El Cerrito City Council
June 16, 2026

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA)
Revenue Allocations – Streets & Highways Code Sec 2103-2108 “HUTA” Cities and counties receive revenue from the motor vehicle fuel taxes imposed pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7360(a) and (b) through the Highway User Tax Account under the following formulas outlined in the Streets and Highways code and illustrated in Figure 1.

Section 2104. Section 2104 allocates funds to counties with designated allotments for engineering and administration, snow removal, heavy rainfall / storm damage as well as county streets, roads and public mass transit guideways and facilities.

Section 2105. Section 2105(a) allocates 11.5 percent of the tax revenues in excess of 9 cents per gallon (i.e. the Proposition 111 rate) monthly among counties based on population.

Section 2105(b) allocates 11.5 percent of the tax revenues in excess of 9 cents per gallon (i.e. the Proposition 111 rate) monthly among cities based on population.

Section 2106. Revenues equal to 1.04 cents per gallon are allocated as follows:
a. $7.2 million per year to the State Bicycle Transportation Account. b. $400 per month to each city ($2,313,600 per year among the 482 eligible cities2) c. $800 per month to each county ($556,800 per year among the 58 counties) d. The residual amount to each county and the cities in that county based on registered vehicles. In each county, from this amount, the county receives an allotment based on the share of assessed value of the county which is in the unincorporated area. The remainder is allocated to the cities within the county based on population.
2 The city of Rolling Hills has only private streets and is therefor not eligible to receive these allocations.

Agenda Packet Page 229 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Section 2107. This section provides monthly allocations to cities of 1.315 cents per gallon of gasoline, 1.8 cents per gallon of diesel, and 2.59 cents per liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), as follows. a. Each city with snow removal costs in excess of $5,000 is allocated 50 percent of the cost exceeding $5,000.
b. The remainder is allocated to cities based on population.

Section 2107.5. These funds (about $2.7 million per year) are allocated to cities annually in July based on population as follows:

Section 2107.5 funds must be used for engineering costs and administrative expenses related to city streets. Cities with populations under 10,000 may also expend the moneys for street construction or acquisition of street rights-of-way.

Section 2103 HUTA and the 2010 Gasoline Sales Tax – Excise Tax Swap In March 2010 as a part of a special budget session called by Governor Schwarzenegger, the Legislature enacted a swap of state sales taxes on gasoline for a gasoline excise tax. Intended to be “revenue neutral,” the fuel tax swap provided the Legislature with greater flexibility in the use of funds, in particular relieving the general fund from the cost of state transportation debt service payments. The fuel tax swap:

1. Repealed the state sales tax on gasoline (local rates including the Bradley Burns are NOT affected);

2. Increased the excise tax on gasoline by 17.322 cents and added an annual adjustment mechanism intended to ensure the new excise tax provides, over time, the same amount of revenues expected from the sales tax on gas (no more, no less);

3. Increased the sales tax on diesel by 1.75 percent and allocated 75 percent to local transit agencies and 25 percent to state transit programs. The excise tax on diesel was reduced from 18 cents to 13.6 cents.

Sales tax revenues from diesel must go to transit funding.

4. Provided for a specific allocation of the funds among state and local transportation needs.

Revenues from the new Section 2103 excise tax rate are now allocated as follows:

1. State transportation debt service;

2. Remainder allocated:
a. 44 percent to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP); b. 12 percent State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP); c. 44 percent evenly split between cities and counties using current HUTA formulas.

Section 2103 funds are allocated to cities on a per capita basis and to counties 75 percent based on the proportion of registered vehicles and 25 percent based on the proportion of maintained county road miles.

City Population Annual Allocation
over 500,000 $ 20,000
100,000 to 500,000 $ 10,000
50,000 to 99.999 $ 7,500
25,000 to 49,999 $ 6,000
20,000 to 24,999 $ 5,000
15,000 to 19,999 $ 4,000
10,000 to 14,999 $ 3,000
5,000 to 9,999 $ 2,000
less than 5,000 $ 1,000
Streets & Highway Code §2107.5
Agenda Packet Page 230 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
The law included expressed legislative intent to fully replace the local streets and road funds cities and counties would have received under Proposition 42 state sales tax on gasoline with allocations from the new higher motor vehicle excise tax (HUTA) rate.

However, the swap created certain revenue effects related to the timing and receipt of revenues. In particular, the law provided that the new excise tax rate be adjusted annually by the BOE to garner an amount of revenues equal to what Prop42 would have provided in the prior year. Thus, the annual Sec 2103 funds were always “looking backward.” If the Section 2103 amounts generated less than Prop42 would have, the difference was made up until the following year.

In the years following the swap, there were a number of snafus and changes in interpretation of the Section 2103 allocation. In FY2011-12 SCO allocated more money to cities and counties and did not fully backfill state transportation programs for weight fees that were used for debt service and loans that those funds would have otherwise received. This was contrary to the Legislature’s intention, but the statute was not clear. The statute was clarified in the 2013 budget to clarify the original intent of the weight fee swap to fully backfill state transportation funds. [Streets & Highways Code 2103 (a)(1)(D)].

Changes to HUTA Allocated Rates, Including the Variable Rate by the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1 Beall)
In addition to increasing various fuel and motor vehicle registration taxes, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1 Beall) removed BOE’s discretionary rate setting role over the Section 2103 variable rate and reset the variable rate at 17.3 cents per gallon on July 1, 2019, up from the current 11.7 cents. This adjustment more than doubled Section 2103 revenue allocations for FY2019-20 over the prior year.

With regard to diesel fuel taxes, SB1 also eliminated the price-based adjustment mechanism applied to the diesel fuel tax rate.

Since 2020, gasoline and diesel fuel excise tax rates are increased on July 1 by the change in the California Consumer Price Index from the prior year. These include the 18 cent per gallon base rate, the 17.3 percent per gallon rate, the diesel fuel excise tax rate and vehicle registration taxes.

Streets & Highways Code Section 2103 Variable Gas Tax Allocations to Cities and Counties Agenda Packet Page 231 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Use of Funds: HUTA
The use of local Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax funds is restricted by Article XIX of the California State Constitution and by Streets and Highways Code Section 2101. All Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax funds allocated from the Highway Users Tax Account must be expended for the following:
(a) The research, planning, construction, improvement, maintenance, and operation of public streets and highways (and their related public facilities for nonmotorized traffic), including the mitigation of their environmental effects, the payment for property taken or damaged for such purposes, and the administrative costs necessarily incurred in the foregoing purposes. (b) The research and planning for exclusive public mass transit guideways (and their related fixed facilities), the payment for property taken or damaged for such purposes, and the administrative costs necessarily incurred in the foregoing purposes.
(c) The construction and improvement of exclusive public mass transit guideways (and their related fixed facilities), including the mitigation of their environmental effects, the payment for property taken or damaged for such purposes, the administrative costs necessarily incurred in the foregoing purposes, and the maintenance of the structures and the immediate right-of-way for the public mass transit guideways. (d) The payment of principal and interest on voter-approved bonds issued for the purposes specified above.

Effective Date Base Rate Sec2103 SB1 Rate Total
July 1, 2015 $ 0.180 $ 0.120 $ 0.300
July 1, 2016 $ 0.180 $ 0.098 $ 0.278
July 1, 2017 $ 0.180 $ 0.117 $ 0.297
Nov 1, 2017* $ 0.180 $ 0.117 $ 0.120 $ 0.417
July 1, 2019 $ 0.180 $ 0.173 $ 0.120 $ 0.473
July 1, 2020 $ 0.192 $ 0.185 $ 0.128 $ 0.505
July 1, 2021 $ 0.194 $ 0.187 $ 0.130 $ 0.511
July 1, 2022 $ 0.205 $ 0.197 $ 0.137 $ 0.539
July 1, 2023 $ 0.220 $ 0.212 $ 0.147 $ 0.579
July 1, 2024 $ 0.227 $ 0.218 $ 0.151 $ 0.596
July 1, 2025 $ 0.233 $ 0.224 $ 0.155 $ 0.612
July 1, 2026e $ 0.241 $ 0.232 $ 0.161 $ 0.634
California Gasoline Excise Tax Rates - Per Gallon
Effective Date Base Rate SB1 Rate Total
July 1, 2017 $ 0.160 $ 0.160
Nov 1, 2017* $ 0.160 $ 0.200 $ 0.360
July 1, 2019 $ 0.160 $ 0.200 $ 0.360
July 1, 2020 $ 0.171 $ 0.214 $ 0.385
July 1, 2021 $ 0.173 $ 0.216 $ 0.389
July 1, 2022 $ 0.182 $ 0.228 $ 0.410
July 1, 2023 $ 0.196 $ 0.245 $ 0.441
July 1, 2024 $ 0.202 $ 0.252 $ 0.454
July 1, 2025 $ 0.207 $ 0.258 $ 0.465
July 1, 2026e $ 0.214 $ 0.268 $ 0.482
California Diesel Excise Tax Rates
Agenda Packet Page 232 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

Agenda Packet Page 233 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Three Year State General Fund TCRF Loan Repayment Funds SB1 stipulated the repayment of $706 million by the state General Fund to transportation funds over three fiscal years: 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. Under SB1, $75 million was allocated to local streets and roads from repayments of Transportation Congestion Relief Funds (TCRF) in each of these three years. These funds were allocated half to cities and half to counties with the city funds allocated among cities on a per capita basis, the county funds allocated among counties based on numbers of registered vehicles and county road mileage.

These TCRF revenues may be deposited in local HUTA funds.3 However, these TCRF funds carried slightly
different use requirements than HUTA funds. TCRF funds could be expended only for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction or storm damage repair. For these purposes,  “Maintenance” means patching and/or overlay and sealing.  “Reconstruction” includes any overlay, sealing or widening of the roadway, if the widening is necessary to bring the roadway width to the state minimum standards, but does not include widening for the purpose of traffic capacity.
 “Storm damage repair” is repair or reconstruction of local streets and highways and related drainage improvements that have been damaged due to winter storms and flooding, and construction of drainage improvements to mitigate future roadway flooding and damage problems, in those jurisdictions that have been declared disaster areas by the President of the United States.

Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)
Revenue Allocations – Streets & Highways Code Sec 2031 “RMRA” The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1 Beall) represented a significant additional investment in California’s transportation systems of over $5 billion per year. The Act increased per gallon fuel excise taxes, diesel fuel sales taxes and vehicle registration taxes, stabilized the problematic price-based fuel tax rates and provided for inflationary adjustments to rates in future years. The Act is more than doubling local streets and road funds allocated through the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) and through the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) which it established.

The RMRA receives funds4
from the following new taxes imposed under the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017:
 A 12 cent per gallon increase to the gasoline excise tax effective November 1, 2017.  A 20 cent per gallon increase to the diesel fuel excise tax effective November 1, 2017, half of which will be allocated to Trade Corridors Enhancement Account (TCEA) with the remaining half to the RMRA.  A new vehicle registration tax called the “transportation improvement fee,” effective January 1, 2018, based on the market value of the vehicle.
 An additional new $100 vehicle registration tax on zero emission vehicles model year 2020 and later effective July 1, 2020.
3 Note that the “loan repayment” is between the state general fund and state transportation funds. From an accounting standpoint this is NOT a debt repayment to local agencies, it is simply revenue. 4 In addition, funds from a 4 percent increase in the diesel sales tax to 5.75 percent from the prior 1.75 percent effective November 1, 2017 are allocated to the Public Transportation Account.

Agenda Packet Page 234 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
 Annual rate increases to these taxes every July 1 (January 1 for the registration fees) for the change in the California Consumer Price Index. The first adjustment made on July 1, 2020 covered CPI change for two years: November 1, 2017 through November 12, 2019.

