Greenfield City Council
March 26, 2024

City of Greenfield
599 El Camino Real
Greenfield, CA 93927
City Council Special and Regular
Meeting Agenda
March 26, 2024
5:30 P.M.

Mayor Robert White
Mayor Pro-tem Ariana Rodriguez
Councilmembers
Yanely Martinez
Rachel Ortiz
Andrew Tipton
The Greenfield City Council meeting on March 26, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. will be held in the City Council Chambers located at 599 El Camino Real, Greenfield, California 93927, and will be open to the public. This meeting will also be accessible online and may be viewed through the following options:

Facebook Live: https://www.facebook.com/GreenfieldCA/
Join Zoom Meeting: http://meeting.ci.greenfield.ca.us
Meeting ID: 844 8164 8935
PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES.

A. CALL TO ORDER – SPECIAL MEETING
B. ROLL CALL – CITY COUNCIL
City Council Agenda
March 26, 2024

C. EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER ABSENCES
This agenda item allows the City Council to excuse the absence of Councilmembers not present at the meeting. If all Councilmembers are present, this agenda will be skipped. a. Public Comments
b. City Council Comments / Action
D. MAYOR’S PRESENTATION, PROCLAMATIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, RESOLUTIONS D-1. Swearing In – Nancy Utterback
D-2. Certificates of Recognition – Academic World Quest-Greenfield High School E. INVOCATION BY PASTOR ROBERT MULLEN
F. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
G. AGENDA REVIEW
H. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
This portion of the Agenda allows an individual the opportunity to address the Council on any items not on the Closed Session, Consent Calendar, Public Hearings, and City Council Business. Under state regulations, no action can be taken on non-agenda items, including issues raised under this agenda item. Members of the public should be aware of this when addressing the Council regarding items not specifically referenced on this Agenda.

PLEASE NOTE: Public comments may be made in the following formats: in person, through Zoom, or by email. If you wish to make a public comment through Zoom, please use the “raise your hand” feature during the public comment section. You will be selected by the meeting host and will be allowed to say your comment aloud. If you wish to make a public comment through email, please submit your public comment to [email protected]. In the email subject line, please write your name and the agenda item or topic you are commenting on. If you wish to submit a public comment on more than one agenda item or topic, please send a separate email for each agenda item or topic you are commenting. All public comments submitted through email must be received no later than 12:00 p.m. (noon) on March 25, 2024. Comments submitted through email on time will be incorporated into the City Council Agenda and made part of the record for the meeting. Comments submitted by email that are not received on time will not be accepted. Public comments submitted by email will not be read aloud during the meeting.

Please be aware that written public comments, including your name, may become public information.

I. COMMENTS FROM CITY COUNCIL
City Council Agenda
March 26, 2024

J. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one action of the City Council, unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received prior to the time Council votes on the motion to adopt. a. Public Comments
J-1. APPROVE Warrants #320962 through #321119 and Bank Drafts #5930 through #5950 in the amount of $781,510.72 – Page 1
J-2. APPROVE Minutes of the March 12, 2024 City Council Meeting – Page 19 J-3. RECEIVE AND FILE Department Report – Finance Department – Page 24 J-4. ADOPT Resolution #2024-23, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield to Oppose Initiative #21-0042A1 – Page 25
J-5. ADOPT Resolution #2024-24, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Awarding a Professional Services Agreement to G And C Consulting for Utility Infrastructure and Public Works Consulting in an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000 – Page 31
J-6. AUTHORIZE the Greenfield Fire Department to Surplus a Pickup Truck Canopy and Bed Slide Out Tray – Page 34

K. MAYOR’S PRESENTATION, PROCLAMATIONS, COMMUNICATIONS,

RESOLUTIONS
K-1. PRESENTATION – Domestic Violence Presentation – Page 35 K-2. UPDATE – Welcome to Greenfield Signs
K-3. UPDATE – ADA Play Equipment
K-4. UPDATE – Tom Rogers Museum and Visitors’ Center
L. PUBLIC HEARINGS
L-1. ADOPT A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Approving the Tax Sharing Formula Between the County of Monterey and the City of Greenfield for the Proposed “Tunzi-Thorp Annexation” Involving Annexation of 18.671± Acres to the City of Greenfield (APNS: 109-232-006 and 109-232-007) INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY AND FIRST READING of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Pre-Zoning Assessor Parcel Numbers 109-232-006 and 109-232-007 for the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation Project – Page 39 a. Staff Report
b. Open Public Comments
c. Close Public
d. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution #2024-25 / First Reading of an Ordinance
City Council Agenda
March 26, 2024

L-2. ADOPT A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Denying a Design Review and Rejecting a Draft Development Agreement for a Proposed Three-Story, 34,300 Square Foot Building with 20 Multi-Family Residential Units, a 600 Square Foot Community Room, and 12,000 Square Foot of Commercial Floor Area on a 1.42 Acre Undeveloped Site on the East Side of 4th Street Between Apple and Palm Avenues (APN: 042-151-011); (Permit PLN #20018) – Page 53
a. Staff Report
b. Open Public Comments
c. Close Public
d. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution #2024-26
M. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
M-1. REVIEW AND APPROVE – Councilmember Absence from February 27, 2024 City Council Meeting – Page 132
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comments
c. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Review
M-2. ADOPT A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Approving a Donation for the 2024 Greenfield Sober Grad Event – Page 135 a. Staff Report
b. Public Comments
c. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution #2024-27
M-3. ADOPT A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Supplementally Appropriating $49,733 for the Funding of the Police Captain Position for the Remainder of Fiscal Year 2023-2024 – Page 138
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comments
c. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution #2024-28
M-4. ADOPT A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield to Make a Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $1,900,088.80 to the 2023-2024 Fiscal Year Budget for Needed Repairs to the Fire Station – Page 141 a. Staff Report
b. Public Comments
c. City Council Comments / Review / Action
Staff Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution #2024-29
N. BRIEF REPORTS ON CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND MEETINGS ATTENDED BY

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
a. League of California Cities Monterey Bay Division
b. League of California Cities – Environmental Quality Policy Committee c. Transportation Agency for Monterey County
City Council Agenda
March 26, 2024

d. Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
e. Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
f. Monterey Salinas Transit
g. South Salinas Valley Broadband Authority
h. Monterey County Mayors’ Association
i. Salinas Valley Mayors/Managers Group
j. Planning Commission
O. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
P. CITY MANAGER REPORT
Q. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (831) 674-5591. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

This agenda is duly posted outside City Hall and on the City of Greenfield web site. 3/22/2024 3:48:25 PM Page 1 of 4
Check Report
Greenfield, CA By Check Number
Date Range: 03/08/2024 - 03/21/2024
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Bank Code: APBNK-APBNK
05263 A TOOL SHED, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 117.60 320962 00174 A&G PUMPING 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 9,000.00 320963 00180 ALL SAFE INTEGRATED SYSTEMS 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 126.00 320964 05329 ANDREW KOBE SIQUEIROS 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 500.00 320965 05403 ANGELA MEJIA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 45.20 320966 04379 ARMANDO JR. LERMA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 443.00 320967 05047 ART DIAZ 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 301.00 320968
04750 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 360.45 320969 01937 BRENT SLAMA CONSULTING 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 17,355.00 320970 04535 BRYAN GAGE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 301.00 320971
04407 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 377.53 320972 00752 CITY OF GREENFIELD 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 5,458.52 320973 00348 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 30,149.59 320976 05008 EAST BAY TIRE CO. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 661.26 320977 05464 EDWIN CARVAJAL CASTRO 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 300.00 320978 00528 EL CAMINO ELECTRIC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 6,677.97 320979 04635 ENRIQUE LUGO 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 17.82 320980 04455 FABIOLA LOPEZ 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 66.82 320981 05450 FAMCON PIPE SANTA MARIA, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 4,865.09 320982 04287 FLUID RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 9,854.77 320983 04801 FRANCISCO VAZQUEZ 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 399.00 320984 05463 FRANK ISOLA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 301.00 320985 04753 G&C CONSULTING, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 6,000.00 320986 04525 GOLDEN STATE TRUCK & TRAILER REPAIR 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 656.43 320987 00720 GRAINGER 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 3,183.23 320988
00725 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 4,820.98 320989 00721 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 225.18 320990 00805 HACH COMPANY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 1,762.96 320991 04708 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 14,668.00 320992 04452 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM OF SAN JOSE, INC.03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 479.12 320993 05466 ISAAC ESPINOZA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 30.00 320994 01028 J.R. INTERPRETING SERVICES 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 493.75 320995 04888 JOSH SAVINON 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 450.00 320996 04253 JUSTIN MATTKE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 207.00 320997 05465 MANUEL GALVAN LUNA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 30.00 320998 04549 MCFCA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 100.00 320999
05108 METER VALVE & CONTROL INC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 4,115.84 321000 01300 MISSION LINEN SUPPLY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 52.74 321001 00418 MJJ COLLISION CENTER 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321002 13015 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 27,472.26 321003 01348 MONTEREY COUNTY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPT. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 1,012.00 321004 04653 NEW SV MEDIA, INC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 262.44 321005 03896 NICK'S GARAGE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 1,865.15 321006 05258 NV5, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 596.50 321007
01532 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 251.34 321008 05326 OSCAR GUADALUPE PEREZ 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 500.00 321009 01705 QUINN COMPANY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 975.22 321010 01919 SALINAS VALLEY FORD 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 114.33 321011 01999 SALINAS VALLEY SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 122,341.91 321012 19020 SAN BENITO SUPPLY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 433.44 321013 04338 SHRED-IT USA 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 147.62 321014 01988 SIRCHIE ACQUISITION COMPANY, LLC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 52.35 321015 04315 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 62.21 321016 00386 STATE OF CA DEPT. OF JUSTICE 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 245.00 321017 1 Check Report Date Range: 03/08/2024 - 03/21/2024
3/22/2024 3:48:25 PM Page 2 of 4
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 04445 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS, LLC 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 2,589.43 321018 05174 THEODORE AVERY 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 443.00 321019 02037 TRI-CITIES DISPOSAL 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 129,487.49 321020 04832 TYLER KEISLING 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 615.02 321021 02208 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUIPMENT 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 653.42 321022 02372 WALLACE GROUP 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 5,616.74 321023 04766 XIO, INC. 03/08/2024 Regular 0.00 12,646.00 321024 00749 CITY OF GREENFIELD 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 154.89 321044 00713 G P O A 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 1,120.00 321045
00795 GREENFIELD POLICE SERGEANTS ASSOCIATION 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 300.00 321046 04521 Greenfield Professional Firefighters 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 315.00 321047 05322 OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 3 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 191.10 321048 01911 SEIU Local 521 03/14/2024 Regular 0.00 673.44 321049 05263 A TOOL SHED, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 117.60 321050 00174 A&G PUMPING 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 677.50 321051 04732 ALPHA AUTO BODY INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 404.00 321052 05348 AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE AMR 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 944.47 321053 00153 AT&T 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 139.10 321054
04233 BADGER METER, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 3,790.84 321055 05467 BAR PSYCHOLOGICAL GROUP 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 485.00 321056 05100 BSN SPORTS LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 166.44 321057 03903 CENTRAL COAST SIGN & DESIGN 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,068.51 321058 04571 CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS FORMS, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 569.54 321059 05136 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 544.90 321060 04407 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 368.34 321061 05194 CLEATH-HARRIS GEOLOGISTS, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 3,488.70 321062 05462 CLIVE SPORTS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,164.00 321063 00348 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 45,292.09 321064 04944 CYNTHIA ZAVALA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321065 00413 DELL MARKETING, L.P. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,442.17 321066 05452 DIEGO MENDOZA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321067 05461 DIGITAL BUYER 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,853.46 321068 05103 DRIVE CUSTOMS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 840.00 321069 04567 ELSA HERRERA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 334.00 321070 04614 ERNEST GALLARDO 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321071 05291 FELIPE CAMARENA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 180.00 321072 04287 FLUID RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,666.03 321073 04753 G&C CONSULTING, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 6,000.00 321074 00725 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 125.38 321075 05005 GREENFIELD 101, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 84.00 321076 00721 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 219.94 321077 05397 GREENSHINE NEW ENERGY LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 25,278.95 321078 00803 HYDRO TURF, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,388.41 321079 03979 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 65.00 321080 01028 J.R. INTERPRETING SERVICES 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 512.25 321081 05120 JAMIE TUGEL 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 118.00 321082 04568 KS STATEBANK 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 21,627.83 321083 03107 L.N. CURTIS & SONS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 6,917.50 321084 01241 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - MONTEREY BAY DIVISION 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321085 13015 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 3,530.00 321086 04286 MY JEEP-CHRYSLER-DODGE-RAM/MY CHEVROLET/MY NISSAN-KIA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 252.59 321087 04670 NAPA AUTO PARTS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 18.95 321088 01506 OFFICE DEPOT 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 304.69 321089 01628 ONE WORKPLACE L. FERRARI LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,307.01 321090 01532 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 930.37 321091 01601 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 28,647.90 321092 01301 PAUL MUGAN 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,659.88 321093 04299 PURE WATER 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 72.00 321094
01837 R G FABRICATION 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 18.27 321095 05356 RICKY SERRANO'S PLUMBING INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 1,169.00 321096 05447 ROBERT JAMES MULLEN 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 69.00 321097 2 Check Report Date Range: 03/08/2024 - 03/21/2024
3/22/2024 3:48:25 PM Page 3 of 4
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 04731 ROBERT URQUIDEZ 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321098 02367 ROBIN WARBEY CONSULTING 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 3,150.00 321099 19020 SAN BENITO SUPPLY 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 388.76 321100 04954 SAN LORENZO LUMBER 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,747.73 321101 04338 SHRED-IT USA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 134.59 321102 01933 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAPING 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 15,925.00 321103 01945 SOUTH COUNTY TIRE, LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 4,831.97 321104 01998 STANDARD INSURANCE COM 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,710.31 321105 04315 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 185.91 321106 00386 STATE OF CA DEPT. OF JUSTICE 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 973.00 321107 00780 STEPHANIE GARCIA 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 50.00 321108 09396 SWIFT TECTONICS, INC. 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,198.92 321109 04445 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS, LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,280.29 321110 04937 T-MOBILE 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 65.60 321111
05459 TOTAL BODY EXPERTS, LLC 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 5,473.91 321112 04832 TYLER KEISLING 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 2,325.10 321113 00634 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 75.00 321114 03904 ULINE 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 175.35 321115
02208 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUIPMENT 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 317.38 321116 02234 VALLEY TROPHIES & DETECTORS 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 35.06 321117 02372 WALLACE GROUP 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 747.73 321118 04583 WEX BANK 03/15/2024 Regular 0.00 259.22 321119
01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 301.68 DFT0005930 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 451.58 DFT0005931 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 790.20 DFT0005932 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 1,940.00 DFT0005933 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 2,965.00 DFT0005934 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 1,643.94 DFT0005935 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 400.00 DFT0005936 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 885.00 DFT0005937 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 350.00 DFT0005938 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 250.00 DFT0005939 00431 DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 346.15 DFT0005940 01916 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST CO. 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 2,272.50 DFT0005941 00384 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 4,145.05 DFT0005942 03103 Internal Revenue Service 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 10,953.74 DFT0005943 03103 Internal Revenue Service 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 46,836.70 DFT0005944 00384 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 16,368.37 DFT0005945 03103 Internal Revenue Service 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 40,206.39 DFT0005946 00107 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE 03/15/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 2,067.82 DFT0005947 00384 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD 03/19/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 2.75 DFT0005948 03103 Internal Revenue Service 03/19/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 7.26 DFT0005949 03103 Internal Revenue Service 03/19/2024 Bank Draft 0.00 31.00 DFT0005950 Regular Checks
Manual Checks
Voided Checks
Discount
Payment
Payment Type Count
Bank Code APBNK Summary
Bank Drafts
EFT's
137
0 0
21 0

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 158 0.00
Payment
648,295.59

0.00 0.00
133,215.13

0.00 781,510.72
Payable
Count
219
0 0
21 0
240
3 Check Report Date Range: 03/08/2024 - 03/21/2024
3/22/2024 3:48:25 PM Page 4 of 4
All Bank Codes Check Summary
Payment Type Discount
Payment
Count Payment
Payable
Count
Regular Checks
Manual Checks
Voided Checks
Bank Drafts
EFT's
137
0 0
21 0

