plan and is consistent with other adopted plans.

3. As required by Government Code Section 65585(e), the City has considered the findings made by the HCD included in the letters to the City dated December 12, 2022, and May 19, 2023, consistent with Government Code Section 65585(f), and has changed the Housing Element in response to the findings of the Department to substantially comply with the requirements of State Housing Element Law as interpreted by HCD.

4. Based on the comments from HCD and the City’s responses to those comments, the 2023-2031 Housing Element is in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law.

5. The Planning Commission has considered the General Plan EIR Addendum which is attached to the staff report for this item and hereby incorporated by reference and finds that (i) the 2023-2031 El Cerrito Housing Element update does not result in substantial changes to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the 1999 General Plan EIR, the 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR, or the 2022 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan SEIR due to the involvement of new significant effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, (ii) there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the 2023-2031 El Cerrito Housing Element update will be undertaken which will require major revisions of the does not result in substantial changes to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the 1999 General Plan EIR, the 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR, or the 2022 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan SEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, and (iii) there is no new information of substantial importance which would result in the 2023- 2031 El Cerrito Housing Element creating new significant environmental impacts, an increase in the severity of previously identified environmental impacts, a previously infeasible mitigation measure being feasible, or different mitigation measures or alternatives than those previously considered in the 1999 General Plan EIR, the 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR, or the 2022 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan SEIR substantially reducing one or more significant effects on the environment and that therefore no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required under CEQA Guidelines section 15162.

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of El Cerrito hereby recommends the City Council adopt a resolution repealing the 2015-2023 Housing Element in its entirety and approving the 2023-2031 Housing Element with the modification that Program H-4.B be modified as follows:
“To accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities and provide a streamlined permit review process, the City shall update reasonable accommodation procedures in Chapter 19.37 of the City’s Municipal Code to ensure persons with disabilities have a streamlined and objective process for requesting modification to any policy, rule, or procedure that presents a barrier to obtaining and retaining equal housing opportunity. The City shall post information on reasonable accommodation procedures prominently on the City website and at the public counter”; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of El Cerrito hereby recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager or designee to file all necessary material with the Department of Housing and Community Development for the Department to find that the Housing Element is in conformance with State Housing Element Law and is further directed and authorized to make all non-substantive changes to the Housing Element to make it internally consistent or to address any non-substantive changes or amendments requested by the Department to achieve certification. Such changes by the City Manager shall not change the policy of the City or include any legislative action.

CERTIFICATION
Agenda Packet Page 490 of 595
I certify that this resolution was adopted by the El Cerrito Planning Commission at a special meeting held on July 27, 2023, upon motion of Commissioner Bloom, second by Commissioner Navarrete.

AYES: Bloom, Gillett, Hamilton, Mendez, Navarrete, Tinclair.

NOES: None.

ABSTAIN: None.

ABSENT: Singh.
_________________________________
Sean Moss, AICP
Planning Manager
Agenda Packet Page 491 of 595
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
July 27, 2023
Sean Moss, Planning Manager
Planning Division
Community Development Department
City of El Cerrito
10890 San Pablo Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Dear Sean Moss:

RE: City of El Cerrito’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of El Cerrito’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review on June 15, 2023, along with revisions received on July 26, 2023.

Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a telephone conversation on July 17, 2023 with you, Aissia Ashoori, Senior Program Manager, Diego Romero, Assistant Planner, and Chelsey Payne and Matthew Gelbman, Consultants. In addition, HCD considered comments from Rachel Rosekind pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The revised draft element meets the statutory requirements described in HCD’s May 19, 2022 review. The housing element will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) when it is adopted, submitted to and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.

For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), as the City failed to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), any rezoning to make prior identified sites available or accommodate the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Please be aware, if the City fails to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until all necessary rezones pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c) (1) (A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed.

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element Agenda Packet Page 492 of 595
Sean Moss, Planning Manager

process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs, and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

HCD appreciates the hard work and dedication of you, Aissia Ashoori, Senior Program Manager, and Diego Romero, Assistant Planner, in preparation of the City’s housing element and looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Clare Blackwell, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
Agenda Packet Page 493 of 595

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Date: August 15, 2023
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Crystal Reams, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Finance Department; Karen Pinkos, City Manager, City Management
Subject: Amendment to City Comprehensive Financial Policies Related to YearEnd Surpluses and the Emergency Disaster Relief Fund

ACTION PROPOSED
Adopt a resolution amending the City of El Cerrito Comprehensive Financial Policies to a) revise Section 2.7 regarding year-end surplus, b) revise section 4.1 regarding the Emergency Disaster Relief Fund.

BACKGROUND
The City of El Cerrito’s Comprehensive Financial Policies serve as a guideline for operational and strategic decision making related to financial matters for use by the City Council and staff. The goal is to maintain the City’s financial stability in order to continually adapt to local, regional, and national economic changes. Such policies will allow the City to maintain and enhance a sound fiscal condition. These Financial Policies are reviewed annually by the Financial Advisory Board (FAB) and any proposed substantive revisions are submitted to the City Council for approval. The City’s Comprehensive Financial Policies are utilized when preparing the Annual Operating Budget and are in conformance with all state and federal laws, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and standards of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).

These Policies were last revised by the City Council on September 20, 2022.

ANALYSIS
The FAB created a subcommittee of Chair Farahmand and Member Patterson to review and recommend language to modify the Comprehensive Financial Policies with respect to the General Fund Reserve balance in the event of a year-end surplus. Because the City has generated a General Fund Reserve of $16.6 million over two years, the City Council has been interested in a policy that would assist the Council and staff in prioritizing how to allocate this fund balance, including funding the Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF) and the desire to fund pension costs through a Section 115 Trust.

Further, in the event of future year-end surpluses, the Council will seek to continue the City's financial sustainability as well as consider various capital expenses or one-time expenditures at their discretion. The FAB's subcommittee worked with staff and reviewed policies from other cities in order to provide language for the City Council's consideration of how to allocate the General Fund Reserve balance including year-end surpluses.

Agenda Packet Page 494 of 595
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

The current language regarding year-end surpluses is Section 2.7 of the Comprehensive Financial Policies, which reads:

2.7. Any year-end operating surpluses will revert to unappropriated balances for use in maintaining reserve levels set by policy and will be available for capital projects and/or one-time expenditures upon approval of the City Council.

The City is currently following this policy, and the current reserve level of 34% exceeds the current minimum reserve level of 10% of General Fund expenditures as stated in Section 3. However, the EDRF has not been funded to date, meaning that the current reserve of $16.6 million is unassigned.

The FAB discussed a "waterfall" list of priorities for the City Council that would ensure that the General Fund Reserve and the EDRF were funded in advance of any other considerations for allocation. The next priorities would be funding pension costs and one-time expenditures such as capital, maintenance, or items that do not require additional ongoing costs. The language proposed by the FAB reads as follows:

2.7 Any General Fund year-end operating surplus (the excess of actual General Fund revenue less actual General Fund expenditures) shall be allocated for the following, subject to City Council approval, using the following priority order until any such annual General Fund surplus is fully allocated:

1. General Fund Reserve, until the General Fund has reached 100% of its targeted reserve ratio as specified in the General Fund Reserve Policy (Section 3 of this policy).

2. Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF), until the balance in that fund reaches 100% of the target balance as specified in Emergency and Disaster Recovery Fund (Section 4 of this policy).

3. A minimum of 33% of the remaining surplus to additional discretionary payments towards the City’s unfunded liabilities and/or contributions towards a pension or other post-employment benefit trust.

4. The City Manager will make recommendations to the City Council to use any remaining surplus to fund non-recurring expenditures such as capital improvements, equipment purchases, or other, one-time expenditures which will not require additional future expense outlay for maintenance, additional staffing, or other recurring expenditures.

Further, the FAB discussed the funding of the EDRF as per the Policies. To date, the EDRF has not been funded due to the lack of General Fund Reserves in prior fiscal years. The EDRF is intended as a separate fund to provide cash reserves in the amount of three months of payroll costs, to only be used in the event of severe economic downturns or disasters. The current language states:

Agenda Packet Page 495 of 595
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

4.1. The City shall maintain a separate fund on its books called the Emergency and Disaster Recovery Fund (EDRF), separate from the City’s General Fund. The cash in this fund will be invested in accordance with the City’s investment policy.

Per the current language, the City Council would need to move funding from the General Fund into a new, separate fund, which would potentially impact the target ratio for the General Fund Reserve. City staff recommended to the FAB that the EDRF become a restricted portion of the General Fund instead of moving the funding for the EDRF into a separate fund. This would maintain the overall General Fund ratio, and allow for the City's financial statements to clearly note that the EDRF is part of the General Fund. The EDRF would still be restricted per Section 4.2 of the Policies requiring a severe economic situation or emergency. The proposed language to change Section 4.1 is as follows:

4.1. The City shall maintain a separate fund on its books called the Emergency and Disaster Recovery Fund (EDRF), separate from the City’s General Fund which will be a restricted portion of the City’s General Fund. The cash in this fund will be invested in accordance with the City’s investment policy.

The changes to Sections 2.7 and 4.1 of the Comprehensive Financial Policies were recommended by the FAB by motion, which passed by a 2-1 vote. Staff concurs with the FAB's proposed language and recommends that the City Council approve the language to revise the Policies.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This item is consistent with Strategic Plan Goal B: Achieve long-term financial sustainability.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

Reviewed by:

Alexandra Orologas, Assistant City Manager
Agenda Packet Page 496 of 595
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A to Resolution
Agenda Packet Page 497 of 595
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO APPROVING

AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF EL CERRITO COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL

POLICIES RELATED TO YEAR-END SURPLUSES AND THE EMERGENCY

DISASTER RELIEF FUND
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Comprehensive Financial Policies are to provide guidelines for operational and strategic decision making related to financial matters; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Financial Policies were last amended in September 2022 as a part of the annual review; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Financial Policies have been reviewed by the Financial Advisory Board (FAB); and
WHEREAS, the FAB and the City Council intend to modify the Comprehensive Financial Policies to provide priorities for the Council’s consideration for allocation of any year-end surplus in relation to the General Fund Reserve; and WHEREAS, the FAB and the City Council intend to modify the Comprehensive Financial Policies to require that the Emergency Disaster and Relief Fund (EDRF) is a restricted portion of the General Fund; and
WHEREAS, City staff agree with the recommended amendments to the Comprehensive Financial Policies that establishes the intended revisions; and WHEREAS, revisions to the policy proposed by the FAB and City staff have been incorporated in the attached document.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito, that it hereby approves the City of El Cerrito Comprehensive Financial Policy effective August 15, 2023 incorporated by reference and attached hereto as Exhibit A.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on August 15, 2023 the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City of El Cerrito on______________.
________________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk
APPROVED:
________________________
Lisa Motoyama, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 498 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
Approved: Resolution No. 2022-72: September 20, 2022
PAGE 1
PURPOSE:

To establish a comprehensive set of financial policies for the City that will serve as a guideline for operational and strategic decision making related to financial matters.