Vehicle Value Jan 2018 Jan 2020 Jan 2021 Jan 2022 Jan 2023 Jan 2024 Jan 2025 Jan 2026 0 - $4,999 $ 25 $ 27 $ 27 $ 28 $ 29 $ 32 $ 32 $ 33
$5,000 - $24,999 $ 52 $ 54 $ 55 $ 56 $ 59 $ 65 $ 65 $ 66 $25,000 - $34,999 $ 105 $ 107 $ 110 $ 112 $ 118 $ 129 $ 129 $ 132 $35,000 - $59,999 $ 157 $ 161 $ 165 $ 168 $ 177 $ 194 $ 194 $ 198 $60,000 & over $ 183 $ 188 $ 192 $ 196 $ 206 $ 227 $ 227 $ 231 Jan 2020 Jan 2021 Jan 2022 Jan 2023 Jan 2024 Jan 2025 Jan 2026 ZEV vehicle* $ 100 $ 101 $ 103 $ 108 $ 118 $ 118 $ 121
*Zero Emission Vehicles, 2020 or later models.

SB1 Transportation Improvement Fee
SB1 Road Improvement Fee (RIF)
Agenda Packet Page 235 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
The Road Repair and Accountability Act directs the State Controller to allocate, on a monthly basis, fifty percent of the revenues in the RMRA to the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOP) in the State Highway Account and half to cities and counties. But there are a series of specific program allocations, subject to appropriation in the annual state budget, to be taken out first:

1. Administrative costs.

2. $200 million for the State-Local-Partnership Program for existing and aspiring self-help jurisdictions.

3. $100 million annually for the Active Transportation Program for the purpose of encouraging increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking.

4. $400 million for state bridge and culvert maintenance and rehabilitation.

5. $25 million for the state’s Freeway Service Patrol program.

6. $5 million for five years through FY 2021-22 for pre-apprenticeship training programs of the California Workforce Development Board.

7. $25 million for local planning grants to encourage local and regional planning.

8. $7 million for transportation research and transportation-related workforce education, training, and development including $5 million to the University of California and $2 million to the California State University.

Agenda Packet Page 236 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Use of Funds: RMRA [Streets and Highways Code Section 2030] The use of RMRA local streets and roads funds is similar but, not identical, to HUTA use rules. Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 2030, RMRA local streets and roads allocations must be used for projects “that include, but are not limited to,” the following
 Road maintenance and rehabilitation
 Safety projects
 Railroad grade separations
 Traffic control devices
 Complete street components, “including active transportation purposes, pedestrian and bicycle safety projects, transit facilities, and drainage and storm-water capture projects in conjunction with any other allowable project.”
RMRA funds may also be used to satisfy a match requirement for projects eligible for state or federal funds.

SB1 also contains non-obligatory intent language regarding the use of funds. “To the extent possible and cost effective,” cities and counties are to use a use:
 advanced recycling techniques that reduce greenhouse gas emissions;  automotive technologies, ZEV fueling, infrastructure-to-vehicle;  communications autonomous vehicle systems;
 resiliency re climate change, fires, floods, sea level rise; and  complete street elements, access for bicycles, pedestrians.

If a city or county has an average Pavement Condition Index that meets or exceeds 80, the city or county may spend its RMRA funds on transportation priorities other than these. [Streets and Highways Code Sec 2037] Maintenance of Effort: RMRA [Streets and Highways Code Sec 2036] The Road Repair and Accountability Act contains a local agency maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement that applies to funds allocated through the RMRA. The Act states that the MOE requirement is to ensure that these new roads funds do not supplant existing levels of city and county general revenue spending on streets and roads. The MOE for the receipt of RMRA funds state that a city or county must maintain general fund spending for street, road, and highway purposes at no less than average of 2009–10, 2010–11, and 2011–12 years. In making this calculation an agency may exclude one-time funds. A city or county that fails to comply in a particular year may make it up with in additional expenditures in the following year.

The Act provides that the State Controller may perform audits to ensure compliance with these MOE rules. If the State Controller determines that a city or county has not met its MOE, the agency will be required to reimburse the state for the funds it received during that fiscal year. However, a city or county that fails to comply in a particular fiscal year may expend during that fiscal year and the following fiscal year a total amount that is sufficient to comply. Any funds withheld or returned as a result of a failure to comply will be reapportioned to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are in compliance.

For further guidance, see the State Controller’s “Guidelines Relating to Gas Tax Expenditures for Cities and Counties.”
Agenda Packet Page 237 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Spending Plans and Reports: RMRA [Streets and Highways Code Sec 2034] The Road Repair and Accountability Act stipulates that, prior to receiving RMRA funds in a fiscal year, a city or county must submit to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) a project list pursuant to an adopted budget. The list must include for each project: description, location, schedule, useful life. [Streets and Highways Code Sec 2034(a)]
The Road Repair and Accountability Act also requires that a city or county submit to the CTC an annual report of project completion in order to receive RMRA funds. The report must include descriptions of all projects for which RMRA funds were expended including: description, location, funds expended, completion date, estimated useful life of the project.

Budgeting and Accounting for RMRA Funds: The ~60 Day Delay The allocation of Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) revenues to cities and counties takes many weeks. It takes the State Controller’s Office roughly 30 to 60 days from the time of revenue collection by the state, through the various statutory set asides to distribute the funds to cities and counties in monthly allocations. Consequently, the estimates shown in this report are for revenues collected for July through June are not received on a cash basis by local agencies until September through August. That is, for example, the FY2022-23 figure for your agency is revenues collected in and for July 2022 through June 2023 but distributed in monthly allocations September 2022 through August 2023. Cities and counties thus have two choices in the budgeting and accounting of RMRA revenues:
1) apply a 60 day accrual policy to RMRA funds (recommended); or 2) adjust RMRA budgets (especially in FY2017-18) to reflect a distributed cash basis.

Local Streets and Roads (HUTA and RMRA) Revenue Estimates for FY2025-26 and FY2026-27
We have computed revenue estimates for each city and county using a model reflecting the local allocation formulas, latest population figures used by the State Controller for allocations and estimates by the state Department of Finance (DOF) of statewide HUTA and RMRA tax revenues provided with the Governor’s May Revision of his Proposed 2026-27 Budget (released May 14, 2026) and analyses of SB1(Beall), The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. Compared to their January 2026 projections for 2025-26, DOF statewide revenue estimates show a slight (0.5 percent) downward revision in their RMRA estimate and a slight (0.8 percent) downward revision in HUTA estimate for a 0.7 percent lower total LSR estimate for this current 2025- 26 fiscal year.

DOF’s May 2026 revised 2026—27 budget year local RMRA estimate is 0.3 percent higher than in January, it’s HUTA estimate 0.3 percent lower for an insignificant total LSR change.

DOF now estimates overall LSR allocations to cities and counties for the current 2025-26 year will increase 1.2 percent from prior year. For budget year FY2026-27, DOF estimates total statewide local streets and roads allocations will grow by 2.0 percent.

Fuel consumption was sharply down during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic but has largely recovered to its prior, slightly declining trajectory. Recently, fuel prices have increased steeply but the price of fuel no longer has a direct effect on local streets and roads revenues because all rates are per gallon, regardless of price.

Agenda Packet Page 238 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Despite lower fuel consumption, scheduled rate increases stipulated in SB1 have kept local allocations of revenue growing at a modest pace but this growth is expected to continue to flatten. Gas tax revenue collections are forecast to increase 2 percent in 2025-26 and again in 2026-27 but to zero growth by FY 2030-

31. On the other hand, vehicle registration tax revenues from the SB1 vehicle registration tax (“Transportation Improvement Fee”) and the zero emission vehicle registration tax (“Road Improvement Fee”) are forecast to increase by about 6 percent in 2025-26 and again in 2026-27 and sustain this pace of growth over the five year forecast period.

HUTA (Highway Users Tax Account)
HUTA revenues are allocated to cities and counties pursuant to Sections 2103-2107 of the Streets and Highways Code. The per gallon excise tax rates that provide HUTA revenues are adjusted annually on July 1 as described above. Revenue changes depend on the combined effects of 1) these rate adjustments, 2) taxable gallonage, and 3) the relative change of statutory transfers including the “weight fee offset” that pays state transportation bond debt.

Sec2103-2108 HUTA allocations (not including RMRA) grew 5.5 percent in FY2024-25. But HUTA revenue growth is now flattening and will continue to decline. DOF estimates 1.1 percent HUTA growth in current year 2025-26 and 2.4 percent growth in budget year 2026-27.

RMRA (Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account)5
The Road Repair and Accountability Act (SB1) taxes that provide funding to cities and counties through the RMRA began on November 1, 2017 when the new per-gallon fuel excise taxes took effect. It also includes allocations from the SB1 vehicle registration tax (“Transportation Improvement Fee”) and the zero emission vehicle registration tax (“Road Improvement Fee”) which are expected to grow more robustly and are not 5 Note that RMRA revenues are delayed 60 days from collection to allocation. That is, the revenues for a July 1 to June 30 fiscal year are allocated September 1 through August 31. These are spendable in the fiscal year because your accounting staff “accrues” them back into your fiscal year.

Agenda Packet Page 239 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
included in the HUTA allocations. Additionally, various fixed-amount statutory allocations are made from the SB1 tax rates prior to the city and county allocations.

Because of this, city and county RMRA revenues are expected to grow more robustly. DOF estimates 2025-26 revenue will be 1.4 percent higher than 2024-25 actuals and that 2026-27 revenues will grow by 6.9 percent over the current year.

California Local Streets and Roads Program - State Funds to Cities and Counties Looking Ahead: Long Term Estimates of Local Streets and Roads Funding Since the recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020, we have seen modest year over year growth in local streets and roads revenues. In future years, as alternative fuel vehicles come more into use, fuel consumption will continue to decline. The SB1 annual cost of living adjustments will help to maintain revenues but we will see decline in revenue growth to below the rate of inflation.

Due to complicated statutory transfers from these revenues before the city and county allocations are made (including the $1.31 billion transfer for state transportation debt service), actual growth in funding allocated to cities and counties varies somewhat among the various categories of local streets and roads allocations and will not exactly mirror total tax collections. Taking all these factors into account, for the purposes of long-term transportation program planning, we estimate transportation allocations to cities and counties will increase in outyears at the following growth rates:
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
FY12-13FY13-14FY14-15FY15-16FY16-17FY17-18 FY18-19 FY19-20 FY20-21FY21-22 FY22-23 FY23-24 FY24-25 FY25-26 FY26-27 FY27-28 FY28-29 FY28-30FY30-31 Millions
§2103
cities,
countie
§2104
counties
§2106
§2107
cities
estim. projected > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > R.M.R.A.

TCRF loan
repayment
H.U.T.A.
§2105
cities,
counties
Estimated Annual Revenue Growth Rate over prior year
2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31
HUTA 2103 2.1% 2.8% 1.7% -0.6% -0.4% -0.9%
HUTA 2104 2.0% 2.2% 2.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.4%
HUTA 2105 -0.7% 2.2% 2.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.4%
HUTA 2106 -0.1% 2.2% 2.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.4%
HUTA 2107 -2.6% 2.2% 2.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.4%
RMRA 1.4% 6.9% 5.9% 4.7% 5.3% 5.3%
Agenda Packet Page 240 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Your Mileage Revenues May Vary
Long-term, in addition to the growth in statewide local streets and roads revenue collections, the allocations to each particular city will be primarily related to changes in the city’s population relative to the change in state population in cities. The current forecast for California population, provided by the Demographics Unit of the California Department of Finance is as follows:6
If you think your city’s population growth will be significantly different from the statewide average in cities, then you should adjust accordingly. For example, the City of Buenavida’s planning department estimates the city will see average annual residential population growth of 1.5 percent annually over the next ten years. The city’s estimated HUTA 2105 allocation for FY2026-27 is $381,200. The long term projection of Section 2105 revenue would be:
$381,200 x Sec2105 growth x Buenavida Population Growth ÷ Statewide City Population Growth So, for 2027-28, the city would estimate $381,200 x 1.023 x 1.015 ÷ 1.008 = $395,646 And long term …
Changes for in allocations to an individual county will be affected by many things including: the population of the county relative to the total population of the state, proportion of population in the unincorporated area of the county, as well as relative numbers of vehicle registrations, assessed values and maintained road miles.

Next Update
The next update to these revenue estimates will be in January 2027. mjgc
ATTACHMENTS:
6 See http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/projections/ . California population in cities estimated by author based on recent historic trend of proportion of population in cities.