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 158 0.00
648,295.59

0.00 0.00
133,215.13

0.00 781,510.72
219
0 0
21 0
240
Fund Name Period Amount
Fund Summary
999 CASH CONTROL 3/2024 781,510.72
781,510.72
4 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 1 of 14
Expense Approval Report
Greenfield, CA By Fund
Payment Dates 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Fund: 100 - GENERAL FUND
ENRIQUE LUGO 320980 03/08/2024 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIU… 100-26001 17.82 NEW SV MEDIA, INC 321005 03/08/2024 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 100-22512 262.44 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 320989 03/08/2024 7840 - NEW TRASH PUMP AND…100-320-66300.000 468.12 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 320989 03/08/2024 7840 - NEW TRASH PUMP AND…100-320-71500.000 1,827.72 ALL SAFE INTEGRATED SYSTE… 320964 03/08/2024 BURGLARY MONITORING - 12… 100-110-63900.000 126.00 SALINAS VALLEY SOLID WASTE…321012 03/08/2024 WASTE SERVICES FY 22-23 100-191-64400.000 62,749.79 GRAINGER 320988 03/08/2024 CVC LIGHTING INVERTER 100-111-65900.000 2,355.54 EL CAMINO ELECTRIC 320979 03/08/2024 ART CENTER - INSTALLATION … 100-551-65900.000 1,872.19 STATE OF CA DEPT. OF JUSTICE 321107 03/15/2024 PD LIVESCANS JANUARY 2024 100-215-63400.000 650.00 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES…321085 03/15/2024 MMONTEREY BAY DIVISION … 100-101-68300.000 50.00 BSN SPORTS LLC 321057 03/15/2024 REC BASKETBALL JERSEYS 100-551-63500.000 166.44 SIRCHIE ACQUISITION COMP… 321015 03/08/2024 EVIDENCE SEALING TAPE 100-215-65400.000 52.35 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 100-111-63700.000 487.50 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 100-310-63700.000 720.00 ULINE 321115 03/15/2024 SAND BAGS - FLOOD PREVENT…100-320-65100.000 175.35 OFFICE DEPOT 321089 03/15/2024 OFFICE SUPPLIES - FINANCE D… 100-190-61400.000 58.36 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS, LLC 321018 03/08/2024 PD NEW OFFICER UNIFORM-E… 100-215-65200.000 2,589.43 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 PLAS COAT WIRE 100-111-65700.000 14.06 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 SUPPLIES 100-111-65700.000 16.64 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 321016 03/08/2024 BANKER BOXES/LABEL MAKER…100-201-61400.000 62.21 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 321106 03/15/2024 CVC JANITORIAL SUPPLIES / … 100-111-65600.000 71.04 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 321106 03/15/2024 CVC JANITORIAL SUPPLIES / … 100-310-61400.000 114.87 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 100-550-64100.000 68.42 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 100-551-64100.000 306.15 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 100-551-64200.000 166.70 RICKY SERRANO'S PLUMBING … 321096 03/15/2024 COMMUNITY CENTER 2" COP… 100-551-65900.000 925.00 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 100-590-64100.000 466.75 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 100-590-64200.000 235.37 OFFICE DEPOT 321089 03/15/2024 CLASP ENVELOPES - POLICE D… 100-201-61400.000 68.96 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CONNECTOR 100-551-65900.000 13.13 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CONNECTOR - ART CENTER 100-551-65900.000 33.80 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 7538 - BOLTS & NUTS 100-550-66300.000 6.53 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CONNECTOR 100-551-65900.000 5.58 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CONNECTOR 100-551-65900.000 12.14 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUI… 321022 03/08/2024 7532 - PARTS 100-550-66300.000 248.26 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 CABINET KEYES - POLICE DEPT 100-201-65100.000 16.00 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 2 KEYES - POLICE DEPT 100-201-65100.000 -8.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 GAS CAN 100-550-65700.000 32.84 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 321075 03/15/2024 RECTOR SEAL 100-550-65700.000 20.00 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CVC SUPPLIES 100-111-65900.000 29.40 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 SUPPLIES 100-111-65900.000 13.09 TRI-CITIES DISPOSAL 321020 03/08/2024 STREET SWEEPING LANDFIELD…100-320-64400.000 877.94 J.R. INTERPRETING SERVICES 320995 03/08/2024 INTERPRETING SERVICES - CITY…100-101-63100.000 493.75 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 597 EL CAMINO REAL LS 100-111-64300.000 93.82 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 599 EL CAMINO REAL 100-111-64300.000 108.43 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 599 EL CAMINO REAL 100-111-64400.000 37.16 TRI-CITIES DISPOSAL 321020 03/08/2024 ADMIN HEARING SERVICES 100-191-64400.000 128,609.55 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 899 CHERRY AVENUE - CVC BK…100-320-64300.000 167.29 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 PALM & FWY EST - 101 SPR 100-320-64300.000 66.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 801 APRICOT STREET PARK 100-320-64300.000 53.03 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 45 ELMWOOD DR - PERC POND 100-320-64300.000 34.30 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1245 APPLE AVE - PERC POND 100-320-64300.000 34.33 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 PALM & FWY WEST - 101 SPR… 100-320-64300.000 158.00 5 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 2 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1245 GREENLEAF LP - PERC P… 100-320-64300.000 108.46 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 263 PALO VERDE ST - PERC P… 100-320-64300.000 108.64 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 786 APRICOT STREET #PERC P… 100-320-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 100-320-64400.000 130.57 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 221 PINOT AVE - CITY PARK 100-550-64300.000 106.35 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 300 APPLE AVENUE PARK 100-550-64300.000 260.53 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 100 FIFTH STREET PARK 100-550-64300.000 61.14 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 328 PARKSIDE CT 100-550-64300.000 101.26 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 540 BAYWOOD WAY 100-550-64300.000 51.04 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 890 TYLER AVE - CITY PARK 100-550-64300.000 74.68 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1355 OAK AVE - IRRIGATION 100-550-64300.000 66.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1355 OAK AVE #PP RESTROOM 100-550-64300.000 82.85 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1355 OAK AVE #PP RESTROOM 100-550-64400.000 45.91 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 300 APPLE AVENUE PARK 100-550-64400.000 45.91 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 100-550-64400.000 130.58 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 215 EL CAMINO REAL N 100-551-64300.000 34.87 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 213 EL CAMINO REAL N 100-551-64300.000 33.04 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1351 OAK AVE/COMMUNITY … 100-551-64300.000 74.07 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1351 OAK AVE FIRE PROTECTI… 100-551-64300.000 167.29 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1351 OAK AVE/COMMUNITY … 100-551-64400.000 45.91 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 215 EL CAMINO REAL N 100-551-64400.000 59.95 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 131 THIRTEENTH ST DAY CARE 100-590-64300.000 81.66 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 100-111-65600.000 38.18 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 UNIFORMS 100-320-65200.000 82.02 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 UNIFORMS 100-550-65200.000 82.02 SHRED-IT USA 321102 03/15/2024 SHREDDING SERVICES - POLICE…100-215-63400.000 134.59 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 321075 03/15/2024 PVC NIPPLE TBE 100-550-65700.000 12.25 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 321075 03/15/2024 PVC/ADAPTERS 100-550-65700.000 7.93 MONTEREY COUNTY INFORM…321004 03/08/2024 PD TELECOM COUNTY NETW… 100-215-64500.000 1,012.00 JUSTIN MATTKE 320997 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - SHERMAN BLOCK … 100-215-67200.000 207.00 SALINAS VALLEY SOLID WASTE…321012 03/08/2024 WASTE SERVICES FY 22-23 100-191-64400.000 59,592.12 PURE WATER 321094 03/15/2024 WATER - POLICE DEPT 100-201-65100.000 72.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7822 - FANT FIBERGLASS 100-320-66300.000 28.48 GREENFIELD 101, INC. 321076 03/15/2024 CAR WASHES - POLICE DEPT F… 100-215-65100.000 84.00 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUI… 321116 03/15/2024 7827 - REWIND STARTER ASSY 100-320-66300.000 48.90 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7822 - HARDENER 100-320-66300.000 5.29 STATE OF CA DEPT. OF JUSTICE 321107 03/15/2024 FINGERPRINT SERVICES - POLI… 100-215-63400.000 323.00 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 KEYS FOR CABINET/SOCK BOO…100-215-65400.000 57.13 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-22496 304.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-22512 4,104.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-22537 152.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-22555 152.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-601-63600.000 1,976.00 ANDREW KOBE SIQUEIROS 320965 03/08/2024 ANDREW SIQUEIROS REC BAS… 100-551-63500.000 500.00 OSCAR GUADALUPE PEREZ 321009 03/08/2024 OSCAR GUADALUPE PEREZ RE… 100-551-63500.000 500.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7822 - HARDENER 100-320-66300.000 5.29 VALLEY TROPHIES & DETECTO… 321117 03/15/2024 NAME TAGS - OFFICER/CIVILI… 100-215-65100.000 35.06 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 CVC KITCHEN TRAP 100-111-65900.000 42.58 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-22495 1,672.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-22496 1,216.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-22512 608.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-22538 836.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-26173 456.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-26174 76.00 HR & ASSOCIATES, LLC 320992 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-601-63600.000 3,116.00 BRENT SLAMA CONSULTING 320970 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-601-63600.000 8,190.00 BRENT SLAMA CONSULTING 320970 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - FEB… 100-601-63600.000 9,165.00 JAMIE TUGEL 321082 03/15/2024 PER-DIEM - PW OFFICE INSTIT… 100-310-67100.000 118.00 MANUEL GALVAN LUNA 320998 03/08/2024 PAYMENT TAKEN IN ERROR - … 100-43440.000 30.00 ISAAC ESPINOZA 320994 03/08/2024 PAYMENT TAKEN IN ERROR - … 100-43440.000 30.00 6 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 3 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount DIGITAL BUYER 321068 03/15/2024 PD EVIDENCE STORAGE CABIN…100-201-61400.000 1,853.46 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 100-111-65600.000 40.03 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 UNIFORMS 100-320-65200.000 81.15 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 UNIFORMS 100-550-65200.000 81.15 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 320976 03/08/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - DEC… 100-601-63600.000 23,569.50 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 320976 03/08/2024 PLAN CHECK REVIEW SERVICES…100-25105 2,255.58 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 320976 03/08/2024 PLAN CHECK REVIEW SERVICES…100-25105 4,324.51 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 320989 03/08/2024 7841 - NEW TRASH PUMP AND…100-320-66300.000 517.99 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 320989 03/08/2024 7841 - NEW TRASH PUMP AND…100-320-71500.000 1,827.72 HYDRO TURF, INC. 321079 03/15/2024 7538 - PARTS 100-550-66300.000 1,388.41 ELSA HERRERA 321070 03/15/2024 PER-DIEM - CAPE 2024 ANNU… 100-201-67200.000 334.00 BAR PSYCHOLOGICAL GROUP 321056 03/15/2024 PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUTATI… 100-201-63900.000 485.00 ROBERT JAMES MULLEN 321097 03/15/2024 ASSIST. INDIVIDUALS & GROU… 100-215-67200.000 69.00 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION…321080 03/15/2024 FY 23-24 ANNUAL MEMBERSH…100-201-68300.000 65.00 J.R. INTERPRETING SERVICES 321081 03/15/2024 INTERPRETING SERVICES - CITY…100-101-63100.000 512.25 STEPHANIE GARCIA 321108 03/15/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION STIP… 100-601-67100.000 50.00 ERNEST GALLARDO 321071 03/15/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION STIP… 100-601-67100.000 50.00 ROBERT URQUIDEZ 321098 03/15/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION STIP… 100-601-67100.000 50.00 CYNTHIA ZAVALA 321065 03/15/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION STIP… 100-601-67100.000 50.00 DIEGO MENDOZA 321067 03/15/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION STIP… 100-601-67100.000 50.00 PAUL MUGAN 321093 03/15/2024 REIMBURSEMENT - PLANNING…100-601-67100.000 1,659.88 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 321064 03/15/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - DEC… 100-601-63600.000 18,597.75 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 321064 03/15/2024 CONSULTING SERVICES - JAN… 100-601-63600.000 21,906.75 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 NEW ADDRESS MAPPING AND…100-601-63700.000 425.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 100-111-63700.000 225.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 100-310-63700.000 180.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 100-320-63700.000 1,080.00 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 321064 03/15/2024 PLAN CHECK REVIEW SERVICES…100-25105 4,787.59 CLIVE SPORTS 321063 03/15/2024 SOFTBALL UNIFORMS 100-551-63500.000 1,164.00 A&G PUMPING 321051 03/15/2024 SOCCER COMPLEX PORTABLE … 100-551-63500.000 677.50 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE DFT0005947 03/15/2024 February 2024 100-22440 2,026.66 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 COPE - Union Dues 100-22420 0.21 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 100-22420 304.70 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005930 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 100-22430 90.50 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005932 03/15/2024 Deferred Compensation Loan … 100-22435 790.20 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005933 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-GPOA 100-22430 400.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005934 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-GPSA 100-22430 1,185.08 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005935 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Management 100-22430 660.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005936 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Mid Management 100-22430 220.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 100-22430 300.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005938 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-OE3 Employees 100-22430 350.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005939 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Chief of Police 100-22430 250.00 G P O A 321045 03/14/2024 GPOA DUES 100-22410 320.00
OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL…321048 03/14/2024 Union Dues 100-22420 63.70 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005941 03/15/2024 Roth Retirement 100-22431 2,272.50 GREENFIELD POLICE SERGEAN… 321046 03/14/2024 GPSA DUES 100-22415 152.01 CITY OF GREENFIELD 321044 03/14/2024 Weapon Repay 100-22481 154.89 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 100-22225 1,341.77 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 100-22215 3,563.14 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 100-22215 15,235.46 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 100-22220 4,633.55 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 100-22210 12,339.75 Fund 100 - GENERAL FUND Total: 440,291.17
Fund: 102 - Fire General
GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 320989 03/08/2024 RUBBER BOOTS 102-250-65200.000 179.43 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC 320969 03/08/2024 AUVI-Q & OXIMETER 102-250-65400.000 360.45 ART DIAZ 320968 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - FEBRUARY WINTE… 102-250-67300.003 301.00 BRYAN GAGE 320971 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - FEBRUARY WINTE… 102-250-67300.003 301.00 TYLER KEISLING 321021 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - CHIEF OFFICER 3B 102-250-67200.000 465.02 TYLER KEISLING 321113 03/15/2024 PER DIEM- CHIEF OFFICER 3D 102-250-67200.000 930.04 7 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 4 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount TYLER KEISLING 321113 03/15/2024 PER DIEM- CHIEF OFFICER 3C 102-250-67200.000 697.53 TYLER KEISLING 321113 03/15/2024 PER DIEM- CHIEF OFFICER 3A 102-250-67200.000 697.53 CENTRAL COAST SIGN & DESI… 321058 03/15/2024 NEW COMMAND VEHICLE DE… 102-250-95690.000 2,068.51 TOTAL BODY EXPERTS, LLC 321112 03/15/2024 REVPRO STAIRCLIMBER 102-250-67200.000 5,473.91 CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS F… 321059 03/15/2024 FRR BOOKS 102-250-65400.000 569.54 MISSION LINEN SUPPLY 321001 03/08/2024 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 102-250-65600.000 52.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 380 OAK AVE 102-250-64300.000 50.07 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 380 OAK AVE - FIRE PROTECTI… 102-250-64300.000 167.29 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 380 OAK AVE 102-250-64400.000 289.72 TYLER KEISLING 321021 03/08/2024 REIMBURSEMENT - CHIEF OFF…102-250-67400.000 150.00 JOSH SAVINON 320996 03/08/2024 REIMBURSEMENT - MCFTA IN… 102-250-67800.000 450.00 L.N. CURTIS & SONS 321084 03/15/2024 BOOTS - DIAZ 102-250-65200.000 223.65 L.N. CURTIS & SONS 321084 03/15/2024 COMPRESSOR SERVICE 102-250-66300.000 3,377.85 L.N. CURTIS & SONS 321084 03/15/2024 HURST TOOLS SERVICE 102-250-66300.000 2,081.00 L.N. CURTIS & SONS 321084 03/15/2024 FIT TESTING 102-250-66300.000 1,235.00 FRANK ISOLA 320985 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - FEBRUARY WINTE… 102-250-67300.003 301.00 FRANCISCO VAZQUEZ 320984 03/08/2024 TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT 102-250-67200.000 399.00 MCFCA 320999 03/08/2024 2024 MCFCA MEMBERSHIP 102-250-68300.000 100.00 AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPON… 321053 03/15/2024 LUCAS DEVICE CHARGER 102-250-66300.000 944.47 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005931 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 102-22430 170.70 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 102-22430 300.00 Greenfield Professional Firefig…321047 03/14/2024 Fire Union Dues 102-22410 211.25 DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERV…DFT0005940 03/15/2024 Misc Withholding 102-22450 346.15 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 102-22225 490.49 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 102-22215 1,293.10 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 102-22215 5,529.24 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 102-22220 2,773.11 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 102-22210 5,714.25 Fund 102 - Fire General Total: 38,694.04
Fund: 105 - Community Outreach
FABIOLA LOPEZ 320981 03/08/2024 TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT - M…105-105-67200.000 66.82 ANGELA MEJIA 320966 03/08/2024 REIMBURSEMENT - ANNUAL … 105-105-67200.000 45.20 EDWIN CARVAJAL CASTRO 320978 03/08/2024 SOCOS SOCIAL EVENT 105-105-68200.000 300.00 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 105-22225 69.85 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 105-22215 184.18 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 105-22215 787.46 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 105-22220 156.27 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 105-22210 386.40 Fund 105 - Community Outreach Total: 1,996.18
Fund: 200 - SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
ONE WORKPLACE L. FERRARI L…321090 03/15/2024 PD FILING CABINET FOR RECO… 200-205-65100.000 1,307.01 ARMANDO JR. LERMA 320967 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - 2024 ILEETA CON… 200-205-67200.000 443.00 THEODORE AVERY 321019 03/08/2024 PER-DIEM - 2024 ILEETA CON… 200-205-67200.000 443.00 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS, LLC 321110 03/15/2024 PD UNIFORM AND EQUIPMEN…200-205-71400.000 1,280.29 WEX BANK 321119 03/15/2024 GASOLINE 200-205-67200.000 259.22 FELIPE CAMARENA 321072 03/15/2024 PER-DIEM - ICI CORE 2 WEEK … 200-205-67200.000 180.00 Fund 200 - SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT Total: 3,912.52 Fund: 220 - Supplemental Transactions & Use Tax Fund (V & W) TEMPLETON UNIFORMS, LLC 321110 03/15/2024 PD UNIFORM AND EQUIPMEN…220-605-65200.000 1,000.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005931 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 220-22430 280.88 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005933 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-GPOA 220-22430 1,540.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005934 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-GPSA 220-22430 1,779.92 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005936 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Mid Management 220-22430 100.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 220-22430 150.00 Greenfield Professional Firefig…321047 03/14/2024 Fire Union Dues 220-22410 103.75 G P O A 321045 03/14/2024 GPOA DUES 220-22410 800.00
OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL…321048 03/14/2024 Union Dues 220-22420 127.40 GREENFIELD POLICE SERGEAN… 321046 03/14/2024 GPSA DUES 220-22415 147.99 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 220-22225 1,494.20 8 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 5 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 220-22215 3,939.28 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 220-22215 16,843.92 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 220-22220 6,403.53 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 220-22210 15,675.18 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005948 03/19/2024 SDI 220-22225 2.75 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005949 03/19/2024 Medicare 220-22215 7.26 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005950 03/19/2024 Social Security 220-22215 31.00 Fund 220 - Supplemental Transactions & Use Tax Fund (V & W) Total: 50,427.06 Fund: 230 - GAS TAX FUND
MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 230-320-63700.000 1,320.00 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 STREET LIGHTING 230-320-64100.000 6,016.48 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 230-320-64100.000 483.58 SAN LORENZO LUMBER 321101 03/15/2024 LUMBER FOR TYLER RESERVO… 230-320-65700.000 2,747.73 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 MORRIS AVE - MEDIAN STIP 230-320-64300.000 25.34 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 208 EL CAMINO REAL MEDIAN 230-320-64300.000 25.34 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 131 S EL CAMINO REAL LS 230-320-64300.000 18.55 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 140 EL CAMINO REAL CENTER… 230-320-64300.000 25.34 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 110 EL CAMINO REAL CENTER… 230-320-64300.000 25.34 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 18 S EL CAMINO REAL-MEDIAN 230-320-64300.000 66.74 EL CAMINO ELECTRIC 320979 03/08/2024 TWO LED CORN COB LIGHTS I… 230-320-63700.000 1,245.20 Fund 230 - GAS TAX FUND Total: 11,999.64
Fund: 263 - LLM #1 - LEXINGTON
CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 411-A CARDONA CIRCLE 263-360-64300.000 64.62 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 0000 GIANOLINI PARKWAY 263-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 324 WILSON CIRCLE 263-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 400 CARDONA CIRCLE 263-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 326 WILSON CICLE 263-360-64300.000 150.60 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 LEXINGTON SQUARE SUBDIVIS…263-360-63700.000 1,695.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 MARIPOSA PLACE 263-360-63700.000 715.00 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 263-22420 3.92 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 263-22225 7.64 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 263-22215 20.14 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 263-22215 86.14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 263-22220 11.08 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 263-22210 38.94 Fund 263 - LLM #1 - LEXINGTON Total: 2,895.71
Fund: 264 - LLM #2 - TERRA VERDE, ETC
EL CAMINO ELECTRIC 320979 03/08/2024 LED HEAD LIGHT REPLACED BY…264-360-63700.000 760.58 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 STREET LIGHTING 264-360-64100.000 623.84 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 264-360-64100.000 341.93 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 321075 03/15/2024 PVC NIPPLE TBE 264-360-65700.000 32.05 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES - CENT… 264-360-65700.000 47.77 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 317 MORENO STREET 264-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 632 VAZQUEZ AVENUE 264-360-64300.000 60.61 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 246 BORZINI CIRCLE 264-360-64300.000 95.02 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 634 ST CHRISTOPHER LANE 264-360-64300.000 66.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 THORP/WALNUT TREE LINE 264-360-64300.000 66.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 200 RAVA PARKWAY PARK 264-360-64300.000 66.83 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 207 TUSCNY AVENUE PARK 264-360-64300.000 224.60 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 300 LAS MANZANITAS DRIVE 264-360-64300.000 63.32 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 355 THORP AVENUE - TREE LI… 264-360-64300.000 75.44 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 20 WALKER LANE ISLAND 264-360-64300.000 148.61 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 349 LAS MANZANITAS DRIVE … 264-360-64300.000 49.26 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 98 S EL CAMINO REAL/PARK 264-360-64300.000 0.04 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 264-360-65700.000 40.24 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 IRRIGATION PARTS - CENTENI… 264-360-65700.000 17.67 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 LA VINA SUBDIVISION 264-360-63700.000 3,510.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 TRADITIONS SUBDIVISION 264-360-63700.000 3,200.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 BAROLO PARK 264-360-63700.000 220.00 9 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 6 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 ST CHARLES LANDSCAPE AND … 264-360-63700.000 2,625.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 TERRA VERDE SUBDIVISION 264-360-63700.000 1,710.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 ST CHRISTOPHER PARK 264-360-63700.000 1,115.00 SMITH & ENRIGHT LANDSCAP… 321103 03/15/2024 ST CHARLES GAZEBO 264-360-63700.000 1,135.00 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 264-22420 3.92 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 264-22225 7.67 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 264-22215 20.22 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 264-22215 86.50 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 264-22220 11.10 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 264-22210 39.04 Fund 264 - LLM #2 - TERRA VERDE, ETC Total: 16,498.95