POLICY:

The following financial policies are intended to establish a comprehensive set of guidelines for use by the City Council and staff on decision-making that has a fiscal impact. The goal is to maintain the City’s financial stability in order to be able to continually adapt to local, regional, and national economic changes. Such policies will allow the City to maintain and enhance a sound fiscal condition.

This financial policy will be reviewed annually by the Financial Advisory Board and any proposed substantive revisions will be submitted to the City Council for approval. The City’s comprehensive financial policies will be utilized when preparing the Annual Operating Budget and shall be in conformance with all state and federal laws, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and standards of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).

1. OVERVIEW & LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING

1.1. A Five-Year Year Financial Plan will be prepared at a minimum for the General Fund, and Integrated Waste Management Funds. The City’s Five-Year Financial Plan is the long-term picture of the City’s finances and will be updated annually as part of the annual budget process.

1.2. The City shall seek a balance in the overall revenue structure between more stable revenue sources (e.g. Property Tax and Utility Taxes) and economically sensitive revenue sources (e.g., Sales Tax).

1.3. The City shall develop and maintain methods for the evaluation of future development and major fiscal impacts on the City budget.

1.4. The City shall develop and implement a financial plan to address its funding needs for issues like deferred maintenance and unfunded liabilities.

1.5. The City shall address issues related to cash flow requirements and any short term borrowing requirements on a timely basis.

1.6. The City shall require any annexation agreements to have a long- term beneficial financial impact on the City.

2. BUDGET POLICIES

2.1. The City Manager shall prepare a proposed annual budget to be reviewed by the Financial Advisory Board and presented to the City Council within all statutorily prescribed deadlines. The City Council will adopt the budget at a public hearing by June 30 of each year.

2.2. A Budget will be adopted by Resolution of the City Council annually, which will contain the budget amendment process, budget amendment authority, and spending authorities.

All departments are responsible for meeting the City’s financial policy goals and ensuring the City’s long-term financial health. Budget control is maintained at the fund level. The City Manager is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts within departments and within funds. In addition, amendments that are made to authorize spending of increased or new special purpose revenues may be approved by the City Manager. Budget modifications Agenda Packet Page 499 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 2
between funds or increases or decreases to a fund’s overall budget must be approved by the City Council.

2.3. It is the City’s policy to adopt a balanced General Fund budget where operating revenue is equal to, or exceeds, operating expenditures. In the event a balanced budget is not adopted, due to a deliberate reduction of accumulated fund balance or if the cause of the imbalance is expected to last for no more than one year, as with the case of a one time settlement or large purchase, the planned use of reserves to balance the budget is permitted as long as the reserve is consistent with the amounts described in Section 3., General Fund Balance Reserve Policy.

2.4. The operating budget shall serve as the annual financial plan for the City. It shall serve as the City’s management plan for implementing goals and objectives of the City Council, City Manager and departments and will define service levels.

2.5. During the annual budget development process, the existing budget shall be examined to assure removal or reduction of any services or programs that should be eliminated or reduced in cost.

2.6. The annual review process shall include an assessment to determine if funds are available to operate and maintain proposed capital facilities and other public improvements.

2.7. Any year-end operating surpluses will revert to unappropriated balances for use in maintaining reserve levels set by policy and will be available for capital projects and/or one-time expenditures upon approval of the City Council. Any General Fund year-end operating surplus (the excess of actual General Fund revenue less actual General Fund expenditures) shall be allocated for the following, subject to City Council approval, using the following priority order until any such annual General Fund surplus is fully allocated:

1. General Fund Reserve, until the General Fund has reached 100% of its targeted reserve ratio as specified in the General Fund Reserve Policy (Section 3 of this policy).

2. Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF), until the balance in that fund reaches 100% of the target balance as specified in Emergency and Disaster Recovery Fund (Section 4 of this policy).

3. A minimum of 33% of the remaining surplus to additional discretionary payments towards the City’s unfunded liabilities and/or contributions towards a pension or other post-employment benefit trust.

4. The City Manager will make recommendations to the City Council to use any remaining surplus to fund non-recurring expenditures such as capital improvements, equipment purchases, or other, one-time expenditures which will not require additional future expense outlay for maintenance, additional staffing, or other recurring expenditures.

2.8. Where practical, the City’s annual budget will include performance measures of workload, efficiency, and effectiveness.

2.9. Revenues:

2.9.1. The City will estimate annual revenues using an objective, analytical process; specific assumptions will be documented and maintained. Budgeted revenues will be estimated conservatively using accepted standards and estimates provided by the state, other governmental agencies, and/or reliable economic forecasters when available.

2.9.2. Specific revenue sources will not be dedicated for specific purposes, unless required by law or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). All non-tax increment, non-restricted revenues will be deposited in the General Fund and Agenda Packet Page 500 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 3
appropriated through the budget process. On-going revenues will fund on-going expenditures.

2.9.3. A diversified and stable revenue system will be maintained to the extent possible to protect programs from short-term fluctuations in any single revenue source.

2.10. Appropriations:

2.10.1. The City shall, to the extent possible, pay for current year expenditures with current year revenues. Where authorized activities or equipment remain incomplete and/or unpurchased, revenues and/or fund balance may be carried forward at the City Manager's direction to the next fiscal year to support such an activity/purchase.

2.10.2. The City shall avoid budgetary procedures which rely on financial strategies that defer payment of current operating expenses to future years.

2.10.3. Department Heads are responsible for ensuring that department expenditures stay within the department's budgeted appropriation.

2.10.4. A City Council Resolution is necessary to increase any total fund appropriation where no corresponding revenue offset exists that is restricted for that purpose.

2.10.5. The City Manager may adjust appropriations among departments within a fund.

3. GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY

3.1. The purpose of the reserve policy is to set aside funds to insure against events that would adversely affect the financial condition of the City and jeopardize the continuation of necessary public services. The reserve is designed to protect issuer ratings and offset economic downturns and revenue shortfalls.

3.2. It is a goal of the City to achieve a General Fund annual operating reserve of 10% of projected General Fund operating expenditures in each fiscal year. As part of the annual budget process, the City Council shall consider a Five-Year Plan that attempts to maintain a reserve ratio of 10%. The City Council may adopt a deficit budget to deal with the uses discussed in Section 3.5 so long as the projected reserve does not go below 10% in any year of the Five-Year Plan. Should the General Fund reserve fall below 10%, each budget year the City will adopt a plan to restore the reserve percentage to 10% within five years and 15% within 10 years.

3.3. The unreserved fund balance in an Internal Service Fund may be transferred to the General Fund only for a fiscal emergency or for one-time uses such as natural disasters or unforeseen liabilities.

4. EMERGENCY AND DISASTER RECOVERY FUND (EDRF)

4.1. The City shall maintain a separate fund on its books called the Emergency and Disaster Recovery Fund (EDRF), separate from the City’s General Fund which will be a restricted portion of the City’s General Fund. The cash in this fund will be invested in accordance with the City’s investment policy.

4.2. The purpose of this fund is to provide cash reserves in the event of severe economic downturns or disasters. The City Council shall fund three months of payroll costs, currently $6 million, in the EDRF.. The cash reserve requirement shall be reviewed every biennial budget cycle. The City budget shall contain a plan to achieve the target cash reserve in the EDRF over two biennial budget cycles.

4.3. The City Council may authorize the use of the EDRF for the purposes described in this Section 4 by a simple majority of the quorum. In the event that, because of an emergency, a quorum of the City Council is unavailable to meet, a single member or the City Manager may call a meeting to reconstitute the City Council, pursuant to the California Emergency Agenda Packet Page 501 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 4
Services Act (Gov. Code § 8642.) Once reconstituted, the City Council may authorize the use of the EDRF for the purposes described in this Section 4.

4.4. In the event that, because of the nature of an emergency, use of the EDRF is necessary before it is possible for the City Council to meet, the City Manager may use the EDRF for the purposes described in this Section 4. At the first meeting of the City Council thereafter, the City Council shall be asked to ratify the action of the City Manager. In the event that the City Manager is unavailable because of the emergency, the assistant director of emergency services, as defined in Chapter 2.28 of the El Cerrito Municipal Code, may use the EDRF for the purposes described in this Section 4. At the first meeting of the City Council thereafter, the City Council shall be asked to ratify the action of the assistant director of emergency services.

5. FINANCIAL REPORTING POLICIES

5.1. Accounting Standards: The City’s accounting and financial reporting systems shall be maintained in conformance with all state and federal laws, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and standards of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). The City will make every attempt to implement all changes to governmental accounting practices at the earliest practicable time.

5.1.1. Annual Audit: An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with an audit opinion to be included with the City’s published Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR will be submitted annually to the Government Finance Officers Association for peer review with the goal of continuing receipt of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting.

5.1.2. The independent firm will be selected through a competitive bidding process at least once every five years. The contract may be for an initial period of three years with two additional one-year options at the City Council’s discretion. The current firm may be allowed to participate in the bid process. The need for rotation of the audit staff or audit firm will be considered in the bid process. The Finance Director will review the qualifications of prospective firms and make a recommendation to the City Council. The audit contract will be awarded by the City Council.

5.2. The City shall prepare and issue timely interim budget reports on the City’s fiscal status to the City Council on no less than a quarterly basis. Reports will be prepared and presented to the City Council that explain key economic and fiscal developments, note significant deviations from the budget, include information on revenue and expenditures by operating department and by revenue/expenditure category, and when required, outline any corrective actions necessary to maintain the City’s financial position. Reports may be required on a monthly basis by the City Council if they deem it necessary to more frequently monitor the budget. Reports will be provided to the public on the City’s website.

6. OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES

6.1. The City shall not commit to new spending for operating or capital improvement purposes until an analysis of all current and future cost implications relating to those programs and projects is completed.

