Item # 8.
Appendix 3.2.1
Partner Member Survey
Partner Survey
Sierra Harvest and Interfaith Food Ministry Call for Community Input on Food Campus Vision
Sierra Harvest and Interfaith Food Ministry share a vision of investing in and transforming land at DeVere Mautino Park to strengthen the community through food access and education.
With community input and support from organizations like yours, this project will:
● design and nurture vibrant, beautiful, and inclusive garden spaces ● increase access to organic foods
● promote community learning
● elevate social connection
● foster diverse, healthy ecosystems benefiting the entire community and the land Initial Concepts:
Educational Farm - Sierra Harvest is exploring moving the beloved Food Love Farm to a new location that is closer to town and more accessible so it may better serve the community and reach more people with its food and educational offerings.
Food Forest - Interfaith Food Ministry is seeking to expand its sites producing locally grown food to enhance the nutrition and abundance of its free food distributions to 10,000 residents annually while also offering volunteering and educational opportunities.
Composting - Interfaith Food Ministry is exploring the creation of a small demonstration composting site that will reduce food waste from local businesses, build soil for food production, and teach residents how to recycle their food scraps at home.
Community voices and input are essential to this vision We invite you to fill out this survey as a starting point. We will be hosting a partner listening session and it will help us indicate your desire to participate in a deeper conversation to understand ideas, concerns, or areas of collaboration.
Partner Listening Session at Peace Lutheran Church
Item # 8.
(NEW TIME!) 2/20, 2:00 - 4:00 pm
Partner Organization
Name of Organization:
Name of person / people completing this survey:
Contact Info of people completing this survey:
Community Values and Vision
Are you supportive of a project at Mautino Park that plants trees, grows and provides food, and hosts educational opportunities for the community?
Yes/No/Maybe
What are the most pressing needs in our community that a community food project could help address? (Check all that apply)
a. Food insecurity/affordable food
b. Social isolation/community events
c. Educational classes
d. Job training
e. Food production
f. Community resilience and sustainability
g. Age appropriate programming (youth, seniors)
h. Other _________________
Are there ways your organization/entity could imagine collaborating or being involved in this project? Y/N/M
How?____________________________________________
Are there any other people or organizations you think should be involved in this project? Name: ___________________ Organization: _________________________ Phone/Email:_______________________________
Potential Features and Activities
What types of community events, activities, or workshops would you like to see at Mautino Park? (Check all that apply)
a. Gardening, pest management, and native plants workshops
Item # 8.
b. Soil science education and small-scale composting
c. Cooking and nutrition classes
d. Educational Programming
e. Volunteer work days
f. Community events, potlucks, concerts
g. Age appropriate programming (seniors, youth)
h. Farm stand (fruit, veg, smoothies, etc)
i. Exercise opportunities - yoga, tai chi, aerobics
j. Other ___________________________________
Barriers to Participation
What barriers might your clients have in participating in Mautino Park activities? (Check all that apply) a. Childcare responsibilities
b. Language barriers (spanish, etc)
c. Limited transportation
d. Disability or health conditions
e. Social comfort/inclusion/safety
f. Time/schedule
g. Other __________________________
h. No barriers
Share your Feedback
What questions, ideas, or concerns do you have related to the project? _____________________________________________________________________________ Keep in Touch
If you are interested in receiving future communications, and/or being involved in an upcoming partner listening session, then please leave your information below:
Name: Email:
Phone:
Area of interest_______________________________________________ Partner Listening Session at Peace Lutheran Church
Thurs, 1/16, 5:30-7:30pm
Item # 8.
Appendix 3.2.2
Partner Member Summary Responses
Are you supportive of a project at Mautino Park that plants trees, grows and provides food, functions as a community hub, and hosts educational opportunities for children and adults? (Select only one response)
What are the most pressing needs in our community that a community food campus could help address?
Item # 8.
What types of community events, activities, or workshops would you like to see at Mautino Park? ● Gardening workshops - organic gardening, composting, and pest management: 12 responses (12.5%)
● Farm stand (fruit, veg, smoothies, etc): 12 responses (12.5%) ● Educational Programming: 11 responses (11.5%)
● Community events, potlucks: 10 responses (10.4%)
● Age appropriate programming (seniors, youth): 10 responses (10.4%) ● Volunteer work days: 9 responses (9.4%)
● Cooking and nutrition classes: 8 responses (8.3%)
● Exercise opportunities - yoga, tai chi, and aerobics: 8 responses (8.3%) What barriers might prevent your clients from participating in Mautino Park activities? Are there ways your organization can partner with this project and if so, how? ● Direct Partnership/Collaboration: Many organizations expressed a general willingness to "partner together" or collaborate directly.
● Promotion and Educational Sessions: One organization specifically mentioned "Promotion" and "doing educational sessions." Another offered to "Help with educational workshops for all ages" and "partnering on workshops for children," including coordinating field trips and trainings.
● Design, Build, and Maintenance: A licensed contractor and executive director of a 501c3 offered their expertise to "design and build gardens." Another organization offered to "Design and build trails that connect throughout the park and to other neighborhoods," "improve existing trails," "assist with restoration of native plants," and provide "trail stewardship." One response also mentioned the possibility of "Providing volunteers to help staff community garden and to deliver food to IFM."