California 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Population 39,646,907 39,592,978 39,625,898 39,700,141 39,780,004 39,879,496 39,987,811 40,099,750 40,213,883 40,317,228 …... in Cities 33,177,867 33,168,083 33,195,661 33,257,856 33,324,760 33,408,107 33,498,845 33,592,619 33,688,232 33,774,806 percent change -0.03% 0.08% 0.19% 0.20% 0.25% 0.27% 0.28% 0.28% 0.26% 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043
Population 40,410,843 40,499,318 40,581,880 40,656,029 40,724,862 40,790,825 40,853,343 40,910,344 40,960,959 Population in Cities 33,853,230 33,927,348 33,996,512 34,058,629 34,116,292 34,171,551 34,223,924 34,271,675 34,314,077 percent change 0.23% 0.22% 0.20% 0.18% 0.17% 0.16% 0.15% 0.14% 0.12% City of Buenavida EXAMPLE
2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 2031-32 2032-33 HUTA Sec2015 381,200 $
2105 growth 2.3% 0.9% 0.8% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Buenavida pop 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5%
Cities pop 0.08% 0.19% 0.20% 0.25% 0.27% 0.23%
HUTA Sec2015 395,646 $ 404,295 $ 412,884 $ 419,906 $ 425,057 $ 430,442 $ Agenda Packet Page 241 of 320

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
A) Local Streets and Roads - Projected Individual City Revenues – FY2025-26 B) Local Streets and Roads - Projected Individual City Revenues – FY2026-27 C) Local Streets and Roads - Projected Individual County Revenues – FY2025-26 (from CSAC) D) Local Streets and Roads - Projected Individual County Revenues – FY2026-27 (from CSAC) Agenda Packet Page 242 of 320

ATTACHMENT A
Local Streets and Roads - Projected FY2025-26 Revenues
Based on State Dept of Finance statewide revenue projectionsEstimated May 2026 TOTAL Road Mntnc Sec2103 (3) Sec2105 (3) Sec2106 (3) Sec2107 (3) Sec2107.5 (4) HUTA Rehab Acct Highway Users Tax Acct (HUTA)(1) Streets & Highways Code TOTAL

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
ANTIOCH 739,351 1,124,937 442,065 987,491 10,000 3,303,844 3,074,813 6,378,657 BRENTWOOD 416,250 633,333 250,978 555,951 7,500 1,864,012 1,731,101 3,595,113CLAYTON 70,047 106,578 46,227 93,556 3,000 319,409 291,312 610,721CONCORD 794,679 1,209,118 474,787 1,061,387 10,000 3,549,971 3,304,908 6,854,879 DANVILLE 276,460 420,639 168,303 369,245 6,000 1,240,646 1,149,741 2,390,387EL CERRITO 164,475 250,252 102,074 219,676 6,000 742,478 684,020 1,426,498HERCULES 166,033 252,622 102,995 221,756 6,000 749,406 690,497 1,439,904LAFAYETTE 160,968 244,916 99,999 214,992 6,000 726,875 669,434 1,396,308MARTINEZ 237,663 361,608 145,358 317,427 6,000 1,068,056 988,392 2,056,448MORAGA 109,547 166,678 69,588 146,313 4,000 496,125 455,583 951,709OAKLEY 296,460 451,069 180,131 395,957 6,000 1,329,617 1,232,916 2,562,533 ORINDA 123,589 188,043 77,893 165,068 4,000 558,593 513,983 1,072,576 PINOLE 119,879 182,398 75,699 160,113 4,000 542,089 498,554 1,040,643 PITTSBURG 483,531 735,701 290,768 645,812 7,500 2,163,313 2,010,907 4,174,220 PLEASANT HILL 218,499 332,450 134,024 291,831 6,000 982,803 908,692 1,891,495 RICHMOND 733,774 1,116,450 438,766 980,041 10,000 3,279,031 3,051,616 6,330,647 SAN PABLO 203,893 310,227 125,386 272,323 6,000 917,828 847,949 1,765,777 SAN RAMON 535,604 814,931 321,565 715,362 7,500 2,394,963 2,227,469 4,622,433 WALNUT CREEK 445,114 677,249 268,048 594,502 7,500 1,992,412 1,851,138 3,843,551

DEL NORTE COUNTY
CRESCENT CITY 42,621 64,849 24,402 56,925 2,000 190,796 177,252 368,048

EL DORADO COUNTY
PLACERVILLE 68,502 104,228 70,632 91,493 3,000 337,855 284,888 622,743SOUTH LAKE TAHOE 135,637 206,375 135,149 1,981,445 5,000 2,463,606 564,088 3,027,694 15 May 2026 CaliforniaCityFinance.com Page 2 of 16
Agenda Packet Page 243 of 320

ATTACHMENT A
Local Streets and Roads - Projected FY2025-26 Revenues
Based on State Dept of Finance statewide revenue projectionsEstimated May 2026 TOTAL Road Mntnc Sec2103 (3) Sec2105 (3) Sec2106 (3) Sec2107 (3) Sec2107.5 (4) HUTA Rehab Acct Highway Users Tax Acct (HUTA)(1) Streets & Highways Code TOTAL

MADERA COUNTY
CHOWCHILLA 122,000 185,625 51,743 162,946 4,000 526,314 507,374 1,033,688MADERA 420,657 640,037 166,660 561,837 7,500 1,796,690 1,749,427 3,546,117

MARIN COUNTY
BELVEDERE 13,447 20,460 13,240 17,960 1,000 66,108 55,924 122,032CORTE MADERA 64,647 98,361 45,375 86,343 3,000 297,726 268,853 566,579FAIRFAX 48,085 73,162 34,980 64,223 2,000 222,449 199,974 422,423LARKSPUR 82,811 125,998 56,775 110,603 3,000 379,187 344,393 723,580 MILL VALLEY 89,465 136,122 60,951 119,491 3,000 409,029 372,065 781,094NOVATO 336,599 512,141 216,062 449,567 7,500 1,521,870 1,399,847 2,921,717 ROSS 14,789 22,502 14,082 19,753 1,000 72,127 61,506 133,634 SAN ANSELMO 80,943 123,156 55,603 108,109 3,000 370,811 336,626 707,437 SAN RAFAEL 389,976 593,356 249,564 520,859 7,500 1,761,256 1,621,833 3,383,089 SAUSALITO 45,071 68,576 33,088 60,198 2,000 208,934 187,441 396,375 TIBURON 57,822 87,977 41,091 77,228 2,000 266,118 240,469 506,588

MARIPOSA COUNTY

MENDOCINO COUNTY
FORT BRAGG 45,502 69,231 33,012 60,773 2,000 210,517 189,232 399,749POINT ARENA 2,912 4,431 6,606 3,890 1,000 18,839 12,112 30,950UKIAH 105,109 159,925 69,969 140,385 4,000 479,388 437,126 916,514WILLITS 31,320 47,654 24,219 41,831 1,000 146,024 130,253 276,277

MERCED COUNTY
ATWATER 201,721 306,923 94,290 269,423 6,000 878,357 838,918 1,717,275 DOS PALOS 36,689 55,823 21,076 49,002 2,000 164,590 152,581 317,170 GUSTINE 38,487 58,558 21,874 51,404 2,000 172,323 160,058 332,381 LIVINGSTON 91,427 139,108 45,360 122,112 3,000 401,008 380,228 781,236 LOS BANOS 309,565 471,009 142,134 413,461 6,000 1,342,168 1,287,419 2,629,587 MERCED 620,694 944,397 280,161 829,010 7,500 2,681,762 2,581,341 5,263,103

MODOC COUNTY
ALTURAS 17,221 26,201 14,155 26,735 1,000 85,312 71,617 156,929

MONO COUNTY
MAMMOTH LAKES 45,710 69,549 64,734 1,677,985 2,000 1,859,979 190,101 2,050,079 15 May 2026 CaliforniaCityFinance.com Page 7 of 16
Agenda Packet Page 244 of 320

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Date: June 16, 2026
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Claire Coleman, Budget/Financial Services Manager; Crystal Reams, Finance Director/City Treasurer; Finance Department
Subject: CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
Approval of the City’s Fiscal Year 2026-27 and 2027-28 Proposed Budget and Spending Authority by Fund for the City and Public Financing Authority,and Approval of the FY 2026-27 Annual Gann Appropriation Limit.

ACTION PROPOSED
1) Adopt a City Council resolution authorizing Fiscal Year 2026-27 spending authority by fund for the City of El Cerrito; 2) Adopt an El Cerrito Public Financing Authority resolution authorizing Fiscal Year 2026-27 spending authority by fund; and 3) Adopt a City Council resolution approving the calculation and establishing the FY 2026-27 Gann Appropriation Limit.

BACKGROUND
The City of El Cerrito’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 Proposed Biennial Budget presents the City’s projection of revenues and expenditures for the next two fiscal years. It describes in detail the various components of the City, each of its departments and divisions, and the City’s separate legal entity, the El Cerrito Public Financing Authority. The Budget also describes the City’s mission, vision, and values, outlines overall goals and strategies developed through the Strategic Plan, and indicates how resources are allocated to fulfill these objectives. On April 1, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2025-01 dissolving the Employee Pension Board. As all funds have been disbursed and there remains no further obligations, there is no longer a need to include this entity in the budget, and a resolution is no longer required.

The FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 Biennial Budget was developed as a result of significant staff time, public input, and seven separate City Council workshops and study sessions. The proposed budget represents the City Council, Financial Advisory Board, and public’s guidance and priorities, particularly relating to the balance between maintaining services and a significant reserve balance. It is grounded in the City’s adopted Strategic Plan and aims to translate the Council and community’s values into the services provided directly to the community. The City Council continues to closely monitor the budget and the City's financial position through quarterly reporting, regular adjustments and updates, and long-range financial forecasting.

The Proposed Biennial Budget document was first provided to the City Council, the Financial Advisory Board, and the public on May 22, 2026, and can be found on the City's website at www.elcerrito.gov/BiennialBudgetFY27FY28.

Agenda Packet Page 245 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

The City Council has held seven separate workshops, study sessions, and meetings, including:
• January 10 – City Council Retreat and Priority Setting • March 17 – Department Workplan and Priority Presentation to the City Council • April 21 – Budget Study Session
• May 5 – Budget Study Session
• May 19 – Budget Study Session
• June 2 – Budget Study Session
• June 16 – Consideration of Budget Adoption
Staff also held two public workshops on March 7 (in-person) and on March 25 (virtual) to get more public input and share information about the budget conditions and process.

The public budget survey was available from January 16 through March 31st.

In addition, the Financial Advisory Board (FAB) met to review and discuss the Biennial Budget three times: May 7, May 26, and June 4. The FAB did not provide a recommendation to send to the City Council regarding adoption of the FY 2026-27 budget.

At the June 2, 2026, City Council meeting, the City Council received a presentation from City staff that introduced the full Proposed FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 Proposed Biennial Budget and provided an overview of all funds and departments for the City Council's review and discussion. Following the original publication of the draft budget book on May 22, staff made adjustments to the budget book including adding additional detail and charts for citywide funds and fund balances, and correcting various errors and typos. An updated version was published along with the City Council agenda on May 28, which was the version reviewed and discussed at the June 2 City Council meeting. The version presented for the June 16 City Council meeting and for final adoption contains minor adjustments and changes to narratives to improve clarity, and fixes to small typos and inconsistencies in the document. None of the budget totals by fund have changed since the original budget book publication on May 22.

ANALYSIS
Proposed FY 2026-27 and FY 2025-26 Biennial Budget
City staff has prepared a budget document that will span two fiscal years, July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027 and July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028. By creating a two-year budget plan, the City enhances its ability to plan for expenses and revenues over a longer time horizon and take a more strategic approach. While the budget document covers two fiscal years, the budget must be formally adopted on an annual basis per the City's municipal code and state requirements for an annual appropriations limit.