6.2. All departments are responsible for meeting policy goals and ensuring long-term financial health. Future service plans and program initiatives will be developed to reflect current policy directives, projected resources and future service requirements.

Agenda Packet Page 502 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 5

6.3. Departmental requests for increases in staffing will be thoroughly analyzed; only those that meet adopted program initiatives and policy directives will be considered. To the extent feasible, personnel cost reductions will be achieved through attrition.

6.4. User Fees and Charges and Development Impact Fees:

6.4.1. Where direct services to users can be measured, as set forth in the Master Fee Schedule, the City should use appropriate fees, charges, or assessments rather than general tax funds. All user fees and charges will be examined or adjusted annually to determine the direct and indirect cost of service. User fees and charges for services shall be established at a level related to the cost of providing such service except where the City Council has determined there is a public benefit to subsidize the service with tax-based revenue. The acceptable recovery rate and any associated changes to user fees and charges will be approved by the City Council following public review.

6.4.2. The City may identify the costs associated with new development as a basis for establishing development impact fees but the long-term benefit of the development to the City should be considered in establishing such fees.

6.5. Grant Management:

6.5.1. The City shall actively pursue federal, state and other grant opportunities when deemed appropriate. Before accepting any grant, the City shall thoroughly consider the implications in terms of ongoing obligations that will be required in connection with acceptance of said grant and present that report for approval by the City Council.

6.5.2. The term of Grant funded positions for programs should be clearly identified and presented to the City Council for approval. It is mandatory to disclose if General Fund revenues will be needed to fund a position during or after the Grant or program expires.

6.5.3. Grant funding will be considered to leverage City funds. Inconsistent and/or fluctuating grants should not be used to fund ongoing programs. Programs financed with grant monies will be budgeted in separate cost centers, and the service program will be adjusted to reflect the level of available funding. In the event of reduced grant funding, City resources may be substituted only after all program priorities and alternatives are considered.

6.5.4. The cost of all externally mandated services for which funding is available shall be fully evaluated, including overhead, to allow for complete reimbursement of expenses.

6.6. Revenue Collection Policy:

6.6.1. The City will pursue revenue collection and auditing to assure that monies due the City are received in a timely manner.

6.6.2. The City will seek reimbursement from the appropriate agency for State and Federal mandated costs whenever possible.

6.6.3. The City will centralize accounts receivable/collection activities so that all receivables are handled consistently.

6.6.4. Accounts receivable management and diligent oversight of collections from all revenue sources are imperative. Sound financial management principles include the establishment of an allowance for doubtful accounts. Efforts shall be made to pursue the timely collection of delinquent accounts. When such accounts are deemed uncollectible, they will be written-off from the financial statements in accordance with established policies.

7. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Agenda Packet Page 503 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 6

7.1. Staff shall keep City Council apprised of financial opportunities available and shall develop appropriate recommendations.

7.2. All requests for City Council action in excess of the City Manager’s approval limit, shall include an analysis of the immediate and future fiscal impact of such action particularly impacts on the General Fund. No appropriation for new or expanded programs or staffing levels shall be approved without identifying the amount and source of available funds.

7.3. Cash Management Investment:

7.3.1. Cash and investment programs will be maintained in accordance with California Government Code Section 53600 et seq. and the City’s adopted investment policy and will ensure that proper controls and safeguards are maintained. Pursuant to the Investment Policy, the Financial Advisory Board, at least annually will review, and the City Council will affirm, a detailed investment policy.

7.3.2. Reports on the investment portfolio and cash position will be developed and presented to the Financial Advisory Board and the City Council in conformity with the California Government Code.

7.3.3. Funds will be managed in a prudent and diligent manner with emphasis on safety of principal, liquidity, and yield, in that order.

7.3.4. The quarterly report shall include a statement in compliance with California Government Code 53646.

8. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT POLICIES

8.1. A Ten-year Capital Improvement Plan will be developed and updated annually, including anticipated funding sources. Capital improvement projects are defined as infrastructure or equipment purchases or construction which result in a capitalized asset and have a useful (depreciable) life of two years or more.

8.2. Each Capital Improvement Project will identify, where applicable, current operating maintenance costs and funding streams available to repair and/or replace deteriorating infrastructure and to avoid significant unfunded liabilities.

8.3. The City will develop and implement a post-implementation evaluation of its infrastructures condition on a specified periodic basis, estimating the remaining useful life, and projecting replacement costs.

8.4. The City shall actively pursue outside funding sources for all Capital Improvement Projects. Outside funding sources, such as grants, shall be used to finance only those Capital Improvement Projects that are consistent with the Ten-year Capital Improvement Plan and/or local governmental priorities, and who’s operating and maintenance costs will be included in future operating budget forecasts.

8.5. Capital improvement lifecycle costs will be coordinated with the development of the Operating Budget. Future operating, maintenance and replacement costs associated with new capital improvements will be forecasted, matched to available revenue sources, and included in the Operating Budget. Capital project contract awards will include a fiscal impact statement disclosing the expected operating impact of the project and when such cost is expected to occur.

8.6. The City must carefully seek and analyze the appropriate type of financing instrument appropriate for financing capital projects. Several options may be available – general obligation debt, fee-supported debt, fund reserves, tax increment, etc. All debt financing mechanisms shall be carefully considered and analyzed for fiscal benefit and cost effectiveness. Long-term borrowing shall be restricted to projects too large to be financed from current revenues (pay-as-you-go). Where possible, special assessment, revenue or other self-supporting bonds shall be used in lieu of general obligation bonds.

Agenda Packet Page 504 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 7

9. DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICIES

9.1. These Debt Management Policies are intended to comply with Government Code Section 8855(i) and shall govern all debt undertaken by the City. The City hereby recognizes that a fiscally prudent debt policy is required in order to:
• Maintain the City’s sound financial position.
• Ensure the City has the flexibility to respond to changes in future service priorities, revenue levels, and operating expenses.
• Protect the City’s creditworthiness.
• Ensure that all debt is structured in order to protect both current and future taxpayers, ratepayers and constituents of the City.
• Ensure that the City’s debt is consistent with the City’s planning goals and objectives and capital improvement program or budget, as applicable.

9.2. Purposes for Which Debt May Be Issued

9.2.1. Long-Term Debt: Long-term debt may be issued to finance the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of capital improvements and facilities, equipment and land to be owned and operated by the City.
a. Long-term debt financings are appropriate when the following conditions exist:
 When the project to be financed is necessary to provide basic services  When the project to be financed will provide benefit to constituents over multiple years
 When total debt does not constitute an unreasonable burden to the City and its taxpayers and ratepayers.
 When the debt is used to refinance outstanding debt in order to produce debt service savings or to realize the benefits of a debt restructuring.
b. Long-term debt financings are not appropriate for current operating expenses and routine maintenance expenses.
c. The City may use long-term debt financings subject to the following conditions:
 The project to be financed must be approved by the City Council.  The weighted average maturity of the debt (or the portion of the debt allocated to the project) will not exceed the average useful life of the project.
 The City estimates that sufficient revenues will be available to service the debt through its maturity.
 The City determines that the issuance of the debt will comply with the applicable state and federal law.

9.2.2. Short-term debt: Short-term debt may be issued to provide financing for the City’s operational cash flows in order to maintain a steady and even cash flow balance.

Short-term debt may also be used to finance short-lived capital projects; for example, the City may undertake lease-purchase financing for equipment.

9.2.3. Financings on Behalf of Other Entities. The City may also find it beneficial to issue debt on behalf of other governmental agencies or private third parties in order to further the public purposes of the City. In such cases, the City shall take reasonable steps to confirm the financial feasibility of the project to be financed and the financial solvency of any borrower and that the issuance of such debt is consistent with the policies set forth herein.

Agenda Packet Page 505 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 8

9.3. Types of Debt: The following types of debt are allowable under these Debt Management Policies:
• general obligation bonds
• bond or grant anticipation notes
• tax and revenue anticipation notes
• lease revenue bonds, certificates of participation and lease-purchase transactions
• other revenue bonds (including sales tax revenue bonds) and certificates of participation
• pension obligation bonds
• land-secured financings, such as special tax revenue bonds issued under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, and limited obligation bonds issued under applicable assessment statutes • tax increment financing to the extent permitted under state law • conduit financings, such as financings for affordable rental housing and qualified 501c3 organizations
The City may from time to time find that other forms of debt would be beneficial to further its public purposes and the City Council may approve such debt by amending these Debt Management Policies.

Debt shall be issued as fixed rate debt unless the City makes a specific determination as to why a variable rate issue would be beneficial to the City in a specific circumstance.

9.4. Relationship of Debt to Capital Improvement Program and Budget: New debt issues, and refinancing of existing debt, must be analyzed for compatibility within the City’s Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan. The City shall strive to fund the upkeep and maintenance of its infrastructure and facilities due to normal wear and tear through the expenditure of available operating revenues. The City shall seek to avoid the use of debt to fund infrastructure and facilities improvements that are the result of normal wear and tear. The City shall seek to issue debt in a timely manner to avoid having to make unplanned expenditures for capital improvements or equipment from its General Fund.

9.5. Policy Goals Related to Planning Goals and Objectives: The City is committed to longterm financial planning, maintaining appropriate reserves levels and employing prudent practices in governance, management and budget administration. The City intends to issue debt for the purposes stated in these Debt Management Policies and to implement policy decisions incorporated in the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan and its annual operating budget.

It is a policy goal of the City to protect taxpayers, ratepayers, and constituents by utilizing conservative financing methods and techniques so as to obtain the highest practical credit ratings (if applicable) and the lowest practical borrowing costs.

The City will comply with applicable state and federal law as it pertains to the maximum term of debt and the procedures for levying and imposing any related taxes, assessments, rates and charges.

When refinancing debt, it shall be the policy goal of the City to realize, whenever possible, and subject to any overriding non-financial policy considerations, (i) minimum Agenda Packet Page 506 of 595

CITY OF EL CERRITO

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL POLICIES
PAGE 9
net present value debt service savings equal to or greater than 5% of the refunded principal amount, and (ii) present value debt service savings equal to or greater than 100% of any escrow fund negative arbitrage.