● Community Center Usage: One organization offered their "community center that could be used" for the project.
● Internship and Subsidized Employment Programs: Several organizations expressed interest in supporting the project through "paid internship programs" and "subsidized employment opportunities" to provide staff hours and on-the-job training. This also includes connecting internship programs, especially in Kitchen & Nutrition Programs.
Item # 8.
● Youth and Family Engagement: Organizations are interested in bringing "groups of youth participating in our programs on educational field trips" and connecting "their families to affordable local foods."
● Food Entrepreneur Support: One organization mentioned the "Sierra Commons Food Entrepreneur Food Accelerator program."
● Networking, Marketing, and Sponsorship: One response suggested "Networking - connect people/farms/organizations that are not already connected," "Marketing/event sponsorship - potentially sponsor/co-create/market events," and "Volunteers could receive PatchWorks discount." They also offered to "Provide input on our current food waste system, past classes."
● Access for Low-Income Clients: One organization explicitly stated they would "like to explore ways our low-income clients could access food grown there."
Item # 8.
Appendix 3.3.1
IFM Client Survey
Item # 8.
Results of Client
Feedback Survey
Clients attending one of IFM’s food distribution events between April 26 – May 21, 2021, were offered the survey.
A total of 469 Surveys were completed.
This represents 55% of all the clients
visiting IFM during this timeframe.
(469 / 859 = 55%)
Updated 6/25/2021
1
Item # 8.
Analysis and Impacts
1. Other Food Resources
a) 1/3 reported only using IFM, and 2/3 utilize other food resources.
Of those using other resources, about 65% use the Food Bank of Nev Co and 40% receive Cal Fresh food stamps.
b) Collaboration with the FBNC is critical to tackling food insecurity issues in Nev Co.
c) CF food stamps are an important resource and IFM should commit to continuing its CF contract to provide services.
2. Barriers
a) Nearly 3/4 reported NOT having any barriers to accessing IFM, indicating that our current location and open days/times work for the majority of our clients. However, that leaves the other 1/4 reporting some kind of barrier/challenge to access.
b) Of the 1/4 with a barrier, Half (53%) said they would come more often if they could come every week. IFM will start this on July 1. c) Of the 1/4 with a barrier, 23% said we should be open on a different day/time, but only 8 wrote-in suggestions, 4 said
afternoon/evening. Depending on results of client phone call survey, IFM could consider this. 2
Item # 8.
Analysis and Impacts
3. Need Changed
a) Nearly 2/3 reported their need has NOT changed in the last 12 months, and 1/3 said their need increased and has stayed the same.
Only 4% said their need increased and then more recently decreased.
Surprising! Expected both the 1/3 and the 4% to be higher! b) Of the 72 surveys that had write-in responses for why/how need has changed, 44% said income loss/unemployment, 26% said expenses increased, 22% said relative moved in/ household size grew, and 7% said kids home from school.
4. Most Important Foods Received
a) Consistent with previous surveys, the top 3 types of food were: Dairy (60%), Protein (49%), and Produce (45%). Grains=27%, Staples=20%.
Fittingly, most of the IFM Food Budget goes towards these items. 92%, or 430 surveys had at least one food written in = strong data. b) See Slide 17 for more details on specific foods written in by clients.3
Item # 8.
Analysis and Impacts
5. Food IFM Should Provide More Of
a) 62% wrote in a valid response for this question, suggesting that nearly 40% of clients are satisfied with the amounts/types of food distributed. b) The 2 top responses were 30% Protein and 29% Produce. Dairy was next at 17% and Staples at 14%. IFM’s Food Committee already has efforts underway to offer more protein and produce, both in volume distributed and options offered (and grown locally!). See Slide 19 for more details on additional types and specific foods written in by clients. c) 8% reported Specialty Diets, indicating the Food Committee should continue to explore new options and could call these clients (if phone # provided) in order to get more detailed suggestions and requests.
6. Prefer Drive-Thru or Coming Inside?
a) A clear majority (88%) prefer the Drive-Thru model, so IFM will continue with this as our primary model for the long-term. However, 12% preferring to come inside does merit IFM exploring if possible. 4
Item # 8.
Analysis and Impacts
7. Ever Had a Bad Experience?
a) 321 responses were written in. The categories were: 91% said never a bad experience/always good, 7% said had received Expired Food/ Moldy Bread/Rotten Produce, 2% said a person was rude/didn’t listen to their needs, and 1 % said don’t like sign-up process.
8. Ever Had a Positive Experience?
a) 341 responses were written in. The categories were: 67% volunteers are kind/friendly/welcoming, 28% said always a positive experience, 6% said the quality of food was great.
9. Impacts of IFM Services
a) Had a strong response rate of 95% giving at least one response: 76% said w/o IFM would struggle to have enough food, 55% saved money they spent on other bills (see below), 30% learned new cooking tips/recipes, and 26% introduced to new foods. The first two indicate the importance of our basic food distribution program to our clients, and the second two related to our client education efforts. b) Of the 118 write-in responses for which bills: 39% PG&E/ Utilities, 24% Rent/Mortgage, 19% All Bills, and 10% Car/Gas/Ins. 5
Item # 8.
