2 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget (continued)
Type Fund Comb 1 Fund Type
2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
R 22 R22 CDBG - Comm Dev Block Grant Rev 90,000 73,929 138,678 128,678 124,998 E 22 E22 CDBG - Comm Dev Block Grant Exp 90,000 45,563 138,678 128,678 124,998 $- $28,366 $- $- $-
R 25 R25 Spring Mountain Ranch Rev 2,000 30,134 - 30,000 - E 25 E25 Spring Mountain Ranch Exp - - - - 1,041,000
$2,000 $30,134 $- $30,000 $(1,041,000)
R 26 R26 LNDSCP & LGTG Assessment Dist Rev 60,732 71,507 72,219 72,219 72,219 E 26 E26 LNDSCP & LGTG Assessment Dist Exp 52,325 35,252 41,545 41,899 40,315 $8,407 $36,255 $30,674 $30,320 $31,904
R 31 R31 S/A RDA Obligation Retirement Fund Rev - - - - - E 31 E31 S/A RDA Obligation Retirement Fund Exp - - - - - $- $- $- $- $-
R 32 R32 S/A Capital Projects Fund Rev - - - - -
E 32 E32 S/A Capital Projects Fund Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 33 R33 S/A Debt Service Fund Rev - - - - -
E 33 E33 S/A Debt Service Fund Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 36 R36 2011 Tabs A & B Bond Proceeds Rev - - - - -
E 36 E36 2011 Tabs A & B Bond Proceeds Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 45 R45 Capital Improvements - Commerce
Way Rev - 26,283 - - -
E 45 E45 Capital Improvements - Commerce
Way Exp - - - - -
$- $26,283 $- $- $-
R 46 R46 Capital Improvements - Streets Rev 664,833 896,749 650,000 750,000 1,655,000 E 46 E46 Capital Improvements - Streets Exp 868,825 896,749 650,000 684,852 1,655,000 $(203,992) $- $- $65,148 $-
R 47 R47 Cap. Prj. Barton/Colton Bridge Rev - - - - -
E 47 E47 Cap. Prj. Barton/Colton Bridge Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 48 R48 Capital Projects Fund Rev - - - - -
E 48 E48 Capital Projects Fund Exp - 33,810 - - -
$- $(33,810) $- $- $-
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 3 FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget (continued)
Type Fund Comb 1 Fund Type
2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
R 49 R49 Capital Projects Fund - Parks Rev - 207,723 - - - E 49 E49 Capital Projects Fund - Parks Exp - 29,373 - 45,194 - $- $178,350 $- $(45,194) $-
R 50 R50 Capital Project Bond Proceeds Rev - 819,403 - - - E 50 E50 Capital Project Bond Proceeds Exp - 945 - - -
$- $818,458 $- $- $-
R 52 R52 Housing Authority Rev - 108,638 - (365) -
E 52 E52 Housing Authority Exp 19,567 22,338 24,017 44,637 26,999 $(19,567) $86,300 $(24,017) $(45,002) $(26,999)
R 56 R56 Road Maintenance & Rehab Acct
Fund Rev 305,000 370,614 325,000 324,900 330,000
E 56 E56 Road Maintenance & Rehab Acct
Fund Exp 305,000 525,391 325,000 325,000 330,000
$- $(154,777) $- $(100) $-
R 61 R61 Community Benefits Fund Rev 20,000 22,498 20,000 20,000 20,000 E 61 E61 Community Benefits Fund Exp 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 $- $2,498 $- $- $-
R 62 R62 Light Up Grand Terrace Rev 33,000 31,272 33,000 35,434 33,000 E 62 E62 Light Up Grand Terrace Exp 33,000 23,795 33,000 35,434 33,000 $- $7,477 $- $- $-
R 63 R63 GT Illegal Fireworks Enforcement Rev 2,000 6 - - - E 63 E63 GT Illegal Fireworks Enforcement Exp 2,000 - - - - $- $6 $- $- $-
R 64 R64 Public Safety Fund Rev - 716 - - -
E 64 E64 Public Safety Fund Exp - - - - -
$- $716 $- $- $-
R 65 R65 Senior Bus Program Rev 114,996 72,623 109,334 269,334 109,514 E 65 E65 Senior Bus Program Exp 114,996 101,590 109,334 109,430 109,514 $- $(28,967) $- $159,904 $-
R 66 R66 Cal Recycle Grant Rev - (20,880) - - -
E 66 E66 Cal Recycle Grant Exp - - - - -
$- $(20,880) $- $- $-
R 67 R67 Public, Educational, & Govt Access Rev 19,300 21,552 19,300 26,247 22,000 E 67 E67 Public, Educational, & Govt Access Exp 16,800 9,910 16,800 23,889 22,000 $2,500 $11,642 $2,500 $2,358 $-
4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget (continued)
Type Fund Comb 1 Fund Type
2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
R 68 R68 40TH Year Birthday Celebration Fnd Rev - - - - - E 68 E68 40TH Year Birthday Celebration Fnd Exp - - - - - $- $- $- $- $-
R 69 R69 Community Day Fund Rev 22,000 8,805 20,000 20,000 20,000 E 69 E69 Community Day Fund Exp 22,000 16,552 20,000 20,000 20,000 $- $(7,747) $- $- $-
R 70 R70 Equip Replacement Reserve Fund Rev - 5 - 180,728 - E 70 E70 Equip Replacement Reserve Fund Exp - 70,852 - 180,728 - $- $(70,847) $- $- $-
R 71 R71 Firestation Proceeds Rev - 819,780 - - -
E 71 E71 Firestation Proceeds Exp - - - - -
$- $819,780 $- $- $-
R 73 R73 Active Transportation Prgm Fund Rev - - - - -
E 73 E73 Active Transportation Prgm Fund Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 74 R74 Highway Safety Improv Program Rev - - - - -
E 74 E74 Highway Safety Improv Program Exp 1,691 - - - - $(1,691) $- $- $- $-
R 75 R75 Emer Mgmt Prep Grant (EMPG) Fund Rev - - 27,216 - - E 75 E75 Emer Mgmt Prep Grant (EMPG) Fund Exp - - 27,216 - - $- $- $- $- $-
R 76 R76 Eifd - Enhanced Infrast Fin Dist Rev - - - - - E 76 E76 Eifd - Enhanced Infrast Fin Dist Exp - - - - - $- $- $- $- $-