9.6. Internal Control Procedures: When issuing debt, in addition to complying with the terms of these Debt Management Policies, the City shall comply with any other applicable policies regarding initial bond disclosure, continuing disclosure, post-issuance compliance, and investment of bond proceeds. The City will periodically review the requirements of and will remain in compliance with the following:
• the City’s Disclosure Policies and Procedures, and
• any federal tax compliance requirements, including without limitation arbitrage and rebate compliance, related to any prior bond issues, and • the City’s investment policies as they relate to the investment of bond proceeds.

Whenever reasonably possible, and for the purpose of ensuring that proceeds of debt will be used for their intended purpose, proceeds of debt will be held by a third-party trustee and the City will submit written requisitions for such proceeds. The City will submit a requisition signed by the Finance Director only after obtaining the signature of the City Manager.

9.7. Debt Limits: The outstanding principal amount of debt described in Section B will not exceed two percent (2%) of the total assessed value of property in the City, and debt service and lease payments incurred for financing purposes that are payable from the City’s General Fund will not exceed 5% of operational appropriations.

10. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND

10.1.The City may maintain a dedicated fund to provide for replacement of vehicles and certain equipment. Unreserved fund balance will be available for transfer to the General Fund only in the event of a fiscal emergency as described in Section 3.4.

11. ENTERPRISE FUNDS

11.1.All Enterprise Funds user fees will be examined annually to ensure that they recover all direct and indirect costs of service, provide for capital improvements and maintenance, and maintain adequate reserves.

11.2.Rate increases shall be approved by the City Council following formal noticing and a public hearing. Rate adjustments will be based on the projected expenditures in the TenYear Financial Plan.

Agenda Packet Page 507 of 595

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 9.B.

Date: August 15, 2023
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Crystal Reams, Finance Director/City Treasurer; Karen Pinkos, City Manager, City Management
Subject: Study Session on General Fund Reserve Balance

ACTION PROPOSED
Conduct a study session and provide direction/possible action to staff regarding the allocation of the City's General Fund Reserve Balance.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Fiscal Year 2021-22 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) shows the General Fund Reserve balance at $16.6 million. The City's Comprehensive Financial Policies (Policies), which will be considered for revision at the August 15, 2023 City Council meeting, provide guidance for setting General Fund Reserve goals as well as how to allocate any year-end surplus. The Policies include establishment of an Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF), to be used in case of "severe economic downturns or disasters." The EDRF policy was approved by the City Council in 2019.

However, due to the lack of General Fund Reserve balance, there was not sufficient funding to establish or fund the EDRF in the following two fiscal years.

On June 15, 2021, the City Council passed a motion to direct staff to establish a Section 115 Trust for pension obligations. Since that time, City staff has conducted research and consulted with our financial advisors, NHA Advisors, to help guide the process of establishing the Trust. In September 2022, the City Council held a joint meeting with the Financial Advisory Board (FAB) to learn about the City's pension obligations and create a working group consisting of City staff, a member of the City Council (Councilmember Quinto), and a member of the FAB (Chair Farahmand). The group's work was unfortunately stalled due to severe staffing issues in the Finance Department, however in the past few months staff has worked with the FAB to provide recommendations to revise the Comprehensive Financial Policies to include consideration of funding pension costs as one of the priorities for allocation of any year-end surplus. Additionally, the City's new Finance Director has reviewed and provided input regarding administration of a Section 115 Trust.

At this time, the City Council may wish to consider using recommended Comprehensive Financial Policies to discuss allocating the current General Fund Reserve balance of $16.6 million, that resulted from the prior Fiscal Years 2020-21 and 2021-22 surpluses. In doing so, there are options for the City Council to consider based on the Policies including creating and funding the EDRF and establishing and funding a Section 115 Trust.

Agenda Packet Page 508 of 595
Agenda Item No. 9.B.

Staff has provided scenarios in Attachment 1 for allocation of the FY 2021-22 year-end General Fund Reserve balance that will be discussed in detail during the presentation at the August 15, 2023 City Council meeting. As previously discussed with the City Council during the FY 2023-24 Budget process, there is approximately $1.6 million in expected one-time expenditures that will be considered on a case-by-case basis during the fiscal year for Council approval, which the scenarios take into account.

Considerations are made to ensure that the General Fund Reserve meets the current targets as stated in the Comprehensive Financial Policies, provides funding for the EDRF, and provides for an allocation to a Section 115 Trust for funding pension costs.

Further, City staff recommends that the City Council consider providing direction to pursue working with Public Agency Retirement System (PARS) to administer the Section 115 Trust. The City is a long-time client of PARS for the City's retirement program for part-time employees. PARS is recommended by other public agencies and the City's financial advisor and provides the most flexibility on investment strategies for either active or passive investment management. In consultation with our financial advisor, staff notes that costs are comparable to other firms (CalPERS, Keenan, and PFM) and that PARS works with the largest number of agencies in California for Section 115 Trusts. Upon City Council direction, staff would work with NHA Advisors and PARS to develop Section 115 Trust documents for the City Council to consider at a future meeting.

City staff requests that the City Council discuss the options for allocating the General Fund Reserve balance to create and establish funding for the EDRF and the Section 115 Trust. Staff further requests direction on administration of the Section 115 Trust with PARS.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This item is consistent with Goal A: Deliver exemplary government services and Goal B:

Achieve long-term financial sustainability.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Any action taken by the City Council to allocate the FY 2021-22 year-end General Fund Reserve balance will determine the appropriate reserve ratios and the amount of unrestricted funds for use as directed by the Council. No additional funds are generated by this action. Costs related to establishing the Section 115 Trust will be included in the program that will be brought to the City Council at a future meeting.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

Reviewed by:

Agenda Packet Page 509 of 595
Agenda Item No. 9.B.

Alexandra Orologas, Assistant City Manager
Attachments:

1. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 510 of 595
STUDY SESSION –

GENERAL FUND RESERVE BALANCE
City Council Meeting
August 15, 2023
Agenda Packet Page 511 of 595

ALLOCATION OF GENERAL FUND BALANCE
• General Fund balance as of FY 2021-22 ACFR: $16.6 million • Comprehensive Financial Policies – Recommended Priorities for Year-end Surplus • General Fund Target
• General Fund Reserve target: minimum 10% of annual expenditures • Goal: 17% per GFOA recommendations
• Current: 34%
• Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF)
• Three months of payroll costs (currently $9 million)
• Minimum 33% to Pension Costs
• City Manager recommendations for one-time expenditures (capital, etc.) • Consider taking action to create/fund EDRF
• Consider taking action to create/fund Section 115 Trust for pension costs Agenda Packet Page 512 of 595

EMERGENCY DISASTER RELIEF FUND
(EDRF)
• Restricted portion of General Fund - contributes to overall General Fund Reserve ratio • Restricted as to use per Comprehensive Financial Policies – in event of Severe Economic Downturns or Disasters
• Would be reflected in Annual Comprehensive Financial Statements (ACFR) as Restricted in General Fund
• Current Policy calls for three months of payroll costs • Currently ~$9 million
• Future funding will be considered during budget process/subject to year-end surplus policy • FAB plans to review and discuss possible future revisions as to amount • Recommendation: City Council designate an amount of the General Fund Reserve balance of $16.6 million to create and fund EDRF
Agenda Packet Page 513 of 595
SECTION 115 TRUST
(PENSION RESERVE)
• City Council directed staff by motion (6/2021) to establish Section 115 Trust (Pension Reserve) • Section 115 Trust recommended by staff and financial advisor as vehicle for addressing pension liabilities
• Creates an irrevocable trust that can only be used to either pay pension costs or paydown unfunded liability • Greater investment security compared to CalPERS investment return fluctuations • Greater investment flexibility compared to General Fund investment strategy • Allows City discretion to withdraw funds from Section 115 Trust to make CalPERS normal cost payments during rate increases or economic downturns
• Section 115 Trust will be an asset in City Financial Statements • Viewed favorably by bond rating agencies
Agenda Packet Page 514 of 595
SECTION 115 TRUST
• Staff has reviewed potential firms and recommends working with PARS to administer the Trust • Public Agency Retirement System (PARS) already working with City for the retirement program for part-time employees
• PARS is recommended by other public agencies and City financial advisor and provides most flexibility on investment strategies (active or passive investment management) • Costs are comparable to other firms (CalPERS, Keenan, PFM) reviewed by staff and financial advisor and PARS works with the largest number of agencies in California for Section 115 Trusts • Staff would work with NHA Advisors (financial advisor) and PARS to develop Section 115 Trust documents for the City Council to consider at a future meeting
• Recommendation: City Council designate an amount from General Fund Reserve balance of $16.6 million to fund initial deposit of Section 115 Trust
• Recommendation: City Council direct staff and NHA Advisors, to establish Section 115 Trust by working with PARS and bring program details for City Council approval at future Council meeting Agenda Packet Page 515 of 595

FUNDING SCENARIOS
Option 1
Fund Balance as of FY 2021-22 $16,624,174 Totals 34% of GF Expenditures ($48,435,585) Fund 1/2 of EDRF in FY 2023-24 4,500,000 Restricted (totals 9% of GF Expenditures) $12,124,174 Unrestricted (totals 25% of GF Expenditures) One-time Expenditures FY 2023-24
(estimated) 1,600,000
$10,524,174 Unrestricted (21% of GF Expenditures, Total including EDRF = 31%) Section 115 Trust 1,000,000 Restricted – Separate Trust Fund $9,524,174 Unrestricted (19% of GF Expenditures, Total including EDRF = 28%) Option 2
Fund Balance as of FY 2021-22 $16,624,174 Total GF 34% of Expenditures ($48,435,585) Fund full EDRF in FY 2023-24 9,000,000 Restricted (totals 18.5% of GF Expenditures $7,624,174 Unrestricted (totals 15% of GF Expenditures) One-time Expenditures FY 2023-24
(estimated) 1,600,000
$6,024,174 Unrestricted (12% of GF Expenditures, Total including EDRF = 31%) Section 115 Trust 1,000,000 Restricted – Separate Trust Fund $5,024,174 Unrestricted (10% of GF Expenditures, Total including EDRF – 28%) $4,500,000
$9,524,174
EDRF Unrestricted
$9,000,000
$5,024,174
EDRF Unrestricted
Agenda Packet Page 516 of 595

NEXT STEPS
• Staffrecommendations:
• City Council designate an amount of the General Fund Reserve balance of $16.6 million to create and fund EDRF
• City Council designate an amount from General Fund Reserve balance of $16.6 million to fund initial deposit of Section 115 Trust
• City Council direct staff and NHA Advisors, to establish Section 115 Trust by working with PARS and bring program details for City Council approval at future Council meeting • City Council discussion and possible direction by motion Agenda Packet Page 517 of 595
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
August 15, 2023
(Revised August 16, 2023)

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

PUBLIC COMMENT INDEX

1. Public Comments received
Agenda Item 6A – Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Presentation

1. Revised presentation

2. Presentation
Agenda Item 8C – Adoption of the 2023-2031 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

1. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 518 of 595
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
August 15, 2023
The following Public Comments were received by 2:00:00 p.m. 8/15/2023, 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. Cordell Hindler

2. Joan Setka

3. Cathy Taruskin

4. Gary Prost

5. Sue Duncan

6. Scott Tipping

Agenda Packet Page 519 of 595
From: Cordell Hindler
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments
Date: Thursday, August 10, 2023 4:37:58 PM
Hello Mayor Motoyama, Council Members and Staff,
I AM Submitting the Following Comments into the Record:

1. For A Future Agenda, The Council Should Invite Danny Wan To Provide a Presentation on the Port of Oakland

2. Also to Direct Staff To Provide an Update on The Class & Comp Study Sincerely
Cordell
Agenda Packet Page 520 of 595
From: Joan Setka
To: City Clerk
Subject: not on the agenda-proposal for for El Cerrito to be a sister city Date: Friday, August 11, 2023 12:40:33 PM
Hello,
I would like to propose that El Cerrito develop a sister city relationship with a city in Ukraine.