Analysis and Impacts
10. New Services IFM Could Offer
a) 58% gave a valid response, suggesting that 42% of clients are satisfied with the services that we currently offer.
b) Of the 273 responses, the top 2 were 41% Be Part of a Community Garden and 40% Recipes/Cooking Classes. IFM is already working on expanding our garden program and re-introduce cooking classes. c) 26% said interested in Establishing a Home Garden and 20% need Help w/ Keeping a Household Budget. IFM will explore these ideas. d) 12% said Job Training in Food Careers and 8% said Training on Reading Nutrition Labels. IFM will possibly explore these ideas.
11. Anything Else to Share?
a) Only 46 surveys had written in responses: 26 saying a version of Thank You/Appreciate IFM, 12 said Service/Staff/Volunteers are great, and 8 said God Bless You.
6
Item # 8.
Graphs and Tables
Explanations:
A. Response Rate – on slide 11 it shows a “response rate” of 95%.
This is derived by taking the 445 surveys with a valid response to this question and dividing it by the 469 total surveys completed. On the flip side, 24 clients (or 5%) left this question blank.
A strong response rate means we can be confident that they results of the question are reflective of our entire client population.
B. Select Only One vs Check All that Apply – Slides 14 and 20 are examples of “select only one,” so therefore the response %s will add up to exactly 100%. Slides 9, 12, 16, 18, 24, and 26 have %s that add up to more than 100% because clients could give multiple responses. 7
Item # 8.
67%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Use Other Food Resources Only Use IFM
Use Other Food Resources?
Response Rate = 100%
N = 469 Responses
8
Item # 8.
66%
41%
7% 5%
3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Seventh Day/FBNC CalFresh WIC Kids' School All Others
What Other Food Resources Used?
Response Rate = 67%
N = 316 Responses
(i.e. Only includes those that
indicated using another resource)
“All Others” = 3% EACH Gold Country Seniors, Sierra Roots, Salvation Army, and United Way 9
Item # 8.
Meaningful write-in responses included:
What Other Food Resources Used?
"Other" Food Resources Written In # Responses
Other Church 8
Penn Valley Church 4
Family/Friends/Neighbors 2
Friendship Club 1
Colfax/FBNC 1
NSJ/FBNC 1
Washington/FBNC 1
10
Item # 8.
73%
27%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
No Barriers to Access Has Barriers
Have Barriers to Accessing IFM Food?
Response Rate = 95%
N = 445 Responses
11
Item # 8.
53%
23% 23%
20%
14%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Every Week Different Days Transportation Issues Different Types Food Closer to my Home What Barriers do you have?
Response Rate = 27%
N = 118 Responses
Not on Graph: 7% didn’t like the sign-up paperwork, 6% said drive-thru takes too long. 12
Item # 8.
Meaningful write-in responses included:
Other Days/Times IFM Could be Open Written In
"Other" Days/Times Written In # Responses
Late Afternoon / Evening / 3-6pm 3
Saturdays 3
Tuesdays at 9am 1
Afternoons 1-3pm 1
Also had 15 responses written in for “Other” Barriers, but only 3 were very meaningful and all 3 had to do with being homeless. 13
Item # 8.
63%
33%
4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Need NOT Changed Need Increased & Stayed Same Need Increased & Then Decreased Has Need Changed in Last 12 Months?
Response Rate = 94%
N = 443 Responses
14
Item # 8.
Meaningful write-in responses included:
Comments Written In for How/Why Need has Changed
"Comments" Written In for
How/Why Need has Changed
# Responses % of Write In
Responses
Income Loss / Employment
Challenges
32 44%
Expenses Increased (Home
Insurance, Health Issue, Car)
19 26%
Relative Moved In / HH Size Grew 16 22%
Kids Home from School 5 7%
Total 72 100%
15
Item # 8.
60%
49%
45%
27%
20%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
1. DAIRY 2. PROTEIN 3. PRODUCE 4. GRAINS 5. STAPLES
Most Important Food Items You Receive
Response Rate = 92%
N = 430 Responses
See more detailed data table on next slide. 16
Item # 8.
Food Category % Specific Food Items Written in by Clients
1. DAIRY 60% Milk 78%, Eggs 62%, Cheese 18%, Yogurt 5%
2. PROTEIN 49% Meat/Protein 85%, Peanut Butter 11%, Chicken/Turkey 8%, Seafood/Fish 4%
3. PRODUCE 45% Veggies 77%, Fruit 34%, Produce 15%, Salad/Greens/Lettuce 10%, Potatoes 2%, Corn 1%
4. GRAINS 27% Bread 58%, Rice 23%, Cereal 15%, Pasta 6%, Oatmeal 5%, Ramen 4%, Mac Cheese 4%
5. STAPLES 20% Canned Goods/Staples 60%, Butter 35%, Sugar 7%, Honey 5%, Jelly 2%, Flour 1%, Oil 1%
6. SNACKS/DESSERTS 5%
7. SPECIAL DIETS 3% Organic 7, Gluten-Free 3, Sugar-Free 2, Dairy-Free 2
8. EXTRAS 2% Pet Food 6, Diapers 3
9. BEVERAGES 1% Water 3, Juice 2
N=430 responses Note: Last 3 rows are #s of clients, NOT %.