R 77 R77 So Cal Incentive Proj (Scip) Grant Rev - - - - - E 77 E77 So Cal Incentive Proj (Scip) Grant Exp - - - - - $- $- $- $- $-
R 85 R85 Opiod Settlement Funds Rev 3,400 28,231 3,400 9,549 8,000 E 85 E85 Opiod Settlement Funds Exp - - - - -
$3,400 $28,231 $3,400 $9,549 $8,000
R 90 R90 COVID-19 Reimbursement Funds Rev - - - - -
E 90 E90 COVID-19 Reimbursement Funds Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 5 FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget (continued)
Type Fund Comb 1 Fund Type
2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
R 91 R91 SB County Corona Virus Relief Rev - - - - -
E 91 E91 SB County Corona Virus Relief Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 92 R92 CDBG - Covid Rev - - - - -
E 92 E92 CDBG - Covid Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 93 R93 Covid - Infrastructure Rev - - - - -
E 93 E93 Covid - Infrastructure Exp - - - - -
$- $- $- $- $-
R 94 R94 ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) Rev - - - - -
E 94 E94 ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) Exp - 69,717 - - - $- $(69,717) $- $- $-
R Total Revenue $10,659,850 $13,698,330 $11,204,651 $12,865,361 $13,536,431 E Total Expense $11,469,017 $13,710,370 $11,476,639 $12,730,739 $14,544,305 $(809,167) $(12,040) $(271,988) $134,622 $(1,007,874)
6 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed Revenue Summary by Fund
Fund Fund Title
2023-24
Actual
2024-25
Actual
2025-2026
Projected
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
General Funds
10 General Fund $11,197,404 $8,913,707 $9,969,505 $10,132,700 61 Community Benefits Fund 22,481 22,498 20,000 20,000
62 Light Up Grand Terrace 33,920 31,272 35,434 33,000
63 GT Illegal Fireworks Enforcement 6 6 - -
64 Public Safety Fund 719 716 - -
69 Community Day Fund 28,097 8,805 20,000 20,000
70 Equip Replacement Reserve Fund 64,287 5 180,728 -
71 Firestation Proceeds - 819,780 -
Development Impact Fees
11 Street Fund $70,646 $24,808 $4,801 $-
12 Storm Drain Fund 9,896 12,771 3,423 -
13 Park Fund 4,330 70,066 775 -
19 Facilities Fund 7,550 5,811 3,253 2,500
Special Revenue Funds
14 SLESF (AB3229 COP S) $188,355 $196,718 $202,733 $201,100 15 Air Quality Improvement Fund 20,144 19,664 17,178 17,400 16 Gas Tax Fund 534,061 456,808 440,898 441,000
17 Traffic Safety Fund 7,666 6,127 3,993 4,500
20 Measure “I” Fund 351,743 349,658 342,500 332,500
25 Spring Mountain Ranch 31,039 30,134 30,000 -
26 LNDSCP & LGTG Assessment Dist 71,039 71,507 72,219 72,219 56 Road Maintenance & Rehab Acct Fund 359,920 370,614 324,900 330,000 67 Public, Educational, & Govt Access 7,969 21,552 26,247 22,000 85 Opiod Settlement Funds 5,740 28,231 9,549 8,000
94 ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) 747,544 - - -
Enterprise Fund
21 Waste Water Disposal Fund $64,578 $52,605 $9,578 $10,000 Grant Funds
22 CDBG - Comm Dev Block Grant $3,142 $73,929 $128,678 $124,998 65 Senior Bus Program 162,377 72,623 269,334 109,514
66 Cal Recycle Grant 562 (20,880) - -
75 Emer Mgmt Prep Grant (EMPG) Fund 29,212 - - -
Successor Agency
Capital Project Funds
45 Capital Improvements - Commerce Way $26,388 $26,283 $- $- 46 Capital Improvements - Streets 851,878 896,749 750,000 1,655,000 49 Capital Projects Fund - Parks 89 207,723 - -
50 Capital Project Bond Proceeds - 819,403 -
Housing Authority
52 Housing Authority $44,932 $108,638 $(365) $-
Dog Park Endowment Fund
$14,947,714 $13,698,331 $12,865,361 $13,536,431
7 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed Expenditure Summary by Fund
Fund Fund Title
2023-24
Actual
2024-25
Actual
2025-2026
Projected
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
General Funds
10 General Fund $7,981,623 $10,688,561 $10,075,800 $10,130,887 61 Community Benefits Fund 11,350 20,000 20,000 20,000
62 Light Up Grand Terrace 26,626 23,795 35,434 33,000
69 Community Day Fund 20,266 16,552 20,000 20,000
70 Equip Replacement Reserve Fund 35,598 70,852 180,728 - Development Impact Fees
19 Facilities Fund 5,000 (2,742) - -
Special Revenue Funds
14 SLESF (AB3229 COP S) $186,851 $194,820 $195,000 $200,550 15 Air Quality Improvement Fund 11,000 - 20,000 25,000
16 Gas Tax Fund 336,092 503,726 436,198 431,042
17 Traffic Safety Fund 6,571 - 4,000 4,000
20 Measure “I” Fund 299,336 335,598 340,000 330,000
25 Spring Mountain Ranch 50,000 - - 1,041,000
26 LNDSCP & LGTG Assessment Dist 47,093 35,252 41,899 40,315 56 Road Maintenance & Rehab Acct Fund 625,794 525,391 325,000 330,000 67 Public, Educational, & Govt Access 9,142 9,910 23,889 22,000 94 ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) 785,989 69,717 - -
Enterprise Fund
21 Waste Water Disposal Fund $88,570 $88,570 $- $-
Grant Funds
22 CDBG - Comm Dev Block Grant $43,526 $45,563 $128,678 $124,998 65 Senior Bus Program 306,027 101,590 109,430 109,514
75 Emer Mgmt Prep Grant (EMPG) Fund 29,212 - - -
92 CDBG - Covid 22,995 - - -
Successor Agency
Capital Project Funds