I would like to briefly present background and relevant information.

Joan Setka
Agenda Packet Page 521 of 595
From: Tessa Rudnick
To: Cathy Taruskin
Cc: Karen Pinkos; Chris Jones; City Clerk
Subject: Re: Pickleball at Castro Park
Date: Sunday, August 13, 2023 9:44:51 AM
Hi Cathy,
Adding City Clerk on Cc so this update can be submitted as public comment at our next Council meeting.

Thank you for the update, and for the dedication and hard work of the Pickleball Community.

I hope the District and our dedicated staff are able to find a resolution. Looking forward to playing on the court.

Best,
Tessa
From: Cathy Taruskin
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 10:36 AM
To: Lisa Motoyama <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Fadelli <[email protected]>; Tessa Rudnick <[email protected]>; Gabe Quinto <[email protected]>; Carolyn Wysinger <[email protected]>; Karen Pinkos <[email protected]>; Chris Jones <[email protected]> Subject: Pickleball at Castro Park
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Greetings all,
Last November and December, before Councilmembers Quinto and Wysinger were in office, I met individually with Councilmembers Fadelli, Rudnick and Motoyama to talk about pickleball at the Castro Park Tennis courts. There is new information that I would like to share with all of you, to bring us all on the same page regarding the status of the pickleball program at Castro.

In Spring of 2021 the EC Parks and Rec Commission approved the conversion of the Castro courts from two tennis courts into six permanent pickleball courts. (We had successfully lobbied to get this into the EC Master Plan in 2019). To accelerate the project, the East Bay Pickleball Association, our 501c3, has agreed to fund the full cost of this conversion (paying for pickleball nets, court painting, etc.). At the time, we all felt this conversion would happen within the coming year (2021).

However, in December of 2021 Chris Jones informed us that the city and the WCCUSD needed to renew their very dated land use agreement for all of Castro Park. He said this would need to be signed off on before Agenda Packet Page 522 of 595
improvements could be made on the tennis courts. As background, the school district owns the land at Castro Park (the entire park, not just the tennis courts), but the city finances the improvements, including the clubhouse, restrooms, baseball field, tennis courts, etc. At the time, we were all under the impression that this would just cause a short delay.

In fact, the agreement has still not been signed, after 20 months of negotiation. When I spoke to Lisa, Tessa and Paul at the end of last year, Chris was under the impression that the terms had all been worked out and it was now in the hands of the attorneys. We thought signatures were imminent. However, it continued to drag on due to staff turnover, other priorities, etc. Finally in May the district provided the city with a contract.

Upon examination, however, it included a clause that stipulated the district could cancel the agreement at any time, with six months' notice. The city challenged this and countered with a request that if the district cancelled the agreement, they would reimburse the city for improvements made on the property. I believe that is where negotiations stand at this point.

Knowing that relations between the city and the district are delicate, I have steered clear of approaching the district management directly over the 20 months to inquire about the delays (although some of our members went ahead and did so). However, the 6-month cancellation clause puts us in a bind -- how wise would it be to invest many thousands of dollars in pickleball improvements at Castro, only to have them (possibly) taken away after a short time? I therefore wrote to Superintendent Hurst and Associate Superintendent Freese in July asking if they would consider adding a clause to the agreement that would exempt the pickleball courts from the 6-month clause for xx years (I suggested 10-15), just so that our investment would be protected. After all, being reimbursed for the improvements is no real benefit to us if it means we no longer can play pickleball anywhere in El Cerrito. Luis Freese replied: "Thank you for letting us know about your concerns about the long-term use of the courts. We will take this into consideration when finalizing the agreement."
Meanwhile, Castro Park, which I would wager generates more revenue than all the other EC tennis courts combined, has had all maintenance deferred pending the agreement. The courts are now in deplorable condition -- badly impacted by the rains last winter. The window of time for court improvements is limited by the need to avoid work during the rainy season, so once again the clock is ticking.

Without a fundraising target (Chris does not want to solicit bids until the contract is signed) we continue to hold fundraising events. Pickleball is so popular that it is an easy to raise money -- players are very willing to give.

We are a tight-knit, constantly-growing community. So far in 2023 these efforts include:

Agenda Packet Page 523 of 595
Proceeds from Monthly Round Robins at Castro, led by Paul Taruskin: $4,200
East Bay Pickleball T-Shirt sales, donated by Scott Kane: $900.

Lesbian Meetup Group, led by Linda Moran and friends: $880 Instructors who have set aside a portion of their clinic proceeds to help support the courts: $410
This has brought our total to over $60,000.

One of our members spoke to Chris Jones yesterday, and he informed her that he had again nudged the district to get an updated agreement.

My purpose in writing is to let you know where this project stands and why nothing has happened (with my limited knowledge). We realize that the use of the tennis courts is a very small matter in the overall land use agreement, and in the priorities of the District and the City, but it's of enormous importance to a large community, including many seniors, who rely heavily on pickleball for health and social reasons.

I don't know what it will take to get this contract across the finish line, but we are waiting with bated breath and yearn for better pickleball courts in El Cerrito.

Sincerely,
Cathy Taruskin
USA Pickleball Ambassador, El Cerrito
EC Resident since 1987
Agenda Packet Page 524 of 595
From: Gary Prost
To: City Clerk
Subject: Not on the Agenda: Vegetation Abatement in the Hillside Natural Area - Big Thank You! Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 9:41:15 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

City Council Meeting Aug 15 2023
Mayor Motoyama and City Council,
I am Gary Prost with Make El Cerrito Fire Safe. If you are not already aware, Contra Costa Countyhired crews have been clearing brush around the Hillside Natural Area 100 ft shaded fire break off and on for the past few weeks. They have completed the stretch from Earl Court to Buckingham along the east (uphill) edge of HNA. The requests were submitted by our group of neighbors using the Measure X portal, and were supported, supervised, and coordinated by the EC FD. I would like to personally and enthusiastically thank the Fire Department, and Chiefs Saylors and Beckman, for their continued support of this effort. There is more to be done.

We need only look at what just happened in Lahaina, Maui, to see what a wind-driven fire can do to a community in a matter of minutes. Doesn’t matter if you’re in the hills or flats, when you are in the way of a wildfire, you better have your vegetation under control and your home hardened. The alternative is devastation and death.

Thank you,
Gary Prost
Agenda Packet Page 525 of 595
From: Sue Duncan
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment, not on agenda
Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 1:39:25 PM
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
Sadly, tragically, another deadly wildfire has occurred.

It should remind all of us that what we saw happen on Maui, and before that in Coffey Park, Paradise, the Oakland/Berkeley Tunnel fire and too many others, that it can happen here in El Cerrito.

El Cerrito has the fuel, the Diablo Winds and houses close together with vegetation in between them.

It should also remind us that once a wildfire enters and starts to burn neighborhoods, that it is next to or impossible to fight that fire.

With 81 mph winds, the Lahaina fire spread at a mile per minute. True, usually our Diablo Winds aren’t that strong but the winds that fanned the Oakland fire were 60-65 mph. Keep in mind that from the top of Terrace Drive above the Arlington to the Costco parking lot is 3.2 miles per the map. This is not a lot of distance for fire to travel rapidly.

All of El Cerrito is at risk.

It is imperative that the city find more funds to maintain the recent work that has been done in HNA, creating a 100-foot defensible space from property lines. It also must fund more continued work.

Thank you,
Sue Duncan
Agenda Packet Page 526 of 595
1 From: Scott Tipping
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 1:55 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: Not on Agenda - HNA Fire Hazards (+ Measure X shaded fuel break) Attachments: 1994.05.01_EC_HNAFireHazardReductionPlan.pdf; El Cerrito Kensington Wildfire Action Plan 2017.pdf Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. sophospsmartbannerend
Honorable Mayor and Council members,
We have just had the most deadly wildfire in over 100 years in the USA.  No one expec this to happen in Lahaina.  All of El Cerrito is in A VERY HIGH FIRE or HIGH FIRE ZONE! We do expect it and yet El Cerrito government seems to ignore this fact!   We had a grass fire caused by electric malfunction this week that could have easily been catastrophic if conditions were slightly different, and our wonderful fire department had not been able to respond so quickly and completely.

We CAN NOT reasonably change the weather or conditions that lead to the coming fire. We CAN REDUCE HAZARDOUS VEGETATION and help reduce chances of a catastrophic fire disaster.  Many m Please take time to read this comprehensive email thread and inform noted at a time when you are able to fully take in the information here.

Unfortunately I find it necessary to write to you again, little has been done by the city of El Cerrito to mitigate the extreme fire danger in the Hillside Natural Area since speaking before you all in June of 2023.  There was a few minor efforts immediately after I spoke, to trim tall dry grass in a few areas, however this was too little too late, and the city’s contractor didn’t complete work prior to the 4th of July when danger is often greater.  Four foot tall dry grass was all over the hillside where people smoked and attempted to watch fireworks.  Fortunately we’ve had a foggy cool summer and lower risk of fire, so far.