Fund: 265 - SMD #1
SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 265-22420 3.92 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 265-22225 7.64 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 265-22215 20.14 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 265-22215 86.14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 265-22220 11.08 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 265-22210 38.94 Fund 265 - SMD #1 Total: 167.86
Fund: 266 - SMD #2
SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 266-22420 3.93 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 266-22225 7.59 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 266-22215 20.02 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 266-22215 85.82 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 266-22220 11.03 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 266-22210 38.83 Fund 266 - SMD #2 Total: 167.22
Fund: 267 - Vintage Meadows LLMD #3
CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 10 PEPPER TREE COURT 267-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 33 REDWOOD WAY 267-360-64300.000 34.21 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 1284 SYCAMORE STREET 267-360-64300.000 34.21 Fund 267 - Vintage Meadows LLMD #3 Total: 102.63
Fund: 297 - GREENFIELD SCIENCE WORKSHOP
GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 PAINT 297-597-65900.000 38.27 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 297-597-64100.000 870.69 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 297-597-64200.000 232.22 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 920 WALNUT AVE - SCIENCE … 297-597-64300.000 66.74 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 45 EL CAMINO REAL 297-597-64300.000 51.16 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 45 EL CAMINO REAL 297-597-64400.000 119.49 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005935 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Management 297-22430 693.94 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 297-22225 178.77 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 297-22215 471.32 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 297-22215 2,015.24 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 297-22220 502.24 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 297-22210 1,394.59 Fund 297 - GREENFIELD SCIENCE WORKSHOP Total: 6,634.67
Fund: 385 - INTERNAL SERVICE
GOLDEN STATE TRUCK & TRAI… 320987 03/08/2024 8411 - RESET TRANSMISSION … 385-311-66200.000 656.43 STATE OF CA DEPT. OF JUSTICE 321017 03/08/2024 FINGERPRINT SERVICES - CITY… 385-160-68100.000 245.00 ALPHA AUTO BODY INC. 321052 03/15/2024 7925 - TAIL LAMP 385-311-65000.000 -10.00 NICK'S GARAGE 321006 03/08/2024 7340 - SUSPENSION REPAIR 385-311-66200.000 1,865.15 ALPHA AUTO BODY INC. 321052 03/15/2024 7340 - WINDSHIELD REPLACE… 385-311-66200.000 414.00 STANDARD INSURANCE COM 321105 03/15/2024 INSURANCE FY 2023-2024 385-180-52530.000 2,710.31 T-MOBILE 321111 03/15/2024 INTERNET BACKUP SERVICE 385-125-61700.000 65.60 EAST BAY TIRE CO. 320977 03/08/2024 7927 - FOUR NEW TIRES 385-311-65000.000 661.26 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM…320993 03/08/2024 8401 - BATTERIES 385-311-65000.000 479.12 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 7930 - OIL, CABIN FILTER 385-311-65000.000 26.03 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 7919 - AIR & OIL FILTER 385-311-65000.000 70.36 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 385-311-64200.000 178.59 10 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 7 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount RICKY SERRANO'S PLUMBING … 321096 03/15/2024 CY RELIEF VALVE INSTALLATI… 385-311-65900.000 244.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 7347 - OEM, CBIN FILTER 385-311-65000.000 30.08 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 7347 - MOTOR OIL 385-311-65000.000 39.37 SALINAS VALLEY FORD 321011 03/08/2024 7352 - SHIELD 385-311-65000.000 114.33 R G FABRICATION 321095 03/15/2024 THREAD 385-311-65700.000 18.27 MJJ COLLISION CENTER 321002 03/08/2024 7342 - ALIGNMENT 385-311-66200.000 50.00 AT&T 321054 03/15/2024 INTERNET SERVICE - COMMUN…385-125-61700.000 53.50 AT&T 321054 03/15/2024 INTERNET SERVICE - COMMUN…385-125-61700.000 85.60 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321008 03/08/2024 7343 - OIL, AIR & CABIN FILTER 385-311-65000.000 52.66 ROBIN WARBEY CONSULTING 321099 03/15/2024 IT CONSULTING SERVICES - FY …385-125-63200.000 3,150.00 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 UNIFORMS 385-311-65200.000 24.14 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 385-311-65600.000 29.98 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7914 - TOGGLE SWITCH 385-311-65000.000 40.87 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7936 - OIL, AIR FILTER 385-311-65000.000 83.29 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 CAP WRENCH 385-311-65700.000 8.75 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 321060 03/15/2024 INTERNET SERVICE 385-125-61700.000 544.90 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7937 - CABIN, OIL FILTER 385-311-65000.000 72.63 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 GREASE 385-311-65700.000 98.44 SHRED-IT USA 321014 03/08/2024 SHREDDING SERVICES - CITY … 385-160-63900.000 147.62 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7340 - ADJUST ARM 385-311-65000.000 254.08 MY JEEP-CHRYSLER-DODGE-R… 321087 03/15/2024 7340 - ARM UPPER 385-311-65000.000 252.59 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 321077 03/15/2024 8411 - SEALANT 385-311-65000.000 13.09 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7340 - CABIN FILTER 385-311-65000.000 14.44 DRIVE CUSTOMS 321069 03/15/2024 8410 - EMERGENCY EQUIPME… 385-311-66200.000 840.00 EL CAMINO ELECTRIC 320979 03/08/2024 NEW LIFT INSTALLATION 385-311-66300.000 2,800.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7340 - QUICK STRUT 385-311-65000.000 205.27 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7340 - ENGINE MOUNT 385-311-65000.000 47.13 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 7340 - BMPR RTNR 385-311-65000.000 10.05 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 UNIFORMS 385-311-65200.000 24.12 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 385-311-65600.000 30.27 DELL MARKETING, L.P. 321066 03/15/2024 GRANTS PC 385-125-65300.000 1,442.17 NAPA AUTO PARTS 321088 03/15/2024 7334 - VIRTUAL 385-311-65000.000 18.95 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 385-22420 34.72 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005935 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Management 385-22430 150.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005936 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Mid Management 385-22430 80.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 385-22430 60.00 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 385-22225 145.24 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 385-22215 382.88 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 385-22215 1,637.14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 385-22220 658.76 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 385-22210 1,536.78 Fund 385 - INTERNAL SERVICE Total: 22,887.96
Fund: 390 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT…390-390-89141.000 600.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 WALNUT AVE SIDEWALK/BIKE… 390-390-83141.000 6,215.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 12TH ST. FROM OAK TO ELM … 390-390-83146.000 14,882.26 GREENSHINE NEW ENERGY LLC 321078 03/15/2024 SIX - LUMINA 30W SYSTEM W… 390-390-89105.000 25,278.95 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 390-390-83145.000 300.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 390-390-89141.000 240.00 Fund 390 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Total: 47,516.21
Fund: 406 - Municipal Finance Corporation Debt Service - City KS STATEBANK 321083 03/15/2024 CONVERGINT CITYWIDE SURV… 406-900-91210.000 21,627.83 Fund 406 - Municipal Finance Corporation Debt Service - City Total: 21,627.83 Fund: 503 - SEWER FUND
MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 503-330-63700.000 240.00 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 WWTP DESIGN ENVIRONMEN… 503-390-89132.000 1,487.50 HACH COMPANY 320991 03/08/2024 WWTP PORTABLE pH/EC/TDS…503-335-65700.000 1,762.96 OFFICE DEPOT 321089 03/15/2024 OFFICE SUPPLIES - FINANCE D… 503-191-61400.000 88.69 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUI… 321022 03/08/2024 MIX OIL, TRIMMER LINE & SU… 503-335-65700.000 405.16 11 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 8 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 503-333-64100.000 1,572.69 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 503-335-64100.000 5,677.07 WALLACE GROUP 321118 03/15/2024 WWTP-COMPLIANCE AND PR… 503-335-63800.000 747.73 WALLACE GROUP 321023 03/08/2024 CCTV COORDINATION SUPPO… 503-390-85825.000 590.49 WALLACE GROUP 321023 03/08/2024 MIRA MONTE DEVELOPMENT… 503-333-73600.000 2,123.12 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 503-330-64300.000 81.55 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 503-330-64400.000 45.91 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 503-330-64400.000 130.57 A&G PUMPING 320963 03/08/2024 HAULED SLUDGE FROM WWT… 503-335-63800.000 9,000.00 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 UNIFORMS 503-333-65200.000 50.11 SWIFT TECTONICS, INC. 321109 03/15/2024 WWTP MOVE SAND AT PONDS 503-335-63800.000 2,198.92 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES 321114 03/15/2024 UTILITY BILLING ONLINE COM… 503-191-63300.000 37.50 XIO, INC. 321024 03/08/2024 CLOUD BASE MONITORING A… 503-333-61700.000 1,023.00 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 321091 03/15/2024 CLEANER 503-335-65700.000 56.36 WALLACE GROUP 321023 03/08/2024 CCTV COORDINATION SUPPO… 503-390-85825.000 780.00 SOUTH COUNTY TIRE, LLC 321104 03/15/2024 7730 - DISMOUNT $ INSTALL 3…503-335-66300.000 255.00 FLUID RESOURCE MANAGEM… 320983 03/08/2024 WASTEWATER OPERATION - J… 503-335-63800.000 9,854.77 CLEATH-HARRIS GEOLOGISTS, …321062 03/15/2024 QUARTELY GROUNDWATER … 503-335-63800.000 3,488.70 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 UNIFORMS 503-333-65200.000 55.81 SOUTH COUNTY TIRE, LLC 321104 03/15/2024 7730 - TWO NEW TIRES 503-335-66300.000 4,379.96 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321086 03/15/2024 CITY ENGINEERING SERVICES 503-330-63700.000 480.00 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE DFT0005947 03/15/2024 February 2024 503-22440 20.58 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 503-22420 120.82 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005930 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 503-22430 105.59 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005935 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Management 503-22430 70.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 503-22430 37.51 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 503-22225 160.45 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 503-22215 423.04 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 503-22215 1,808.50 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 503-22220 506.60 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 503-22210 1,319.19 Fund 503 - SEWER FUND Total: 51,185.85
Fund: 504 - WATER FUND
G&C CONSULTING, INC. 320986 03/08/2024 GM SERVICES 504-12392 3,000.00 G&C CONSULTING, INC. 320986 03/08/2024 GM SERVICES 504-390-86206.000 3,000.00 QUINN COMPANY 321010 03/08/2024 9802 - VEE BELT 504-345-66300.000 273.94 GRAINGER 320988 03/08/2024 TWO LOCKERS FOR NEW EMP… 504-345-65700.000 827.69 FAMCON PIPE SANTA MARIA, …320982 03/08/2024 OAK AVENUE BOOSTER STATI… 504-345-66500.000 4,865.09 MNS ENGINEERS, INC. 321003 03/08/2024 APPLE AVENUE FARM HOUSI… 504-390-86210.000 2,120.00 QUINN COMPANY 321010 03/08/2024 9800 - TROUBLESHOOT GENE… 504-345-66300.000 701.28 OFFICE DEPOT 321089 03/15/2024 OFFICE SUPPLIES - FINANCE D… 504-191-61400.000 88.68 FLUID RESOURCE MANAGEM… 321073 03/15/2024 PUMP TUBES FOR 120V PUMP…504-345-63900.000 160.00 FLUID RESOURCE MANAGEM… 321073 03/15/2024 PUMP TUBES FOR 120V PUMP…504-345-66500.000 1,506.03 METER VALVE & CONTROL INC 321000 03/08/2024 25 REMOTE ANTENAS AND 5"… 504-345-65700.000 1,347.95 NV5, INC. 321007 03/08/2024 APPLE AVENUE WATER SYST… 504-390-86210.000 596.50 SAN BENITO SUPPLY 321013 03/08/2024 BASE ROCK - WATER SERVICE 504-345-65700.000 433.44 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 321092 03/15/2024 MONTHLY UTILITIES 504-345-64100.000 11,407.42 SOUTH COUNTY TIRE, LLC 321104 03/15/2024 REAR TIRE 504-345-66300.000 197.01 WALLACE GROUP 321023 03/08/2024 MIRA MONTE DEVELOPMENT… 504-345-73600.000 2,123.13 GREEN RUBBER-KENNEDY AG 321075 03/15/2024 BALL VALVE 504-345-65700.000 53.15 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 SINGLE SIDED KEYS 504-345-65100.000 48.00 GREENFIELD TRUE VALUE 320990 03/08/2024 INTERPRETING SERVICES - CITY…504-345-65100.000 -12.00 A TOOL SHED, INC. 320962 03/08/2024 COMPACTOR RENTAL - WATER…504-345-65700.000 117.60 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 CITY WIDE FIRE HYDRANT FLU… 504-340-64300.000 108.14 CITY OF GREENFIELD 320973 03/08/2024 520 TENTH STREET 504-340-64400.000 130.57 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 320972 03/08/2024 UNIFORMS 504-345-65200.000 71.08 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES 321114 03/15/2024 UTILITY BILLING ONLINE COM… 504-191-63300.000 37.50 SAN BENITO SUPPLY 321100 03/15/2024 UTILITY SAND - WATER SERVI… 504-345-65700.000 388.76 BADGER METER, INC. 321055 03/15/2024 FOUR 2" METERS FOR REPLAC… 504-345-65700.000 3,790.84 XIO, INC. 321024 03/08/2024 CLOUD BASE MONITORING A… 504-345-61700.000 1,023.00 12 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 9 of 14
Vendor Name Payment Number Payment Date Description (Item) Account Number Amount G&C CONSULTING, INC. 321074 03/15/2024 GM SERVICES 504-12392 3,000.00 G&C CONSULTING, INC. 321074 03/15/2024 GM SERVICES 504-390-86206.000 3,000.00 A TOOL SHED, INC. 321050 03/15/2024 RAMMER COMPACTOR RENT… 504-345-63900.000 117.60 VALLEY SAW & GARDEN EQUI… 321116 03/15/2024 7825 - PARTS 504-345-66300.000 268.48 XIO, INC. 321024 03/08/2024 SCADA SYSTEM UPGRADE PRO…504-390-85805.000 10,600.00 CINTAS CORPORATION #630 321061 03/15/2024 UNIFORMS 504-345-65200.000 55.81 METER VALVE & CONTROL INC 321000 03/08/2024 25 REMOTE ANTENAS AND 5"… 504-345-65700.000 2,767.89 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE DFT0005947 03/15/2024 February 2024 504-22440 20.58 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 COPE - Union Dues 504-22420 9.79 SEIU Local 521 321049 03/14/2024 Union Dues 504-22420 187.51 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005930 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 504-22430 105.59 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005935 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Management 504-22430 70.00 STATE STREET BANK & TRUST … DFT0005937 03/15/2024 Defer Comp-Misc Employees 504-22430 37.49 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005942 03/15/2024 SDI 504-22225 233.74 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005943 03/15/2024 Medicare 504-22215 616.28 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005944 03/15/2024 Social Security 504-22215 2,635.14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDD DFT0005945 03/15/2024 State Withholding 504-22220 690.02 Internal Revenue Service DFT0005946 03/15/2024 Federal Tax Withholding 504-22210 1,684.50 Fund 504 - WATER FUND Total: 64,505.22
Grand Total: 781,510.72
13 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 10 of 14
Report Summary
Fund Summary
Fund Payment Amount
100 - GENERAL FUND 440,291.17
102 - Fire General 38,694.04
105 - Community Outreach 1,996.18
200 - SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 3,912.52
220 - Supplemental Transactions & Use Tax Fund (V & W) 50,427.06 230 - GAS TAX FUND 11,999.64
263 - LLM #1 - LEXINGTON 2,895.71
264 - LLM #2 - TERRA VERDE, ETC 16,498.95
265 - SMD #1 167.86
266 - SMD #2 167.22
267 - Vintage Meadows LLMD #3 102.63
297 - GREENFIELD SCIENCE WORKSHOP 6,634.67
385 - INTERNAL SERVICE 22,887.96
390 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 47,516.21
406 - Municipal Finance Corporation Debt Service - City 21,627.83 503 - SEWER FUND 51,185.85
504 - WATER FUND 64,505.22
Grand Total: 781,510.72
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
100-101-63100.000 Administration Services 1,006.00
100-101-68300.000 Memberships 50.00
100-110-63900.000 General Services 126.00
100-111-63700.000 Public Works Services 712.50
100-111-64300.000 Water Utility 202.25
100-111-64400.000 Waste Disposal 37.16
100-111-65600.000 Janitorial Supplies 149.25
100-111-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 30.70
100-111-65900.000 Building Maintenance S… 2,440.61
100-190-61400.000 Office Supplies 58.36
100-191-64400.000 Waste Disposal 250,951.46
100-201-61400.000 Office Supplies 1,984.63
100-201-63900.000 General Services 485.00
100-201-65100.000 General Operating Suppl… 80.00
100-201-67200.000 Other Training 334.00
100-201-68300.000 Memberships 65.00
100-215-63400.000 Police Services 1,107.59
100-215-64500.000 Phone Charges 1,012.00
100-215-65100.000 General Operating Suppl… 119.06
100-215-65200.000 Uniforms/Personnel Equ… 2,589.43
100-215-65400.000 Police Supplies 109.48
100-215-67200.000 Other Training 276.00
100-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 12,339.75
100-22215 FICA Payable 18,798.60
100-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 4,633.55
100-22225 S.D.I. Payable 1,341.77
100-22410 G.P.O.A. Union Dues Pay… 320.00
100-22415 G.P.S.A. Union Dues Pay… 152.01
100-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 368.61
100-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 3,455.58
100-22431 Roth 2,272.50
100-22435 PERS Loan Payable 790.20
100-22440 AFLAC Insurance Payable 2,026.66
100-22481 POLICE AMMUNITION 154.89
100-22495 Planning Deposit- 4th St… 1,672.00
100-22496 Planning Deposit- EAH D… 1,520.00
14 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 11 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
100-22512 Planning Deposits -296 … 4,974.44
100-22537 Planning Deposits - Mira… 152.00
100-22538 Planning Deposits - 447 … 836.00
100-22555 Planning Deposits - 216 … 152.00
100-25105 Building Deposits – Cons… 11,367.68
100-26001 Suspense Account 17.82
100-26173 Cannabis Compliance De… 456.00
100-26174 Cannabis Compliance De… 76.00
100-310-61400.000 Office Supplies 114.87
100-310-63700.000 Public Works Services 900.00
100-310-67100.000 Meetings & Conferences 118.00
100-320-63700.000 Public Works Services 1,080.00
100-320-64300.000 Water Utility 765.00
100-320-64400.000 Waste Disposal 1,008.51
100-320-65100.000 General Operating Suppl… 175.35
100-320-65200.000 Uniforms / Personnel Eq… 163.17
100-320-66300.000 General Operations Equi… 1,074.07
100-320-71500.000 Parks/Public Works Equi… 3,655.44
100-43440.000 Other City Fines 60.00
100-550-64100.000 Electricity 68.42
100-550-64300.000 Water Utility 804.59
100-550-64400.000 Waste Disposal 222.40
100-550-65200.000 Uniforms/Personnel Equ… 163.17
100-550-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 73.02
100-550-66300.000 General Operations Equi… 1,643.20
100-551-63500.000 Recreation Services 3,007.94
100-551-64100.000 Electricity 306.15
100-551-64200.000 Gas Utility 166.70
100-551-64300.000 Water Utility 309.27
100-551-64400.000 Waste Disposal 105.86
100-551-65900.000 Building Maintenance S… 2,861.84
100-590-64100.000 Electricity 466.75
100-590-64200.000 Gas Utility 235.37
100-590-64300.000 Water Utility 81.66
100-601-63600.000 Community Developmen… 86,521.00
100-601-63700.000 General Engineering Serv… 425.00
100-601-67100.000 Meetings & Conferences 1,909.88
102-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 5,714.25
102-22215 FICA Payable 6,822.34
102-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 2,773.11
102-22225 S,D.I Payable 490.49
102-22410 Union Dues Payable 211.25
102-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 470.70
102-22450 Wage Garnishments Pay… 346.15
102-250-64300.000 Water Utility 217.36
102-250-64400.000 Waste Disposal 289.72
102-250-65200.000 Uniforms/Personnel Equ… 403.08
102-250-65400.000 Firefighter Supplies/Prev… 929.99
102-250-65600.000 Jantorial Supplies 52.74
102-250-66300.000 General Operations Equi… 7,638.32
102-250-67200.000 Other Training 8,663.03
102-250-67300.003 Other Meals & Travel 903.00
102-250-67400.000 Certifications 150.00
102-250-67800.000 Tuition Fees 450.00
102-250-68300.000 Memberships 100.00
102-250-95690.000 Vehicle Replacement All… 2,068.51
105-105-67200.000 Other Training 112.02
105-105-68200.000 Community Outreach 300.00
15 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 12 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
105-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 386.40
105-22215 FICA Payable 971.64
105-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 156.27
105-22225 S.D.I. Payable 69.85
200-205-65100.000 General Operating Suppl… 1,307.01
200-205-67200.000 Other Training 1,325.22
200-205-71400.000 Police Equipment 1,280.29
220-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 15,675.18
220-22215 FICA Payable 20,821.46
220-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 6,403.53
220-22225 S.D.I. Payable 1,496.95
220-22410 G.P.O.A. Union Dues Pay… 903.75
220-22415 G.P.S.A. Union Dues Pay… 147.99
220-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 127.40
220-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 3,850.80
220-605-65200.000 Uniforms/Personnel Equ… 1,000.00
230-320-63700.000 Public Works Services 2,565.20
230-320-64100.000 Electricity 6,500.06
230-320-64300.000 Water Utility 186.65
230-320-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 2,747.73
263-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 38.94
263-22215 FICA Payable 106.28
263-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 11.08
263-22225 S.D.I. Payable 7.64
263-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 3.92
263-360-63700.000 Public Works Services 2,410.00
263-360-64300.000 Water Utility 317.85
264-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 39.04
264-22215 FICA Payable 106.72
264-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 11.10
264-22225 S.D.I. Payable 7.67
264-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 3.92
264-360-63700.000 Public Works Services 14,275.58
264-360-64100.000 Electricity 965.77
264-360-64300.000 Water Utility 951.42
264-360-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 137.73
265-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 38.94
265-22215 FICA Payable 106.28
265-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 11.08
265-22225 S.D.I. Payable 7.64
265-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 3.92
266-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 38.83
266-22215 FICA Payable 105.84
266-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 11.03
266-22225 S.D.I. Payable 7.59
266-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 3.93
267-360-64300.000 Water Utility 102.63
297-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 1,394.59
297-22215 FICA Payable 2,486.56
297-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 502.24
297-22225 S.D.I. Payable 178.77
297-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 693.94
297-597-64100.000 Electricity 870.69
297-597-64200.000 Gas Utility 232.22
297-597-64300.000 Water Utility 117.90
297-597-64400.000 Waste Disposal 119.49
297-597-65900.000 Building Maintenance S… 38.27
385-125-61700.000 Software Maintenance C… 749.60
16 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 13 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
385-125-63200.000 Technology Services 3,150.00
385-125-65300.000 Technology Supplies 1,442.17
385-160-63900.000 General Services 147.62
385-160-68100.000 Recruitment 245.00
385-180-52530.000 Long-Term Disability Ins… 2,710.31
385-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 1,536.78
385-22215 FICA Payable 2,020.02
385-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 658.76
385-22225 S.D.I. Payable 145.24
385-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 34.72
385-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 290.00
385-311-64200.000 Gas Utility 178.59
385-311-65000.000 Vehicle & Equip. Parts & … 2,475.60
385-311-65200.000 Uniforms / Personnel Eq… 48.26
385-311-65600.000 Janitorial Supplies 60.25
385-311-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 125.46
385-311-65900.000 Building Maintenance S… 244.00
385-311-66200.000 Vehicle and Equipment … 3,825.58
385-311-66300.000 General Operations Equi… 2,800.00
390-390-83141.000 Walnut Avenue Pedestri… 6,215.00
390-390-83145.000 Traffic Master Plan 300.00
390-390-83146.000 2306 12th Street Improv… 14,882.26
390-390-89105.000 City Surveillance System 25,278.95
390-390-89141.000 New Community Center 840.00
406-900-91210.000 Principal 21,627.83
503-191-61400.000 Office Supplies 88.69
503-191-63300.000 Financial Services 37.50
503-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 1,319.19
503-22215 FICA Payable 2,231.54
503-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 506.60
503-22225 S.D.I. Payable 160.45
503-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 120.82
503-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 213.10
503-22440 AFLAC Insurance Payable 20.58
503-330-63700.000 Public Works Services 720.00
503-330-64300.000 Water Utility 81.55
503-330-64400.000 Waste Disposal 176.48
503-333-61700.000 Software Maintenance C… 1,023.00
503-333-64100.000 Electricity 1,572.69
503-333-65200.000 Uniforms/Personnel Equ… 105.92
503-333-73600.000 Studies 2,123.12
503-335-63800.000 Sewer & Water Services 25,290.12
503-335-64100.000 Electricity 5,677.07
503-335-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 2,224.48
503-335-66300.000 General Equipment Ope… 4,634.96
503-390-85825.000 CCTV Sewer Collection S… 1,370.49
503-390-89132.000 New WWTP Environmen… 1,487.50
504-12392 Clark Colony-GSP Prepar… 6,000.00
504-191-61400.000 Office Supplies 88.68
504-191-63300.000 Financial Services 37.50
504-22210 Federal Withholding Tax… 1,684.50
504-22215 FICA Payable 3,251.42
504-22220 State Withholding Tax P… 690.02
504-22225 S.D.I. Payable 233.74
504-22420 S.E.I.U. Union Dues Paya… 197.30
504-22430 Deferred Comp Payable 213.08
504-22440 AFLAC Insurance Payable 20.58
504-340-64300.000 Water Utility 108.14
17 Expense Approval Report Payment Dates: 3/8/2024 - 3/21/2024 3/22/2024 3:49:25 PM Page 14 of 14
Account Summary
Account Number Account Name Payment Amount
504-340-64400.000 Waste Disposal 130.57
504-345-61700.000 Software Maintenance C… 1,023.00
504-345-63900.000 General Services 277.60
504-345-64100.000 Electricity 11,407.42
504-345-65100.000 General Operating Suppl… 36.00
504-345-65200.000 Uniforms / Personnel Eq… 126.89
504-345-65700.000 Public Works Supplies 9,727.32
504-345-66300.000 General Operations Equi… 1,440.71
504-345-66500.000 Water Operations Equi… 6,371.12
504-345-73600.000 Studies 2,123.13
504-390-85805.000 Scada System 10,600.00
504-390-86206.000 GSA - GSP Implementati… 6,000.00
504-390-86210.000 Apple Avenue Consolidat… 2,716.50
Grand Total: 781,510.72
Project Account Summary
Project Account Key Payment Amount
**None** 781,510.72
Grand Total: 781,510.72
18 City Council Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page | 1