46 Capital Improvements - Streets 916,682 896,749 684,852 1,655,000 48 Capital Projects Fund - 33,810 - -
49 Capital Projects Fund - Parks 27,426 29,373 45,194 - 50 Capital Project Bond Proceeds 207,000 945 -
Housing Authority
52 Housing Authority $38,325 $22,338 $44,637 $26,999
$12,118,094 $13,710,370 $12,730,739 $14,544,305
8 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed Citywide Revenue and Expenditure Report 2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
REVENUES
$4,970,732 $5,253,219 $5,262,219 $6,550,443 $6,587,219
- - - - -
- 1,325 - - -
675,000 737,287 675,000 708,466 710,000
758,970 693,033 575,520 487,709 681,700
1,690,000 1,697,739 1,940,000 1,712,682 1,680,000
749,007 1,017,161 791,876 927,139 744,460
135,500 101,065 132,500 47,914 58,400
49,400 91,971 48,400 35,140 47,000
42,710 66,420 49,624 157,725 39,000
84,060 559,302 101,860 258,397 239,800
318,349 401,500 401,500 481,800 481,800
818,122 2,704,188 858,152 1,129,946 871,052
- - - - -
368,000 374,121 368,000 368,000 368,000
- - - - -
Property Tax
Residual Receipts - RPTTF
Proceeds from Sale of Property
Franchise Fees
Licenses, Fees & Permits
Sales Tax
Intergovernmental Revenue/Grants
Charges for Services
Fines & Forfeitures
Miscellaneous
Use of Money & Property
Waste Water Receipts
Transfers In
Residual Receipts - Sr Ctr
Gas Tax
Bond Proceeds
Capital Projects - - - - 1,028,000
Total Revenues $10,659,850 $13,698,331 $11,204,651 $12,865,361 $13,536,431
EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY
Salaries $2,123,159 $2,136,812 $2,410,151 $2,198,322 $2,612,746 Benefits 1,532,638 1,342,104 1,746,015 1,674,697 1,857,521 Materials & Supplies 489,880 406,052 457,825 437,641 511,635 Professional/Contractual Services 5,509,657 5,670,586 5,167,101 5,581,887 5,581,341 Equipment 7,100 168,372 50,400 539,138 86,500
Lease of Facility/Equipment 8,700 8,473 3,750 5,316 4,850 Utilities 360,645 333,519 372,195 371,352 393,005
Overhead Cost Allocation (248,400) - (248,400) (56,595) (56,595) Capital Projects 879,516 940,256 659,450 849,032 1,656,250 Debt Service - 8 - 3 -
Transfers Out 806,122 2,704,188 858,152 1,129,946 1,897,052 Total Expenditures $11,469,017 $13,710,370 $11,476,639 $12,730,739 $14,544,305 Revenues 10,659,850 13,698,331 11,204,651 12,865,361 13,536,431 Expenditures by Category (11,469,017) (13,710,370) (11,476,639) (12,730,739) (14,544,305) Surplus or Approved Use of Fund Balance $(809,167) $(12,039) $(271,988) $134,622 $(1,007,874)
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 9 FY 2026-27 Proposed General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Report 2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
REVENUES
Property Tax $4,910,000 $5,187,316 $5,190,000 $6,478,224 $6,515,000 Proceeds from Sale of Property - 1,325 - - -
Franchise Fees 675,000 737,287 675,000 708,466 710,000
Licenses, Fees & Permits 658,770 606,030 505,320 470,509 665,300 Sales Tax 1,360,000 1,365,441 1,600,000 1,372,682 1,350,000 Intergovernmental Revenue/Grants 58,500 74,018 58,500 43,791 60,000 Charges for Services 132,500 101,065 132,500 47,914 58,400 Fines & Forfeitures 39,000 59,664 41,000 21,591 35,000
Miscellaneous 26,710 53,326 33,624 144,065 25,000
Use of Money & Property 72,660 257,018 72,660 200,463 219,200 Waste Water Receipts 318,349 401,500 401,500 481,800 481,800 Transfers In - 69,717 - - 13,000
Total Revenues $8,251,489 $8,913,707 $8,710,104 $9,969,505 $10,132,700
EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY
Salaries $1,983,894 $1,982,956 $2,186,753 $1,974,924 $2,344,229 Benefits 1,468,901 1,289,221 1,642,959 1,571,925 1,741,021 Materials & Supplies 489,280 403,412 455,175 434,991 508,975 Professional/Contractual Services 4,849,769 5,022,581 4,552,992 4,974,117 5,031,625 Equipment 7,100 97,520 50,400 411,946 86,500
Lease of Facility/Equipment 8,700 8,473 3,750 5,316 4,850 Utilities 251,880 224,562 257,620 256,777 273,530
Overhead Cost Allocation (281,950) (90,145) (281,950) (90,145) (90,145) Capital Projects - 12,251 - 56,000 1,250
Debt Service - 8 - 3 -
Transfers Out 141,289 1,737,722 208,152 479,946 229,052 Total Expenditures $8,918,863 $10,688,561 $9,075,851 $10,075,800 $10,130,887 Revenues 8,251,489 8,913,707 8,710,104 9,969,505 10,132,700 Expenditures by Category (8,918,863) (10,688,561) (9,075,851) (10,075,800) (10,130,887) Surplus or Approved Use of Fund Balance $(667,374) $(1,774,854) $(365,747) $(106,295) $1,813
10 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 FY 2026-27 Proposed General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Report 2024-25
Adjusted
Budget
2024-25
Actuals
2025-26
Adjusted
Budget
2025-26
Year-End
Projections
2026-27
Proposed
Budget
REVENUES
Property Tax $4,910,000 $5,187,316 $5,190,000 $6,478,224 $6,515,000 Proceeds from Sale of Property - 1,325 - - -
Franchise Fees 675,000 737,287 675,000 708,466 710,000