4. What are the food items you receive from IFM that are most important to your family? Note: This was an open-ended question so respondents could write in as many answers as they wanted. That is why the %s add up to more than 100%.
This data table corresponds with the graph on the previous slide. 17
Item # 8.
30%
29%
17%
14%
9%
8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
1. PROTEIN 2. PRODUCE 3. DAIRY 4. STAPLES 5. GRAINS 6. SPECIAL DIETS Types of Food IFM Should Provide More Of
Response Rate = 62%
N = 291 Responses
See more detailed data table on next slide. 18
Item # 8.
This data table corresponds with the graph on the previous slide.
Food Category % Specific Food Items Written in by Clients
1. PROTEIN 30% Meat/Protein 85%, Beef 11%, Chicken/Turkey 7%, Seafood/Fish 7%, Tofu 2%
2. PRODUCE 29% Veggies 59%, Fruit 48%, Produce 13%, Salad/Greens/Lettuce 5%, Potatoes 4%, Corn 2%, Green
3. DAIRY 17% Cheese 43%, Milk 31%, Dairy 14%, Yogurt 10%, Eggs 8%, Mayo 4%, Half@Half 2%
4. STAPLES 14% Butter 41%, Sugar 34%, Canned Goods/Staples 19%, Flour 10%, Oil 10%
5. GRAINS 9% Bread 33%, Cereal 26%, Ramen 15%, Grains 11%
6. SPECIAL DIETS 8% Organic 11, Gluten-Free 7, Sugar-Free 4, Vegetarian 2, Dairy-Free, Vegan 1, Mexican 1
7. BEVERAGES 6% Juice 12, Coffee 4, Water 4
8. SNACKS/DESSERTS 4%
9. EXTRAS 1% Pet Food 3, Diapers 1
N=291 responses Note: Last 4 rows are #s of clients, NOT %.
5. What types of food items would you request that IFM start providing (or provide more of)? Note: This was an open-ended question so respondents could write in as many answers as they wanted. That is why the %s add up to more than 100%.
19
Item # 8.
88%
12%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Drive Thru Come Inside
Prefer Drive Thru or Come Inside?
Response Rate = 87%
N = 406 Responses
20
Item # 8.
"Comments" Written In for
Suggest Any Changes to Process?
"Comments" Written In for Suggest
Any Changes to Process?
# Responses
Both Models are Fine / No Preference 30
Drive-Thru Works Well / Is Fast 15
Liked Coming Inside (miss selecting
food/bread, socializing, books)
14 Nice to Allow for Both Models 4
Don't Like Getting Food I Won't Use 3
Meaningful write-in responses included:
21
Item # 8.
"Comments" Written In for
Ever Have a Bad Experience at IFM?
Meaningful write-in responses included:
22 "Comments" Written In for Ever Have a
Bad Experience?
# Responses %
Never / Always Good 291 91%
Expired Food / Moldy Bread / Rotten
Produce
21 7%
Rude Volunteer / Didn't Listen to my Needs 5 2%
Don't Like the Sign-Up Process 4 1%
Total 321 100%
Item # 8.
"Comments" Written In for
Ever Have a Positive Experience at IFM?
Meaningful write-in responses included:
23 "Comments" Written In for Ever Have a
Positive Experience?
# Responses %
Volunteers are Kind, Friendly, Welcoming 227 67%
Always a Positive Experience 94 28%
Quality of Food 20 6%
Total 341 100%
Item # 8.
76%
55%
30%
26%
10%
3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Without IFM, I would
struggle to have enough
food for my family
Saved money that I have
spent on other bills
I’ve learned new recipes
and cooking tips from IFM
I’ve been introduced to
new foods
I’ve received diapers, baby
food, and/or formula
IFM helped me get Food
Stamps
Impacts of IFM Services
Response Rate = 95%
N = 446 Responses
See data table on next slide. 24
Item # 8.
Without IFM, I would struggle to have enough food for my family 76% Saved money that I have spent on other bills 55%
I’ve learned new recipes and cooking tips from IFM 30%
I’ve been introduced to new foods 26%
I’ve received diapers, baby food, and/or formula 10%
IFM helped me get Food Stamps 3%
These data tables correspond with the graph on the previous slide.
Impacts of IFM Services
"Comments" Written In for Impacts IFM Services has had? # Responses Eat Healthier / Learned Something New About Food 6
Food / Bday Cakes for my Children 5
Pet Food 2
Socialize / Meet People 2
"Comments" Written In for Bills Been Able to Pay? # Responses PG&E / Utilities 46
Rent / Mortgage 28
All Bills 23
Car / Gas / Insurance 12
Food 6
Debt / School Loans 3
25
Item # 8.
41% 40%
26%
20%
12%
8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Being part of a
Community Garden
Recipe Sharing/Cooking
Classes
Establish Garden at
Home
Help w/ Keeping a
Household Budget
Job Training in Food
Careers
Training on Reading
Nutrition Labels
Possible New Services to Offer
Response Rate = 58%
N = 273 Responses
See data table on next slide. 26
Item # 8.