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2024

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor White called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mayor White, Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, Councilmembers Martinez, Ortiz and Tipton
ABSENT: None
STAFF: City Manager Wood, Chief of Police Mixer, Public Works Director Tugel, IT Director Espinosa, City Attorney Thompson, City Clerk Rathbun GUESTS: Gail Stewart-White, Pastor Robert Mullen

INVOCATION
Invocation by Pastor Robert Mullen.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
All recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

AGENDA REVIEW
No changes made.

PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Chief Mixer gave his condolences to the families affected by the tragedy in King City. He stated that Greenfield Police had been very active with King City as well as the Sheriff’s Department and Highway Patrol. He stated that this tragedy had brought all the cities together. He announced that this weekend was opening day for the Greenfield Little League and there would be extra patrol on duty. He also announced that there would be a DUI check point this weekend.

COMMENTS FROM CITY COUNCIL
Councilmember Tipton thanked all the first responders and stated that thoughts and prayers were going out to King City and the families affected. He stated that the SNIP bus had been in Greenfield providing spay and neuter services and reminded everyone that it was the law to alter their cats and dogs. He stated that stop signs were not optional and reminded everyone walking and riding their bikes at night time to not wear dark clothing. He stated that the EAH housing project was moving forward and wanted to know how many of the units were two story. He announced that the Greenfield Police Department had been citing semi-truck drivers for turning left on Walnut Avenue. He stated that some of the Planning Commissioners attended the Planning Commission Academy last week. He congratulated Chantel Vega for being selected the Firefighter of the Year for Monterey County.

Councilmember Martinez stated that she would like to highlight two non-profit organizations, first, Organización Mariposa. She stated that they held their annual conference for families with special needs 19 City Council Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page | 2
at Vista Verde on March 2nd. She asked if staff could reach out to them and help them. She stated that the other organization was Lideres Campesinas. She stated that they help people in need and were very active in the community. She thanked Chief Mixer and the Greenfield Police Department for all the help that they had provided King City. She stated that she attended Career Day at Cesar Chavez School and the kids were excited and told her that they wanted to see more housing, stores, services for homeless people and another middle school. She stated that she was receiving complaints about students harassing the seniors at the Magnolia apartments and asked if staff could work with the school to help with the situation. She stated that she would not be attending the next City Council meeting due to her husband’s surgery.

Councilmember Ortiz stated that she noticed that they were digging holes at the park to put the cameras in the park and was glad because there was a lot of activity there. She stated that she attended the vigil in King City and it was very emotional and stated that the pastors were united. She stated that everyone needed to look out for one another and asked if the City could help King City in any way. She stated that King City Little League had opening day and there was a very low attendance because people were Scared. She stated that residents were moving in April to the Magnolia II apartments and some people might need help if any was interested in helping them. She announced that TAMC was recruiting bus drivers and hiring people on the spot. She thanked the police officers for going above and beyond in King City.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez thanked all the law enforcement for helping in King City. She stated that her heart goes out to all the families that were affected by the tragedy. She thanked City Manager Wood for his video of the highlights of the Council meeting and stated that it had been viewed more than 600 times, which showed that people were interested in what was going on.

Mayor White thanked the staff at Arroyo Seco Academy for allowing him to attend Career Day. He announced the following events: the Women’s Empowerment conference on May 18th sponsored by the Rotary; Avila Boxing would be having a boxing event on April 6th and 7th; the Easter Event at Patriot Park on March 23rd from 3-6 p.m. and the Market at the Gazebo would be starting on Saturday, March 23rd.

He also stated that Sober Grad was still seeking donations.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez asked that an item regarding donation to Sober Grad be added to the next agenda.

PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Gabriella Serrato stated that she had attended the meetings for the last 11 months and had noticed that Councilmember Martinez had missed several meetings. She stated that she knew that Councilmember Martinez had gone through a lot this year; however, at some point she needed to consider stepping down as a Councilmember if it was affecting the community. She stated that while reviewing the Council’s policies this should be reviewed as well as the Council’s social media policies. She stated that she admired the profession that Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez had, a counselor. She stated that she was a role model in that capacity as well as a Councilmember. She stated that every time Mayor Pro-tem Rodrigez made a decision, spoke up or was silent she was taking a stance. She stated that accountability was uncomfortable but necessary for growth. She stated that she chose her words very carefully and that was why she chose survivor instead of victim and she knew survivors could not appreciate a Councilmember writing a letter in support for a child’s sex offender.

Beatriz Diaz thanked City Manager Wood for his Council meeting summary. She asked why Councilmember Martinez’s absence was not excused and asked that the vote be rescinded. She also stated that Gabby Serrato comments during the meetings; however, she was not a member of the community,
20 City Council Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page | 3
Laura Mireles requested that restrooms be built for the northside of Patriot Park and lights be installed there as well. She invited the Council and public to the soccer event this Saturday at Patriot Park.

CONSENT ITEMS
A MOTION by Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, seconded by Councilmember Tipton to approve the consent items including Warrants #320863 through #320956 and Bank Drafts #5906 through #5929 in the amount of $2,229,769.64 and approve Minutes of the February 27, 2024 City Council Meeting. All in favor. Motion carried.

MAYOR’S PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, RESOLUTIONS.

PROCLAMATION – A PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING MARCH 2024 AS AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH
Mayor White read the proclamation proclaiming March 2024 as American Red Cross Month.

Patsy Gasca, American Red Cross, thanked the City Council for the proclamation and gave a brief description of the services that they provide.

PRESENTATION – BY JOHN ERICKSON, PHD, PE, COMMUNITY WATER CENTER John Erikson, Community Water Center, gave a power point presentation.

Saul Cardona, property owner, stated that there had been water issues on his property and the other properties for many years and would like to work together to find a solution.

Avery Pura, property owner, stated that she looked forward to working together to find a solution for the water issues.

UPDATE – WELCOME TO GREENFIELD SIGNS
Public Works Director Tugel gave an update on the Welcome to Greenfield Signs.

CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS

ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING A PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT WITH CLOACINA LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,083,973.90 FOR

THE ACQUISITION OF A PACKAGED MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR TREATMENT (MBR) SYSTEM FOR THE NEW WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND APPROPRIATE $150,000 IN

SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS FOR PHASE I OF THIS AGREEMENT AS REQUIRED AND AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT RESOLUTION #2023-20

ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING AMENDMENT #1 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HYDROSCIENCE ENGINEERS IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $647,037.00 AND APPROPRIATE

SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS AS REQUIRED FOR THE NEW WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

DESIGN SERVICES AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER

TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
RESOLUTION #2023-21
Staff report was given by Public Works Director Tugel and Engineer Tony Nisich. 21 City Council Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page | 4
There was discussion among Council and staff regarding the design of the MBR system for the wastewater treatment plan. Public Works Director Tugel stated that at this time the Council was not approving the $31,000,00 but only the $150,00 and the $647,037. She stated that once this project was completed, the City would be in compliance with the State.

A MOTION by Councilmember Ortiz, seconded by Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez to adopt Resolution #2023-20, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Approving a Procurement Agreement with CLOACINA LLC, in the Amount of $31,083,973.90 for the Acquisition of a Packaged Membrane Bioreactor Treatment (MBR) System for the New Wastewater Treatment Plant and Appropriate $150,000 in Supplemental Funds for Phase I of this Agreement as Required and Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute this Agreement”. All in favor. Motion carried.

A MOTION by Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, seconded by Councilmember Tipton to adopt Resolution #2024-21, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Approving Amendment #1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Hydroscience Engineers in the Not-to-Exceed Amount of $647,037.00 and Appropriate Supplemental Funds as Required for the New Wastewater Treatment Plant Design Services and Related Improvements and Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute this Agreement Amendment”. All in favor. Motion carried.

ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD TO SUPPLEMENTALLY APPROPRIATE $124,700 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR PUBLIC

WORKS EXPENDITURES
RESOLUTION #2024-22
Staff report was given by City Manager Wood.

A MOTION by Councilmember Tipton, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz to adopt Resolution #2024- 22, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield to Supplementally Appropriate $124,700 for the Fiscal Year 2023-2024 for Public Works Expenditures”. All in favor. Motion carried.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
CLOSED SESSION – GOVERNMENT CODE SESSION 54956.9
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (2) OF THE SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
1-CASE: BROWN ACT DEMAND TO CURE AND CORRECT FROM ANDREW SANDOVAL No comments were received.

Meeting adjourned to closed session at 7:21 p.m.

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
Meeting reconvened to open session at 7:34 p.m.

No action was taken.
22 City Council Minutes
March 12, 2024
Page | 5

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None.

CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Wood stated that he attended Career Day for 4th graders at Arroyo Seco Academy.

ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
_________________________
Mayor of the City of Greenfield
____________________________
City Clerk of the City of Greenfield
23 DEPOSITORY MATURITY DATE INTEREST RATE DOLLAR/PAR AMOUNT MARKET VALUE State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Immediate 14,197,678 $ 14,197,678 $ Laif Interest (October - December 2023) 4.00% 142,632 $ $ 142,632 Total State of California $ 14,340,310 $ 14,340,310
Wells Fargo Bank Checking Account Pool Cash Immediate $ 1,916,828 $ 1,916,828 Total Wells Fargo Bank $ 1,916,828 $ 1,916,828N/A Petty Cash General Immediate $ 1,531 $ 1,531 N/A Petty Cash Police Immediate $ 500 $ 500
Total Petty Cash $ 2,031 $ 2,031
Pro Equities Cash Balance Cash, Money Funds and Bank Deposits $ 3,158 $ 3,158 Pro Equities Money Market Dreyfus Govt Cash Mngt Inv Sh 4.97% $ 542,370 $ 542,370 Pro Equities Bond Federal Home Ln Bks Cons Bd 0.370% 3/8/2024 0.37% $ 570,000 $ 569,436 Pro Equities Treasury Notes United Sts Treas NTS 0.250% 6/15/2024 0.25% $ 600,000 $ 591,234 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit California CR UN Glendale CALIF SH CTF 4.850% 12/27/2024 4.85% $ 244,000 $ 243,456 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit First Natl Bk Damriscotta ME Ctf 0.950% 12/30/2024 0.95% $ 249,000 $ 240,654Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Medallion BK Salt Lake City Utah CTF DEP 4.500% 12/30/2024 4.50% $ 249,000 $ 247,850Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Third Fed SVGS & LN ASSN of Cleveland CTF DEP 0.900% 12/30/2024 0.90% $ 248,000 $ 239,613Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Morgan Stanley Bk NA Salt Lake City Utah Ctf Dep 1.800% 2/13/2025 1.80% $ 247,000 $ 239,568 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Morgan Stanley Private Bk Natl Assn PUR NY Ctf Dep 1.800% 2/13/2025 1.80% $ 247,000 $ 239,568 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Technology CR UN SAN JOSE CALIF SH CTF 5.000% 2/24/2025 5.00% $ 248,000 $ 247,916 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Valley Strong CR UN Bakersfield CALIF SH CTF 4.800% 6/23/2025 4.80% $ 249,000 $ 248,656 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Gesa CR UN Richland WA SH CTF 5.500% 7/31/2025 5.50% $ 248,000 $ 250,083 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Chartway Fed CR UN VA Beach VA SH CTF 5.250% 8/11/2025 5.25% $ 248,000 $ 249,334 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Townebank Portsmouth VA CTF DEP 5.050% 8/11/2025 5.05% $ 243,000 $ 243,518 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Connexus Cr UN Wausau WIS SH Ctf 3.500% 08/26/25 8/26/2025 3.50% $ 249,000 $ 244,167 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Community West CR UN Kentwood MICH CTF 4.650% 12/19/2025 4.65% $ 249,000 $ 248,574 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit First FND TN BK Irvine CA CTF DEP 4.450% 12/22/2025 4.45% $ 244,000 $ 242,619 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Security ST BK Warroad MINN CTF DEP 4.250% 12/22/2025 4.25% $ 249,000 $ 246,856 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Eaglebank Bethesda MD CTF DEP 4.400% 12/23/2025 4.40% $ 249,000 $ 247,506Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Flagstar BK NATL ASSN HICKSVILLE NEW YORK CTF DEP 4.650% 12/23/2025 4.65% $ 244,000 $ 243,544Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit First BK Hamilton New Jersey CTF DEP 4.450% 12/26/2025 4.45% $ 244,000 $ 242,709Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Bankers BK Madison WIS CTF DEP 4.350% 6/29/2026 4.35% $ 249,000 $ 248,051 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Synchrony Bk Retail Ctf Dep Fidelity Instl Ctf Dep 1.200% 11/30/2026 1.20% $ 248,000 $ 228,036Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Sallie Mae Bk Salt Lake City UT Ctf Dep 1.350% 12/15/2026 1.35% $ 248,000 $ 228,812Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Austin Telco Fed CR UN Tex SH CTF 4.590% 12/16/2026 4.95% $ 248,000 $ 252,223Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit All In Fed CR UN Daleville AL SH CTF 4.450% 12/21/2026 4.45% $ 249,000 $ 249,998Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit DORT FINL CR UN Grand Blanc MI SH CTF 4.400% 12/21/2026 4.40% $ 247,000 $ 247,647 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit State Bk India New York NY Ctf Dep 1.400% 12/30/2026 1.40% $ 248,000 $ 228,996 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Texas Exchange Bk Crowley Ctf Dep 1.300% 12/30/2026 1.30% $ 249,000 $ 229,165Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit First UTD BK & TR CO DURANT OK CTF DEP 4.000% 2/8/2027 4.00% $ 249,000 $ 247,391 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Latino CMNTY CR UN Durham North Carolina SH CTF 4.500% 12/21/2027 4.50% $ 249,000 $ 252,349Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Ideal CR UN Woodbury MN SH CTF 4.500% 12/29/2027 4.50% $ 249,000 $ 252,411 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit US Alliance FCU RYE New York SH CTF 4.750% 12/30/2027 4.75% $ 248,000 $ 253,602Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Liberty First CR UN LINCOLN NEB SH CTF 4.350% 2/3/2028 4.35% $ 249,000 $ 251,239 Pro Equities Certificates of Deposit Maine SVGS FCU Hampden ME SH CTF 4.800% 7/21/2028 4.80% $ 249,000 $ 256,228 Total Pro Equities $ 9,642,528 $ 9,538,537
TOTAL Cash and Investments $ 25,901,697 $ 25,797,707

CITY OF GREENFIELD
Cash & Investment Report
At February 29, 2024

DESCRIPTION OF SECURITY
24 TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul Wood, City Manager
DATE: March 22, 2024
SUBJECT: INITIATIVE NO. 21-0042A1, THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION

AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
I. SUMMARY
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act would revise the California Constitution with provisions that limit voters’ authority and input, adopt new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and may make it more difficult to impose fines and penalties for violation of state and local laws.

The measure puts billions of local government tax and fee revenues at risk statewide with related core public service impacts.

The measure could have significant negative impacts on City of Greenfield operations and core service delivery.

The proposed constitutional initiative is sponsored by the California Business Roundtable.

Full text of Ballot Initiative
II. MAJOR PROVISIONS
Fees and Charges1:
• Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence. • Requires fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property and the amount paid to purchase or rent government property to be “reasonable.” These fees and charges are currently allowed to be market-based. Whether the amount is “reasonable” 1 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pgs.4-6; Section 1 (a)-(j)
City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591
25 (introducing a new legal standard aiming to force below market fee and charge amounts) must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.”2 The standard may significantly reduce the amount large companies (e.g., oil, utilities, gas, railroads, garbage/refuse, cable, and other corporations) will pay for the use of local public property. • Prohibits fees on new development based on vehicle miles traveled.

Taxes3:
• Taxes and fees adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted4.
• Invalidates Upland decision that allows a majority of local voters to pass special taxes.

The measure specifies that taxes proposed by the initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council.
• Expressly prohibits local advisory measures which allow local voters to express a preference for how local general tax dollars should be spent.5 • Requires voter approval to expand existing taxes (e.g., Utility, Transient Occupancy) to new territory (e.g., annexations) or to expand the tax base (e.g., new utility service) • New taxes can only be imposed for a specific time period. • City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • All state taxes require majority voter approval.

Fines and Penalties6:
• May require voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.

III. DISCUSSION/ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
On Jan. 4, 2022, the California Business Roundtable filed the “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act” or AG# 21-0042A1. On Feb. 1, 2023, the measure qualified for the November 2024 ballot.
2 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pg.5; (3))
3 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pgs.4-6; Section 1 (a)-(j)
4 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pg.7; Section 6 (Sec. 2)(g) 5 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pg.6 (3))
6 Initiative No. 21-0042A1 (pg. 5 (4))
26 The League of California Cities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses, strongly opposes this initiative.

Local government revenue-raising authority is currently substantially restricted by state statute and constitutional provisions, including the voter approved provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978, Proposition 218 of 1996, and Proposition 26 of 2010. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act adds and expands restrictions on voters and local government tax and fee authority.

Fees and Taxes
Local governments levy a variety of fees and other charges to provide core public services.

Major examples of affected fees and charges are:
• Nuisance abatement charges, such as for weed, rubbish, and general nuisance abatement to fund community safety, code enforcement, and neighborhood cleanup programs. • Commercial franchise fees.
• Emergency response fees, such as in connection with DUI. • Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport charges.
• Document processing and duplication fees.
• Transit fees, tolls, parking fees, and public airport and harbor use fees. • Facility use charges, fees for parks and recreation services, garbage disposal tipping fees.