Licenses, Fees & Permits 658,770 606,030 505,320 470,509 665,300 Sales Tax 1,360,000 1,365,441 1,600,000 1,372,682 1,350,000 Intergovernmental Revenue/Grants 58,500 74,018 58,500 43,791 60,000 Charges for Services 132,500 101,065 132,500 47,914 58,400 Fines & Forfeitures 39,000 59,664 41,000 21,591 35,000
Miscellaneous 26,710 53,326 33,624 144,065 25,000
Use of Money & Property 72,660 257,018 72,660 200,463 219,200 Waste Water Receipts 318,349 401,500 401,500 481,800 481,800 Transfers In - 69,717 - - 13,000
Total Revenues $8,251,489 $8,913,707 $8,710,104 $9,969,505 $10,132,700
EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT
City Council $115,650 $117,662 $110,522 $109,088 $124,294 City Manager 1,026,316 972,575 1,014,832 1,133,740 1,298,871 City Clerk 355,978 347,842 309,618 305,113 364,485
Finance 682,162 666,857 838,726 759,139 807,302
City Attorney 185,000 219,259 207,500 294,887 235,000
Planning & Dev. Svcs 1,366,671 1,269,801 1,168,324 1,096,673 1,126,266 Public Works 1,648,797 1,847,078 1,537,477 1,987,846 1,595,412 Non-Departmental 787,089 2,579,004 947,602 1,406,918 1,243,057 Public Safety 2,751,200 2,668,483 2,941,250 2,982,396 3,336,200 Total Expenditures $8,918,863 $10,688,561 $9,075,851 $10,075,800 $10,130,887 Revenues $8,251,489 $8,913,707 $8,710,104 $9,969,505 $10,132,700 Expenditures by Department (8,918,863) (10,688,561) (9,075,851) (10,075,800) (10,130,887) Surplus or Approved Use of Fund Balance $(667,374) $(1,774,854) $(365,747) $(106,295) $1,813
11 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ► Adopted ANNUAL BUDGET. 2025-2026 Summary of Positions
Class Title 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26
Proposed
Requests 2026-27
Annual
Minimum
Annual
Maximum
1 Assistant City Manager 1.0 - - - - - - $172,839 $210,087 2 Assistant Planner 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1 1.0 66,732 81,113 3 Assistant to CM - - - - - - - 77,433 94,120
4 Associate Planner 1.0 - - - 1.0 - 1.0 77,249 93,896
5 Building Permit Tech 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1) - 58,339 70,911 6 Bus Driver 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 48,845 59,372
7 City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 103,744 126,102
8 City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 253,050 253,050 9 Code Enf/Animal Ctrl Off 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1) - 63,057 76,646 10 Community Development
Director - - - - - 1 1.0 181,153 220,193
11 Department Secretary 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 3.0 51,689 62,828 12 Executive Assistant - - - - - - - 57,698 70,132
13 Finance Director - 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 152,177 184,972 14 Finance Manager 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 103,744 126,102 15 Finance Technician - - 1.0 1.0 - - - 43,439 52,799
16 Grants & Government Affairs
Manager - - - - - 1 1.0 108,493 131,874
17 Intern-1 (P/T) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 - 0.5 18,200 22,122 18 Maintenance Crew Leader 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 2.0 - 2.0 61,247 74,446 19 Maintenance Crew Leader (PT) - - - - - - - 61,247 74,446 20 Maintenance Project Manager - - - - 1.0 1.0 104,797 127,382 21 Maintenance Worker I 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 (1) - 45,703 55,553 22 Maintenance Worker II 2.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 52,907 64,309 23 Management Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 - 2.0 77,052 93,657 24 Office Specialist 1.0 - - 1.0 1.0 (1.0) - 44,650 54,273 25 Planning & Development Svcs Dir 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1.0) - 149,035 181,153 26 Planning Technician - - - - - - - 54,899 66,731
27 Senior Accountant 2.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 77,258 93,907 28 Senior Finance Tech - - - - - - - 51,415 62,495
29 Sr. Code Enforcement Off 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 72,993 88,723 30 Sr. Maint Crew Leader
- 1.0
- 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - - 74,597 90,673
31 Sr. Management Analyst 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 2.0 89,257 108,493 32 Sr. Planner 0.0 1.0 0 0.0 0 - - 89,824 109,182
TOTAL 21.5 20.5 21.5 23.5 23.5 1.0 24.5
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2026
TITLE: Discussion and Direction Regarding Vacant Commercial Property Registration and Maintenance
PRESENTED BY: Konrad Bolowich, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: PROVIDE DIRECTION TO CITY STAFF ON PREPARATION OF AN
APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE REGARDING VACANT COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY REGISTRATION AND MAINTENANCE
2030 VISION STATEMENT:
This staff report supports City Council Goal #3, “Promote Economic Development” and Goal #5, “Engage in Proactive Communication”. This staff report provides an overview of a potential vacant commercial property registration and its potential role in addressing commercial vacancies and supporting economic activity within the City.