Possible New Services to Offer
Also had 9 responses written in for “Other” possible new services to offer, but only 4 were very meaningful and all 4 had to do with having transportation issues / requesting home delivery.
27 "Comments" Written In for
Anything Else to Share?
# Responses
Thank You 26
Service / Staff / Volunteers are Great 12
God Bless You 8
Total 46
Being part of a Community Garden 41%
Recipe Sharing/Cooking Classes 40%
Establish Garden at Home 26%
Help w/ Keeping a Household Budget 20%
Job Training in Food Careers 12%
Training on Reading Nutrition Labels 8%
Item # 8.
28
Item # 8.
Appendix 4.1.2
Key Definitions
Agroecology – A sustainable farming approach that integrates ecological principles, biodiversity, and local knowledge to create resilient food systems.
Analogous Models - An analogous model offers insights into a complex system by examining a more familiar or manageable system that shares structural or functional similarities. This comparative approach facilitates understanding through the identification of commonalities and differences.
Biodiversity – The variety of plant and animal life within an ecosystem, which is crucial for ecological balance, soil health, and resilient food systems.
Climate Resilience – The ability of food systems, communities, and ecosystems to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to climate-related disruptions, such as extreme weather, droughts, and changing growing conditions.
Community Garden – A shared space where individuals or groups collaboratively grow food, often promoting community engagement, education, and access to fresh produce.
Composting – The process of decomposing organic waste, such as food scraps and plant materials, into nutrient-rich soil amendments for gardening and farming.
Cooperative Farming – A model in which farmers or community members collectively own and manage agricultural land, equipment, and resources to share risks and benefits.
CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) – A model in which consumers purchase shares of a farm’s harvest in advance, providing farmers with financial stability while ensuring fresh, seasonal produce for members.
Ecological Farming - Ecological farming, also known as agroecology, is a sustainable agricultural approach that emphasizes the integration of ecological principles to enhance food production while minimizing environmental impact. It focuses on building healthy ecosystems within farming systems, promoting biodiversity, conserving natural resources, and reducing reliance on synthetic inputs.
Edible Landscaping – The practice of integrating food-producing plants, such as fruit trees, herbs, and vegetables, into public or private landscapes for both aesthetic and functional purposes.
Farm-to-School – A program that connects schools with local farms to provide fresh, locally grown food in cafeterias while incorporating food education into the curriculum.
Item # 8.
Food Forest – A perennial, multi-layered agricultural system designed to mimic a natural forest ecosystem, incorporating fruit trees, shrubs, herbs, and ground cover plants to create a self-sustaining food source.
Food Justice – The movement advocating for equitable access to nutritious and culturally appropriate food, particularly in historically marginalized communities.
Food Security – The condition in which all people have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs for an active and healthy life.
Food Sovereignty – The right of communities to control their own food systems, including production, distribution, and consumption, in ways that are culturally appropriate and ecologically sustainable.
Food Waste Reduction – Strategies and initiatives aimed at minimizing food loss across the supply chain, including composting, food recovery programs, and consumer education.
Human-Centered Design -
Job Training – Programs designed to equip individuals with the skills and experience needed for employment in agriculture, food production, and related industries, often focusing on workforce development for underserved communities.
Land Trust - A land trust is a legal arrangement where a trustee holds property title for the benefit of one or more beneficiaries. Land trusts can also be community-based, non-profit organizations that work to conserve land through acquisition or conservation easements e.g. Bear Yuba Land Trust Native Plants – Plant species that have evolved and naturally occur in a specific region or ecosystem without human introduction. These plants are well-adapted to local climate, soil conditions, and wildlife, making them essential for biodiversity, habitat restoration, and sustainable agriculture.
Permaculture – A design philosophy and agricultural system that focuses on creating sustainable and regenerative ecosystems through principles such as biodiversity, soil health, and water conservation.
Pollinator Habitat – Natural or cultivated spaces designed to support pollinators such as bees, butterflies, and birds, which are essential for food production and ecosystem health.
Regenerative Agriculture – Farming and land-use practices that restore soil health, increase biodiversity, and improve water cycles, ultimately enhancing the resilience of ecosystems.
Resilience Farming – Agricultural practices designed to withstand climate change, economic fluctuations, and other challenges through diversification, soil conservation, and water management.
Item # 8.
Revenue Generation – The process of creating financial income to sustain and expand programs, which can include selling produce, offering workshops, securing grants, or establishing community-supported initiatives.
Sustainable Agriculture – Farming practices that meet current food needs without compromising the ability of future generations to produce food, focusing on environmental, economic, and social sustainability.
Item # 8.
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Residential Permit Parking Program Discussion
Recommendation: Provide direction to staff on the implementation of a Residential Permit Parking program for implementation of terms via future ordinance/resolution adoption Prepared by: Alexander K. Gammelgard, Chief of Police
Council Meeting Date: 08/12/2025 Date Prepared: 08/07/2025 Agenda: Administrative
Background Information: Over the past year or so, the City has been in contact with residents of the Mill Street area related to street parking availability concerns in the neighborhood. The City recently constructed a parking facility located at 309 Mill Street. That new facility is composed of a total of thirty-three (33) vehicle parking spaces – fourteen (14) - two of which are ADA - on the upper level and nineteen (19) on the lower level. The lot is currently posted for 3-hour parking in the upper level and traditional City parking permit use on the lower level.