With all funds combined, the Proposed Biennial Budget recommends total expenditures of $97.4 million in FY 2026-27 and $86.4 million in FY 2027-28 that provide funding for all City services, including Police, Fire, Recreation, Community Development, Public Agenda Packet Page 246 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Works, and City Management. Revenue and expenses were analyzed against prior year trends and expectations for the next two fiscal years, and the City used a Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommended Target Based Budgeting approach to match expenses to available revenues. This approach ensures that expenses reflect what the City can afford, rather than a status quo of prior year expenditures. The Proposed Budget includes all personnel expenses as a result of approved Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with various bargaining units and estimates for one MOU currently under negotiations.

The Proposed FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 General Fund operating budget was balanced through an extensive target-based budgeting process through which departments identified budget decreases across a variety of non-personnel expenditure lines, in addition to updates to the City’s Cost Allocation Plan and budget solutions reviewed and approved by the City Council. For FY 2026-27, staff is proposing a General Fund budget with projected revenues of $58.4 million and expenditures amounting to $57.6 million. While the ongoing operating budget does not utilize any fund balance and has a significant surplus in both fiscal years, two major one-time expenditures are proposed for the Fire Department, to replace core safety equipment including a fire engine and the department’s Self-Contained Breathing Apparatuses (SCBAs). This one-time expenditure results in an annual planned use of fund balance of $250,376 in FY 2026-27 and $261,217 in FY 2027-28. The City anticipates maintaining unrestricted General fund reserves above 31% in FY 2026-27 and above 29% in FY 2027-28, which includes 13% of General Fund expenditures in the Emergency Disaster Relief Fund (EDRF) and unassigned General Fund reserves of 18% and 16%, respectively. Staff will closely monitor revenue and expenditure trends and will continue to update the City Council throughout the fiscal year and in quarterly reports. Staff will recommend adjustments for the City Council’s consideration if necessary.

The Proposed FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 Budget seeks to maintain the current programs and services provided to the community at the highest level possible given the revenue constraints facing the City. Attachment 1 provides a detailed overview of the strategies presented to the City Council that are included in the proposed budget. It also includes items that are not in the proposed budget that had previously been considered by the City Council during the budget development process.

Gann Appropriations Limit
Included in the recommended actions for adopting the FY 2026-27 Budget is the approval of the calculation and establishing the City’s FY 2026-27 Gann Appropriation Limit as $205,024,075. Approved in 1979 and amended in 1990, the Gann Initiative sets an annual appropriation limit on City expenditures based on the amount of tax proceeds received. This amount is adjusted each year based on changes in population and inflation. The California Government Code requires that the City adopt the Gann appropriations limit by resolution on an annual basis. In FY 2026-27, the respective State and County offices have provided the City with the following factors to establish the Gann limit computation:

Agenda Packet Page 247 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Cost of Living
• California Per Capita Personal Income = 4.95%
Population
• Population Change, City of El Cerrito = -0.43%
• Population Change, County of Contra Costa = -0.31%
Based on the California Per Capita Personal Income factor 4.95% and the percentage of Population Change in the County of Contra Costa, the City’s appropriations limit will increase from $195,961,530 to $205,024,075. The Gann Limit is calculated annually and will be updated for FY 2027-28 in spring 2027 when the budget is formally adopted by Council.

Next Steps
The resolutions for the City's spending authority and Gann Limit are presented for the City Council's consideration, and staff recommends approval of the Proposed FY 2026- 27 and FY 2027-28 Budget as presented. The City Council may choose to adopt the FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 Budget as proposed or provide further direction to staff. If further direction is provided, staff recommends that the Council consider scheduling additional special meeting(s) for review and discussion to allow for budget approval no later than June 30, 2024. Staff will bring the second year of the Biennial Budget to the City Council for formal adoption, along with any recommended adjustments, in 2027.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal(s) of:
• High Performing Organization; and
• Community Safety; and
• Livability and Belonging; and
• Infrastructure and Amenities; and
• Environmental Sustainability.

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

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
With all funds combined, the Proposed FY 2026-27 Budget recommends total expenditures of $97,390,524 and provides funding for all City services, including Police, Fire, Recreation, Community Development, Public Works, and City Management. At this time, total revenues are projected to be $93,529,790. These funds will continue to be monitored throughout the fiscal year. For FY 2026-27, staff propose a General Fund budget with revenues of $58,429,622 and expenditures of $58,679,998, resulting in a Agenda Packet Page 248 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.
planned use of fund balance of $250,376. Staff will bring the second year of the biennial budget to the City Council for formal adoption, along with any recommended adjustments, in spring 2027.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
Approval of the attached resolutions is required to adopt the City’s spending authority for Fiscal Year 2026-27. In addition to the Gann limit appropriation, there is a separate resolution for the Public Financing Authority, which is a component unit of the City. The City Council is obligated to adopt a budget, including spending authority and Gann limit appropriation, by June 30, 2026.

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution (Spending Authority)

2. PFA Resolution (Spending Authority)

3. Resolution (Gann)

4. Final Budget Scenario

5. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 249 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FY 2026-27 AND SPENDING AUTHORITY FROM ALL FUNDS OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 WHEREAS, City staff have prepared, transmitted, and presented the proposed FY 2026-27 Budget to the City Council of the City of El Cerrito for its consideration, and it has been reviewed and analyzed in public review session; and WHEREAS, the City prepares and adopts a budget with the intent of providing a planned program for City services and a financial system to carry out the program of services; and
WHEREAS, the proposed budget represents anticipated revenues and proposed expenditures, including interfund transfers, from all funds of the City of El Cerrito; and WHEREAS, proposed spending authority from tax proceeds are within the City’s Fiscal Year 2026-27 Gann Appropriations Limit, as defined by the California State Constitution Article XIIIB.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito hereby adopts the FY 2026-27 Budget spending limits across funds as follows:

Fund Name Fund
Number
FY 2026-27 Total
Expenditures
General Fund 101 $57,654,998
Gas Tax Fund 201 $888,893
National Pollution Distribution Elimination
System Fund 202 $436,231
Landscape & Lighting Assessment District 203 $861,277
Measure J-Return to Source Fund 204 $818,599
Measure J Storm Drain Fund 205 $755,507
Measure H Park & Recreation Facilities Fund 207 $671,486 Asset Seizure Fund 208 $100,000
Vehicle Abatement Fund 209 $70,000
Street Improvement & Maintenance Fund 211 $4,305,722
SB1-Road Repair & Accountability Fund 212 $1,046,209
Public Art Fund 213 $50,500
Measure J-Paratransit Fund 214 $365,316
C.O.P.S. Grant Fund 222 $256,250
4th of July Donations Fund 225 $175,000
Grants - Community Development Fund 228 $8,600,000
City Housing Trust Fund 231 $6,486,507
City LMI Housing Fund 232 $389
Capital Improvement Fund Master 304 $5,384,465
Agenda Packet Page 250 of 320
Integrated Waste Management Fund 501 $5,525,510
Vehicle/Equip Replacement Fund 601 $497,652
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito hereby authorizes the City Manager or designee to:

1. Create such appropriations into such new accounts as may be appropriate for proper accounting in the City’s financial system and to make any necessary nonmaterial changes to finalize the budget document.

2. Apply correct accounting rules for the proper classification of interfund transactions, including transfers between funds, or other financial transactions, as may be necessary to address bond or loan covenants, or any other requirements imposed by formal, legal agreements between the City any other parties, as previously entered into by the City.

3. Approve payment of goods and services received by the City in accordance with the City’s approved budgets, programs, and policies, subject to a limitation of $45,000 for any single vendor in any one fiscal year, beyond which amount the City Council retains authority to approve payment with the exception of those items falling under other statutory authority (e.g., Public Works, State purchasing).

4. Shift expenditure authority within funds among departments, as may be necessary to meet the City’s operational needs.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on June 16, 2026 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:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 251 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachment 2
PFA RESOLUTION 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 BUDGET WITH SPENDING LIMITS FOR FY 2026-27
WHEREAS, the El Cerrito Public Financing Authority (Authority) provides for payment of long-term debt obligations; and
WHEREAS, the Authority Board wishes to maintain funding levels to support payments of principal and interest on those long-term obligations; and WHEREAS, the Board wishes to adopt the Authority’s budget for Fiscal Year 2026-

27. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the El Cerrito Public Financing Authority adopts the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget with spending limits in FY 2026-27 across funds as follows:

Financing Authority City Hall Debt Service $578,813
Financing Authority Street Improv Debt Service $707,500 Total $1,274,063
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a special meeting on June 16, 2026 the Public Financing Authority 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 on .

Holly M. Charléty, Authority Clerk
APPROVED:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 252 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachment 3
RESOLUTION 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO SETTING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 AND SELECTING THE

CALIFORNIA PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

POPULATION ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution establishes a limitation on spending by cities of funds from proceeds of taxes; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 7910, the City Council must establish an annual appropriations limit; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 7910, the City Council must select annually the per capita change in the cost of living for purposes of calculating appropriations limit; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 7910, the City Council must select annually the population growth factor for purposes of calculating the appropriations limit; and
WHEREAS, an appropriations limit has been calculated in accordance with applicable law.

NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of El Cerrito does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. In accordance with Article XIIIB of the Constitution and Government Code Section 7900 et seq., the adjustment factors to be applied to the appropriations limit for the 2026-27 fiscal year shall be the California Per Capita Personal Income adjustment factor and the Contra Costa County population adjustment factor.

SECTION 2. In accordance with Article XIIIB of the Constitution and Government Code Section 7902, the appropriations limit for the 2026-27 fiscal year shall be $205,024,075 which exceeds the City’s projected applicable appropriation amount by $161,942,876.

SECTION 3. The City Council reserves the right to change or revise any adjustment factors associated with the calculation of the appropriations limit if such changes or revisions would result in a more advantageous appropriations limit in the present or future.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

Agenda Packet Page 253 of 320
I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on June 16, 2026 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:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 254 of 320
Proposed Budget
Operating Budget Additions
• Invest in cybersecurity, technology infrastructure, and work order management software ($140k) Operating Budget Reductions
• Reduce non-personnel budgets citywide, including supplies, equipment, professional services, and maintenance • Update overhead cost allocation to special funds, reducing General Fund subsidy • Utilize special revenue funds for allowable Police Department costs, including software, equipment, and administrative overhead, and decrease software and equipment budget ($168k FY27, $143k FY28) • Reduce Police Officer recruitment incentives and recruitment support ($48k) • Decrease professional communications support, including managing social media in-house and eliminating the News and Views newsletter ($58k)
• Eliminate or reduce Recreation programs and events, including some special events and most contract janitorial services ($82k)
• Reduce select administrative support and supplies costs ($45k) • Cancel Advisory Board Member recognition dinner and holiday light installation on San Pablo Avenue ($10k) • Decrease City Council travel and training allocation by $1k per member ($5k total) • Decrease General Fund contribution for 4th of July event by 50% ($25k) • Decrease City Council Retreat facilitator budget ($10k) • Permanently continue to utilize consultant services in lieu of filling vacant positions in the Building Division ($210k) Internal Service Fund and Long-Term Planning Allocations • Restructure vehicle and equipment replacement contributions through internal service fund, citywide ($440k) • Annual contribution to internal service fund for deferred maintenance and capital infrastructure ($300k) • Annual contribution to Fire Department vehicle and equipment replacement reserve ($50k) • Add annual Fire Department small vehicle replacement funding ($100k) • One-time contributions to ISF for Fire Engine ($925k FY27, $259k FY28) • One-time Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) replacement ($330k FY28 only) Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachment 4
Agenda Packet Page 255 of 320
Fiscal Year 2026-27 &
Fiscal Year 2027-28
Proposed Biennial Budget
City of El Cerrito
El Cerrito Public Financing Authority
El Cerrito Employee Pension Trust Board
June 16, 2026
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Attachment 5
Agenda Packet Page 256 of 320
Agenda
• Budget Overview
• Review of the Proposed Budget -
Emphasis on FY 2026-27
• Long-Range General Fund Forecast
• Capital Improvement Program
• Next Steps
2 Agenda Packet Page 257 of 320
About the Budget
Agenda Packet Page 258 of 320
Target-Based Budgeting
• Target-Based Budgeting (TBB) is a
budget methodology that focuses
on available revenue rather than
prior year spending
• Endorsed by the Government Finance
Officers Association (GFOA)
• Central budget authority sets
spending targets for departments;
departments develop proposals within
those targets
• Reduces "budget games" and
encourages departments to identify
efficiencies
• How El Cerrito used TBB:
• Finance developed status quo
projection incl. deficit of $1.7M in FY
2026-27 and $2.2M in FY 2027-28
• Spending targets assigned to each
department based on expenditure
share, staffing levels, and cost
recovery ratios
• Departments submitted proposals;
Finance and CMO evaluated
feasibility and impacts
• Solutions assessed against criteria
including health and safety,
community impacts, legal mandates,
labor implications, revenue impacts,
and alignment with Council priorities
4 Agenda Packet Page 259 of 320
Strategic Plan • Reaffirmed by City Council at
January Workshop
• Budget process and
recommendations guided by
Strategic Plan
• Department workplans
aligned to Strategic Plan
goals • Detailed strategic alignment
information for each
department has been included
in budget document
5 Agenda Packet Page 260 of 320
Public Engagement
Budget Survey
• Open from January 16 through
March 31, 2026
• 173 respondents
• 96% of respondents live in El
Cerrito
• 4 questions:
• Investment levels of 16 City services
• Top 3 Budget Priorities
• Allocate Points across Infrastructure
categories
• Open-ended Comments
Budget Workshops
• In-person workshop on March 7,
2026, and virtual workshop on
March 25, 2026
• Recording available on City Website
• Included a review of city finances
and city services
• Two activities:
• Survey to consider tradeoffs
• Prioritization of core service areas
6 Detailed survey and workshop data presented to the City Council on April 21, 2026 Agenda Packet Page 261 of 320
Major Factors Influencing the Budget
• Economy uncertain:
• International conflict and tariff
uncertainty
• Complex interest rate environment
• Consumer confidence shaky
• Inflation stabilizing but still impacting
costs
• Volatile and costly insurance markets
• Insurance markets – rapidly increasing costs
• Pension costs – rising but approaching peak
• Unfunded mandates and
increasing state requirements
7 $0.0000
$2.0000
$4.0000
$6.0000
$8.0000
$10.0000
$12.0000
$14.0000
$16.0000
2025-262026-272027-282028-292029-302030-312031-322032-332033-342034-352035-362036-372037-382038-392039-402040-412041-422042-432043-442044-452045-462046-472047-482048-492049-502050-512051-522052-532053-542054-55 Projected City Pension Costs
Normal Cost UAL Payment
Approaching highest UAL around
FY32, then decrease over time.