BACKGROUND:
During the March 24, 2026, City Council meeting, Councilmember Allen requested that a future agenda item be brought forward for discussion regarding a potential vacancy tax on commercial properties.
California municipalities have broad police power authority under Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution to enact ordinances addressing public health, safety, and welfare. This authority includes the regulation of property conditions for purposes such as nuisance abatement, blight prevention, and maintenance standards for vacant or underutilized structures.
Attachment No. 1 provides an overview of a model ordinance for City Council discussion regarding vacant commercial property registration and maintenance standards.
DISCUSSION:
Commercial vacancy can have a direct impact on the economic vitality, appearance, and overall health of a City’s commercial corridors. Prolonged vacancies may contribute to blight, reduced pedestrian activity, and deterioration of building conditions, particularly when properties are not actively maintained or secured. In some cases, vacant commercial properties may also become vulnerable to nuisance conditions, including illegal dumping, unauthorized occupancy, or vandalism.
The proposed ordinance establishes a vacant commercial property registration and maintenance framework intended to provide the City with basic information regarding vacant properties while promoting proactive maintenance and re-occupancy. The program would require owners of qualifying vacant commercial properties to register with the City and provide updated contact information, along with general information regarding the property’s status and intended future use.
In addition to registration, the ordinance establishes minimum maintenance and security standards to
ensure that vacant properties are not maintained in a manner that contributes to blight or creates public health and safety concerns. These standards include requirements related to securing structures, maintaining site cleanliness, and preventing nuisance conditions. The ordinance also contemplates enhanced expectations for properties that remain vacant for extended periods, including demonstration of active marketing efforts or submission of plans for re-occupancy or redevelopment.
The ordinance further provides the City with the ability to conduct inspections to verify compliance, subject to applicable legal requirements, and to enforce the provisions through existing administrative and nuisance abatement procedures. Enforcement tools may include administrative citations, cost recovery for abatement, and other remedies authorized under the municipal code.
This item is presented for City Council discussion and direction regarding whether to pursue development of a formal vacant commercial property registration ordinance. The City Council may wish to consider whether additional information is needed regarding commercial vacancy trends, administrative costs, and potential implementation mechanisms prior to directing staff to prepare a formal ordinance for adoption.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Model Ordinance: Vacant Commercial Property Registration and Maintenance ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
01247.0001 2147575.2
Model Ordinance: Vacant Commercial Property Registration and Maintenance
Section 1. Purpose and Intent
The purpose of this chapter is to:
• Prevent blight and deterioration of vacant commercial properties • Protect public health, safety, and welfare
• Maintain the economic vitality of commercial corridors • Establish a reasonable regulatory framework for monitoring and maintaining vacant properties
Section 2. Definitions
“Vacant Commercial Property” means any commercial or mixed-use building, or portion thereof, that:
• Is unoccupied by authorized persons for more than [to be determined, i.e., 60] consecutive days, and
• Is not actively operating under a valid business license or lawful occupancy “Owner” includes any person or entity holding legal or equitable title to the property. “Active Marketing” means a good-faith effort to sell or lease the property, including listing with a licensed broker or verifiable advertising methods.
Section 3. Registration Requirement
• Any vacant commercial property may be required to register with the City within [to be determined, i.e., 30] days of becoming vacant.
• Registration may include, at a minimum:
o Owner contact information
o Local property manager contact (if applicable)
o Emergency contact information (24-hour response)
o General statement of intended use, re-occupancy or disposition Section 4. Annual Renewal and Fees
• Registration may be subject to annual renewal, if established by City Council resolution.
• The City Council may establish fees by resolution to recover administrative costs associated with program implementation, which may:
o Increase escalated fees for properties vacant longer than 12 months o Be waived or reduced for properties under active permit or construction Section 5. Maintenance and Security Standards
All vacant commercial properties shall be maintained in a manner that does not create blight or nuisance conditions and shall generally::
• Be secured against unauthorized entry where feasible (e.g., doors, windows, openings)
• Be maintained free of graffiti, debris, and overgrown vegetation • Maintain exterior building conditions in a safe and non-deteriorated state
01247.0001 2147575.2
• Maintain basic site maintenance, including landscaping where applicable • Provide adequate lighting if required for safety
• Not constitute a public nuisance under applicable municipal code provisions Section 6. Additional Requirements for Properties Vacant Over 12 Months Properties vacant for more than 12 months shall:
• Demonstrate active marketing or reuse efforts, or
• Submit a general plan for re-occupancy, rehabilitation, or redevelopment The City may require periodic updates documenting these efforts.