Some good news,  I and a group of concerned El Cerrito citizens were able to research and access Contra Costa County’s Measure X services for Vegetation management crews to help begin to establish a 100’ shaded fuel break along the HNA property lines.  This is only a start, and in no way releases the City of El Cerrito of its responsibility to ensure the safety of its citizens. We are thankful for the cooperation of ECFD and CON Fire in this process, and our fellow citizen who assisted in establishing communication with the county.  MUCH, MUCH, MORE needs to be done. We look forward to the City providing proper ongoing maintenance to these areas, to a much higher standard than has generally been done over the past 10 years. Further hazardous fuel load reduction to decrease fire risk in El Cerrito must become a VERY HIGH PRIORITY, to match the very high risk.

In my June 2023 email, I noted that in recent city management reports, the amount of fire prevention work noted in HNA seemed to be inaccurate, by this I mean over reported for the amount of work accomplished.  Since that time I’ve gone back and further reviewed several years of these reports and it appears there has been an ongoing pattern of misinformation relayed by City staff in these reports.  Again, reading the 2017 El Cerrito Wildfires Action Plan (currently adopted plan and guiding document adopted by EC city council and ECFD) and 1994 Fire Hazard Reduction Plan, and then walking these areas in HNA near homes makes it obvious the these plans have not been implemented as stated in the reports.  I have hundreds of photos and videos over the years in some areas to show this.

It’s time for the City of El Cerrito to truly make this a high priority, and get things done, not just talk about it. It seems there is a lot of reliance on the recent grant to create yet another plan for fire hazard reduction in the HNA.  For some reason the upcoming Hillside Natural Area Fire Resilience and Forest Conservation Management plan underway only https://www.el-cerrito.org/DocumentCenter/View/19267/19940501_EC_HNAFireHazardReductionPlan http://www.el-cerrito.org/DocumentCenter/View/7216/041817-4c Agenda Packet Page 527 of 595
2 seems to dedicate around $29,000 of the $144,000 proposal to wildfire expertise.  (See below summary of costs inserted). Please keep in mind the entire purpose for this grant was to provide vegetation reduction and fire safety for WUI’s like ours in El Cerrito.  The city must ensure the plan have a heavy focus on safety of the city and wildfire hazard reduction.  That’s the point of the plan in the first place.  The city has failed at each previous attempt to implement a vegetation fire safety plan, primarily due to lack of funding.  This can’t happen again.

Agenda Packet Page 528 of 595
3 Agenda Packet Page 529 of 595
4 This problem hasn’t happened overnight and can’t be resolved overnight, but much much more needs to be done now.

Thank you for you close attention to these matters.

Take Care,
Scott Tipping
From: Scott Tipping
Date: June 6, 2023 at 1:33:59 PM PDT
To: [email protected]‐cerrito.ca.us
Cc: Scott Tipping
Subject: Not on Agenda ‐ HNA Fire Hazards (corrected)

Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
I spoke before Council in 2018 and have spoken to most of you at one time or another about many of our fellow El Cerrito residents great concern about fire hazards in the Hillside Natural Area.

The responsibility for managing the Hillside Natural Area (HNA) is the City of El Cerritos responsibility and it’s my understanding it falls under the Department of Public Works in the city of El Cerrito. The HNA is a substantial fire hazard and this hazard has only increased over the decades of inadequate vegetation management.

Over the past 10 years the quality of vegetation management and fuel reduction for fire safety has degraded substantially. Even the most basic measures such as string trimming of tall dry grass seldom occurs, and has not occurred at all in the past 3 years in area south of King Ct. I feel whom ever is now overseeing the vegetation management in HNA should be removed from having responsibility of anything related to fire safety in the HNA. Someone with the proper qualifications for fire safety should be directing all fuel reduction efforts and expenditures in HNA and especially within 200 feet of property lines upslope from the HNA.

In my opinion, the City of El Cerrito is displaying gross negligence by its lack of fuel load and vegetation management in the HNA. The responsible party (The City of El Cerrito) knowing a hazardous situation exists and doing inadequate measures to reduce the known hazard makes them responsible.

Agenda Packet Page 530 of 595
5 There has been recent references in reports and statements in news letters that the city is following the 1994 EC HNA Fire Reduction Plan (attached) until new ~ 2025 “hillside, natural area wild fire resilience and forest conservation management plan,“ is implemented. This is simply not true, the City is NOT implementing the 1994 plan in any meaningful way. If the City were following this plan there would be a fuel break on the full upper slope / eastern border of HNA, within 100 feet of property lines, at a minimum. In addition the new plan will be the 4th such “plan” but has no meaningful implementation as it’s only funded to do a plan, no actual work. Stop planning and start doing something!
(Insert from 1994 plan, shows recommended fuel breaks that have never been implemented).

Agenda Packet Page 531 of 595
6 Agenda Packet Page 532 of 595
7 The City and the personnel responsible for the HNA management are well aware of these hazards, and have documented this over decades, as have members of this city government.

When a fire occurs, and loss of property or worse happens, the City of El Cerrito will be held responsible. Substantially more efforts to reduce these hazards must occur immediately.

Respectfully,
Scott Tipping
From: Scott Tipping
Date: February 21, 2023 at 2:54:41 PM PST
To: [email protected]
Cc: Scott Tipping
Subject: Not on Agenda ‐ EC Wild Fire Action Plan 2017
Honorable Mayor Matoyama and Council members
Regarding: Hillside Natural Area vegetation management
My name is Scott Tipping and I’ve been a resident of El Cerrito for 20 years living adjacent to the Hillside Natural Area (HNA).
** In my opinion, at a minimum, the city of El Cerrito should take immediate action to create a 100 foot fire safe zone between the Hillside Natural Area and property lines on the upslope (east border) of the HNA,
in accordance with 2017 El Cerrito ‐ Kensington Wildfire Action Plan. ** For the past 10 I’ve noticed a steady decline in vegetation management in the HNA. I’ve found this decline in very concerning due to ever increasing danger of Wildfires.

Due to the increase in Wildfire concerns, for the past five years, I’ve been much more active in learning about wildfire hazards, history of this topic in El Cerrito and efforts by the city of El Cerrito specifically in the Hillside Natural Agenda Packet Page 533 of 595
8 Area, and have worked with volunteer fellow citizens, in addition to various members of ECFD and El Cerrito government.

In 2017, working with Contra Costa Fire, Diablo fire council, El Cerrito, fire, chief, El Cerrito arborist, and others, put together the “El Cerrito – Kensington Wildfire Action Plan” (pdf attached). That same year El Cerrito City Council adopted the plan. Unfortunately not much has happened since. I highly encourage each of you to read this plan, especially the executive summary and section 4.

In the past, the city of El Cerrito has spent tens of thousands of dollars and funded at least two other plans specific to the Hillside Natural Area, one in 1987 and a new updated plan after the Oakland Hills fire in 1994 specific to fire vegetation management. Unfortunately, my understanding is that the city never adopted the neither 1987 nor 1994 plan. As a result, the fire danger in the Hillside Natural Area has literally been allowed to grow for decades.

That being said, at least the 2017 Wild Fire Action plan was adopted by city council. Unfortunately, there’s been more “plan” and little “ACTION” when it comes to wildfire vegetation management in the HNA over the past 10 years, and nothing significant since the 1994 plan was created and distributed. After doing a fair amount of research I found this has been the history with this subject in the city of El Cerrito.

It’s time for ACTION regarding the Hillside Natural Area and fire safety. Much more needs to be done than is being done by the City of El Cerrito! Many of the cities own communications outline what a danger the vegetation and fuel loads are in Hillside Natural Area is with regard to wildfire safety. Even so, very little action has been taken to alleviate this growing danger.

It’s long past the time for the city of El Cerrito to do more. I and many of my fellow citizens of El Cerrito look forward to substantial progress this year in making El Cerrito Fire Safe!
Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Scott Tipping
Agenda Packet Page 534 of 595
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
City of El Cerrito Local Government Forum
August 15, 2023
Agenda Item No. 6.A.

Agenda Packet Page 535 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 2 Topics For Discussion
1 Capacity
2 Identifying and Reducing Wildfire Risk
3 Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings
4 Public Safety Power Shutoffs
5 Customer Resources and Support
6 Open Discussion
Agenda Packet Page 536 of 595
Capacity
Agenda Packet Page 537 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 4 PG&E system is
now capable of
handling new
capacity
Ensuring Capacity for New Customers
*Application must include:
• Load sheets
• Site plans
• Elevation plans
• Diagrams
• Spec sheets
Customer submits an
application/job
package* to PG&E
New customer
requires
electric power
Conducts
reinforcements
and upgrades
If large customer
PG&E performs large
load studies,
as needed
Planning Department
reviews applications for
normal and large
customers
Identifies if
reinforcements or
upgrades to their
system are needed
PG&E has a robust process for ensuring there is sufficient capacity to support new customers.

NEW CUSTOMER PG&E
Agenda Packet Page 538 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 5 Capacity Projects in El Cerrito

PROJECT TYPE STATUS
Waldo Substation
Power
transformer
replacement
Start date:
07/25/2023
El Cerrito G
Substation
Transfer trip relay
replacement
Estimated start date:

October 2023
Capacity Coordination: Are there new developments on the horizon? Agenda Packet Page 539 of 595
Identifying and Reducing
Wildfire Risk
Agenda Packet Page 540 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 7 Wildfire Risk in Your Community
PG&E’s high fire-risk area
map helps us target wildfire
mitigation efforts in the
areas and communities at
highest risk.

High fire-risk area
City of El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 541 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 8 Layers of Wildfire Protection
Using the latest technologies
and equipment
Keeping trees and branches
away from powerlines
Installing stronger powerlines
and poles
Ensuring safety with enhanced
protection and temporary outages
Undergrounding 10,000 miles of
powerlines in highest fire-risk areas
Together,
These layers
reduce wildfire
risk from
equipment
Agenda Packet Page 542 of 595
Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings
Agenda Packet Page 543 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 10 How It Works
Turning off power within one-tenth of a second if
a tree branch or other object strikes the line.

Why We Do It
Stopping wildfires
before they have a
chance to start.