Normal cost remains steady as
UAL gradually diminishes.

Agenda Packet Page 262 of 320
Major Budget Changes
Structural Changes
• Increased investment in Internal Service
Funds
• Vehicles & Equipment
• Capital and deferred maintenance
• Updated cost allocations to special funds
• Updated budget methodology for
insurance, worker’s compensation, and
one-time payouts
Discussed but Kept in Budget
• Additional library hours
• Landscape Maintenance
• EC Stars Internship program
Budget Cuts
• Reductions to non-personnel budgets citywide, including supplies, equipment, professional services, and maintenance
• Decrease in professional communications
and facilitation support
• Decrease City Council travel and training
• Reduction in some programs and events
• Reduced City contribution to 4th of July
event
• Cancel Advisory Board Member recognition
dinner, holiday light installation on San Pablo
Avenue, some Recreation special events
8 Agenda Packet Page 263 of 320
Citywide Budget –
All Funds
10 Agenda Packet Page 264 of 320
Revenues – All Funds by Source
• Property Tax: $19.2M annually, 5% increase
• Sales Tax: $12.4M annually, 2% increase
• Property Transfer Tax: $3.4M
annually, 6% increase
• Utility Users Tax: $4.9M, 32% increase
• FY26 budget significantly lower than
actuals in both FY25 and FY26
• New court case with expected positive
impacts on the City’s UUT
• Fees and Other: $48M, 60% increase
• Increase primarily from grants (181%
increase over FY26 budget)
11 Citywide Revenue by Source – FY 2026-27
Agenda Packet Page 265 of 320
Expenditures – By Fund
• General Fund is largest part of City
operations
• Special revenue funds include:
• Gas Tax funds and Street
Improvement Fund (Measure A)
• Measure H Parcel Tax for Parks
• Landscape and Lighting District
• Enterprise Fund is the Solid Waste
& Recycling Program (Integrated
Waste Management Fund)
• Expenditures vary widely based on
type of revenue (source) and
allowable uses
12 Citywide Expenditures by Fund Type – FY 2026-27
Agenda Packet Page 266 of 320
Proposed Staffing
13 Department FY 2023 -24 FY 2024 -25 FY 2025 -26 FY 2026 -27 FY 2027 -28 City Council 5 5 5 5 5
City Management 10.5 10 10 10 10
Finance 6.5 6 6 6 6
Community
Development 15 15 15 15 15
Police 48 48 48 48 48
Fire 37.5 37.5 38 38 38
Public Works 27.3 27.3 27.3 27.44 27.44
Recreation 20 20 20 20 20
TOTAL 169.8 168.8 169.3 169.44 169.44
Agenda Packet Page 267 of 320
Citywide Expenditures by Department
14 Includes significant new grant funding in FY 2026-27 in the Community Development Department Agenda Packet Page 268 of 320
Citywide Fund Balances
• Detailed table of all fund
balances in budget book
• General Fund to remain
above 29% unrestricted
reserves in both years (13%
EDRF and 16% unassigned)
15 Agenda Packet Page 269 of 320
General Fund
16 Agenda Packet Page 270 of 320
Operating Budget Overview
17 Agenda Packet Page 271 of 320
General Fund Revenue
• General Fund revenues remain
stable
• Most revenues received from
general purpose taxes,
including:
• Property Tax
• Sales and Transactions Taxes
• Utility Users Taxes
• Property Transfer Tax
• Business License Taxes
• Council adopted updates to
Master Fee Schedule on May
19, 2026
18 Agenda Packet Page 272 of 320
General Fund Expenditures
19 Agenda Packet Page 273 of 320
Major One-Time Expenditures
• 2 major needs recommended for use of one-time fund
balance
• Fire Engine approaching 15-year end-of-life
• Self-Contained Breathing Apparatuses (SCBAs): approaching federally-mandated maximum service life of 15 years
• Cost impacts frontloaded through ISF contributions to smooth budgetary impact
Item FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 Total
Fire Engine $1,025,000 $158,600 $1,183,600
SCBAs - 330,000 330,000
Total General Fund Contribution $1,025,000 $488,600 $1,513,600 20 Agenda Packet Page 274 of 320
Long-Range General Fund Forecast
21 • Reserves remain above 31% in FY 2026-27 and above 29% ($20.8M) in all subsequent forecasted years
• Use of Section 115 modeled to smooth highest UAL costs from FY29 to FY35 Agenda Packet Page 275 of 320
Gann Limit
• Included in the recommended actions for adopting the FY 2026- 27 Budget is the approval of the calculation and establishing the City’s FY 2026-27 Gann Appropriation Limit
• California Government Code requires that the City adopt the Gann appropriations limit by resolution on an annual basis • Calculated Gann Limit for FY 2026-27 is $205,024,075
22 Agenda Packet Page 276 of 320
CIP Budget - Summary
• $10M of projects planned for
FY 2026-27, largely grantfunded
• Over 30 active projects
• Primarily Transportation
projects in FY 2026-27
• Variety of smaller parks and
facilities projects
23 Agenda Packet Page 277 of 320
Proposed Budget Summary
• Reflects City Council priorities, including
feedback during the budget development
process
• Aligns with the City's Strategic Plan
• Has revenues exceeding expenditures for
the operating budget
• Maintains reserves above a combined 29%,
including 13% EDRF and 16% unassigned
• Enables the City to continue providing key
services with some changes to programs
24 Agenda Packet Page 278 of 320
Next Steps
• Questions, Comments, Direction
• Additional Special Meetings as needed
• Adoption of Budget by June 30, 2026
• After budget adoption:
• Continued CIP process improvements
• Internal Service Fund policy and schedule
development
• Asset Inventory and Asset Management Module
configuration in progress
• Policy review and updates (purchasing,
grants, ISF, CIP, etc.)
25 Agenda Packet Page 279 of 320
Thank you!
For more information: elcerrito.gov/BudgetProcess
26 Agenda Packet Page 280 of 320

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 9.B.

Date: June 16, 2026
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Claire Coleman, Budget/Financial Services Manager; Crystal Reams, Finance Director/City Treasurer; Finance Department
Subject: Spending Authority for Certain Vendors Expected to Exceed $45,000 for FY 2026-27

ACTION PROPOSED
Adopt a resolution approving spending authority for vendors expected to exceed $45,000 in Fiscal Year 2026-27.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Resolution 2017-71A, adopted by the City Council on October 3, 2017, authorizes the City Manager to purchase goods and services and enter into professional services agreements in amounts not to exceed $45,000 without City Council authorization, and further requires that purchases and professional service agreements of more than $45,000 for any one vendor in any one fiscal year must be approved by the City Council. Each fiscal year, the City Council affirms the requirement for the single vendor threshold of $45,000 in its resolution adopting the annual budget. Additionally, the City's Procurement Policy (Administrative Policy III-1) sets guidelines and requirements for purchases of goods and services using City funds that conform with the approval thresholds set by the City Council and outlines the procedures for the use of purchase orders. Services performed for the City require a contract and insurance verification, while purchases of goods and supplies typically do not.

In 2024, as a part of Citywide efforts to improve accuracy, transparency, and compliance with City policies, staff began bringing an annual list of vendors with whom the City may need to spend over $45,000 during the fiscal year. In accordance with the Procurement Policy, staff is seeking approval to make purchases estimated above $45,000 throughout the year with certain vendors for goods/supplies and on-call services for vehicle maintenance and Recreation Instructor services on an as-needed basis. All purchases included in this agenda bill for approval were included in the FY 2026-27 Budget and do not require additional appropriation authority from the City Council.

Goods & Supplies
The following purchases of goods and supplies are made on an as-needed basis in small amounts that would typically not come before the City Council for approval according to the City's Procurement Policy, but which cumulatively amount to over $45,000 in a single year with a specific vendor. Each vendor is selected per the Policy and based on excellence in quality, pricing, and availability.

Agenda Packet Page 281 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.B.
• Knorr ($105,000) - Pool maintenance and supplies. Knorr has been the City’s capital maintenance contractor at the El Cerrito Swim Center since it was renovated in 2004. There are very few contractors in Northern California that provide the level of service and expertise that Knorr provides who are additionally able to respond quickly to emergencies and thereby minimize pool closure times.

Staff periodically surveys pools in the Bay Area, the majority utilize Knorr Systems for their capital maintenance needs. The main exception to this is that some cities, mostly larger ones with several pools, utilize city staff for pool maintenance needs.
• LN Curtis ($75,000) - Safety equipment and clothing for the Fire Department. LN Curtis offers the best prices and customer service for our firefighter's turnouts, including timely sizing, service, and delivery. LN Curtis is locally based in Walnut Creek, CA.
• Folger Graphics ($50,000) - Printing and mailing services for multiple departments, including the rECguide and citywide public information efforts. The City no longer intends to publish the biannual News and Views newsletter. Folger Graphics provides high-quality printing services to multiple departments citywide.
• CivicPlus ($55,000) - City, Recreation and Police website hosting, livestream and archive services for City Council meetings, agenda management, advisory body member management, accessibility services on our website, codification and management of our municipal code.
• Lehr Upfitters ($100,000) – Vehicle upfitting for Police Department vehicles.

Lehr specializes in law enforcement vehicle upfitting and outfitting, providing the specialized equipment and installation expertise required for police fleet vehicles. • Contra Costa County - Office of the Sheriff-Coroner ($65,000) and Forensic Services Division ($70,000) - Law enforcement software and forensic services.

The City contracts with the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff-Coroner for access to Aries, the County's records management system used by the El Cerrito Police Department, and with the Forensic Services Division for Cal-ID services.