Section 7. Inspections
• The City may conduct periodic inspections to verify compliance with applicable standards
• Access shall be coordinated in accordance with applicable law and notice requirements
Section 8. Prohibited Conditions
It shall be unlawful for a vacant commercial property to be maintained in a condition that:
• Creates a known public health, safety, or fire hazard • Constitutes a public nuisance under applicable municipal code • Is used for unauthorized storage, dumping, illegal activity, or unpermitted occupancy
Section 9. Enforcement and Penalties
• The City may enforce this chapter through existing administrative and nuisance abatement procedures
• Failure to comply may result in:
o Administrative citations
o Fines established by resolution
o Recovery of abatement costs
• The City may determine appropriate enforcement mechanisms consistent with municipal code authority
• Failure to adhere to the maintenance standards for nonresidential properties shall be a public nuisance, subject to abatement or summary abatement in accordance with this Code.
Section 10. Exemptions
The following may be exempt or conditionally exempt:
• Properties undergoing active construction with valid permits • Properties undergoing active renovation or redevelopment approvals • Properties temporarily vacant but actively maintained or marketed • Properties actively listed for sale/lease and in full compliance • Other exemptions as determined appropriate by the City Council
01247.0001 2147575.2
Section 11. Severability / Administration
Standard severability and implementation provisions shall apply as adopted by the City Council.
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2026
TITLE: Discussion and Direction Regarding Billboard Businesses PRESENTED BY: Konrad Bolowich, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: PROVIDE DIRECTION TO CITY STAFF ON ABILITY TO PASS AN ACTIVE
COMMERCIAL USE ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS BILLBOARD
BUSINESSES
2030 VISION STATEMENT:
This staff report supports City Council Goal #5, “Engage in Proactive Communication”. This report provides an overview of legal considerations associated with a potential ordinance addressing nonoperative or underutilized commercial uses, including “billboard businesses.” BACKGROUND:
During the April 14, 2026, City Council meeting, Councilmember Wilson requested that a future agenda item be brought forward for discussion regarding commercial properties or businesses that appear to have no credible or active operations.
DISCUSSION:
Cities generally have authority under Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution to regulate land use, zoning, and property maintenance for purposes related to public health, safety, and welfare.
Within this authority, municipalities commonly address issues such as vacancy, blight, and nuisance conditions through zoning regulations and property maintenance standards.
The concept of regulating the level or intensity of business operations within an otherwise permitted commercial use raises implementation and legal considerations. Unlike traditional zoning regulations, which focus on permitted uses, development standards, or property conditions, operational requirements tied to business activity levels may present challenges in defining measurable standards and enforcing compliance in a consistent manner.
City staff is not aware of an established California statutory or case law authority specifically addressing ordinances that require a minimum level of ongoing business activity as a condition of lawful commercial occupancy. Existing municipal approaches generally address commercial vacancy, nuisance conditions, or physical property maintenance rather than operational activity thresholds.
City staff also notes that previously discussed vacant commercial property registration and maintenance concepts may address some related policy objectives, including identification of underutilized properties and mitigation of blight conditions, through more commonly used regulatory frameworks.
This item is presented for City Council discussion and direction on whether to further explore potential regulatory approaches related to nonoperative or underutilized commercial uses.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Take no further action regarding the development of an Active Commercial Use Requirement ordinance.
2) Provide any other direction.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2026
TITLE: Operation of Bicycles within the City of Grand Terrace PRESENTED BY: Konrad Bolowich, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE OPERATION OF
BICYCLES WITHIN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, INCLUDING
ELECTRIC BICYCLES
2030 VISION STATEMENT:
This staff report supports Goal #2, Maintain Public Safety BACKGROUND:
California law regulates both traditional bicycles and electric bicycles through the California Vehicle Code. Bicyclists generally possess the same rights and responsibilities as motorists and are required to obey applicable traffic laws unless a specific exception applies.
State law establishes three classifications of electric bicycles:
To qualify as an electric bicycle, the bicycle must have fully operable pedals and an electric motor producing less than 750 watts. Devices exceeding these limitations may be classified as mopeds, motor-driven cycles, or motorcycles and become subject to separate licensing, registration, and operational requirements.
California law also establishes operational requirements for bicycles and electric bicycles, including:
• Bicyclists are generally subject to the same rules of the road as motor vehicles. • Bicycles operated on a roadway or shoulder must travel in the same direction as vehicular traffic.
• Riders under 18 years of age must wear a helmet while operating an electric bicycle.
Class Description Maximum Assisted
Speed
Class
1 Pedal-assist only; motor provides assistance only while pedaling
20 mph
Class
2 Equipped with a throttle and may be propelled without pedaling
20 mph
Class
3 Pedal-assist only and equipped with a speedometer 28 mph
• All Class 3 electric bicycle operators must wear a helmet regardless of age. • Riders must be at least 16 years of age to operate a Class 3 electric bicycle.
While California establishes the statewide framework governing bicycles and electric bicycles, local agencies retain authority to regulate their operation on local streets, sidewalks, trails, parks, and other public facilities.