SAFETY SETTINGS IN ACTION IN NAPA COUNTY
Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings: A Technology To Prevent Wildfires Data is approximate; *Based on 2022 performance for CPUC-reportable ignitions in HFTD compared to 2018-2020 weather-normalized performance; **Relative to the 2018-2020 average
68%
99%
reduction in
fire size**
68%
reduction in
ignitions*
Agenda Packet Page 544 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 11 Safety Settings, Step-By-Step
Agenda Packet Page 545 of 595
Public Safety Power Shutoffs
Agenda Packet Page 546 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 13 What is a Public Safety Power Shutoff?
High winds can cause tree
branches and debris to contact
energized electric lines,
damage our equipment and
cause a wildfire.

To prevent wildfires, we may
need to turn off power as a
last resort.

Agenda Packet Page 547 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 14 What Conditions Could Lead to a PSPS?
Low humidity
levels of 30%
and below
Forecasted high
winds above
19 mph and gusts
above 30-40 mph
Condition of dry
material on the
ground and low
moisture content
of vegetation
A Red Flag
Warning issued
by the National
Weather Service
On-the-ground,
real-time
observations
Agenda Packet Page 548 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 15 Warning
Watch
How Are Customers Notified for a PSPS?
Automated calls, texts and emails
(available in 16 languages).

We will also use pge.com, social media and
will inform local news and radio.

How We’ll Notify
@pacificgasandelectric
@PGE4Me
@pacificgasandelectric
Enroll at: pge.com/addressalerts
How To Receive Notifications
For Any Address
Annual registration is required.

Anyone can sign up for address
alerts in 16 languages to receive
PSPS notifications for any location,
such as their work or child’s school.

When We’ll Notify
48-24 hours before power is turned off
4-1 hours before power is turned off
When power is turned off
After weather has passed
If estimated restoration time changes
Daily until power has been restored
Agenda Packet Page 549 of 595
Customer Resources
Agenda Packet Page 550 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 17 Portable Battery Program
No-cost portable backup battery solutions, mini-fridges, and insulin cooler wallets pge.com/backuppower Generator and Battery Rebate Program
Rebates with purchase of a portable generator or battery pge.com/backuppower Self-Generation Incentive Program
Rebates to help customers purchase permanent battery storage pge.com/sgip Disability Disaster Access and Resources
Emergency preparedness planning, portable batteries, and support for Access and Functional Needs customers
pge.com/pspsresources
Fixed Power Solutions
Permanent, long-term backup power solutions for the most impacted customers pge.com/residentialstorageinitiative Customer Resources and Support for PSPS Outages and EPSS

EXPANDED ACCESS

EXPANDED ACCESS
Agenda Packet Page 551 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 18 Customer Resources
Dedicated wildfire safety contacts: Hotline: 1-866-743-6589 | Email: [email protected] Information on wildfire
prevention efforts
Wildfire Safety
pge.com/wildfiresafety
24-7 free and confidential
support and resources via
calls or texts to 211
211
211ca.org
Submit photos of
non-emergency potential
safety concerns
Report It App
pge.com/reportit
Create an emergency
safety plan to keep you
and your family safe
Safety Action Center
safetyactioncenter.pge.com
Agenda Packet Page 552 of 595
Open Discussion
Agenda Packet Page 553 of 595
Thank You
Agenda Packet Page 554 of 595
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
City of El Cerrito Local Government Forum
August 15, 2023
Agenda Item No. 6.A.

Agenda Packet Page 555 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 2 Topics For Discussion
1 Capacity
2 Identifying and Reducing Wildfire Risk
3 Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings
4 Public Safety Power Shutoffs
5 Customer Resources and Support
6 Open Discussion
Agenda Packet Page 556 of 595
Capacity
Agenda Packet Page 557 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 4 PG&E system is
now capable of
handling new
capacity
Ensuring Capacity for New Customers
*Application must include:
• Load sheets
• Site plans
• Elevation plans
• Diagrams
• Spec sheets
Customer submits an
application/job
package* to PG&E
New customer
requires
electric power
Conducts
reinforcements
and upgrades
If large customer
PG&E performs large
load studies,
as needed
Planning Department
reviews applications for
normal and large
customers
Identifies if
reinforcements or
upgrades to their
system are needed
PG&E has a robust process for ensuring there is sufficient capacity to support new customers.

NEW CUSTOMER PG&E
Agenda Packet Page 558 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 5 Capacity Projects in El Cerrito

PROJECT TYPE STATUS
Waldo Substation
Power
transformer
replacement
Start date:
07/25/2023
El Cerrito G
Substation
Transfer trip relay
replacement
Estimated start date:

October 2023
Capacity Coordination: Are there new developments on the horizon? Agenda Packet Page 559 of 595
Identifying and Reducing
Wildfire Risk
Agenda Packet Page 560 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 7 Wildfire Risk in Your Community
PG&E’s high fire-risk area
map helps us target wildfire
mitigation efforts in the
areas and communities at
highest risk.

High fire-risk area
City of El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 561 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 8 Layers of Wildfire Protection
Using the latest technologies
and equipment
Keeping trees and branches
away from powerlines
Installing stronger powerlines
and poles
Ensuring safety with enhanced
protection and temporary outages
Undergrounding 10,000 miles of
powerlines in highest fire-risk areas
Together,
These layers
reduce wildfire
risk from
equipment
Agenda Packet Page 562 of 595
Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings
Agenda Packet Page 563 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 10 How It Works
Turning off power within one-tenth of a second if
a tree branch or other object strikes the line.

Why We Do It
Stopping wildfires
before they have a
chance to start.

SAFETY SETTINGS IN ACTION IN NAPA COUNTY
Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings: A Technology To Prevent Wildfires Data is approximate; *Based on 2022 performance for CPUC-reportable ignitions in HFTD compared to 2018-2020 weather-normalized performance; **Relative to the 2018-2020 average
68%
99%
reduction in
fire size**
68%
reduction in
ignitions*
Agenda Packet Page 564 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 11 Safety Settings, Step-By-Step
Agenda Packet Page 565 of 595
Public Safety Power Shutoffs
Agenda Packet Page 566 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 13 What is a Public Safety Power Shutoff?
High winds can cause tree
branches and debris to contact
energized electric lines,
damage our equipment and
cause a wildfire.

To prevent wildfires, we may
need to turn off power as a
last resort.

Agenda Packet Page 567 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 14 What Conditions Could Lead to a PSPS?
Low humidity
levels of 30%
and below
Forecasted high
winds above
19 mph and gusts
above 30-40 mph
Condition of dry
material on the
ground and low
moisture content
of vegetation
A Red Flag
Warning issued
by the National
Weather Service
On-the-ground,
real-time
observations
Agenda Packet Page 568 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 15 Warning
Watch
How Are Customers Notified for a PSPS?
Automated calls, texts and emails
(available in 16 languages).

We will also use pge.com, social media and
will inform local news and radio.

How We’ll Notify
@pacificgasandelectric
@PGE4Me
@pacificgasandelectric
Enroll at: pge.com/addressalerts
How To Receive Notifications
For Any Address
Annual registration is required.

Anyone can sign up for address
alerts in 16 languages to receive
PSPS notifications for any location,
such as their work or child’s school.

When We’ll Notify
48-24 hours before power is turned off
4-1 hours before power is turned off
When power is turned off
After weather has passed
If estimated restoration time changes
Daily until power has been restored
Agenda Packet Page 569 of 595
Customer Resources
Agenda Packet Page 570 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 17 Portable Battery Program
No-cost portable backup battery solutions, mini-fridges, and insulin cooler wallets pge.com/backuppower Generator and Battery Rebate Program
Rebates with purchase of a portable generator or battery pge.com/backuppower Self-Generation Incentive Program
Rebates to help customers purchase permanent battery storage pge.com/sgip Disability Disaster Access and Resources
Emergency preparedness planning, portable batteries, and support for Access and Functional Needs customers
pge.com/pspsresources
Fixed Power Solutions
Permanent, long-term backup power solutions for the most impacted customers pge.com/residentialstorageinitiative Customer Resources and Support for PSPS Outages and EPSS

EXPANDED ACCESS

EXPANDED ACCESS
Agenda Packet Page 571 of 595
Some of the measures included in this presentation are contemplated as additional precautionary measures intended to further reduce the risk of wildfires. 18 Customer Resources
Dedicated wildfire safety contacts: Hotline: 1-866-743-6589 | Email: [email protected] Information on wildfire
prevention efforts
Wildfire Safety
pge.com/wildfiresafety
24-7 free and confidential
support and resources via
calls or texts to 211
211
211ca.org
Submit photos of
non-emergency potential
safety concerns
Report It App
pge.com/reportit
Create an emergency
safety plan to keep you
and your family safe
Safety Action Center
safetyactioncenter.pge.com
Agenda Packet Page 572 of 595
Open Discussion
Agenda Packet Page 573 of 595
Thank You
Agenda Packet Page 574 of 595
City Council
August 15, 2023
2023-2031
Housing
Element Update
Agenda Item No. 8.C.

Agenda Packet Page 575 of 595
2 What is the Housing Element?
• Required element (topic area) of the General Plan
 Plan to meet current and future housing needs of all community members  “Fair Share” of the regional housing need
• Updated every 8 years
 State-mandated deadline: January 31, 2023
• Requires review and certification from Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT |
Agenda Packet Page 576 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 3
Housing Element Contents and Organization
Chapters

1. Introduction

2. Needs Assessment

3. Fair Housing Assessment

4. Sites Inventory

5. Constraints Analysis

6. Opportunities for Energy Conservation

7. Housing Plan
Appendices
A. Evaluation of the Previous (2015-2023) Housing Element B. Community Engagement
C. BART TOD Housing Element Letter
Agenda Packet Page 577 of 595
Every city and county
must plan to
accommodate
its “fair share” of the
regional housing need.

CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 4
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
California
(Housing and Community Development) State
ABAG
(Association of Bay Area Governments)
Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND)
441,176 units
Region
Local Jurisdictions
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
City of El Cerrito RHNA = 1,391 units
Cities &
Counties
Agenda Packet Page 578 of 595
Income Category
2015-2023
RHNA
(Housing Units)
2023-2031
RHNA
(Housing Units)
Percent Change
Very Low Income
(<50% of Median Income)
100 334 234%
Low Income
(51-80% of Median Income)
63 192 205%
Moderate Income
(81-120% of Median Income)
69 241 249%
Above Moderate Income
(>120% of Median Income)
166 624 276%
TOTAL 398 1,391 249%
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 5
RHNA Housing Needs by Income Level
Total “lower
income” = 526
units
38% of RHNA
Agenda Packet Page 579 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 6
Public Engagement and Feedback
• Project Webpage & FAQs
• Online Survey
 215 responses
• Community Workshop #1 – April
26, 2022
 24 participants
• Planning Commission-Sponsored
Community Workshop #2 –
August 1, 2022
 7 participants
What did we hear?
• Support for building affordable
housing
• Concerns about gentrification and
displacement
• Constraints on housing
development
• Other concerns
Agenda Packet Page 580 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 7
HCD Submittal & Revisions Process
July 29, 2022 Public Review Draft released
September 19, 2022 Draft Housing Element submitted to HCD for 90-day review December 12, 2022 Received 1st HCD comment letter
March 20, 2023 Draft Housing Element revised and submitted to HCD for 60-day review May 19, 2023 Received 2nd HCD comment letter
June 8, 2023 Draft Housing Element revised and posted online July 14, 2023 Received Preliminary Review comments from HCD July 19, 2023 Draft Housing Element revised and posted online (Errata) July 27, 2023 Planning Commission Hearing
July 27, 2023 Received Conditional Approval Letter from HCD August 15, 2023 City Council Adoption Hearing
Agenda Packet Page 581 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 8
Revisions to Draft Housing
Element
• Chapter 1: Introduction
 Added additional information on public
comments received during HCD review and
described how community feedback informed
Housing Element programs
• Chapter 2: Housing Needs Assessment
 Added supplemental data and analysis on
Extremely Low-Income (ELI) households,
housing cost burden, and resources available to
special housing needs groups
Agenda Packet Page 582 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 9
Revisions to Draft Housing
Element
• Chapter 3: Assessment of Fair Housing
 Provide more local data, contextual knowledge,
and geographic descriptions to expand fair
housing assessment and describe historic trends
– Fair housing enforcement and capacity
– Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA)
– Homelessness
 Expanded discussion in the Fair Housing Analysis
of Sites Inventory to:
– Include analysis of sites inventory in relation to key AFFH indicators
– Include analysis to quantify, evaluate, and
summarize inventory capacity relative to fair
housing indicators by census tract
Agenda Packet Page 583 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 10
Revisions to Draft
Housing Element
• Chapter 4: Sites Inventory
 Updated approved residential projects
with additional details on project status,
phasing, and timing
 Updated discussion on the availability of
the Del Norte BART Station site to reflect
more recent information obtained through
conversations with BART and more specific
assumptions about existing uses on the
site
 Expanded description of environmental
constraints and availability of infrastructure
Agenda Packet Page 584 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 11
Sites Inventory Summary
Lower1 Moderate Above Moderate Total
Regional Housing Needs Allocation 526 241 624 1,391
Approved and Planned Projects 494 611 607 1,712
Vacant and Underutilized Sites within San
Pablo Avenue Specific Plan
497 315 218 1,030
Citywide Vacant and Underutilized Sites 0 0 134 134
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Projection 53 27 9 89
Total Capacity 1,044 953 968 2,965
Surplus(+) +518 +712 +344 +1,574
1 Lower-income includes extremely low-, very low-, and low-income.

Agenda Packet Page 585 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 12
Revisions to Draft Housing Element
• Chapter 5: Constraints Analysis
 Clarified which zones allow emergency shelters without discretionary action  Land use controls
 Local processing and permit procedures
 On/off site improvements
 Inclusionary
• Chapter 6: Energy Conservation, Climate Action, and Sustainability  No Changes
Agenda Packet Page 586 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 13
Revisions to Draft Housing
Element
• Chapter 7: Housing Plan
 Strengthened actions to provide more specific
timelines during the planning period
 Modified programs to include more specific
commitments to AFFH, timing, geographic targeting,
and/or metrics
 New Programs
– 1.F. Facilitate Development of Pipeline Projects
– 1.G. SB 35 Ministerial Approval Procedure
– 1.H. Monitor Land Use Controls
– 2.K. Infrastructure Priority for Affordable Housing
– 4.E. Home Match Contra Costa
– 4.F. Community Engagement and Capacity Building
Agenda Packet Page 587 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 14
Revisions to Housing Plan
Program H-1.E: Zoning for Innovative to Expand Housing Types Choice in Single-family Neighborhoods The City shall evaluate current zoning standards and consider potential adopt zoning modifications and/or incentives to encourage allow development of innovative housing types, including tiny homes, efficiency units, and missing middle housing types. The City shall evaluate ways to mitigate fire risk considerations in the hillside area to facilitate by-right ministerial lot splits and duplexes as well as ADUs more housing variety in the city’s existing single-family neighborhoods as a way to expand housing opportunity in high resource areas and racially concentrated areas of affluence. The City shall engage the public in this process, including targeted outreach to lower-income households and stakeholder interviews. Once fire risk mitigations have been developed and zoning standards modified, the City shall prepare educational materials and conduct workshops in high resource neighborhoods to educate homeowners on opportunities for infill missing middle housing. The City shall conduct a mid-term evaluation to determine the effectiveness of this program. If the City is not on target to meet the objective, the City will consider alternative approaches to expand housing choices in high resource neighborhoods/racially concentrated areas of affluence. Alternatives approaches may include working with property owners on upzoning, identifying higher density housing opportunities on institutional or quasi-institutional lands, adaptive reuse, and/or acquiring and adding affordability to existing structures.

Objective: Encourage the development of at least 25170 units through innovative housing types (e.g., SB 9 lot splits or duplexes, tiny homes, ADUs) as a way to diversify high resource single-family neighborhoods considered racially concentrated areas of affluence
Timeframe: 2026
• Conduct fire risk evaluation and development mitigation in conjunction with the Safety Element Update in 2024/25.
• Evaluate zoning standards and implement zoning modifications to facilitate more housing variety in single family neighborhoods by 2026.
• Distribute educational materials and conduct two educational workshops in high resource neighborhoods by 2027. • Conduct a mid-term evaluation in April 2028 and consider alternatives approaches within 6 months.

Responsible Department or
Agency:

Community Development Department
Agenda Packet Page 588 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 15
Revisions to Housing Plan
Program H-1.G: SB 35 Ministerial Approval Procedure
The City shall establish a written procedure for a streamlined ministerial approval process in compliance with Senate Bill 35 and implement the approval process if and when HCD determines it applies to El Cerrito.

Objective: Compliance with State law
Timeframe: Establish written procedure by June 2024; implement the ministerial approval process immediately upon determination by HCD that El Cerrito is subject to streamlined ministerial approval.

Responsible Department
or Agency: Community Development Department
Agenda Packet Page 589 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 16
Revisions to Housing Plan
Program H-2.E: Develop Mixed Income Housing and Amenities on BART Lands BART owns approximately 20 acres of land in El Cerrito at the El Cerrito Del Norte and El Cerrito Plaza BART stations that are suitable for affordable and market-rate housing development. The City shall partner with BART to develop mixed-income housing in transit-oriented development (TOD) on BART lands, with a goal of providing 15 percent moderate/middle-income units and 35 percent affordable units for lower-income households. This includes maintaining a point of contact with BART and meeting at least quarterly to determine how the City can partner with and support BART, diligently pursuing necessary actions to remove barriers and support housing on BART owned site, demonstrating local support though policy alignment and commitment of staff resources, and supporting BART in acquiring sufficient fundings for housing development. The City shall also support BART efforts to provide amenities, such as bicycle and pedestrian improvements, open space, and community facilities to transform San Pablo Avenue into an area of opportunity. The City shall monitor progress made in providing the identified number of housing units at both stations and if the steps outlined in the timeline below are not completed as anticipated, the City will identify alternative actions within 6 months such as rezoning, demonstrating sufficient capacity at other sites, or taking other actions to facilitate housing development at both stations.

Objective: • 750-850 at least 743 total units at the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station, including 15 percent missing middle units and 35 percent lower-income units 35 deed-restricted very low-, 316 deed-restricted low-, 196 market-rate moderate-, and 196 market-rate above moderate-income units
• 670 total units at the Del Norte BART Station, including 235 very low- and low-income units, 217 market-rate moderate-income units, and 218 market-rate above moderate income units
Timeframe: • Identify and maintain a point of contact at BART and meet at least quarterly to determine how the City can continue to support BART with development of housing at El Cerrito Plaza Station and Del Norte Station • Provide ongoing support to BART in acquiring sufficient funding for development of both stations • Continue to facilitate entitlement of El Cerrito Plaza Station TOD 2022-2027 • Break ground on development of El Cerrito Plaza Station TOD by 2025, with a goal of completing construction by 2029. • Initiate discussions with BART in 2025 2024 on goals and objectives foron development of Del Norte Station TOD. • Support the development of an RFQ for Del Norte Station and participate in developer selection process by 2026/27 • Support entitlement of the Del Norte Station by 2028/29 Responsible Department or
Agency:

Community Development Department
Agenda Packet Page 590 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 17
Recommendation from Planning Commission
Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt and approve for submittal to California Department of Housing and Community Development the 2023-2031 Housing Element, including all revisions made to address HCD comments inclusive of the July 27, 2023 errata with one modification to Program H-4.B (Reasonable Accommodation):

Agenda Packet Page 591 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 18
Recommendation from Planning Commission
Policy H-4.B: To accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities and provide a streamlined permit review process, the City shall update reasonable accommodation procedures in Chapter 19.37 of the City’s Municipal Code to ensure persons with disabilities have a streamlined and objective process for requesting modification to any policy, rule, or procedure that presents a barrier to obtaining and retaining equal housing opportunity. The City shall post information on reasonable accommodation procedures prominently on the City website and at the public counter.

Agenda Packet Page 592 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 19
Next Steps
July 27
mid-August
Received Conditional Approval Letter from HCD
City staff submits Final Housing Element to HCD for 60-day certification Today City Council Hearing for Housing Element Adoption No later than
October HCD certifies Housing Element
Agenda Packet Page 593 of 595
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 20
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt and approve for submittal to California Department of Housing and Community Development the 2023-2031 Housing Element, as amended.

Agenda Packet Page 594 of 595
Learn more about
the Housing Element
Update by visiting:
www.el-cerrito.org/
HousingElement2023
[email protected]
CITY OF EL CERRITO HOUSING ELEMENT | 21
Thank you!
Agenda Packet Page 595 of 595