Staff has met with a neighborhood liaison to discuss the desires and needs of the neighborhood related to parking access. The neighborhood expressed concern with adequate on-street parking inventory. The proximity of the neighborhood to the business improvement district sometimes creates parking impaction issues along Mill Street. Mill Street, in that area, does not have any time-based parking restrictions in place, making it an attractive “all day” parking area, thereby sometimes impacting residential on-street parking. Many of the homes in the area rely upon on-street parking options due to the lack of off-street on-premise parking.
Staff discussed objectives and concerns with the neighborhood, namely the City’s desire to not overly impact the Mill Street parking lot with residential vehicles as well as the neighborhood’s desire to utilize a portion of the Mill Street parking lot to provide parking options for the impacted area. Both parties agreed that the other’s concerns and interests were valid, and worked together to find a mutually agreeable solution.
The best solution was to find a balanced approach that achieves both goals. Over the past many months, the Mill Street Parking Lot utilization rate has been observed and the use of the lot, particularly of the lower section, allows for additional dedicated use without displacing current users.
The lower portion of the lot has eleven (11) spaces on the creek side and eight (8) spaces facing the retaining wall. The recommendation of staff is to assign the retaining wall side of the lower area for residential permit parking (RPP) pursuant to the draft RPP code amendment language (attached). Should council approve the draft language, staff will return with an ordinance to amend the code as well resolution(s) to set other fees and policies.
In addition to the RPP framework in the draft code language, staff is seeking approval on the following items:
Item # 9.
Cost for an RPP permit
o Cost of a current quarterly traditional permit is $60 Assignment of spaces
o Recommendation is for all lower spaces to be assigned as either type of permit, without particular space assignment
o Alternatively the eight (8) lower spaces adjacent to the retaining wall could be designated as either type of permit (see attached overhead view) The number of RPP permits to be issued for the Mill Street parking lot o Recommendation is for issuance of RPP permits not to exceed eight (8) Council Goals/Objectives: The execution of this action attempts to achieve Strategic Goal #1 – Community and sense of place; and, #6 – Exceptional Public Safety Fiscal Impact: The cost of an RPP permit will be set by resolution of the council to be incorporated in the City fee schedule. Revenues are anticipated to be minimal, but will assist in overall administration of the program and parking management.
Attachments:
Draft RPP code amendement langage
Overhead image of Mill Street Parking Lot
Funds Available: Yes. Account #: 100-201 and/or 200-201 Reviewed by:
Item # 9.
Title 10 - VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
Chapter 10.48 OFF-STREET PARKING LOTS
Grass Valley, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2025-06-09 14:50:12 [EST] (Supp. No. 8, Update 2)
Chapter 10.48 OFF-STREET PARKING LOTS
Sections:
10.48.000 Definitions.
When used in this chapter, the following words shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section:
"Dwelling unit" shall mean a self-contained residential house, apartment, stock cooperative unit, or condominium unit occupied by a single household exclusively for residential purposes. “Eligible driver” means a licensed driver identified as the registered owner of a currently registered vehicle who resides in a dwelling unit eligible for residential parking permits. “Eligible residence” shall refer to a dwelling unit located on a parcel that is within a radius of 200 feet of a municipal lot with spaces designated for residential parking permits.
10.48.010 Established—Applicability.
Municipal off-street parking lots are established in the city and all of the provisions of this chapter shall be applicable thereto. Such off-street parking lots are those areas so designated by resolution of the city council. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12)
10.48.020 Method of regulation and control of use.
The method of regulation and control of parking or standing of vehicles in municipal off-street parking lots shall be determined by the city council, and may be by paid parking devices, attendants or any other appropriate means.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.1)
10.48.030 Length of time parking allowed.
A. The limit of parking time which shall apply on municipal off-street parking lots shall be established by the city manager or designee.
B. It is unlawful for any person to park a vehicle or cause, allow, or permit to be parked, a vehicle in any municipal off-street parking lot in violation of signs erected or parking time established pursuant to this chapter.
C. It is unlawful for any person to cause, allow, or permit any vehicle to remain in or upon any municipal offstreet parking lot for more than the time paid for or time indicated by signs erected pursuant to this chapter. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.2; Ord. No. 788B, § 1, 2-13-2018; Ord. No. 816, § 11, 6-28-2022)
10.48.040 Permit parking in municipal lot—Generally.
A. The city manager or their designee may designate specific parking spaces within a municipal parking lot as permit parking spaces. Permit parking spaces shall be clearly identified by curb markings and/or posted
Item # 9.
Created: 2025-06-09 14:50:12 [EST]
(Supp. No. 8, Update 2)
signage stating the applicable permit requirements, hours, and restrictions. The city manager or designee may amend, suspend, or revoke any permit parking restrictions.
B. It shall be unlawful for any person to park a vehicle in a municipal off-street parking lot space which requires a parking permit unless such person has acquired a valid parking permit to park in such space from the city.
C. The city manager or designee may adopt policies and/or administrative regulations to implement permit policies according to this chapter, including, but not limited to, the establishment of permit parking restrictions and the criteria for the issuance, eligibility, duration, quantity of permits, consistent with this chapter and other applicable laws.