As a result, cities may regulate matters such as:
• Operation on sidewalks.
• Operation within parks, plazas, trails, and recreational facilities. • Speed limits within designated areas.
• Operation within pedestrian-oriented environments.
• Unsafe or reckless riding behavior.
• Use of handheld electronic devices while riding.
• Local enforcement provisions.
However, cities may not adopt regulations that conflict with state law regarding bicycle classifications, equipment requirements, registration requirements, licensing requirements, or other matters preempted by the California Vehicle Code.
Over the past several years, many California communities have experienced significant growth in bicycle and electric bicycle usage. While these devices provide important transportation and recreational benefits, local agencies have also reported increased complaints involving excessive speed in pedestrian areas, operation on sidewalks, stunt riding, near-collisions with pedestrians, and unsafe operation within parks and parking lots.
In response, numerous California jurisdictions, including Manhattan Beach, Huntington Beach, San Marcos, Santa Barbara, Marin County, and Redlands, have adopted local regulations intended to address public safety concerns while preserving the ability of residents to utilize bicycles and electric bicycles for transportation and recreation.
The City of Grand Terrace currently relies primarily upon state law to regulate bicycle and electric bicycle operation. Although bicycle riding is prohibited within City parks, the Municipal Code does not contain a comprehensive ordinance governing bicycle operation on sidewalks, within public parking lots, or addressing unsafe riding behaviors. Consequently, the City Council may wish to consider whether additional local regulations are appropriate to address safety concerns and provide clearer standards for bicycle operation within the City.
DISCUSSION:
The policy question before the City Council is not whether bicycles and electric bicycles should be permitted within the community, but whether additional local regulations are necessary to promote public safety and reduce conflicts between bicyclists and pedestrians.
Bicycles and electric bicycles provide significant transportation and recreational benefits. However, their increasing use, particularly electric bicycles capable of speeds between 20 and 28 miles per hour, has generated concerns regarding operation in pedestrian-oriented areas such as sidewalks, parks, trails, and parking lots.
Although state law governs bicycle operation on public roadways, many of the concerns raised by
residents occur in locations where local agencies possess regulatory authority. These areas frequently involve close interaction between bicyclists and pedestrians, creating circumstances where collisions may result in injury.
Sidewalks are intended primarily for pedestrian travel and often contain driveways, intersections, landscaping, and other visibility constraints. Pedestrians generally do not anticipate bicycle traffic approaching from behind or traveling at speeds significantly faster than a walking pace. Similar concerns exist within City parks and parking lots, where bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists frequently interact in confined spaces.
Staff believes these areas warrant additional consideration because they present the greatest potential for conflicts between bicyclists and other users of public facilities.
Staff also recommends focusing any future ordinance on unsafe conduct rather than bicycle type.
While electric bicycles have received significant public attention, many of the behaviors creating safety concerns are equally dangerous when performed on traditional bicycles. A conduct-based approach is easier to enforce, easier for the public to understand, and less susceptible to future changes in bicycle technology.
Consistent with ordinances adopted in Redlands and other California communities, prohibited conduct could include:
• Wheelies, jumps, tricks, or exhibition riding.
• Riding against the flow of traffic.
• Weaving through pedestrians or vehicles.
• Operating at a speed unsafe for conditions.
• Carrying passengers on bicycles not designed for passenger use. • Standing on seats, handlebars, or other unintended portions of the bicycle. • Failing to obey traffic control devices.
• Using a handheld electronic device while riding.
• Any operation that creates a substantial risk of injury to persons or property.
These provisions would allow enforcement personnel to address unsafe behavior before an accident occurs while preserving the ability of residents to utilize bicycles for transportation and recreation.
Should the City Council wish to pursue additional regulation, staff recommends preparation of an ordinance applicable to all bicycles, including electric bicycles, prohibiting operation on sidewalks, within City parks, and within City-owned parking lots, while establishing standards for safe operation.
Such an ordinance would be consistent with actions taken by numerous California jurisdictions and would provide a clear framework for bicycle operation within the City.
NEXT STEPS:
Should the City Council determine that additional regulations are warranted, staff recommends directing preparation of an ordinance, resolution, and associated documents establishing regulations governing bicycle operations within the City.
The proposed regulations would include:
• Prohibiting bicycle operation on sidewalks.
• Prohibiting bicycle operation within City parks.
• Prohibiting bicycle operation within City-owned parking lots, except where specifically
authorized.
• Establishing standards prohibiting unsafe or reckless bicycle operation. • Prohibiting stunt riding, exhibition riding, wheelies, and similar unsafe displays. • Prohibiting the use of handheld electronic devices while operating a bicycle. • Establishing penalties and enforcement procedures for violations.
Staff would return to the City Council with the proposed ordinance, resolution, and supporting documents for consideration and action.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
This action does not meet the threshold of a project under CEQA and is exempt.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action.
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2026
TITLE: Sales Tax Measure Polling
PRESENTED BY: Konrad Bolowich, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: RECEIVE AND FILE THE COMMUNITY SURVEY PRESENTATION
REGARDING A POTENTIAL LOCAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
MEASURE AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
2030 VISION STATEMENT:
This staff report supports Goal #1: Ensure Fiscal Sustainability and Goal #2: Maintain Public Safety.
BACKGROUND:
Over the past several years, cities throughout California have experienced increasing fiscal pressures resulting from inflationary impacts, rising service costs, increased public safety expenditures, and growing demand for municipal services. At the same time, local governments face limitations on revenue generation and increasing uncertainty regarding future state and federal funding sources.