Both are county-administered programs that support regional law enforcement coordination and interoperability; comparable services are not available through private vendors.
• First Serve Productions ($55,000) – Tennis court resurfacing and repairs. First Serve Production was selected through a competitive Request for Proposals process as the lowest responsive bidder. Current contracted work covers resurfacing and repairs at Arlington Tennis Courts. The appropriation includes additional capacity in the event First Serve is engaged for the Cerrito Vista park project, where they are expected to remain cost-competitive. • Tecknica Auto ($50,000) – Vehicle maintenance and repairs for various citywide departments. Tecknica Auto is locally based in El Cerrito and provides maintenance and repair services across the City's diverse vehicle fleet.

Agenda Packet Page 282 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.B.
• Amazon Business ($70,000) – Citywide supplies across all departments. The City purchases through Amazon Business, a marketplace platform through which thousands of independent sellers offer goods. The range of items purchased citywide is too broad and varied to be aggregated into a single competitive bid.

Amazon Business serves as a convenient procurement channel while individual transactions remain subject to the City's standard purchasing thresholds and approval requirements.
• Two Brothers Pool & Spa ($60,000) - Day-to-day Swim Center pool and splash park maintenance and supplies. Two Brothers provides routine operational maintenance including chemical balancing, cleaning, and minor repairs. Services were competitively bid in 2022; FY 2027-28 is the final year of contract extensions. Pool chemicals, including chlorine, acid, and CO2, are procured through this contract as well.
• Miracle Playsystems ($50,000) – Playground equipment repairs and replacement parts. Miracle Playsystems was selected through the State's cooperative purchasing program in the early 2000s when grant funding was used to replace playground equipment across most City parks. Because Miracle manufactured and installed the equipment, replacement parts must be sourced through them directly, and their installers are best positioned to ensure compatibility and safe installation of new components.
• Tyler Technologies ($65,000) – Enterprise resource planning (ERP) software.

Tyler Technologies provides the City's ERP platform, supporting the accounting, purchasing, payroll, and human resources data management functions across all departments. As the City's incumbent ERP provider, Tyler is the sole-source vendor for licensing, maintenance, and support services associated with the platform.

Fire Fleet Maintenance Service
The Fire Department does not expect to spend over $45,000 with all the listed vendors and will not exceed its Council-approved budget, but is seeking approval to ensure the appropriate authorization before repairs become urgent. All purchases included in this agenda bill for approval were included in the FY 2026-27 Budget and do not require additional appropriation authority from the City Council. • Alameda County Fire Department
• Cummings, Inc.
• Diego's Truck Repair
• Hi-Tech EVS, Inc.
• Kelly's Truck Repair
• Peterson Trucks, Inc.

Recreation Instructors
Recreation Instructors are contracted to teach classes for the City and provide a wide range of offerings to the community. Instructors are paid on a cost-sharing basis, whereby they receive 60% of the revenue from class sign-ups and the City receives 40%. How much a Recreation Instructor is paid by the City annually depends on the Agenda Packet Page 283 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.B.
frequency and popularity of their classes. A small number of Recreation Instructors regularly receive over $45,000 per year from the City through this revenue-sharing agreement structure. While these are not purchased services or supplies and all expenses are both budgeted for and offset by class fee revenues, staff feel that these contracts should come to City Council for approval to ensure compliance with the Procurement Policy.

The instructors who staff expect to be paid over $45,000 in FY 2026-27 are:
• Norman Friedman ($170,000) - Norm Friedman is the Director of El Cerrito Sports Camp, providing 9-10 weeks of summer camp each summer. • Stephanie Ramos ($56,000) - Stephanie Ramos is the Independent Contractor providing year-round Zumba and Zumba Gold to adults and seniors. Classes are offered daily, and in some cases 2-3 times per day.
• Belinda Graul ($50,000) - Belinda Graul is our head Gymnastics Coach, offering 12 classes per week during the school year, and 6-7 weeks of camp each summer.
• Ian McAvoy ($50,000) - Ian McAvoy is the owner of Off the Block STEM, providing specialized LEGO classes twice weekly throughout the school year in addition to school-break camps and summer camps.
• Mark Marcos Manqueros ($120,000) - Mark Marcos Manqueros is the owner/director of Crouching Tiger Tennis, providing year-round tennis classes and camps for youth and seasonal classes for adults.
• Tracey Shababo ($50,000) – Tracey Shababo teaches youth sewing, textile arts, and arts and crafts classes and camps.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal(s) of:
• High Performing Organization; and
• Community Safety; and
• Livability and Belonging; and
• Infrastructure and Amenities

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

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
All expenses referenced in this agenda bill are included within the FY 2026-27 Budget considered for adoption by the City Council on June 16, 2026. The proposed expenditures require Council authorization because they are expected to exceed $45,000 with a single vendor in a single fiscal year, but there is no additional fiscal impact from adopting this resolution.

Agenda Packet Page 284 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.B.

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

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution
Agenda Packet Page 285 of 320
RESOLUTION 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO APPROVING SPENDING AUTHORITY FOR VENDORS EXPECTED TO EXCEED $45,000 IN FISCAL YEAR 2026-27
WHEREAS, Resolutions 2017-71A and 2024-46 requires that all purchases totaling over $45,000 with a single vendor in a single fiscal year receive Council approval; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Procurement Policy (Administrative Policy III-1) guides all purchasing and bidding procedures to ensure fairness and transparency; and WHEREAS, certain vendors, selected based on excellence in quality, price, and availability, are expected to exceed $45,000 for goods, supplies, and services in the 2026- 27 fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the proposed expenditures outlined in this resolution and the associated agenda bill were included in the Council-adopted budget for FY 2026-27 and require no additional appropriation authority.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito that it hereby authorizes the purchase of goods and on-call services up to the not-toexceed amount detailed for each vendor in the table below for FY2206-27.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager or designee is authorized to enter into agreements with the individuals or entities listed belwo based on City standard forms or agreements with commercially reasonable terms, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.

Vendor Category
Expenditure
Total
Knorr Systems, Inc.

Supplies & On-Call
Services 105,000
LN Curtis & Sons Supplies 75,000
Folger Graphics, Inc. Supplies 50,000
CivicPlus
Various Online
Applications 55,000
Lehr Upfitters OpCo LC Vehicle Upfitting 100,000
Contra Costa County -
Office of the SheriffCoroner Services 65,000
Contra Costa County -
Forensic Services Division Services 70,000
First Serve Productions,
Inc. Services 55,000
Agenda Packet Page 286 of 320
Vendor Category
Expenditure
Total
Tecknica Auto, Inc. On-Call Services 50,000
Amazon Capital Services,
Inc. Supplies 70,000
Two Brothers Pool & Spa,
Inc.

Supplies & On-Call
Services 60,000
Miracle Playsystems, Inc. Services 50,000
Tyler Technologies Finance and HR Software 60,000
Alameda County Fire
Department Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Cummings, Inc. Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Diego's Truck Repair Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Hi-Tech EVS, Inc. Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Kelly's Truck Repair Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Peterson Trucks, Inc. Fire Vehicle Maintenance
Norman Friedman Recreation Instructor 170,000
Stephanie Ramos Recreation Instructor 56,000
Belinda Graul Recreation Instructor 50,000
Ian McAvoy Recreation Instructor 50,000
Tracey Shababo Recreation Instructor 50,000
Mark Marcos Manqueros Recreation Instructor 120,000
I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on June 16, 2026 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:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 287 of 320

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 9.C.

Date: June 16, 2026
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Shannon Bassi, Human Resources Manager, City Management Subject: Annual Adoption of the City's Full-time Salary Schedule, Effective July 6, 2026

ACTION PROPOSED
Adopt a resolution to approve the City's full-time salary schedule, including approval to establish and modify two classifications.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
City staff annually prepares a salary schedule for all full-time personnel classifications.

The salary schedule contains authorized salaries for all positions based on City Council approved compensation plans, contracts, and Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) including provisions for cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) and other modifications. This salary schedule is published on the City's website and may be amended from time to time as a result of negotiations with bargaining units. City staff recommends presenting the salary schedule to the City Council for adoption each year as part of the annual budget process in the interest of transparency and to ensure compliance with SB 707 and CalPERS regulations.

The proposed salary schedule changes in Exhibit A to the attached resolution include 1) updated salary grade ranges for approved and contractually obligated COLAs; 2) establishing a salary grade range for a new classification titled Environmental Services Manager and updating the current salary grade range for Facilities and Maintenance Manager for internal alignment purposes; and 3) updating the City Manager salary grade, which includes a merit increase of 5% following a performance evaluation conducted by the City Council per the City Manager's Employment agreement, as authorized by City Council retroactive to April 1, 2026 and approved through the adoption of this salary schedule. The proposed changes will be effective July 6, 2026, which is the first full payroll period in July 2026. Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the modifications to the salary schedule proposed in Exhibit A.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This action supports the City’s Strategic Plan Goal(s) of:
• High Performing Organization; and
• Community Safety; and
• Livability and Belonging
Agenda Packet Page 288 of 320
Agenda Item No. 9.C.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
There are no financial impacts with assigning a salary grade range to the new classification in the salary schedule. The operating budget would be adjusted when the positions are filled.

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

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A to Resolution
Agenda Packet Page 289 of 320
RESOLUTION 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO ADOPTING THE CITY'S FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JULY 6, 2026, INCLUDING

ESTABLISHING A SALARY GRADE RANGE FOR A NEW CLASSIFICATION AND

UPDATING AN EXISTING SALARY GRADE RANGE WITHIN THE

MANAGEMENT/CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEE GROUP
WHEREAS, annually the City generates a comprehensive salary schedule for full-time employees; and
WHEREAS, the salary schedule contains authorized salaries for all positions based on City Council approved compensation plans, contracts, and Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) which include provisions for cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) and other modifications; and
WHEREAS, employment contracts and MOUs often span over multiple fiscal years; and
WHEREAS, annual adoption of the comprehensive salary schedule ensures transparency and compliance with multiple regulations including SB 707, CalPERS regulations set forth in Government Code sections 20636, 20636.1, 7522.34, and subdivision (a) of CCR section 570.5: and
WHEREAS, the salary schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A reflects approved COLAs for Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 1021, Public Safety Management Association, Police Employees’ Association (sworn and non-sworn), United Professional Firefighters Local 1230, and Management/Confidential positions; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit A reflects City Council approval of a 5% merit increase (effective April 1, 2026) and COLA for the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the attached salary schedule also establishes a salary grade range for the classification of Environmental Services Manager and modifies the salary grade range for the classification of Facilities and Maintenance Manager; and WHEREAS, the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act allows employee units within the City to represent themselves on matters concerning conditions of employment and salaries.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito does hereby approve and adopt the salary grade ranges proposed for the classifications of Environmental Services Manager and Facilities and Maintenance Manager.