Virtually every city, county, and special district must regularly (e.g., annually) adopt increases to fee rates and charges and revise rate schedules to accommodate new users and activities. Most of these would be subject to new standards and limitations under threat of legal challenge. Based on the current volume of fees and charges imposed by local agencies, including council-adopted increases to simply accommodate inflation, Cal Cities estimates the amount of local government fee and charge revenue at risk is approximately $2 billion per year including those adopted since Jan. 1, 2022. Over ten years, $20 billion of local government fee and charge revenues will be at heightened legal peril.

Hundreds of local tax measures were approved in 20227
that likely do not comply with the
provisions of the initiative. Nearly $2 billion of annual revenues from these voter-approved measures will cease a year after the effective date of the measure, reducing the local public services funded by these measures, unless the tax is re-submitted for voter approval.

Reductions on local government tax revenues have impacts on core services and infrastructure including fire and emergency response, law enforcement, streets and roads, drinking water, sewer sanitation, parks, libraries, affordable housing, homelessness prevention, and mental health services.
7 http://www.californiacityfinance.com/Votes2211final.pdf 27 Fines and Penalties
Under existing law, cities are required to provide due process before imposing a penalty or fine for violation of its municipal code:

1. A local agency must adopt administrative procedures that govern imposing fines and penalties, including providing a reasonable period of time for a person responsible for a continuing violation to correct or remedy the violation [Gov't Code 53069.4].

2. Notice must be given to the violating party before imposing the penalty; and give the party an opportunity to be heard and present any facts or arguments [Merco Construction Engineers v. Los Angeles Unified School District (1969) 274 CA 2d 154, 166].

3. The fine may not be "excessive" [U.S. Constitution amendments VIII and XIV].

The initiative converts administratively-imposed fines and penalties into taxes unless a new, undefined, and ambiguous “adjudicatory due process” is followed. This provision may put at risk authority to impose fines and penalties for violations of state and local law.

IV. FISCAL IMPACT
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act will take billions of dollars away from local government services statewide.

City of Greenfield’s Financial Impact:

This measure could potentially roll back Measure C assessments potentially resulting in approximately $500,000 per year worth of City revenue that is earmarked solely for our Fire Department.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

I MOVE to adopt Resolution #2024-23, A the City Council adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Opposing Initiative No. 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.
28 RESOLUTION #2024-23
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield to Oppose Initiative #21-0042A1 WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is spending tens of millions of dollars to promote a deceptive ballot measure currently eligible for the November 2024 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, the measure creates constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, which could force residents and taxpayers to pay more to maintain services; and
WHEREAS, the measure threatens billions of dollars every year in local government funding for services like fire and emergency response, law enforcement, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more; and WHEREAS, this measure could potentially roll back Measure C assessments potentially resulting in approximately $500,000 per year worth of City revenue that is earmarked solely for our Fire Department,
WHEREAS, the measure is an attack on voters’ rights, containing undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures to fund services, provisions that retroactively cancel measures recently passed by voters, and provisions that prevent voters from passing advisory measures that provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and WHEREAS, the measure contains intentionally restrictive language that will encourage hundreds of frivolous lawsuits against cities and local governments – costing taxpayers many millions and stopping investments in vital local services; and WHEREAS, the measure would make it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the measure is opposed by hundreds of local governments, teachers, firefighters, working families and local elected officials.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Greenfield opposes Initiative #21-0042A1;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Greenfield will join the “Stop the Taxpayer Deception Act” coalition, a growing coalition of public safety, education, labor, local government, and infrastructure groups throughout the state. We direct staff to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of California Cities at [email protected].

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day 26th of March, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
___________________________
Mayor of the City of Greenfield
______________________________
City Clerk of the City of Greenfield
29 City of Greenfield
PO Box 127 / 599 El Camino Real
Greenfield, CA 93927
 831-674-5591  831-674-3149
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
March 26, 2024
League of California Cities
c/o Public Affairs Department
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Letter Opposing Initiative 21-0042A1
The City of Greenfield opposes Initiative #21-0042A1, a November 2024 statewide ballot proposition. The measure is a significant threat to local control and voters’ rights that could jeopardize funding for vital services.

This measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, which could force residents and taxpayers to pay more to maintain services.

The measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to local services at risk, and could force cuts to fire and emergency response, law enforcement, services to support homeless residents, and more.

The measure is also an attack on voters’ rights, containing undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures to fund local services, provisions that retroactively cancel measures recently passed by voters, and provisions that prevent voters from passing advisory measures that provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent.

Furthermore, the measure contains intentionally vague and restrictive language that will encourage hundreds of frivolous lawsuits against cities and local governments — costing taxpayers millions and blocking investments, development and long-term planning.

This measure could potentially roll back Measure C assessments potentially resulting in approximately $500,000 per year worth of City revenue that is earmarked solely for our Fire Department.

You may list the City of Greenfield in formal opposition to Initiative #21-0042A1 and include our city as part of the growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the state opposed to this deceptive proposition.

Sincerely,
Robert White
Mayor of the City of Greenfield
30 MEMORANDUM: March 22, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul Wood, CPA
City Manager
TITLE: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GREENFIELD AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT TO G AND C CONSULTING FOR UTILITY

INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC WORKS CONSULTING IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000
BACKGROUND:

The city of Greenfield has a very active public works program as we identify more and more projects to develop and as we find more deferred maintenance from years gone by. Currently, the city finds itself addressing issues related to stormwater infrastructure, water infrastructure and capacity, wastewater infrastructure and capacity, among many other streets, building, and other facility infrastructure needs.

Current staffing levels, especially the management and director level is having a difficult time of keeping up with all of the necessary regulatory and strategic initiatives. With the addition of applying for and receiving grant monies from the state and federal government, this workload is compounding.

The largest project that we are undertaking is a re-design and build of our wastewater treatment plant. The initial projections for the cost of this plant was between 30 million and $40 million. As time goes by and scope changes, that estimated cost has grown to in excess of $90 million.

City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93927 (831) 674-5591
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
31 This project is very complex and anticipates the introduction of technologically sophisticated processes, not only in the wastewater treatment process, but also in the building and financing of the project.

In order to be able to tackle all of these issues in the best manner for the city of Greenfield, it makes the most sense to bring in professional help that have dealt with these issues in the past, and have been successful.

We are lucky to have such professionals living locally. One of those professionals is Curtis Weeks.

Curtis is the former general manager of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency and the current general manager of the Arroyo Saco Groundwater Sustainability Agency, and is a long time water and wastewater professional in Monterey County. He is an engineer and is very wellversed in all things water and wastewater.

Our professional experience is lacking in his strength areas, and hiring him on a temporary basis should help the city of Greenfield succeed in its efforts to redesign and revamp our wastewater treatment plant.

This contract is not to exceed $25,000 and we expected to run through the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 2024. If we need additional help from Mr. Weeks, we will seek to renew the agreement for an additional amount of time.

BUDGET AND FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The budget impact of this agreement will be less than $25,000, and it will be paid for out of the sewer fund, but there also might be payments made from the water fund.

POTENTIAL MOTION:

I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2024-24, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT TO G AND C CONSULTING FOR UTILITY

INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC WORKS CONSULTING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000.
32 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD

AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO G AND C

CONSULTING FOR UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC WORKS
CONSULTING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000
WHEREAS, the City of Greenfield has a very active public works program as we identify more and more projects to develop; and
WHEREAS, the largest project that the City is undertaking is a re-design and build of our wastewater treatment plant and this project is very complex and anticipates the introduction of technologically sophisticated processes, not only in the wastewater treatment process, but also in the building and financing of the project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Greenfield approves entering into an Agreement for Professional Services with G and C Consulting - Curtis Weeks, former General Manager of the Monterey County Water Resource Agency and the current General Manager of the Arroyo Seco Groundwater Sustainability Agency in amount not to exceed $25,000.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 26th day of March, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, therefore, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
_______________________________
Robert White, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
33 DATE: March 12, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
PREPARED BY: Jim Langborg, Fire Chief
TITLE: AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS A PICKUP TRUCK

CANOPY AND BED SLIDE OUT TRAY

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
In 2019 Greenfield Fire Department purchased a 2016 Ford F150 pickup truck with a fiberglass canopy and later installed a bed slide out tray. In 2021 the vehicle was sold to Enterprise when the city transitioned to utilizing them for vehicle leasing. Enterprise then leased the vehicle to the Fire Department through March 2024. The vehicle will soon be turned into Enterprise and all specialized equipment has been removed to include the slide out tray and canopy. Because this equipment was purchased specifically for this vehicle Public Works recommends that this equipment be sold.

FINANCIAL AND BUDGET IMPACT
We expect to sell both items for approximately $1,000.00.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Fire Chief to surplus the canopy and slide out tray.

PROPOSED MOTION

APPROVE THE GREENFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT TO SURPLUS A PICKUP TRUCK CANOPY AND BED SLIDE OUT TRAY.

City Council Memorandum 599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591 www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
34 1
City Council Memorandum 599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591 www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
MEMORANDUM: 03/17/2024
AGENDA DATE: 03/26/2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Guillermo Mixer, Chief of Police
TITLE: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE STAFF REPORT

BACKGROUND
Domestic violence is a critical issue affecting our community, demanding immediate attention, and concerted efforts. Domestic violence encompasses many forms of abuse including physical, emotional, psychological, sexual, and financial. Its impact extends beyond the immediate victims, affecting families, children, communities, and the overall social fabric.

The stigma and fear surrounding the reporting of domestic violence incidents are significant barriers for victims seeking help and protection. These barriers are deeply rooted in societal, cultural, and personal factors, making it difficult for victims to come forward. These are some of the barriers:
• Economic dependence – By controlling finances, abusers will coerce their victims into staying with them, locking them into a cycle of abuse.
• Psychological manipulation – Verbal and non-verbal communication to erode a victim’s self-worth to exert control over the victim.
• Cultural or societal norms – People have expectations and social norms that define behaviors that they conform to. The norms are learned from their social groups, from experience, and from observation. For example, children learn behaviors from their parents.
• Custody concerns – Fear of not being able to gain custody of their children, or the abuser using children as pawns to control the victim.
• Fear of retaliation – The abuser may have continued access to the victim and continue or escalate the abuse.
• Lack of trust in the criminal justice system – Survivors fear the police may not believe them, they may be arrested, or their abusers will not be punished. 35 2
Unique to Greenfield is our population of Triqui and Mixteco residents. Traditionally, this segment of the population refrains from seeking help from law enforcement and often refuses to report domestic violence. Cultural differences and language barriers add complexity to assisting and providing services to this vulnerable population. Taking the time to understand a survivor’s cultural values informs how police, counselors, case workers, advocates, and other providers approach a victim. Positive experiences in which survivors feel understood, validated, and free of judgment is the difference between a victim who does or does not access services to increase their safety.

Response
In 2023, our city responded to 106 domestic violence calls, out of the 16,574 total calls for service. We know this number to be low, since nationally, only about 25% of domestic violence cases are reported, and in our community where the cultural differences are deeply rooted, 106 may only represent about 5% to 10% of actual domestic violence cases. 0 2
4 6
8 10
12 9
4 6
5 6 6
7 9
8 12
6 5

DV CASES RESULTING IN ARRESTS
January February March April May June July August September October November December 36 3
• In 83 of the 106 calls resulted in the arrest of a domestic violence crime; • 69 of the 83 arrests involved cases where a weapon was used, including one incident where a knife was used;
• In 17 incidents a dangerous weapon was used, and
• In 51 incidents a “personal weapon” was used (hand, fist, elbow, foot, etc.).

While most incidents are reported through our dispatch center and then routed to our officers for immediate response, our officers sometimes discover unreported domestic violence cases during unrelated calls and begin the proper investigation at that time. Our officers understand the impact and dynamics of domestic violence incidents, and we take several steps to ensure that the victims feel safe and comfortable reporting each incident.
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 KNIFE OR CUTTING

INSTRUMENT

OTHER DANGEROUS
WEAPON

PERSONAL WEAPON
JANUARY 0 3 7
FEBERUARY 0 0 4
MARCH 0 0 6
APRIL 0 1 3
MAY 0 2 6
JUNE 0 0 4
JULY 0 1 5
AUGUST 0 2 9
SEPTEMBER 0 1 4
OCTOBER 1 3 11
NOVEMBER 0 1 5
DECEMBER 0 3 5
0 3
7 0 0
4 0 0
6 0
1 3
0 2
6 0 0
4 0
1 5
0 2
9 0
1 4
1 3
11 0
1 5
0 3
5 CASES WHERE WEAPONS WERE USED
37 4
Support Services
In Monterey County, we have a variety of local and national programs that we collaborate with to combat domestic violence and offer support to victims. Some of our partnerships dedicated to raising awareness about domestic violence with local organizations are:
• YMCA Monterey County (831) 372-6300
• Monterey County Rape Crisis (831) 375-4357
• Community Human Services, Casa De Noche Buena (831) 867-8200 • Domestic Violence Coordinating Council (831) 796-6413 • National Domestic Violence Hotline (800) 799-7233, SMS Test START to 88788 Locally, at the Greenfield Police Department, we house a District Attorney Victim’s Assistance Coordinator twice a week, Tuesday and Friday, who is available to assist victims and survivors with services offered throughout the county, (831) 755-5070.

We also house two Monterey County Behavioral Health Psychological Social Workers who are part of the Mobile Crisis Team, (831) 687-4379. The Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Community Engagement
We know that our police department plays a pivotal role in supporting domestic violence victims and survivors. Therefore, we continuously engage with the community to foster a safer and more supportive environment for survivors. Here are some strategies that we implemented to enhance our engagement and support:
• Support and encourage anonymous reporting.
• Encourage and plan follow-ups and check-ins with our victim advocates after the incident. • Collaborate with local organizations such as Lideres Campesinas and LULAC to help spread the message of services offered.
• Provide individualized support and translation services. • Provide specialized training for officers.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, combating domestic violence requires a multi-faceted approach that involves collaboration between law enforcement, established support programs, community organizations, and residents. It is imperative that we recognize the urgency of addressing domestic violence not only to protect current victims but also to safeguard the well-being and future of our children, who deserve environments free from fear and harm. The profound impact of domestic violence on children cannot be overstated. The psychological toll manifests in various forms, from depression and anxiety to post-traumatic stress disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. Tragically, many of these children, caught in the web of violence, find themselves torn between aggression and withdrawal, grappling with confusion and self-blame; and all too often, children who witness domestic violence become aggressors themselves. Only through concerted efforts to break the cycle of violence can we hope to provide survivors and the children of survivors with a safe and nurturing environment they need to thrive and grow into resilient individuals. 38 City of Greenfield
PO Box 127 / 599 El Camino Real
Greenfield CA 93937
Phone: 831-674-5591 Fax: 831-674-3149
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
DATE: March 21, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
PREPARED BY: Paul Mugan, Community Development Director TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING A FAIR SHARE

DISTRIBUTION PROPERTY TAX TRANSFER FOR THE

PROPOSED TUNZI-THORP ANNEXATION INVOLVING
ANNEXATION OF 18.671± ACRES TO THE CITY OF

GREENFIELD AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE

APPROVING PREZONING OF THE TUNZI-THORP

ANNEXATION AREA TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(R-L)

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
The Tunzi-Thorp Annexation on the north side of Apple Avenue and west of 12th Street has been a long-standing goal of the City. On December 13, 2016, the City Council approved a resolution (Resolution #2016-103) affirming the pre-zoning of the TunziThorp Annexation Area to Single-Family Residential (R-L) and directing City staff to file the annexation application to the Monterey County LAFCO (LAFCO). On February 27, 2018, the City Council approved a resolution (Resolution #2018-21) re-affirming the prezoning of the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation Area to Single-Family Residential and re-directing City staff to file the Tunzi-Thorp annexation application to the LAFCO. An application was submitted to LAFCO in 2018, but did not proceed to a hearing before LAFCO due to a dispute between City staff and County staff on what would be required for mitigation of agricultural lands conversion.

In the intervening time, the dispute on the agricultural lands mitigation has been settled, and indeed, such mitigation is no longer necessary. In addition, the Tunzi property has been developed with the Arroyo Seco Academy, and the City recently purchased the Thorp property and was awarded a State Parks grant for the development of a City Recreational Center. As such, City staff, in consultation with LAFCO staff and Monterey County staff, has reactivated the application for the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation. 39 Before the annexation application can be heard by LAFCO, certain actions are required by the City. Among these actions is the adoption of a City Council resolution for a property tax transfer agreement between the City and Monterey County, with this agreement distributing fair share portions of the property taxes collected for properties within the annexation area. In addition, the prior actions on the pre-zoning of the annexation site were done via City Council resolution, and such pre-zoning actions under Section 17.16.150.B of the City’s Municipal Code are required to be done by adoption of an Ordinance.

This staff report includes as attachments a resolution for the property tax sharing agreement (Attachment 1) and the ordinance pre-zoning the Tunzi-Thorp properties to Single-Family Residential (Attachment 2). The pre-zoning ordinance requires two separate City Council actions, the first being introduction and first reading of the ordinance, followed by second reading and adoption of the ordinance at a subsequent meeting. The adoption of the pre-zoning ordinance will establish the site’s zoning upon recordation of the requested annexation.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The requested annexation will bring the Arroyo Seco Academy property and the City Recreational Center property into the City limits. The annexation includes a 18.671-acre area, consisting of APNs 109-232-006 and 109-232-007 (see map below) into the City.

The project site is contiguous to single-family developments within the City limits to the southeast and northeast, and to the Mira Monte project site to the southwest. To the northwest are properties in agricultural use within the City’s Sphere of Influence but outside the City limits. The requested annexation includes two lots totaling 18.671 acres. The fronting streets (Apple Avenue to the southeast and 12th Street to the northeast) are already within Greenfield’s City Limits.

The annexation application to LAFCO requires the City and the County to execute a property tax sharing agreement, and such an agreement has been prepared in the form of a City Council resolution (Attachment 1). Also required is the pre-zoning of the annexation area to Single Family Residential (R-L), with this zoning taking effect upon recordation of the annexation. The existing school use is an allowed use in the SingleFamily Residential (R-L) Zoning District, and the community recreational center is a conditionally allowed use in this zoning district.

PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located northwest of Apple Avenue and southwest of 12th Street for approximately half the block, within the City’s Sphere of Influence but outside of the City limits (see Figure 1). This map was prepared for the annexation application in 2018.

With the 2019-approved and recorded annexation for the Mira Monte subdivision, Lots 180, 181, and 182 are now also within the existing City limits. 40 Figure 1 –Location Map

PROJECT REQUESTS AND ANALYSIS

PROPERTY TAX SHARING AGREEMENT
On July 12, 2016, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors adopted a pro forma “fair share” property tax transfer resolution. The resolution provides that the County and affected agencies would transfer a percentage of their “tax base revenue” based on the pro rata share of the City’s equivalent tax rate to the combined City/County equivalent tax rates. The formula, first adopted in 1980 and not subsequently updated, has been revised to reflect the County’s loss of property tax revenue that was imposed by the State during fiscal year 1993-94. Non-affected jurisdictions, e.g., public schools, community colleges, and special districts, would retain their percentage share of property taxes collected within an affected tax code area. Of the total amount of property taxes available for distribution, the City would receive 32.49% and the County would receive 67.51%.
41 The proposed Tunzi-Thorp Annexation area is within Tax Rate Area 078-001. This Tax Rate Area has the following property tax increment distribution: 26.18% - Monterey County and 73.82% - non-affected districts. Due to reductions imposed by the State on the County of Monterey, the percentage share of the existing County property tax base available for distribution has been reduced by 41 percent from 26.18% to 15.44%. As recommended and approved by the Board of Supervisors, the City would receive 5.02% and the County would receive 10.42% of the existing property tax base available for distribution. The City’s portion is calculated by multiplying the 32.49%/67.51% City/County distribution split by the 15.44% available distribution rate (32.49% X 15.44% = 5.02%).

For the increment in property tax revenue above the base resulting from the increase in assessed value of the property after annexation, the City would receive 6.61% and the County 19.57% of the annual increase in property taxes attributable to increased property values. This fair share distribution of property tax revenues between the City and the County differs slightly from that done for the 2019 Mira Monte Annexation as the formulas for tax sharing have changed slightly since 2019. Staff anticipates that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors will be taking action on a similar resolution to approve the property tax sharing agreement in the next two months.

PRE-ZONING ACTION
As noted above, the City Council previously adopted resolutions in 2016 and 2018, supporting the pre-zoning of the annexation area to Single Family Residential (R-L).