D. The following exemptions apply to permit parking spaces:
1. Vehicles displaying disabled person or disabled veteran license plate or placard, as described in Vehicle Code Section 22511.5(a)(1), shall be exempt from the provisions of this article.
2. A parking permit as designated by the council shall not guarantee or reserve to the holder thereof any permitted parking space in municipal lots.
3. Permit parking restrictions shall not apply to police vehicles, authorized emergency vehicles, or cityowned vehicles when used for official business.
10.48.045 Permit Parking in municipal lot—Residential parking permits.
A. The city manager or their designee may designate specific municipal parking lots, or portions thereof, to include permit parking spaces eligible for use with residential parking permits. Residential parking permits issued under this chapter shall be valid only in lots so designated and only in designated residential permit parking spaces within those lots.
B. Vehicles associated with a valid residential parking permit may only be exempt from overnight parking restrictions, paid parking regulations, and parking time limits as posted in the municipal lot for which the permit was issued. Nothing in this section shall be construed as permitting any person to park a vehicle in violation of any other restriction on parking.
C. The city manager or designee may issue residential parking permits with the following terms:
1. The number of residential parking permits available for purchase per eligible residence shall be set or modified by resolution of the city council.
2. If an existing placard system is in effect, the program shall maintain its current policies with the intention to transition to a virtual permit system. If a virtual permit system is available, the program can execute the following criteria:
a. Duration. A parking permit shall be issued with a term not to exceed one year from the date of issuance, unless earlier revoked or terminated, provided however that a permit shall automatically terminate when the permit holder ceases to reside in an eligible residence. b. Eligibility. A residential parking permit may be issued only to an eligible driver who can demonstrate that they currently reside at an eligible residence. Persons may apply for residential parking permits per guidelines established by the city manager or designee to be issued a residential parking permit, each eligible driver shall provide the following information:
i. The applicant’s full, true name and home address, and proof of residence; ii. The applicant’s driver license;
3. A valid and current vehicle registration and license plate number of the vehicle for which a permit is being requested; The applicable permit fee shall be established by city council resolution and shall be charged at the time of issuance and/or renewal. The council may modify fees by resolution; and
4. Other information as required by the city manager or designee. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.3)
Item # 9.
Created: 2025-06-09 14:50:12 [EST]
(Supp. No. 8, Update 2)
10.48.050 Speed limit.
No person shall move any vehicle on any municipal off-street parking lot at any speed exceeding five miles per hour.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.4)
10.48.060 Use of entrances and exits.
A. No person shall enter any municipal off-street parking lot over any area or driveway or the portion between any curb returns which is not marked with the word "entrance" or otherwise indicated by arrows, signs or words that it is a driveway or place for the entering of such parking lot.
B. No person shall move any vehicle from any such parking lot into any public way over any area except an area marked with the word "exit" or otherwise indicated by arrows, signs or words that it is a driveway or place for the leaving of such parking lot.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.5)
10.48.070 Use of designated parking spaces—Blocking of traffic.
Parking spaces on municipal off-street parking lots shall be designated by lines or other appropriate markings. When parking spaces are so designated, it shall be unlawful for the operator of any vehicle to stop, stand or park such vehicle other than in a regular designated parking space, across any such line or marking, or in such position that such vehicle shall not be entirely within the area so designated a parking space. No vehicle shall be parked, stopped or standing either wholly or partially in any driveway of any municipal off-street parking lot or in any manner which shall obstruct or interfere with the free movement of vehicles in such driveway or in any manner so as to obstruct or otherwise prevent or interfere with ingress to or egress from any regularly designated parking space.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.6)
10.48.080 Size of vehicles permitted.
A. No person, without first obtaining authority from the police department, shall stop, stand or park any vehicle having a gross weight in excess of five thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine pounds in any municipal offstreet parking lot.
B. No person shall stop, stand or park any vehicle having an overall length in excess of twenty-one feet in any municipal off-street parking lot.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.7)
10.48.090 House trailers and truck trailers prohibited.
No person shall stop, stand or park any house or truck trailer in any municipal off-street parking lot. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.8)
Item # 9.
Created: 2025-06-09 14:50:12 [EST]
(Supp. No. 8, Update 2)
10.48.100 Removal of vehicles from off-street parking lots.
A. The police department of the city is empowered to remove, or cause to have removed to the nearest garage or other place of safety, or to a garage designated or maintained by the city, any vehicle that is stopped, standing or parked on any municipal off-street parking lot in violation of this chapter, or which is left on such municipal off-street parking lot for a period exceeding twenty-four hours, or seventy-two hours with a valid residential parking permit. The expense for such removal shall be the responsibility of the registered owner.
B. The provisions of Article 2, Chapter 10, Division 11, of the Vehicle Code of the State of California pertaining to notice to owner and to garage keeper's lien, shall apply in the event of such removal. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.9)
10.48.110 Violations and penalties.
A. For any violation of any provision of this chapter, the police department may issue notices to appear or citations in the usual form and manner as provided in the vehicle code of the state.
B. Regarding parking permits, violations of this section include:
1. Falsely representing oneself as eligible for a parking permit or furnishing false information in association with obtaining a parking permit.