Agenda Packet Page 290 of 320
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the Full-Time Salary Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on June 16, 2026 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:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 291 of 320
JOB CODE JOB CLASS STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5
537 ACCOUNTANT I 6,319 6,635 6,968 7,316 7,683
520 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT I 4,463 4,686 4,920 5,166 5,425 521 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT II 4,759 4,996 5,246 5,508 5,784 687 ASSISTANT ENGINEER 8,966 9,413 9,885 10,379 10,898
665 ASSISTANT PLANNER 6,788 7,128 7,484 7,858 8,249
685 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 7,806 8,197 8,608 9,039 9,489
552 BUILDING INSPECTOR I 6,673 7,006 7,357 7,726 8,111
553 BUILDING INSPECTOR II 7,370 7,739 8,125 8,533 8,960 445 CHILDCARE TEACHER II 4,090 4,293 4,509 4,734 4,970
442 CUSTODIAN 3,987 4,186 4,394 4,616 4,846
557 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN I 6,067 6,369 6,688 7,024 7,374 556 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN II 6,673 7,006 7,357 7,726 8,111 660 ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST 6,812 7,153 7,510 7,886 8,280 522 FINANCE TECHNICIAN I 4,957 5,204 5,464 5,738 6,025
524 FINANCE TECHNICIAN II 5,476 5,750 6,038 6,339 6,654 538 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TECHNICIAN 6,465 6,790 7,130 7,486 7,861 440 LEAD CUSTODIAN 5,737 6,025 6,326 6,643 6,975
631 LEAD MAINTENANCE SERVICES WORKER 5,737 6,025 6,326 6,643 6,975 604 MAINTENANCE SERVICES WORKER I 4,719 4,954 5,202 5,462 5,735 630 MAINTENANCE SERVICES WORKER II 5,219 5,479 5,752 6,042 6,343 536 MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 5,737 6,024 6,324 6,640 6,973
684 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OFFICER I 7,098 7,452 7,825 8,216 8,627 686 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION OFFICER II 7,806 8,197 8,608 9,039 9,489 689 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PROGRAM COORDINATOR 8,587 9,017 9,469 9,943 10,438 530 PERMIT TECHNICIAN I 5,290 5,556 5,834 6,125 6,430
535 PERMIT TECHNICIAN II 5,656 5,940 6,236 6,547 6,875611 PROGRAM COORDINATOR 8,123 8,529 8,955 9,403 9,873 554 PLAN CHECKER I 6,673 7,006 7,357 7,726 8,111
555 PLAN CHECKER II 7,370 7,739 8,125 8,533 8,960
610 RECREATION COORDINATOR 5,461 5,735 6,022 6,324 6,640 632 RECYCLING OPERATIONS DRIVER 5,479 5,754 6,040 6,344 6,660 443 RECYCLING OPERATIONS WORKER 4,275 4,487 4,711 4,949 5,196 558 SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR 8,107 8,513 8,938 9,386 9,856 525 SENIOR FINANCE TECHNICIAN 6,751 7,089 7,443 7,815 8,206 541 SENIOR MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 6,310 6,626 6,957 7,304 7,670 540 SENIOR PERMIT TECHNICIAN 6,598 6,929 7,274 7,638 8,021

CITY OF EL CERRITO

MONTHLY SALARY GRADES
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU) LOCAL 1021

37.5 HRS/WEEK - 3.5% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026
*Please note effective January 1, 2026, salary grade 632 reverted back to a 37.5/week hour schedule (from 40/week), and monthly salaries for each step have been updated accordingly.

Exhibit A
Agenda Packet Page 292 of 320
JOB CODE JOB CLASS STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5
635 ASSISTANT RECREATION SUPERVISOR 6,070 6,372 6,693 7,027 7,379

JOB CODE JOB CLASS FLAT RATE
980 CITY MANAGER 25,235
JOB CODE JOB CLASS Bottom New Bottom Top New Top
935 ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER 17,354 22,776545 ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER 11,922 15,648912 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER 9,600 12,600690 BUDGET/FINANCIAL SERVICES MANAGER 11,922 15,648926 BUILDING OFFICIAL 12,290 16,130551 CITY CLERK 13,332 17,498950 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 15,731 20,647917 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MANAGER New 10,856 New 14,247 913 FACILITIES AND MAINTENANCE MANAGER 9,560 10,856 13,503 14,247924 FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY TREASURER 16,528 21,692921 HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER 12,910 16,945910 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER 12,910 16,945550 MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 7,648 10,039546 MANAGEMENT ANALYST I 7,316 9,603547 MANAGEMENT ANALYST II 8,076 10,600548 MANAGEMENT ANALYST III 8,359 10,970544 SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 8,884 11,360903 NETWORK SECURITY ENGINEER 8,692 11,408916 OPERATIONS & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MANAGER 11,922 15,648915 PLANNING MANAGER 12,290 16,130549 PROGRAM MANAGER 9,366 12,293948 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER 16,527 21,692949 RECREATION DIRECTOR 14,973 19,652650 RECREATION SUPERVISOR 8,359 10,970682 RECYCLING OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 7,688 10,090688 SENIOR ACCOUNTANT 8,485 11,137914 SENIOR ENGINEER 11,697 15,352902 SENIOR HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST 9,284 12,185905 SENIOR PLANNER 8,914 11,700900 SENIOR PROGRAM MANAGER 10,339 13,569 982 EXTRA HELP RETIRED ANNUITANT (HOURLY RATE)*** 18.82 155.29 MICELLANEOUS 37.5 HRS/WEEK - 3.5% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026CITY MANAGER 37.5 HRS/WEEK - 5% EFFECTIVE 4/1/2026; 3% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026 MANAGEMENT 37.5 HRS/WEEK - 3% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026
*** This job class is for any CalPERS Retired Annuitants- applicable pay range is based on the job classification hired for.

Agenda Packet Page 293 of 320
JOB CODE JOB CLASS Bottom Top
543 ACCOUNTANT II 7,003 9,193529 HUMAN RESOURCES SPECIALIST 7,138 9,369539 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST 7,138 9,369716 PUBLIC SAFETY EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT (40 HRS/WEEK) 7,610 9,210 PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (PSMA) (SWORN)40 HRS/WEEK - 3% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026 JOB CODE JOB CLASS BOTTOM1

CONTROL
PT2 TOP3
930 BATTALION CHIEF (56 HRS/WEEK) 16,138 20,172 25,216947 BATTALION CHIEF/PARAMEDIC/TRAINING OFFICER 17,750 22,188 27,735952 FIRE CHIEF (3.8% EFFECTIVE 7/7/2024) 16,514 20,642 25,803933 POLICE CAPTAIN 16,919 21,150 26,437951 POLICE CHIEF (3.8% EFFECTIVE 7/7/2024) 15,265 19,082 23,852 931 POLICE LIEUTENANT 15,373 19,215 24,020
*Battalion Chief/BC Paramedic: 3% Market Adjustment Effective 7/6/2026 JOB CODE JOB CLASS STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 7 841 POLICE CORPORAL 9,984 10,448 10,939 11,455 11,993 12,593 13,223 842 POLICE CORPORAL/DETECTIVE ASSIGNMENT 10,482 10,971 11,486 12,027 12,593 13,223 13,884 830 POLICE OFFICER 9,014 9,431 9,872 10,332 10,816 11,362 11,930 840 POLICE OFFICER - DETECTIVE / MOTOR ASSIGNMENT 9,464 9,904 10,365 10,849 11,357 11,925 12,521 860 POLICE SERGEANT 11,431 11,968 12,534 13,128 13,752 14,439 15,161 861 POLICE SERGEANT/DET/MOTOR/ADMIN ASSIGNMENT 12,003 12,567 13,161 13,785 14,439 15,161 15,919 *Addition of Step 7 Effective 7/6/2025
JOB CODE JOB CLASS STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 812 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER (40 HRS/WEEK) 5,947 6,213 6,494 6,786 7 7,449 ,094 805 POLICE OFFICER RECRUIT (40 HRS/WEEK) 5,732804 POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST 5,161 5,389 5,630 5,882 6,146 6,453 820 POLICE RECORDS SUPERVISOR 7,270 7,602 7,950 8,317 8,702 9,138 817 PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE SPECIALIST (40 HRS/WEEK) 6,619 6,950 7,299 7,663 8,046 8,448 810 SENIOR POLICE RECORDS SPECIALIST 5,576 5,825 6,086 6,362 6,651 6,984 Police Records Supervisor: 3% Market Adjustment Effective 7/6/2025

37.5 HRS/WEEK - 4.25% EFFECTIVE 7/7/2024
*Addition of Step 6 Effective 7/6/2025
CONFIDENTIAL 37.5 HRS/WEEK- 3% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026POLICE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION (PEA) (SWORN) 40 HRS/WEEK - 4.25% EFFECTIVE 7/7/2024POLICE EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION (PEA) (NON-SWORN) Agenda Packet Page 294 of 320
JOB CODE JOB CLASS STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5
760 FIRE CAPTAIN 12,559 13,187 13,845 14,537 15,265770 FIRE CAPTAIN/FPO 13,816 14,506 15,231 15,995 16,792761 FIRE CAPTAIN/PARAMEDIC ASSIGNMENT 13,816 14,506 15,231 15,995 16,792 771 FIRE CAPTAIN/PARAMEDIC ASSIGNMENT/FPO 15,197 15,956 16,755 17,592 18,471 740 FIRE ENGINEER 10,900 11,445 12,017 12,620 13,251741 FIRE ENGINEER/PARAMEDIC ASSIGNMENT 11,990 12,588 13,220 13,879 14,572 720 FIREFIGHTER 9,887 10,381 10,902 11,445 12,016721 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC ASSIGNMENT 10,875 11,419 11,990 12,588 13,219 UNITED PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 1230 (SWORN)
56 HRS/WEEK - 3% EFFECTIVE 7/5/2026
Agenda Packet Page 295 of 320
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.elcerrito.gov

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 16, 2026
(rev. 6/18/2026)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING (6:00 PM)
Public Comments (Not on the Agenda and Consent Calendar) Materials received at meeting
Agenda Item No. 4 – FOURTH PUBLIC HEARING ON TRANSITION TO DISTRICTBASED ELECTIONS – PRESENTATION OF REFINED DRAFT

MAP(S) AND SEQUENCE OF ELECTIONS

1. Staff Presentation

2. Additional Public Comments
Agenda Item No. 9.A. – CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Approval of the City’s Fiscal Year 2026-27 and 2027-28 Proposed Budget and Spending Authority by Fund for the City and Public Financing Authority, and Approval of the FY 2026-27 Annual Gann Appropriation Limit Additional Public Comments
Agenda Packet Page 296 of 320
fm
I'
Q
c: ■;
i
\
Agenda Packet Page 297 of 320
yo\A c\ct f)M: IT
JUI^ I S y i.V
cofOfrii^ v\/Hejr\ ;ro^: non-nJ-irM O^H"'
X
l/yy ^At |4.«^
r
Agenda Packet Page 298 of 320
\
I
■-S
hmt
1/vhilc
r
^ 3rmfn m sc’rmny mcf5 atetjyi Agenda Packet Page 299 of 320 \
V
^^o(M
Agenda Packet Page 300 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Shaulnie Mohan
To: Rebecca Saltzman; Carolyn Wysinger; William Ktsanes; Lisa Motoyama Cc: City Clerk; Gabe Quinto
Subject: Subject: Public Comments - Not on the Agenda: Peregrine Tech Date: Friday, June 5, 2026 10:10:19 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Hello City Councilmembers,
My name is Shaulnie and I live in El Cerrito. I am emailing you to urge you to review the ECPD’s intended contract with Peregrine Tech for a data fusion/ integration platform for El Cerrito.

What is going on? Is city council gonna vote to put carcinogens in the drinking water next? At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if you tried to put an AI data center into Cerrito Vista park?What is the game plan?
These actions are inherently evil.

Consolidating our personal information into a mass surveillance database that is almost certainly going to be searched by bad actors. I don’t want predators, knowing where my children and I live.

But it appears that our police department in city Council are thrilled to provide all of our information to everyone in an effort to violate all of our constitutional rights.

Furthermore, we do not have the money. I went to the meeting. I saw the budget. Where is this money coming from? Is it coming from your pockets? Is it coming from the police chiefs pocket? Let’s have him pay for it personally.

We are your constituents. We should not have to be watching every single one of your moves to make sure you are not putting us directly into danger.

Start serving your constituents.

Sincerely,
Shaulnie Mohan, MD
General Public Comments
Agenda Packet Page 301 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Katie Sherwin
To: City Clerk
Cc: Carolyn Wysinger; William Ktsanes; Rebecca Saltzman; Gabe Quinto; Lisa Motoyama Subject: Public Comments - Not on the Agenda: Peregrine Tech Date: Monday, June 8, 2026 8:53:30 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Hello City Councilmembers,
My name is Katie Sherwin and I live and work in El Cerrito. I am emailing you to urge you to review the ECPD’s intended contract with Peregrine Tech for a data fusion/ integration platform for El Cerrito. Such a system would consolidate residents’ personal info into a mass surveillance database that is vulnerable to security risks and constitutional privacy violations. Mass surveillance endangers the safety and violates the constitutional rights for every resident and visitor to El Cerrito. After taking such a great step forward in protecting our privacy by cancelling our Flock contract, I urge you to review and reconsider starting a contract with Peregrine.