To evaluate the feasibility of pursuing a local revenue measure, the City retained Rincon Strategies to conduct a statistically valid survey of likely November 2026 voters residing within the City of Grand Terrace.
The survey was designed to assess voter attitudes regarding a potential one-percent (1%) local transactions and use tax and to provide the City Council with objective information regarding community priorities, voter concerns, and the likelihood of voter support for various revenue measure structures.
The survey was conducted using a mixed-mode methodology consisting of live telephone interviews and text-to-web responses. The survey sample includes approximately 325 likely November 2026 voters and has an estimated margin of error of plus or minus 5.6 percent at the 95 percent confidence level. The limited sample size due to the population of the community, precludes obtaining a margin of error of less than 5.6%.
The survey was designed to:
• Measure baseline voter support for a proposed one-percent local sales tax. • Compare voter receptiveness to a general tax measure and a legally restricted special tax measure.
• Evaluate the likelihood of passage under applicable voter approval thresholds. • Identify key voter concerns and priorities.
• Evaluate persuasive and opposing messages.
• Assess demographic and geographic voting trends.
• Provide strategic recommendations regarding measure structure, ballot language, and voter communication.
The survey tested two potential revenue measure structures:
General Tax
A general transactions and use tax of one percent (1%) generating approximately $1.7 million annually for general municipal purposes, including support for public safety and other essential City services. A general tax requires approval by a simple majority of voters.
Special Tax
A special transactions and use tax of one percent (1%) generating approximately $1.7 million annually dedicated exclusively to law enforcement and public safety purposes. A special tax requires approval by two-thirds of voters.
The survey further evaluated voter attitudes regarding public safety, emergency response, infrastructure, homelessness, parks, code enforcement, fiscal stability, and other municipal service priorities.
AVAILABILITY OF SURVEY RESULTS
At the time of agenda publication, the City's consultant had not completed the tabulation, analysis, and final presentation of the survey results. As a result, the final survey report was not available for inclusion within the agenda packet.
The purpose of this agenda item is to receive and discuss the results of the voter survey regarding potential local transactions and use tax measure. Staff anticipates receiving the final survey results after publication of the agenda but prior to the City Council meeting.
Consistent with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, any written survey results, presentation materials, or other documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding this agenda item will be made available to the public at the same time they are distributed to the City Council. Such materials will also be posted on the City's website in accordance with the City's standard procedures for late-distributed agenda materials.
If the final survey results are not available until the time of the meeting, the materials will be distributed to the City Council and made available to the public simultaneously during the meeting.
The survey results are being presented solely for informational purposes to assist the City Council in evaluating potential fiscal options and determining whether additional analysis or action is warranted.
The presentation of survey results does not constitute advocacy for or against any potential ballot measure and is intended to provide factual information regarding voter attitudes, priorities, and perceptions related to municipal services and potential revenue measures.
Accordingly, staff believes the proposed process is consistent with the requirements of the Ralph M.
Brown Act, promotes transparency, and provides the public with a meaningful opportunity to review and comment upon the information being considered by the City Council.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of the survey is to provide the City Council with objective information regarding voter attitudes before determining whether to place a local revenue measure on a future ballot.
If the City Council elects to pursue a revenue measure, state law provides several options regarding both the structure of the measure and the intended use of revenues. These options carry different legal requirements and voter approval thresholds.
A general tax measure may be used for any lawful municipal purpose and requires approval by a majority of voters. A special tax measure restricts revenues to specific purposes identified in the ballot measure but requires approval by two-thirds of voters.
The survey was specifically designed to evaluate voter support for both approaches and to determine
whether voters respond more favorably to a broader municipal funding measure emphasizing public safety or to a legally restricted public safety measure.
In addition to measuring voter support, the survey examines:
• Community priorities regarding City services.
• Voter perceptions of City performance.
• Arguments that increase or decrease support for a revenue measure. • Demographic and geographic trends in voter support.
• The durability of support after exposure to both supporting and opposing campaign messages.
The survey results will assist the City Council in determining:
• Whether a revenue measure is likely to be successful. • Which measure structure, if any, appears most viable. • Whether voter support is sufficient to justify proceeding. • What service priorities resonate most strongly with residents. • Whether additional public outreach or fiscal planning efforts are warranted.
Because survey tabulation and final analysis are still being completed, the survey results were not available in time for inclusion within the published agenda packet. The completed survey results and presentation materials will be provided to the City Council prior to the meeting and will be made publicly available at the meeting.
Staff and the City's consultant will present the survey findings and recommendations during the meeting and will be available to answer questions from the City Council and the public.
NEXT STEPS
Following presentation and discussion of the survey results, the City Council may provide direction to staff regarding whether and how to proceed with potential local transactions and use tax measures.
Potential actions may include:
• Receiving and filing the survey results.
• Directing staff to conduct additional public outreach or community engagement. • Directing staff to prepare ballot measure options, including both general tax and special tax alternatives.
• Directing staff to return with draft ballot language, resolutions, impartial analysis, and other election-related documents necessary for consideration of a future ballot measure. • Taking no further action at this time.
Should the City Council determine that placement of a measure on a future ballot warrants further consideration, staff will return with the necessary resolutions, ballot language, fiscal analysis, and supporting documentation for formal Council consideration and action in accordance with applicable election deadlines and legal requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
This action does not meet the threshold of a project under CEQA and is exempt.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action.