2. Copying, reproducing, or otherwise bringing into existence a counterfeit parking permit or permits without written authorization from the city manager or designee.
3. Knowingly using or displaying a facsimile or counterfeit parking permit in order to evade posted parking restrictions.
4. Selling, transferring or exchanging, or offering to sell, transfer, or exchange a parking permit(s) with any other person, or any other vehicle, except as provided for in this chapter and without written authorization from the city manager or designee.
5. Knowingly committing any act that is prohibited by the terms of this chapter or any ordinance or resolution enacted by authority granted by this chapter.
C. Parking penalties shall be established by resolution of the city council. (Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.10; Ord. No. 788B, § 1, 2-13-2018; Ord. No. 816, § 11, 6-28-2022)
10.48.120 Prima facie presumption in prosecution for violation.
In any prosecution charging a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter governing the stopping, standing or parking of a vehicle in any municipal off-street parking lot, proof that the particular vehicle described in the complaint was stopped, left standing or parked in violation of any provision of this chapter, together with proof that the defendant named in the complaint was at the time such stopping, standing or parking the registered owner of such vehicle, shall constitute in evidence a prima facie presumption that the registered owner of such motor vehicle was the person who stopped, left standing or parked such motor vehicle at the point where and for the time during which such violation occurred.
(Ord. 486 § 4 (part), 1992; prior code § 13-12.11)
Item # 9.
Item # 9.
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Identification and Implementation of Supplemental City Goals – FY 2025–2026 CEQA: Not a Project
Recommendation: That the City Council 1) Review the proposed supplemental (nonbudgeted) City Goals for FY 2025–2026; 2) Provide input on additional potential goals for consideration; and 3) Identify and prioritize the top five non-budgeted goals/activities to help guide staff focus and resource allocation during the upcoming fiscal year.
Prepared by: Tim Kiser, City Manager
Council Meeting Date: 08/12/2025 Date Prepared: 08/05/2025 Agenda: Administrative
Background Information: Each year, the City of Grass Valley identifies and budgets for key capital and operational projects, which are then implemented in alignment with City Council direction as part of the City’s adopted Budget. However, staff also dedicates time and effort toward initiatives not directly tied to specific budget line items but deemed important for the City’s long-term vision, community enhancement, and operational improvement.
To better align efforts and resources, staff—along with input from City Council Members—has compiled a list of strategic goals and initiatives that merit further attention and action during the current fiscal year. These goals reflect emerging priorities, community needs, and opportunities for partnership and innovation, and staff seeks Council direction on which items should be prioritized in the coming year to guide future efforts and resource allocation.
North Star Property Partnership and Development
Should the City will continue collaboration with representatives of the Northstar property, including the Northstar House, to explore opportunities and partnerships.
Potential initiatives include establishing a museum, constructing additional parking, planning for future water systems, and adding recreational amenities. This effort would focus on building partnerships with the property owner to identify mutually beneficial opportunities and funding options.
Item # 10.
Public Communication and Engagement
Improving how the City communicates with residents is a key priority. Staff will work to expand the City’s presence on social media, highlight positive work and activities, and share timely updates on City initiatives. The goal is to foster two-way engagement with the community, demonstrate responsiveness to public concerns, and build trust in local government.
Evaluation of City Dispatch Services
In light of escalating costs, the County's joint dispatch center, the City staff would like to evaluate and make a final decision on re-establishing our own in-house dispatch services. The review will consider financial impacts, operational needs, and whether bringing dispatch back under City control would improve responsiveness and service quality for Grass Valley residents.
Joint Animal Shelter Feasibility
The City is reassessing the potential to partner with Nevada County—and possibly other agencies—on constructing a joint animal shelter. With capital and long-term operational costs, compared to the City's current cost services, does it make economic sense to continuing moving forward with tis project.
Fire Services Standards and Future Planning
To assess and improve fire service delivery, staff proposes conducting a Standards of Cover Study. This study would analyze current response times, staffing levels, and resource distribution, while also evaluating future needs and regional collaboration opportunities. It would help measure the effectiveness of investments made through Measures E and B and guide long-term planning.
Development Code Update
Staff recommends initiating a comprehensive review of the City’s Development Code to reflect best practices, streamline approval processes for housing and commercial projects, and ensure compliance with recent state mandates. This effort would support smart growth, housing production, and business development in Grass Valley.
Annexation Strategy and Evaluation
Should the City begin to evaluate areas adjacent to City limits that may benefit from annexation. Staff will focus on identifying locations where property owners express interest and where City services—such as police, fire, and sewer—could enhance community livability. The internal analysis will also consider infrastructure needs, financial impacts, and alignment with the City’s long-term planning vision.
Council Goals/Objectives: This item executes portions of work tasks towards achieving/maintaining the Strategic Plan – High Performance Government & Quality Service and Productive and Efficient Workforce.
Item # 10.
Fiscal Impact: At this time, there are no fiscal impacts associated with setting the Supplemental City Goals. Implementing the Supplemental City Goals would have to return to City Council for any funding not already approved as part of the budget.
Funds Available: N/A Account #: N/A
Reviewed by: City Manager
Attachments: None
Item # 10.