Thanks for your consideration,
Katie Sherwin
Walnut St, El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 302 of 320
From: Claire Levay-Young
To: City Clerk
Cc: Gabe Quinto; Rebecca Saltzman; Carolyn Wysinger; William Ktsanes; Lisa Motoyama Subject: [UNKNOWN SENDER] Public Comments - Not on the Agenda: Peregrine Tech Date: Monday, June 8, 2026 2:51:10 PM
Dear City Council members,
I have been an El Cerrito resident for the past 18 years. I am emailing you to urge you to review the ECPD’s intended contract with Peregrine Tech for a data fusion/ integration platform for El Cerrito. Such a system would consolidate residents’ personal info into a mass surveillance database that is vulnerable to security risks and constitutional privacy violations. Mass surveillance endangers the safety and violates the constitutional rights for every resident and visitor to El Cerrito. After taking such a great step forward in protecting our privacy by cancelling our Flock contract, I urge you to review and reconsider starting a contract with Peregrine.

Thanks for your consideration,
Claire Levay-Young
Agenda Packet Page 303 of 320
From: Cordell Hindler
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments
Date: Monday, June 15, 2026 2:56:46 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Hello Mayor Quinto, Council Members and Staff,
I am Submitting the Following Comments into the Record:

1. for a Future Agenda, The Council Should Invite Caitlin Sly to Present on the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano County

2. Also I am In Full Support of the Items on the Consent Calendar Sincerely
Cordell
Agenda Packet Page 304 of 320
June 16, 2026
Transition to District-Based Elections
Fourth Public Hearing
Agenda Item No. 4
Agenda Packet Page 305 of 320
Agenda
2 ▪ Why is the City Council changing how
members are elected?
▪ Why is this happening so quickly?
▪ Did the Council consider other alternative
voting systems?
▪ What’s happened in the process so far?
▪ What’s next?
▪ Review of draft maps
Agenda Packet Page 306 of 320
Why is the City Council changing
how members are elected?
• Current City Election System is At-Large
• California Voting Rights Aact
▪ Prohibits an at-large election system that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election.
▪ Violation established if racially polarized voting (RPV) and dilution occurs in elections or other matters submitted to the voters ▪ Awards attorneys’ fees to a plaintiff who successfully challenges a city’s at-large election system
3 Agenda Packet Page 307 of 320
Why is the City Council changing
how members are elected?
• March 17th Demand Letter claims City’s at-large system is racially polarized and violates CVRA
• Requests City transition to district-based elections
• City commissioned its own analysis, which concluded a statistical possibility of RPV in past elections in El Cerrito • No allegation of intentional racial discrimination in voting and no evidence presented to support such an allegation
4 Agenda Packet Page 308 of 320
Why is the City Council changing
how members are elected?
• CVRA Safe Harbor Provisions
▪ Caps attorneys’ fees at what is now approx. $38,000 to $40,000 if a city follows the safe harbor process
▪ Adopt resolution of intent to transition to districts within 45 days of receiving the demand letter
▪ Adopt ordinance establishing district-based elections within 90 days of resolution passage
5 Agenda Packet Page 309 of 320
Why is this happening so quickly?
• CVRA allows potential plaintiff to agree to extend the Safe Harbor timelines
• City Attorney requested extensions
• Request denied
• Completing process within Safe Harbor timelines maintains the cap on attorneys’ fees
• Why not litigate?
▪ Multiple cities have fought demands to transition to district elections ▪ None have succeeded
▪ All have paid the plaintiff’s large legal bills
6 Agenda Packet Page 310 of 320
Did the Council consider
other alternative voting systems?
• Council received information about other voting systems ▪ Ranked Choice Voting
▪ Citywide Single Vote (Limited Voting)
▪ Cumulative Voting
• None of the alternative systems maintain the protections of the Safe Harbor
• Contra Costa County not currently equipped to implement RCV—El Cerrito would pay the full cost to implement and additional annual maintenance costs
7 Agenda Packet Page 311 of 320
What’s happened in the process so far?
• April 21: Adopted Resolution of Intent to Transition to Districts • May 5: 1st Public Hearing held
• May 12: Virtual Community Workshop held
• May 14: Community Outreach at Bike to Wherever Day event • May 19: 2nd Public Hearing held; Council direction to proceed with drafting maps with 5 districts
• June 3: Community Workshop #2 held in City Council Chambers • June 9: 3rd Public Hearing held; Council reviewed maps prepared by the public and demographer
8 Agenda Packet Page 312 of 320
What’s next?
• Tonight: Continue review of draft maps from the public and demographer; Council to select final map
• July 7: 5th Public Hearing; Council to approve final map, sequence of elections, and Ordinance to change to districtbased elections • July 21: Adopt Ordinance to change to district-based elections • November 2028: First district-based Council election
• November 2030: Second district-based Council election 9 Agenda Packet Page 313 of 320
Questions and Presentation by Demographer
Agenda Packet Page 314 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Randi Jimenez
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment: Support for Draft Map B (District-Based Elections) Date: Friday, June 12, 2026 6:52:09 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear Members of the City Council,
My name is Randi Jimenez, and I am a homeowner in El Cerrito's Del Norte Neighborhood. I am writing today to express my strong support for Draft Map B as the final configuration for our district-based election system.

Map B provides the most logical, fair, and compact representation for our city's unique geography. Rather than squeezing our lower-elevation flatlands into a single, long and narrow ribbon district that stretches the length of the city, Map B sensibly divides the flats into distinct northern, central, and southern zones. This ensures that the distinct neighborhood and transit needs of the El Cerrito Plaza and Del Norte areas are not diluted.

Furthermore, I strongly favor Map B because it unifies our hillside neighborhoods into a single, cohesive district. Our hills face specific, high-stakes municipal challenges, particularly wildfire evacuation routes, vegetation management, and hillside infrastructure. Consolidating this geography ensures these critical public safety and urban forest management issues have a clear, unified voice on the City Council, rather than being fractured across multiple districts.

Map B is clean, balanced, and respects our natural communities of interest. I urge the City Council to adopt Draft Map B.

Thank you for your consideration,
Randi Jimenez, PhD
Agenda Packet Page 315 of 320
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Saturday, June 13, 2026 1:27:18 PM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: David Rockhold
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/1201/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: We own a home and live on Kenilworth Avenue. In all the proposed maps, we are separated from Ganges Avenue. Our neighborhood includes Ganges Avenue and the streets coming off of Ganges (Glen Mawr, Snowdon, and Kenilworth Ave and probably Wilson Way and Fairview Dr.) should be in the same district. People in the neighborhood walk on all these streets and get to know each other and have similar interest in anything that might affect our neighborhood. Please consider keeping this block of neighbors in one district.

Thank you, Barbara and David Rockhold,
Agenda Packet Page 316 of 320
From: No Reply
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment Submission
Date: Thursday, June 18, 2026 9:26:11 AM
This sender is trusted.

Submitted by: Maureen Dixon
Email Address:

Commented on event: https://elcerritoca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/1201/overview If you are having trouble viewing the URL above, cut and paste the string into your browser window.

User comment: Thank you for sending out the maps. As a resident on Norvell Street I feel our issues would be better represented by plan C3. This aligns the neighborhoods at the same elevation level. For example those of us in the neighborhoods at this elevation will be more directly affected by what happens at BART and the TOD than the people residing in the hills.

And they have more fire concern issues than we do.

Agenda Packet Page 317 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Betty Buginas
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public comments - June 16 9A
Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 7:49:15 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

El Cerrito City Council, show us you listened with a moratorium on Plaza BART library spending
Seventy percent of El Cerrito voters voted “no” on Measure C, which was backed by four of the five City Council members. Not everyone who voted “no” had the same reasons, but two messages are clear. We want the city to spend our money carefully, and we don’t like the idea of having a library at the Plaza BART station. It simply will not serve everyone in the city. We often don’t feel listened to, and we need to see that you heard us this time.

PLAZA LIBRARY SPENDING MORATORIUM
The City Council should impose a moratorium on spending money and staff time on a library at Plaza BART. The city poured a lot of time and money into that plan before the voters ever had a say. You were elected to represent us. You need to pass our message on to city staff that this is not what we want.

LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE
A small group pushed conversation toward fantasizing about a dream library. Now it’s time for a grown-up discussion that focuses on all the city’s needs, including:
-A new public safety building - we count on their safety to ensure our safety -Renovation of the community center/pool - it’s one of the most heavily used and cherished facilities in the city
-The needs of El Cerrito senior citizens - they are struggling more than you might realize

CITY COUNCIL SALARY AND EXPENSES
Council members have discussed the low salary they are paid. Move the money budgeted for travel to salary and to a more flexible fund that allows council members to keep those dollars in El Cerrito with informal sessions to meet with constituents. Send a message you care more about what El Cerrito residents have to say than what your peers outside the city think.

This message is archived at https://elcerritowire.blogspot.com Betty Buginas
El Cerrito
Agenda Item No. 9.A.

Agenda Packet Page 318 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Brian Richmond
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Paths in EC Budget
Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 8:03:00 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

I urge the City to make public path restoration and signage a priority in the 2026 Capital Improvement Plan. This is a low-cost, high-benefit project that should not displace other major priorities. I also encourage the City to adopt a clearer and more workable framework for partnering with community organizations to deliver improvements efficiently.

In El Cerrito’s 2026-28 budget, we request that you include:

Public path signage ($38,000 - one time allocation): Sean Moss (planning manager), Yvetteh Ortiz (public works director/city engineer), and Jarrett Mullen (sustainable transportation program manager) estimate that it would cost “~ $38,000 to install a sign at each street intersection of a public path. We estimated about $25,000 for labor and materials, with the remainder being planning and design work” (Moss email to Janet Byron, 3/3/26, available upon request). We request that the 26-28 Capital Improvement Program budget fully fund the one-time cost of public path sign installation at $38,000.

Public path restoration and upgrade ($50,000/year): We request that the 26-28 Capital Improvement Program budget include a line item for public path rights-of-way (perhaps in the sidewalk line item) of $50,000 per year, to be allocated for stafftime (plan review), labor (site overview), and materials. We recommend that public works coordinate closely with El Cerrito Trail Trekkers, which will assess current needs for handrails, concrete repair, treads, and other improvements to upgrade pedestrian safety on public path rights-of-way.

Hillside Natural Area funding ($25,000/year): We request that the 26-28 Capital Improvement Program or Parks and Recreation budget include a line item of $25,000 per year specifically for the management of the Hillside Natural Area, to be allocated in stafftime, labor, and materials, which would include trail design and repair, management of non-native species, signage, bike storage at trailheads, and other management needs. --
Brian Richmond, PhD
El Cerrito Trail Trekkers, Co-President
Agenda Packet Page 319 of 320
Allow sender | Block sender
From: Friends of the Hillside
To: City Clerk
Subject: Request for HNA Budget Line Item and Improved City–Volunteer Coordination Process and Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 1:27:17 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear City Clerk,
We urge the City of El Cerrito to make Hillside Natural Area (HNA) maintenance a priority within the 2026 Capital Improvement Plan. The HNA is a major community asset, providing access to authentic natural habitat, opportunities to understand native plant resilience, and meaningful open space for residents. It is also a high fire-risk interface area, which makes ongoing vegetation management and trail upkeep especially important.

For the 2026–2028 budget cycle, we request the inclusion of:
$35,000 per year dedicated to the Hillside Natural Area A clearly defined line item within the Capital Improvement Program or Parks and Recreation budget
Allocation for staff time, labor, materials, vegetation management, and trail maintenance
In parallel, we strongly encourage the City to adopt a clearer volunteer partnership framework that allows community organizations to contribute effectively without unnecessary administrative bottlenecks. The current informal structure relies heavily on goodwill and improvisation, which is not a sustainable model for long-term land stewardship.

This is a practical governance issue, not a philosophical one. When residents are already doing the work, the system should at least make it easy for them to do it safely, consistently, and in coordination with City priorities.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Audrey LIESE
For Friends of the Hillside
Follow us for updates, photos, and more:

Website: https://www.echillsidefriends.org/
Facebook: Friends of the Hillside
Instagram: @Hillside_Friends
Agenda Packet Page 320 of 320