However, in accordance with the City’s Pre-Zoning regulations (Section 17.16.150 of the City’s Municipal Code), “the procedure, review and action [for pre-zoning actions] are the same as that established for a zoning code amendment pursuant to Section

17.16.130, Zoning Amendments (Text and Map).” Subsection 17.16.130 F. notes that zoning amendments are to be done by adoption of an ordinance. Subsection 17.16.130 D sets forth required findings for zoning amendments as follows:

1. The proposed zoning amendment (text or map) is consistent with the general plan goals, policies, and implementation programs; and

2. The proposed amendment will have no adverse effects on the public’s health, safety, or welfare.

The pre-zoning of the annexation area to Single Family Residential (R-L) would be consistent with the City’s General Plan and the annexation site’s approved land use designation of Low Density Residential. It would also be consistent with the existing public school use on the Tunzi property’s portion of the annexation area, as well as with the development of a City Recreation Center on the Thorp portion of the annexation area. The pre-zoning would not result in any adverse effects on the public’s health, safety, or welfare. Such effects, as well as the project’s effects on the environment, were evaluated during the City Council’s approval of pursuing a City Recreation Center 42 on the eastern portion of the annexation area on February 23, 2021 and October 12, 2021.

CEQA
On November 25, 2008, via Resolution 2008-103, the City Council adopted the 2008 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Villages project, which covered the entire City block between Apple and Walnut Avenues and 12th and 13th Streets. The current Tunzi-Thorp annexation area is a portion of the project site analyzed in the 2008 IS/MND. The City prepared a supplemental MND for the TunziThorp property for the development of the Arroyo Seco Academy in 2016, and then an addendum to the 2016 Greenfield School District/Thorp Annexation Addendum Environmental Report (AER) in March 2017. Finally, on October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted an addendum to the previously-certified AER to account for the development of the City Recreational Center on the Thorp portion of the annexation area.

As such, the effects of the pre-zoning and the associated annexation, including the approval of the property tax sharing agreement, were analyzed in the previouslyadopted, 2021 addendum to the March 2017 AER, and it was determined that the proposed recreation center project would not result in any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. That October 2021 addendum AER also serves as the adequate environmental review under CEQA for the associated annexation of the Tunzi-Thorp annexation area, as the annexation and associated pre-zoning and property tax sharing agreement would not result in any new environmental impacts. The school use on the Tunzi property is an existing use, and the City Recreation Center’s environmental impacts were adequately evaluated in the 2021 addendum AER.

BUDGET AND FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City is the applicant for the annexation request. However, the City paid the annexation application fee to LAFCO in 2018. Similarly, the City has already funded the 2021 addendum AER utilizing funding from the State Parks grant for the City Recreation Center. Approximately $5,000 in staff and consultant costs are anticipated to prepare the requisite supporting City resolution and ordinance, including this staff report and the staff report for the second reading and adoption of the pre-zoning ordinance, as well as coordination with County staff on the County’s tax sharing agreement resolution and other requirements for the LAFCO annexation application. When the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation is approved by LAFCO and the project site included within the City limits, the tax sharing formula would normally result in City General Fund property tax receipts from the newly annexed area. However, in this case, both the public school and the City Recreation Center would be exempt from property taxes.

In addition, the City purchased the Thorp property recently, with escrow closing in February 2024. While City-owned properties inside the City limits are exempt from property taxes, a City-owned property outside its jurisdiction is required to pay property 43 taxes. As such, there is an additional, on-going financial benefit to the City relative to the annexation of the City-owned Thorp property. Once annexed into the City, the City would no longer be required to remit property taxes to the County for this property. This is estimated to be a savings of approximately $1,600 per year over the current situation, based on the property taxes due in Fiscal Year 2023-2024 for the Thorp property.

RECOMMENDATION
Prior to LAFCO’s approval of the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation, the City and County must each adopt resolutions approving a Fair Share Distribution Property Tax Transfer for the property subject to annexation. A resolution for the City’s approval of the property tax sharing agreement is included for the Council’s consideration (Attachment 1). An ordinance for the pre-zoning action is also included for the Council’s consideration (Attachment 2).

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution and introduce the attached ordinance, taking the following actions:

1. Adopt Resolution 2024-__ (Attachment 1) approving a Fair Share Distribution Property Tax Transfer for the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation Area; and

2. Introduce an Ordinance (Attachment 2) pre-zoning the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation Area to Single Family Residential (R-L) to be consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation.

Prior to action on these recommendations, the City Council should conduct the requisite public hearing.

RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
1) I MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING THE TAX

SHARING FORMULA BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY AND THE
CITY OF GREENFIELD FOR THE PROPOSED “TUNZI-THORP
ANNEXATION” INVOLVING ANNEXATION OF 18.671± ACRES TO THE CITY OF GREENFIELD.
2) I MOVE TO INTRODUCE AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO.___, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD PREZONING THE TUNZI-THORP ANNEXATION AREA TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-L).
44 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-25

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD

APPROVING THE TAX SHARING FORMULA BETWEEN THE COUNTY

OF MONTEREY AND THE CITY OF GREENFIELD FOR THE
PROPOSED “TUNZI-THORP ANNEXATION” INVOLVING
ANNEXATION OF 18.671± ACRES TO THE CITY OF GREENFIELD
(APNS: 109-232-006 AND 109-232-007)
WHEREAS, the Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99 (Assembly Bill 8 (Chapter 282) Statutes 1979, as amended by Senate Bill 180 (Chapter 801)), provides for the Monterey County Board of Supervisors to determine an appropriate tax transfer for all jurisdictional changes of organization occurring within Monterey County and for the city council of any affected city to concur on the transfer prior to the proposal being considered by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); and
WHEREAS, the current distribution of property taxes within Tax Rate Area 078- 001 is as follows:

26.18% Monterey County’s Share

73.82% Non-affected District’s Share
100.00% Total; and
WHEREAS, the Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99 (Senate Bill 180 (Chapter 801)) requires that non-affected local agencies percentage share will remain constant; and
WHEREAS, the County of Monterey and the City of Greenfield wish to agree to a fair share distribution of remaining property tax revenues; and WHEREAS, the County of Monterey has realized a 41% reduction and the City has realized a 16% reduction in property tax revenue imposed by the State under Senate Bill 617 (Chapter 699) Statutes 1992; and whereas each year thereafter both the County and the City continue to shift revenues to the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City of Greenfield City Council does hereby agree to the following formulas for property tax base and increment distribution within Tax Rate Area 078-001 after change of organization annexation:
45 A. DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY TAX BASE
The County’s property tax revenues have realized a 41 percent reduction imposed by the State under Senate Bill 617 (Chapter 699) Statutes 1992.

Reduction of Property Tax due to ERAF
Monterey County’s Share 26.18%
ERAF Reduction - 41.00%
Monterey County Adjusted Share 15.44%
Share Available for Distribution 15.44%
Property tax base is the property tax revenue that is available prior to change of organization/reorganization.

Prior to Change of Organization/Reorganization
(City of Greenfield,
Tax Rate Area 078-001)
Current Rate Current Ratio
City of Greenfield 12.60% 32.49%
Monterey County 26.18% 67.51%
After Change of Organization/Reorganization
(New Tax Rate Area
To Be Assigned)

15.44% Property Tax Available for Distribution

1. City of Greenfield’s Share of Total Property Taxes Collected:

15.44% Property Tax Available for Distribution
X 32.49% City of Greenfield’s Current Ratio
= 5.02%

2. Monterey County’s Share of Total Property Taxes Collected:

15.44% Property Tax Available for Distribution
X 67.51% Monterey County’s Current Ratio
= 10.42%
46 Plus

10.73% Adjustment for State Tax Shift
= 21.15%
Formula for property tax base allocation to the City of Greenfield from Tax Rate Area 078- 001 after change of organization/reorganization:

City of Greenfield’s Property Tax Revenue =
Total Property Taxes Collected X 5.02% X Full Months Remaining in Tax Year ÷ by 12.

B. DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT
Property tax increment is the increase in property tax revenue above the base resulting from the increase in assessed value of property after the change in organization/reorganization.

The formula recognizes that all future growth will be subject to a shift to Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in the amount of 41% for the County and 16% for the City. After the shift, the County and the City will be in the same relative position as before dividing the remainder.

Prior to Change of Organization/Reorganization

(City of Greenfield,
Tax Rate Area 078-001)

Current ÷ ERAF = Resulting Resulting
Rate Adjustment Rate Ratio
City of Greenfield 12.60% 84% 15.00% 25.26%
Monterey County 26.18% 59% 44.37% 74.74%

Based on existing Tax Rate Area 078-001, Monterey County’s share of property tax is

26.18%. The total property tax available for distribution in the proposal area is 26.18%.

The new Resulting Ratios calculated above are applied to the increment.

After Change of Organization/Reorganization
(New Tax Rate Area
To Be Assigned)

26.18% Property Tax Available for Distribution
47 1. City of Greenfield’s Share of Property Tax Increment:

26.18% Property Tax Available for Distribution
X 25.26% City of Greenfield’s New Resulting Ratio
= 6.61%

2. Monterey County’s Share of Property Tax Increment:

26.18% Property Tax Available for Distribution
X 74.74% Monterey County’s Current Ratio
= 19.57%
Formula for property tax base allocation to the City of Greenfield from Tax Rate Area 078- 001 after change of organization/reorganization:

City of Greenfield’s Property Tax Revenue =
Total Property Taxes Collected X 6.61% X Full Months Remaining in Tax Year ÷ by 12.

C. CITY MANAGER AUTHORITY FOR MINOR REVISIONS
The City Manager is authorized to make minor revisions to the tax sharing agreement, should such minor revisions be determined necessary.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 26th day of March 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, therefore, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers
_______________________________
Robert White, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
48 ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD
PREZONING ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 109-232-006
AND 109-232-007 TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-L)

FOR THE TUNZI-THORP ANNEXATION PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted the City’s Zoning Map, which sets forth the zoning district for properties within the City limits, and allows for sites adjoining the City to be pre-zoned to establish the zoning district(s) that would apply upon recordation of annexation approvals; and
WHEREAS, the procedure for pre-zoning is set forth in Section 17.16.150 Prezoning of the City’s Municipal Code, with the procedure for pre-zoning being the same as that established for a zoning code amendment, which requires adoption of a City Ordinance for the requested pre-zoning; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Greenfield conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 599 El Camino Road, Greenfield, California, on January 11, 2016, and recommended approval of the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation Project, including the pre-zoning of the annexation area (APNs 109-232-006 and 109-232-007) to Single Family Residential (R-L); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Greenfield conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 599 El Camino Road, Greenfield, California, on March 26, 2024, for the purpose of approving the pre-zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the pre-zoning is consistent with the General Plan’s goals, policies, and implementation programs and that the pre-zoning will have no adverse effects on the public’s health, safety, or welfare; and WHEREAS, on October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted an Addendum to the previously-certified March 2017 Addendum Environmental Report (AER) for the Greenfield School District/Thorp Annexation project with such Addendum to the 2017 AER addressing impacts related to the development facilitated by the proposed annexation, including the pre-zoning of the site; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of all interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
49 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Environmental Determination: The City Council hereby finds that this action has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and the City's local standards. The City prepared an Addendum to the previously-certified March 2017 Addendum Environmental Report (AER) for the Greenfield School District/Thorp Annexation project, concluded that there was not substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project as mitigated would have a significant impact on the environment. The City adopted the Addendum to the previously-certified March 2017 AER on October 12, 2021, and made certain CEQA findings, and adopted a Mitigation and Monitoring Program, incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Findings: Based upon all evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:
a) The pre-zoning is consistent with the General Plan’s goals, policies, and implementation programs.
b) The pre-zoning will have no adverse effects on the public’s health, safety, or welfare.

SECTION 3 . Action: The City Council hereby 1) approves the pre-zoning of the project site to Single Family Residential (R-L) as shown in attached “Exhibit A”, which is consistent with the land use designations included in the General Plan.

SECTION 4 . Severability: The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this ordinance as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 5. EXECUTION AND CERTIFICATION: The City Clerk is directed to do all things necessary to cause the execution of this ordinance immediately upon its adoption and shall thereafter certify to the passage of this ordinance and cause the same to be published and posted according to law.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: Pursuant to California Government Code section 36937, this ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption by the City Council.
50 ***********
The forgoing Ordinance was introduced by the City Council of the City of Greenfield, California, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on March 26, 2024, and was finally passed and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on _______ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
______________________________
Robert White, Mayor
City of Greenfield
ATTEST:

Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
City of Greenfield
51 Exhibit A. Pre-zoning Map
That portion of the City’s zoning map that includes the Tunzi-Thorp Annexation area, is amended by prezoning the Tunzi and Thorp properties as follows.

Existing City
Limits
52 1
DATE: March 22, 2024
AGENDA DATE March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
PREPARED BY: Brent Slama, Senior Planning Consultant
Rob Mullane, Planning Consultant
Paul Mugan, Director, CD
TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING DESIGN

REVIEW AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
FOR A NEW THREE-STORY, 34,300-SQ FT BUILDING
CONSISTING OF 20 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A
600-SQ FT COMMUNITY AND MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM, AND
12,000-SQ FT OF COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA ON AN
UNDEVELOPED 1.42-ACRE PARCEL ON THE EAST SIDE OF
4TH STREET BETWEEN APPLE AND PALM AVENUES (APN:
024-151-011)

AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURES
The City’s Zoning Code (GMC) requires Design Review for multi-family residential and/or mixed-use developments. The following describes a Design Review (GMC

17.16.070.A):

The purpose of the design review process is to promote the orderly and harmonious growth of the city, to encourage development in keeping with the desired character of the city; to ensure physical, visual, and functional compatibility between uses; and to help prevent the depreciation of land values by ensuring proper attention is given to site and architectural design.

The appropriate decision-making authority is the City Council, because the applicant has requested a Development Agreement (DA) to allow for the proposed residential density. The combination of 20 multi-family residential units and 12,000 sq ft of unknown commercial uses is noncompliant with the parcel’s Highway Commercial principal zoning and land use designation. The mixed-use overlay on the site would allow for a maximum of just eight units for a three-story building at this location, without City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
53 2
the DA. The DA would allow the City Council to exceed the density of the zoning without changing the zoning and General Plan land use designation. Only with a DA approved by the City Council may this project as proposed, be authorized for construction.

Section 17.16.070.E of the GMC requires that this Design Review approval or any modification be granted with the consideration of the Planning Commission’s recommendation. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny a prior, but similar version of the project which was considered in September 2023. That noncompliant proposal had 24 multi-family residential units and 8,850 sq ft of commercial development. Should the City Council decide to approve this Design Review, then the City Council must make each of the below required findings:

1. Any two-story construction requires notification of property owners pursuant to Section 17.14.040, “Public Notices,” of this title;

2. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the general plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, specific plan provisions, planned unit development provisions, applicable city design guidelines, and improvement standards adopted by the City;

3. The proposed architecture, site design, and landscape design are suitable for the purposes of the building and the site and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and the community;

4. The architecture, including the character, scale and quality of the design, relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing and similar elements establishes a clear design concept and is compatible with the character of buildings on adjoining and nearby properties;

5. The proposed project addresses vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian transportation modes of circulation; and

6. For specific plans and planned unit development design review application, the proposed project is well integrated with the City’s street network, creates unique neighborhood environments, employs architectural design that fosters sense of community, and contributes to a pedestrian oriented environment.

The City Council must approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Design Review application. As part of Design Review, the City Council may require that “the applicant modify plans in whole or in part and may condition the Design Review approval to ensure inclusion of specific design features, use of specific construction materials, and conformance with all applicable provisions of this title” (Section

17.16.070.F GMC). The City Council’s failure to approve the required Findings for approval would result in denial of the project and denial of the Design Review.

Development Agreement
Pursuant to the Greenfield Municipal Code, the City Council must approve Development Agreement(s) through City ordinance. Enactment of ordinances requires public hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council; with an introduction and first reading of the ordinance by the City Council followed by second reading and adoption. 54 3
Chapter 16.37 and Section 17.16.160 of the City of Greenfield Municipal Code set forth the procedures for approval, amendment, and cancellation of development agreements (DAs). In this case, the DA would supplant the zoning on the parcel, by permitting the residential unit density to exceed the eight units currently required by the controlling zoning designation (Highway Commercial) and overlay (Mixed Use Overlay).

Before acting on the DA, the City Council must make certain findings as set forth in Section 17.16.160.C. These findings include:

1. The development agreement is consistent with the general plan objectives, policies, land uses, and implementation programs and any other applicable specific plans;

2. The development agreement is in conformance with the public convenience and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the city as a whole; and

3. The development agreement will promote the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

Staff’s recommendation provides consistency with the Planning Commission’s recommendation to the City Council to deny the Design Review for the September 2023 project, and, the City Council’s September 26, 2023 denial of the revised version. The small changes made for the current proposal over the last proposal, fails to change staff’s recommendation of denial, principally because the project remains predominantly a multi-family residential project. As such, it remains inconsistent with the underlying commercial zoning except through a legislative act of the Council whether the instrument is a rezone, a General Plan amendment; or in this case, a Development Agreement. Regardless of the avenue, a legislative act of the Council is required to approve the project.

It remains the professional recommendation of staff, that making the above three findings for approval of a DA remains problematic. Should the City Council disagree with staff’s recommendation and direct staff to prepare a Development Agreement for approval of the proposed project, then the City Council’s decision must articulate and substantively reflect the above findings in the affirmative. Below is a summary discussion of areas that the City Council would need to consider when making findings for consistency. The points below also include the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission, as found in the attached minutes of Planning Commission proceedings.
(1) The project is inconsistent with both the General Plan and Zoning Code attached to the subject parcel: (i)Highway Commercial and (ii) the Mixed Use Overlay district. The maximum number of residential units on the site cannot exceed eight (8) total under current zoning without a legislative act of the Council. Moreover, to accommodate eight units, the project also would have to have a larger massing than the current design and be almost entirely three stories, with two stories of residential development above all of the first-floor 55 4
commercial development. Here, in the current iteration of the project, there are 20 apartments and townhomes proposed and 12,000 sq ft of commercial.

The only way the project could be approved is if the City Council approves a Development Agreement. A Development Agreement is a legislative act only the City Council can approve. In effect, the Development Agreement would place existing zoning in abeyance, and supplant the existing zoning with limitations and standards codified in the Development Agreement. The project remains noncompliant with its General Plan land use designation (Commercial) and also, noncompliant with its zoning; Highway Commercial and Mixed Use Overlay.
(2) General Welfare/General Convenience – This is a subjective determination of the City Council rooted in the basic question “should” the Council approve the project, not can the City Council approve the project?
Staff outlined supra the problematic findings necessary for approval. The larger question the Council must ask is, would the project “sit right” in the community or neighborhood? Here, the legal standards of Health, Safety, and Welfare are implicated. As lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, the city prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. Regarding the traffic/circulation impacts, the proposed mitigation is an in-lieu-fee to address potential adverse impacts. This is an appropriate mitigation; however, staff points out that an in-lieu fee does little to mitigate project specific adverse impacts of added circulation, conflicts, congestion, and demand for on-street parking caused by the project. In other words, the analysis of traffic and parking mitigation is dependent merely on paying the city an impact fee, rather than addressing project-specific issues.

With 12,000 sq ft of unidentified commercial, the question of parking requirements is insufficiently addressed because the applicant admittedly cannot know impacts. Second, a 20-unit residential development never was anticipated to abut the single-family residential developments to the east and south. Regardless of what the parking/circulation plan may be, the intensity of parking and multi-family residential activity never had been previously contemplated in the General Plan or zoning analysis for this site. The project will cause additional traffic, circulation and on-street parking problems. It remains unknown the true impacts on the ground, even with an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The applicant maintains it can be properly managed.

Although the CEQA document fails to mitigate project specific impacts beyond an in-lieu fee, the project’s true impacts remains difficult to identify because 20 multifamily residential apartment units plus 12,000 sq ft of unknown commercial, never has been contemplated nor analyzed for this site. The mixed-use project with a predominantly multi-family residential component is triple the residential units that the zoning allows without a legislative act by the City Council. To approve the for this project, the City Council needs to make the finding that the project conforms to the public 56 5
convenience and public welfare and is not “… detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the city…”. The presumption underlying the staff recommendation for denial is that this standard includes on-street parking, circulation, and internal parking on the 1.42-acre site, along with the proximity of this additional activity on abutting residential streets. (3) Orderly Development/Property Values. Without Zoning Code and General Plan amendments, a Development Agreement is the only way this project can be approved. The Development Agreement is a separate legislative action which can permit the development, should the City Council find that the project promotes orderly and harmonious development with increased property values. In both project proposals which the Planning Commission considered – and denied, the multi-family residential component predominates. The current proposal has been modestly revised but remains predominately a multi-family residential development.

Table 1 on the following pages note the small differences among the three versions of this largely-residential project. The projects were, and remain, fundamentally multi-family residential. Basically, it is a residential development on a commercial parcel. Here, the City Council may decide that this is acceptable, and make the aforenoted findings, and direct staff to return to Council with the appropriate Development Agreement prepared, and an updated CEQA document. During preparation of the city’s General Plan and Zoning Code that is in effect today, this parcel was thought to have attributes for commercial development, such as proximity to the Highway 101 interchange, and proximity to low density residential development. These attributes may support both resident-serving and also, regional commercial uses. The irregular elongated parcel also lends itself to a myriad of possible commercial developments such as high-tech facilities, ie, EV recharging facilities. As the city continues to grow, commercial parcels will always be limited. At this time, this parcel is designated as a commercial parcel.

BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Setting
The project site is a 1.42-acre property on the east side of 4th Street between Palm and Apple Avenues (APN: 024-151-011 (see Figure 1 below)). The project site is undeveloped and is elongated in shape along its 4th Street frontage. Surrounding land uses include residential uses to the east and southeast, commercial uses to the south, 4th Street and U.S. Highway 101 to the west, and an undeveloped portion of the Walnut Avenue Specific Plan area to the north. This northerly area abutting the project site is currently subject to an application for a ten-parcel tentative map, signifying continued interest in buildout of the city’s commercial specific plan area. The project site is currently designated and zoned Highway Commercial with a Mixed Use Overlay on the City’s General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map, respectively. 57 6
Figure 1 –Location Map
.

Background
Eighteen months ago, on September 6, 2022, the applicant requested that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a three-story, 36,410-sq ft mixed use development. That 2022 project proposed 32 residential units and 3,200 sq ft of commercial development. Under the existing zoning, only two residential units would be permitted at the site, at most, pursuant to the overlay district allowance. Because the 2022 project exceeded the allowed density for residential development under current zoning, the applicant also proposed a General Plan and Zoning Code Amendment to rezone the site from Highway Commercial/Mixed Use Overlay to Multi-Family Residential. A conditional use permit was also included to allow certain uses on the site, including a convenience store with sales of alcoholic beverages. During this period, the City worked collaboratively with the property owner (see 11 MAR 22 correspondence) to advance a project, knowing from the outset that the proposal required a legislative act of the City Council to build it.

The Planning Commission expressed numerous concerns with the 2022 proposal and voted 4-0-1 to recommend denial to the City Council. The minutes from the September 6, 2022 Planning Commission meeting list the Commission’s concerns. (See Attachment 2).

Project Site
58 7
On September 8, 2022, staff memorialized the Planning Commission’s action with a letter noting the Planning Commission’s concerns (see Attachment 3). Between November 2022 and June 2023, the applicant team and City again attempted to produce a project that incorporated the input from the Planning Commission.

Throughout a long period of time, the developer/applicant had solid limitations regarding any reduction in the high-unit residential component. During this period, various proposals never deviated materially from a predominantly residential multi-family project with nominal changes to the commercial component. In May and June 2023, the applicant team submitted a revised project for Planning Commission consideration and action.

The 2023 project added 5,650-sq ft of commercial development and reduced the number of residential units by eight: from 32 to 24 units. The 2023 proposal also dropped the Rezone, General Plan Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit components. Pursuant to the site’s existing Highway Commercial zoning and Mixed-Use Overlay, the 8,850 sq ft of commercial floor area permitted a maximum of six residential units. A Development Agreement application was included in the 2023 project proposal to increase the proposed residential density.

The applicant maintained throughout the period leading up to the 2023 project submittal that they were modifying the project to be in accordance with Planning Commission direction. The question was to what degree had the 2023 project adhered to its existing zoning regulations. On a recurring basis, City staff informed the development team that the most serious issue involved the fact that the parcel is zoned Highway Commercial.

Even with the Mixed-Use Overlay, only six residential units would be permitted on-site.

Despite urgent recommendations by staff, the applicant at that time stated that they wished to “take their chances” (with the Commission and Council) regarding the 2023 project proposal.

The Planning Commission in their review of the 2023 project on September 5, 2023, noted that the revised project did not address the major concerns the Commission expressed regarding the 2022 project, and recommended denial of the project on a 5-0 vote. The minutes of the September 5, 2023 Planning Commission meeting are included as Attachment 6.

The 2023 project then proceeded to the City Council for consideration on September 26, 2023. The staff recommendation was for denial of the project based on the Planning Commission’s review, comments, and vote at both the Planning Commission’s September 6, 2022 and September 5, 2023 meetings. The City Council considered the 2023 project and after expressing similar concerns regarding the project as were expressed by the Planning Commission, denied the project on a 3-1-1 vote. In their deliberations, the City Council noted that they were open to considering a revised project; however, the motion and vote were to deny the project rather than continue it.

The City Council’s September 26, 2023, meeting minutes are included as Attachment 7.

A letter noting the City Council’s denial of the project was prepared by City staff and conveyed on December 8, 2023. This letter is included as Attachment 8. 59 8
Table 1 provides a summary of the differences between the September 2022 project, the September 2023 project, and the project currently before the City Council.

Table 1
PROJECT COMPONENTS 2022

PROJECT
2023

PROJECT
2024

PROJECT
Building Square Feet 36,410 36,410 34,300
Parking Spaces 82 82 82
Residential Housing Units 32 24 20
Commercial Floor Area 3,200 8,850 1 12,000 2
1 the 2,700-sq ft community room is a resident-serving use, and not counted as commercial. 2 the 600-sq ft community room is a resident-serving use, and not counted as commercial.

Current 2024 Project
The project consists of a three-story, 34,300-sq ft building with 20 multi-family residential units and 12,000-sq ft of commercial floor area for future, unidentified uses.

Eighty-two parking spaces are proposed. The resident-serving community/multi-purpose room is 600 sq ft in area. To work around the zoning problem, the applicant implicates Section 17.42.030(D) wherein the code states that, “[a]dditional units may be granted in accordance with the state density bonus provision, any density bonus ordinance enacted by the City, or by means of a development agreement adopted pursuant to Section 17.16.160.” Absent a rezoning and General Plan amendment, only with an approved Development Agreement adopted by the City Council may the subject project proposal move forward to obtain Building Permits.

The purpose of the Development Agreement option is to provide one additional tool for decision-makers to make exceptions to the typical zoning code regulations. Staff recognizes the utility of permitting decision-makers the ability to consider particular projects on a case-by-case basis apart from its underlying zoning. This is such a project. For example, if the City’s RHNA production were deficient, then a stronger justification could be advanced to support rezoning the property or utilizing a Development Agreement to permit denser housing development. The present zoning would permit just eight residential units. The presumption is that the eight residential units would be subordinate to more muscular commercial uses on the site. From the outset, the City has viewed development on this parcel as challenged because of the parcel’s shape. The parcel nearly abuts the Oak Avenue interchange for an ideally situated Highway Commercial development opportunity, which likely explains its Highway Commercial zoning designation.

The proposed residential units include four 1,050-sq ft three-bedroom, two-bath apartments, fourteen 1,100-sq ft two-BR, 1 ½-bath townhomes, and two 1,050-sq ft twoBR, 2-bath accessible apartments. All units have in-unit laundry facilities. The building design, square footage, and footprint is reduced by 2,100 sq ft, which corresponds to the elimination of one 1,050-sq apartment from the second floor towards the end of each side of the building. The two- and three-story components reach a maximum height of 38 feet.
60 9
The building faces the Fourth Street frontage with an 82-space parking lot situated at the rear, easterly portion of the parcel. A 25-foot-wide drive aisle traversing the eastern boundary of the property between Apple and Palm Avenues provides access. The project includes new sidewalk, curb, gutter, and street landscaping along the Apple Avenue and Fourth Street frontages. The project would improve 4th Street to the Caltrans Right of Way. The project would also construct new driveway access and install utility service laterals for storm, water, sanitary sewer, gas and electric. The proposed stormwater control plan directs runoff to bio-retention areas prior to entering the City’s storm drainage system. A new 620-foot long, six-foot high concrete masonry wall is proposed along the project site’s eastern property line. Landscaping includes a grass planter with trees along the project’s 4th Street, Apple and Palm Avenue frontages, and plantings in the parking lot landscape fingers. Grading includes 350 cu yd of cut, 225 cu yd of fill, and 125 cu yd of export. The project architect is David Elliott, AIA. The property owners and applicants are Eduardo and Helia Couttolenc.

PROJECT ANALYSIS
Analysis of the 2022 project centered around General Plan and Zoning Ordinance policies and standards as noted in the September 6, 2022 staff report, presented to the Planning Commission. The subject analysis in this report focuses on the degree to which each of the material Planning Commission comments on the 2023 project presented to the Planning Commission and City Council have been addressed or not addressed in this latest proposal before the City Council.

Design Review Request
Approving Design Review for the project would require the City Council to make the required findings in Section 17.16.070.E of the City’s Zoning Code, discussed supra in the Authority and Procedures section of the report.

Development Agreement Request
The applicant has requested a Development Agreement to allow for additional units beyond what is permitted in the Mixed Use Overlay (one unit per floor per 3,000 sq ft of commercial development). Pursuant to Section 17.42.030.D of the City’s Zoning Code, additional units beyond the one unit per floor per 3,000 sq ft of commercial development ratio may be allowed only with the approval of a Development Agreement. Without the Development Agreement, the multi-family residential development would be limited to a total of eight units, and only if all such units were located on the second and third floors above commercial floor area. The granting of a Development Agreement requires that the City Council make three additional findings as set forth in Section 17.16.160.C of the City’s Zoning Code, as discussed supra in the Authority and Procedures section.

Project Revisions in Response of Commission Comments from Sept. 6, 2022 The Planning Commission input in recommending denial of the planning entitlements for the 2022 project were detailed in a September 8, 2022 letter from the City (see Attachment 3), as follows:
1) The loss of Commercial Zoning development opportunities along the Highway 101 Corridor as a result of the proposed redesignation and rezoning of the project site;
61 10
2) The need for clarity on the proposed improvements to the 4th Street Right-of-Way via an exhibit more clearly depicting the existing ROW improvements and the proposed ROW, including all amenities (curb and gutters, planter areas, planter area, travel lanes, on-street parking areas, etc.);
3) The overall proposed density of the project; and the adequacy of the proposed parking;
4) The impact of the project on local roadways and intersections, particularly for the 4th Street/Oak Avenue/Highway 101 intersections area;
5) The number of parking spaces proposed for a development of that scale as well as challenges in managing how parking is controlled with the proposed mix of residential and commercial uses;
6) The 3-BR, 1-BA units having only one bathroom;
7) The lack of in-unit clothes washer and dryer amenities for the proposed dwelling units;
8) The inclusion of the laundromat in the proposed project and the allowance for laundromats as a limited commercial use for the Multifamily Residential Zoning District; and
9) The proposal for alcohol sales from the convenience store.

The Planning Commission expressed similar concerns on the 2023 project, as noted in the minutes of the Commission’s September 5, 2023 meeting (Attachment 6).

Each of these issues are analyzed below.

Loss of Commercial Zoning Development Opportunities
This was a key concern for the Planning Commission during both the September 6, 2022 and September 5, 2023 hearings. As indicated by Table 1 above, the new project resembles the project previously rejected by the Planning Commission because it remains predominantly a residential multi-family project with nominal commercial.

The 2023 project consisted of 36,410-sq ft of development with 24 multi-family residential units and 8,850 sq ft of commercial floor area. The revised project consists of 20 multi-family residential units and 12,000 sq ft of commercial floor area. The 600-sq ft community room supports the residential use. For this latest 2024 project, the applicant reduced residential units by four units and increased the commercial floor area by 3,150 sq ft. Given that the current zoning only allows eight total residential units, staff’s recommendation for denial reflects the nominal changes to the project as it has evolved since 2022.

The site is zoned Highway Commercial. Under General Plan policies, areas assigned for future commercial development are supposed to be protected and reserved for longterm economic interests. The property also has a Mixed Use Overlay; however, under the standard allowance for residential uses in the Mixed Use Overly, the 12,000 sq ft of commercial area would allow a maximum of eight residential units, and these units would have to rely on a monolithic, three-story building with a design substantially different than what is proposed. Instead of the zoning code amendment to address the zoning issue, the applicant has requested a Development Agreement. As discussed supra, this approach should be rejected by the City Council to preserve the finite parcels 62 11
that lend themselves toward commercial development, especially Highway Commercial zoned parcels. Approximately 60,000 vehicle trips pass by the Oak Avenue interchange daily.

Approval of the Development Agreement would require the City Council to make three additional findings in addition to the Design Review findings discussed supra. Staff’s recommendation for a denial reflects staff’s assessment that the requisite findings cannot be made for seamless, harmonious, and orderly development of the subject property.

Clarity on Proposed Improvements to the 4th Street Right-of-Way The applicant’s November 29, 2022 letter refers to revisions on Sheets C2.0 and C6.0 for clearer indications of the proposed changes to the 4th Street Right-of-Way. Staff reviewed the subject revisions. The existing and proposed improvements are not clear.

Staff requested a separate exhibit more clearly showing these specific improvements.

The applicant team indicated that they would prepare such an exhibit; however, as of the date of this staff report, it has not yet been received.

Proposed Density and Adequacy of Parking
The 2024 project has not changed the location or height of the proposed building, nor has it increased the number of proposed off-street parking spaces. The floor area of the building has been reduced from 36,410 sq ft to 34,300 sq ft with the elimination of two apartments towards each end of the building. It remains a three-story building with 82 off-street parking spaces. The project includes 20 residential units. The parking demand calculation included in the revised plan set on Sheet A0.1 notes that 82 parking spaces are required by the City’s Zoning Code. However, this is the minimum required number of off-street parking spaces. The City may require more than the minimum number of spaces depending on the circumstances. This amount of parking may not be insufficient for the mixed uses and depends on information that the City lacks at this time. The applicant would not have additional areas to add off-street parking or mitigate should parking become problematic. Were the project to move forward as proposed, the City Fire Chief has recommended that 4th Street be marked for no parking to ensure adequate access for emergency responders. This would eliminate most on-street parking nearest the site. Overflow parking likely would spill over onto neighboring residential streets.

Impact of the Project on Local Roadways and Intersections A traffic impact analysis was included with the 2022 project application and was incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. The applicant submitted an updated traffic analysis for the 2023 project. Despite few project changes, the impacts are reduced by approximately 1/3 compared to the 2022 project. The 2024 project would be expected to have similar traffic impacts as the 2023 project, given the relatively minor changes in the 2024 project. Both the original traffic study and the updated study for the 2023 project fail to identify project-specific impacts, and instead rely on required impact fees for mitigation. If approved, the City, as lead agency, can and should weigh the utility of the submitted traffic study information, because its conclusions underscore the risks with approving a project without the proper scrutiny which CEQA demands; notably, in areas such as this, where the underlying 63 12
commercial zoning contrasts with residential uses, especially multi-family uses, as presented in the subject project.

As is seen with projects in the Walnut Avenue Specific Plan, a typical traffic impact analysis considers build-out conditions; for example, the assignment of cost-sharing by projects for identified circulation improvements.

Challenges in Managing Parking for Commercial and Residential Uses The revised project maintains the same 82-space parking lot. No parking management plan has been submitted for review. If approved by the City Council, a parking management program should be a condition of approval. This weakness in the current project underscores the contrasting parking and circulation impacts between residential and commercial uses. With commercial uses, the public benefits from well thought out and clear controls over parking spaces. With residential uses, many inimical circulation and on-street parking problems likely may occur. A review of the site plan reveals very limited area for circulation, due to the narrowness of the parcel. It is never clarified how, if at all, the residential and commercial spaces may be apportioned. The necessary tools, such as gates, or assigned parking and enforcement required to mitigate the onsite parking challenges is magnified when contrasting adverse impacts occur between unmitigated and dense residential development and commercial uses.

Proposal for 3-BR, 1-BA Units
There are six three-BR units in the current project design. Four of these are secondfloor units, and two are first-floor units that would be ADA-accessible units. An additional full bath is now proposed for these six units, such that they will be three-BR/two-bath units.

Lack of In-Unit Laundry Appliances
The revised project includes stacked washer/dryer units in each residential unit.

Proposed Laundromat and New Uses in Multi-Family Residential Zoning District The subject project fails to identify any commercial uses. This underscores the predominance and inappropriateness of the proposed, primarily residential development. The parcel is zoned Highway Commercial (C-H) because this is what the City has deemed in its General Plan process to be the predetermined use of the site, which is what the C-H zoning reflects. Previously, the applicant proposed a laundromat and convenience store.

Proposed Alcohol Sales from Convenience Store
The subject property fails to identify any commercial uses. This underscores the predominance of the residential units in the proposal. It remains primarily a multi-family residential project. A retail store is an allowed use in this district, and any proposed alcohol sales would be subject to the normal permitting and licensing requirements for alcoholic beverages sales, which includes obtaining an CUP for alcohol sales from the City Planning Commission.

Conclusion
Staff recommends denial of the project. The current project is only incrementally revised from the 2023 project. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the 2023 64 13
project because the residential/commercial mix is inordinately weighted towards residential uses, and therefore remains inconsistent with the underlying zoning at the site, which would permit a maximum of just eight residential units. Here, the project is still an apartment building. Although the 2024 project reduced unit counts by four units, and increased commercial to 12,000 sq ft, the proposed project remains predominantly a multi-family residential project. Its 20 residential units offer a dense residential development, in contrast to a wide range of acceptable commercial uses with solid access to Highway 101, which is codified as the preferred use in the General Plan and Highway Commercial zoning of the site. The proposed Development Agreement does not change this. The applicant would be correct that the Planning Commission and City Council may approve the subject project as proposed. However, staff analyzed the project’s compatibility with the existing and adjoining area and formulated its professional recommendation to deny premise upon the purpose of Design Review and the Development Agreement to “promote the orderly and harmonious growth of the City.” As proposed, this project neither is orderly nor is it harmonious.

This is reflected in the review of the Findings and Evidence in the resolution (Attachment 1). These findings were reviewed and affirmed by both the Planning Commission in their September 5, 2023 review of the 2023 project and by the City Council in the Council’s September 26, 2023 review of the 2023 project.

As detailed supra, the project is significantly more dense than was anticipated in the General Plan and Zoning Code. In both Planning Commission meetings, the Commission provided explicit direction regarding their concerns situating a predominantly residential project on this commercially zoned parcel and, after reviewing the 2023 project, reaffirmed that with their unanimous vote recommending that the City Council deny the Design Review for the revised project. Moreover, the City Council denied the 2023 project while expressing a willingness to review a revised project at the Council’s meeting of September 26, 2023. In reviewing the slightly modified 2024 project, the City Council may disagree with the Planning Commission’s recommendation and indicate that the Council would like to approve the 2024 project as currently proposed or with specific additional revisions. This would require staff to return with revised findings for approval.

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
The Planning Commission reviewed the 2023 version of the project on September 5, 2023, and on a 5-0 vote, adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council deny the proposed Design Review and deny a Development Agreement. The Commission noted that the project revisions that were made by the applicant in an attempt to address the Planning Commission’s comments and concerns on the prior (September 2022) version of the development were inadequate and reiterated concerns with the project’s consistency with the underlying Highway Commercial zoning and land use designations. The Commission also expressed skepticism that the parking lot operations could be effectively managed. The Commission expressed that the project site was a key commercially-zoned site with excellent visibility from Highway 101 and convenient access from Highway 101 and the surrounding streets. 65 14

PRIOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
The City Council reviewed the 2023 version of the project on September 26, 2023, and on a 3-1-1 vote, adopted a resolution denying the proposed Design Review and attendant Development Agreement. The Council expressed a willingness to consider a revised project and hear more about the new developer that had been identified for the project, but the motion and vote were to deny the project.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of reviewing the various project proposals is the responsibility of the applicant.

There is no impact to the City’s General Plan for the review of the project, unless the applicant fails to remit to the city money owed.

CEQA REVIEW
The City, as lead agency, performed an Initial Study on the project, resulting in a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to CEQA. Because this is a recommendation for denial of the Design Review, the City Council is not being requested to adopt an environmental document.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council adopt Resolution 2024-### denying the Design Review and rejecting the draft Development Agreement for the proposed Palmas de Greenfield project.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-26, with revisions to the resolution or findings

2. Continue the item for additional information or to allow the applicant to make City-directed changes to the project

3. Provide direction to staff to return with a resolution approving the project’s Design Review and an ordinance for adoption of the associated Development Agreement

PROPOSED MOTION
I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT RESOLUTION 2024-26, A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD

DENYING A DESIGN REVIEW AND REJECTING A DRAFT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A PROPOSED THREE-STORY, 34,300-SQ FT BUILDING WITH 20 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 600-SQ FT COMMUNITY ROOM, AND 12,000 SQ FT OF COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA ON A 1.42-ACRE UNDEVELOPED SITE ON THE EAST SIDE OF 4TH STREET BETWEEN APPLE AND PALM AVENUES (APN: 024-151-011).
66 15

ATTACHMENTS

1. City Council Resolution No. 2024-26

2. Planning Commission minutes from September 6, 2022 (pertinent excerpt)

3. City letter dated September 8, 2022

4. City letter dated November 12, 2022 on revised project

5. Applicant letter dated November 29, 2022 and revised June 27, 2023, summarizing project modifications

6. Planning Commission minutes from September 5, 2023 (pertinent excerpt)

7. City Council minutes from September 26, 2023 (pertinent excerpt)

8. City letter dated December 8, 2023 documenting City Council denial

9. Project Plan Set – 2024 Plan Set and 2023 Plan Set (webpage links)

10.Draft Development Agreement

11.Draft MND Documents (webpage link)

12.March 21, 2024 Letter from the Applicant Team
67 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-26

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD

DENYING A DESIGN REVIEW AND REJECTING A DRAFT

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A PROPOSED THREE-STORY,
34,300-SQ FT BUILDING WITH 20 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
UNITS, A 600-SQ FT COMMUNITY ROOM, AND 12,000 SQ FT OF
COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA ON A 1.42-ACRE UNDEVELOPED SITE
ON THE EAST SIDE OF 4TH STREET BETWEEN APPLE AND PALM
AVENUES (APN: 024-151-011); PERMIT PLN #20018)
WHEREAS, the current revised project was submitted to the City on or about November 2023, and the applicant has proposed various projects since 2018, for which none complied with the parcel’s underlying zoning and land use designation established by the City of Greenfield’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance as amended: and WHEREAS, the subject project and past projects always required a legislative remedy such as a zoning code amendment and redesignated land use designation to comply with applicable regulations, at present the parcel is zoned Highway Commercial with a Mixed Use Overlay, which expands the orbit of development slightly, and WHEREAS, Section 17.16.060 of the City’s Zoning Code requires Design Review for all mixed use developments; and
WHEREAS, on or about January 2019, the applicant first approached the City and proposed development at the subject site; and
WHEREAS, various iterations of projects have been presented to the City since none of the proposals have been consistent with its Highway Commercial zoning; and WHEREAS, the project site is Zoned Highway-Commercial (C-H) with a Mixed-Use Overlay, which allows one residential unit per floor for every 3,000 sq ft of commercial development; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.42.030.D of the City’s Zoning Code, additional units beyond the one unit per floor per 3,000 sq ft of commercial development may be allowed by means of a Development Agreement adopted pursuant to Section

17.16.160; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.16.160.B of the City’s Zoning Code designates the City Council as the approving authority for Development Agreements, after review and recommendations by the Community Development Director and the Planning Commission; and
68 2
WHEREAS, Section 17.14.050 of the City’s Zoning Code states in part that when a proposed project require more than one permit with more than one approving authority, final action shall be taken by the highest level approving authority, which in this case, is the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Design Review and Development Agreement requests in accordance with the requirements of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires an assessment of the environmental impacts of a proposed project and the adoption of all feasible measures to mitigate those impacts; and
WHEREAS, City staff determined that an Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was the required CEQA documentation for the project and prepared and circulated for review a Draft IS/MND pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and the City's local standards, with the MND evaluating the environmental impacts of the project and identifying mitigation measures to reduce potential significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level; and WHEREAS, the current project is a revision to a similar mixed-use project at the project site, which was considered by the Planning Commission on September 6, 2022, and recommended for denial by the City Council on a 4-0-1 vote of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the current project was reviewed by the Community Development Director and through interdepartmental review with a recommendation for denial of the project; and
WHEREAS, the application for the proposed Design Review and Development Agreement was considered by the Planning Commission at duly-noticed public hearing on September 5, 2023, and recommended for denial by the City Council on a 5-0 vote of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the current project is a revision to a similar mixed-use project at the project site, which was considered by the City Council at duly-noticed public hearing on September 26, 2023, and was denied by the City Council on a 3-1-1 vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all written and verbal evidence attendant to Permit No. 20018 regarding Design Review and the Development Agreement application during public hearing, and considered commercial and mixed use development in the City’s General Plan and the requirements of City of Greenfield Municipal Code Chapter Sections 17.16.070; 17.16.160; 17.42.030.C; 17.26; 17.32, and

17.72; and
69 3
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the below Findings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Greenfield, after consideration of all written and verbal evidence regarding this matter at the public hearing, does hereby make the following findings:
(1) FINDING: That any two-story construction requires notification of property owners pursuant to Section 17.14.040, “Public Notices,” of this title.

EVIDENCE: Notice of the proposed development and both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings where hearings were held on the design review application was properly given to all property owners of record within 500 feet of the project site via U.S. Mail, posting on site in a location clearly visible to the public, and publication in the local newspaper of general circulation, as required by Section 17.14.040 of the City of Greenfield Zoning Code.
(2) FINDING: That the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the general plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, specific plan provisions, planned unit development provisions, applicable City design guidelines, and improvement standards adopted by the City.

EVIDENCE: The proposed site is designated by the general plan for Highway Commercial Uses and is in the Highway Commercial (C-H) Zoning District with a Mixed Use Overlay. The Mixed Use Overlay allows a limited amount of residential development for sites with predominantly commercial development. One residential unit per floor is allowed for every 3,000 sq ft of commercial floor area. Since the project is proposing 12,000 sq ft of commercial floor area, under the City’s Mixed Use Overlay, the project would be allowed a maximum of eight residential units for a three-story development. The project proposes 20 residential units, which far exceeds the allowable residential development standards under the Mixed Use Overlay. As such, the applicant is requesting approval of a Development Agreement for the additional residential units pursuant to Section

17.42.030.D. The granting of a Development Agreement is a discretionary action of the City Council, and the City is under no obligation to enter into a Development Agreement. The City Council would prefer to see a larger proportion of commercial development for the project site and does not support the requested Development Agreement. As such, this finding fails because it cannot be made.
70 4
(3) FINDING: That the proposed architecture, site design, and landscape design are suitable for the purposes of the building and the site and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and the community.

EVIDENCE: The architecture of the proposed building is well-articulated and designed, with the two-story components on the ends of the building and the three-story components towards the center of the building. Approximately 25% of the total site area will be landscaping and open space, which complies with the landscaping coverage requirements for the Highway Commercial Zoning District. Although the project meets the required minimum number of off-street parking spaces in Table 17.58-1 (Parking Requirements by Land Use) of the City’s Zoning Code, Section 17.58.050.C (Minimum/Maximum Parking Requirements) states, in part, that the number of off-street parking spaces required in Table 17.58-1 shall be considered the minimum necessary for each use and that the approving authority may increase these parking requirements if it is determined that these requirements are inadequate for a specific project. The Planning Commission voiced concerns regarding the sufficiency of off-street parking provided, and how parking spaces will be allocated and/or reserved for the residential and commercial uses, and the City Council has similar concerns. Accordingly, this finding cannot be made.
(4) FINDING: That the architecture, including the character, scale and quality of the design, relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing and similar elements establishes a clear design concept and is compatible with the character of buildings on adjoining and nearby properties.

EVIDENCE: The architecture of the proposed building is well-articulated with a cohesive design. of a ranch style and utilizes a light and neutral color palette. Exterior elevations and detailing are appropriate for the proposed design theme. The architecture of the new mixed-use building, its scale, relationship with the site and neighboring single- and multi-family residences, building materials, and colors establishes a clear design concept and is compatible with other single- and multi-family residences in the surrounding and nearby neighborhoods. Exterior lighting is downward-directed and shielded to prevent light intrusion onto adjacent properties. The proposed exterior lighting is appropriate for the type and scale of the proposed mixeduse development. 71 5
(5) FINDING: That the proposed project addresses vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian transportation modes of circulation.

EVIDENCE: The number of on-site bicycle parking spaces exceeds the requirements of the Zoning Code. Public sidewalks will be constructed along the 4th Street frontage where there currently is not a sidewalk. The new sidewalk along 4th Street will connect to the existing sidewalks to the south to provide a more continuous sidewalk between Apple and Oak Avenues.

However, as discussed supra, the Planning Commission voiced concerns regarding the sufficiency of the number of off-street parking provided, as well as how parking spaces will be allocated and/or reserved for the proposed residential and commercial uses, and the City Council has similar concerns with parking. Accordingly, evidence is lacking that this finding can be made. (6) FINDING: The development agreement is consistent with the general plan objectives, policies, land uses, and implementation programs and any other applicable specific plans.

EVIDENCE: The discussion of Commercial Uses in the City’s General Plan Land Use Element notes that the provision of commercial land use designations is critical for the long-term economic success of the City. The City’s Land Use Element encourages further commercial development on its commercially zoned properties. The proposed project is a primarily residential mixed-use development on a key undeveloped Highway Commercial site.

The requested Development Agreement may allow a larger proportion of residential development than would be permitted under the City’s Mixed-Use Overlay. Use of a Development Agreement to deviate from the base zoning to such degree, is contrary to the objectives of developing commercial projects on commercially designated sites to maintain the long-term economic success of the City. Accordingly, this finding cannot be made. (7) FINDING: The development agreement is in conformance with the public convenience and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the City as a whole.

EVIDENCE: The project site is a key Highway Commercial zoned parcel visible to Highway 101 and serving both City residents and the regional area. 72 6
It is one of the few remaining vacant commercially zoned properties on the east side of Highway 101 other than the areas within the Walnut Avenue Specific Plan. The approval of the requested Development Agreement would allow a primarily residential mixed use project, rather than a predominantly commercial mixed use project that could be developed without the Development Agreement. The dominant multifamily residential nature of the proposed project would drastically limit new commercial development at the site sufficient that a predominantly commercial development is impossible; and in so doing, the consequences would have a detrimental impact on public convenience and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area. There is no evidence in the record that this development will support the general neighborhood or general welfare of the surrounding areas, given the expectation in the city’s General Plan policies that the parcel host commercial development with at-most, nominal residential, not the reverse. (8) FINDING: The development agreement will promote the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

EVIDENCE: There is a single-story residential neighborhood easterly and southeast of the project site. The Development Agreement is requested to allow the development of a primarily residential multifamily development (20 units) on a site zoned for Highway Commercial uses. The resultant project – essentially an apartment building - would not contribute to the orderly development of the site because the underlying zoning is Highway Commercial. Even the overlay district only permits a maximum eight residential units. Use of a Development Agreement to triple the maximum residential density permitted by its zoning, turns the General Plan land use designation and highway commercial zoning designation upside down.

Approval would effectively replace a commercially zoned property with an apartment building. Use of the Development Agreement for this purpose is inimical to orderly development, because the “DA” is a tool intended to allow decision-makers to accommodate unique, exceptional development opportunities that normal zoning leaves in abeyance; and not to enable excessive residential densities that otherwise is not permitted. The parcel is properly zoned Highway Commercial.

EVIDENCE: Planning Commission deliberations at both the September 6, 2022 and September 5, 2023 meetings emphasize the Planning Commission’s expectation that development on the parcel retain its basic 73 7
character as a commercially zoned property. The City Council concurs that the parcel should retain its basic character as a commercially zoned property.

EVIDENCE: City Council proceedings of September 26, 2023.

EVIDENCE: None of the traffic reports attendant to the project identified project-specific mitigation resultant from residential development. There is no evidence in the record demonstrating that the anticipated excess demand for off-street parking would not saturate the surrounding residential neighborhoods with increased parking conflicts. This may become an actual catalyst for accelerated deterioration of the existing neighborhoods, due to inadequate residential parking for units on the project site. This in turn, typically lowers property values. Consequently, this finding cannot be made.

EVIDENCE: Administrative Record – Permit file PLN #20018 (9) FINDING: That the proposed project is consistent with the Permitted Uses set forth in Section 17.42.030.C for the Mixed Use Overlay:

EVIDENCE: The site’s current zoning designation is Highway Commercial with a Mixed Use Overlay. The Mixed Use Overlay allows a limited amount of residential development only for sites with predominantly commercial development. The project lacks predominantly commercial development.

One residential unit per floor is allowed for every 3,000 sq ft of commercial floor area. Since the project is proposing 12,000 sq ft of commercial floor area, under the Mixed Use Overlay, the project would be allowed a maximum of eight residential units for a three-story development. The project proposes 20 residential units, which far exceeds the allowable residential development under the Mixed Use Overlay. As such the applicant is requesting approval of a Development Agreement for the additional residential units pursuant to Section 17.42.030.D. The granting of a Development Agreement is a discretionary action of the City Council, and the City is under no obligation to enter into a Development Agreement. The City Council prefers to see commercial development on the site, or a dramatically larger proportion of commercial development than is proposed; and does not support the requested Development Agreement. Therefore, this finding cannot be made.

EVIDENCE: Administrative record for Permit file PLN #20018 74 8
(10) FINDING: That the proposed project is consistent with the characteristics of the Highway Commercial Zoning District as set forth in Section 17.32.020.C, which states in part: Development in the highway commercial district is expected to be grouped near State Highway 101. Uses in this district should be designed to serve primarily city residents but have regional draw. Uses in the C-H zone should be destination places with a diverse mix of uses and activities. Potential uses within the zone may include gas stations, restaurants, large scale retail, hotels, and entertainment venues. These uses benefit from proximity to freeway interchanges to accommodate higher traffic volumes associated with "destination" places.

EVIDENCE: The project is east of and adjacent to the Highway 101 corridor.

With only the 4th Street Right-of-Way separating the proposed mixed use development from the Highway, and the location of the site between the Walnut Avenue and Oak Avenue highway interchanges, the project site is a prime location for highway commercial development. The Zoning Code demonstrates the site may support a variety of commercial uses serving both the City residents and the region, as intended by its General Plan designation. Here, the dense residential development/apartment building, exceeds the density allowed under the Mixed Use Overlay without the granting of a Development Agreement. The Planning Commission would prefer to see a larger proportion of commercial development for the project site and does not support the requested Development Agreement.

Consequently, this finding cannot be made.

EVIDENCE: Planning Commission proceedings of September 6, 2022 and September 5, 2023.

EVIDENCE: City Council proceedings of September 26, 2023.

EVIDENCE: City of Greenfield General Plan and Zoning Code EVIDENCE: Administrative record for Permit file PLN #20018 (11) FINDING: That both the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Greenfield have conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project, its planning entitlements, and the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project and has considered all written and verbal evidence regarding the project, its planning entitlements, and the associated IS/MND at the public hearing.

EVIDENCE: Administrative Record for Permit file PLN #20018 (12) FINDING: That pursuant to Section 15270 of the State Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA, CEQA does not apply to projects which a public 75 9
agency rejects or disapproves.

EVIDENCE: Since the City Council is denying the proposed project, Section 15270 of the State CEQA Guidelines is applicable, and no action on any CEQA document is necessary.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Greenfield has considered all written and verbal evidence regarding this Design Review and Development Agreement (PLN Permit 20018) at the public hearing and does hereby:

1. Takes no action on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project; and

2. Denies said Design Review and Development Agreement for the 1.42-acre parcel located on the east side of 4th Street between Apple and Palm Avenues (APN: 024-151-011).

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council held on the 26th day of March 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
____________________________________
Robert White, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________________
Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
76 1
City of Greenfield
Greenfield Civic Center
599 El Camino Real
Greenfield, CA 93927
Planning Commission Minutes
Tuesday, September 6, 2022
6:00 p.m.

CHAIR STEPHANIE GARCIA

VICE CHAIR TINA MARTINEZ

COMMISSIONER ERNEST GALLARDO

COMMISSIONER ROBERT URQUIDES

COMMISSIONER CYNTHIA ZAVALA
A. CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order by Chair Garcia at 6:00 p.m.

B. ROLL CALL

Present: Chair Garcia, Vice Chair Martinez (arrived at 6:03 p.m.), Commissioner Zavala, Commissioner Gallardo

Absent: Commissioner Urquides
Staff Present: Community Development Director Paul Mugan, Building Official Gabriel Martinez, Acting Chief Police Guillermo Mixer, Management Analyst Yesenia Attachment 2
77 2
de la Torre, Consulting Planner Rob Mullane, AICP, Consulting Permit Technician Austin Arabia
C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Pledge led by Chair Garcia.

D. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Speaker: Laura, Greenfield Resident, expressed her concern for fixing 12th Street after Magnolia Apartments are completed and for the Greenfield sign being delayed.

E. CONSENT AGENDA

1. Adoption of the August 2, 2022, Planning Commission Minutes

2. Approval of Numerical Addresses for Woodridge Townhomes Project

3. Approval of Numerical Addresses for Walnut Grove Phases II and III Project Motion by Commissioner Zavala to approve the August 2, 2022, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, to approve the Numerical Addresses for Woodridge Townhomes Project, and to approve the Numerical Addresses for Walnut Grove Phases II and III Project; seconded by Commissioner Gallardo.

VOTE
Ayes: Zavala, Gallardo, Martinez, Garcia
Noes: None

Absent: Urquides
Motion carried 4-0-1
F. PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. Consideration of a Resolution Recommending that the City Council Approve a Rezone and General Plan Amendment for a 0.41-acre project site at the southeast corner of Elm Avenue and St. Charles Place; APNs: 024-392-001 through -006
a. Staff Report
b. Open/Close Public Hearing
c. Planning Commission Discussion
Consulting Planner Rob Mullane presented the staff report. He stated that Hugh Walker is requesting a minor change to allowable uses for the project due to its current commercial base zoning.
78 3
Public Hearing opened by Chair Garcia
Hugh Walker, Vice President of Stonebridge, explained that it is difficult to market the townhomes as live/work and expressed concerns with parking issues if businesses are required on site.

Seeing no other speakers, Chair Garcia closed the Public Hearing.

Commissioner Gallardo stated he saw no effect from rezoning the site and recommended that the project move forward.

Vice Chair Martinez expressed her support for the requested change in zoning.

Chair Garcia asked if this change would affect future projects.

Mr. Mullane explained the rezoning will only affect this project.

Motion by Commissioner Zavala that the Planning Commission Adopt Resolution 2022-09 recommending that the City Council (1) Amend the City of Greenfield General Plan to reclassify certain real property at the southeast corner of Elm Avenue and St Charles Place from downtown commercial to medium density residential and, (2) Amend the City of Greenfield Zoning Map to rezone the subject property from retail business with a gateway and mixed-use overlay to multiple family residential; seconded by Vice Chair Martinez.

VOTE
Ayes: Zavala, Martinez, Gallardo, Garcia
Noes: None

Absent: Urquides
Motion carried 4-0-1

2. Consideration of a Resolution Recommending that the City Council Approve a Rezone, General Plan Amendment/land use designation change, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Design Review Permit for the development of a three-story, 36,410-sq ft building with 32 multi-family residential units, a convenience store, and laundromat on a 1.42-acre project site on the east side of 4th Street between Apple and Palm Avenues (APN:024-011). a. Staff Report
b. Open/Close Public Comments
c. Planning Commission Discussion
Mr. Mullane presented the staff report. He explained the proposed project includes 32 multi-family units and two commercial spaces: a laundromat and a convenience 79 4
store with alcohol sales. He noted that both commercial uses would be open to the public.

Public Hearing opened by Chair Garcia
Jessica Bautista, a Greenfield resident, expressed her concerns about the sales of alcohol. She also mentioned that the apartments should have washer and dryer hook ups.

Seeing no other speakers, Chair Garcia closed the public hearing.

Chair Garcia stated a concern about the loss of prime Highway Commercial Zoned lands, particularly along the Highway 101 corridor. Commissioner Gallardo asked where the laundromat will be located.

Mr. Mullane responded the laundromat will be located on the first floor.

Commissioner Gallardo asked if residents will be living on top of laundromat.

Mr. Mullane responded that residents will be living on top of laundromat.

Commissioner Zavala asked if laundromat will be open for everyone and if apartments will have hook ups.

Mr. Mullane responded that laundromat will be open for the public, and that the applicant should be able to field the question regarding laundry hook ups.

Commissioner Zavala expressed her concern regarding adequacy of parking spaces and how the site will be managed with both commercial users and residents.

Chair Garcia asked where the customer parking will be located.

Mr. Mullane explained that that is not specified on the plans, but that there would be a parking management plan as a condition of approval for City staff review and approval.

Commissioner Gallardo stated that he is concerned with the proposed alcohol sales and about impacts on water supply, particularly from the laundromat use.

Vice Chair Martinez expressed her concerned about safety in that area.

Planning Commission approved a 5-minute recess to allow the project applicant to join the meeting.
80 5
Chair Garcia re-opened the Public Hearing at 6:59 p.m.

David Elliott, Project Architect, joined the meeting via zoom. Mr. Elliot explained that there are no laundry units in the residences and residents will have to use the laundry facility downstairs.

Chair Garcia asked if there is an elevator.

Mr. Elliot responded that there is no elevator.

Chair Garcia asked if there will be residents on ground level.

Mr. Elliot responded that there are units at the ground level and that four of these are reserved as ADA-compliance apartments.

Chair Garcia asked if there are parking restrictions to public.

Mr. Elliot responded that the project has adequate parking according to the City’s off-street parking requirements.

Chair Garcia asked why the 3-bedroom units have only one bathroom.

Mr. Elliot responded there is no building code requirement on more than one bathroom per unit.

Commissioner Gallardo asked if there is a possibility for laundry hook ups.

Mr. Elliot provided additional information on the laundry concept.

Chair Garcia asked if residents will have to pay for laundry.

Mr. Elliot responded that residents will have to pay to use the laundry facility.

Commissioner Zavala asked if there will be a manager on site.

Mr. Elliot responded there will be a manager on site.

Commissioner Zavala asked if units will have air conditioning.

Mr. Elliot responded units will not have air conditioning units.

Commissioner Zavala asked if there will be surveillance. 81 6
Mr. Elliot responded there will be surveillance installed to meet Police Department requirements.

Chair Garcia stated opposition to the inclusion of laundromats as an allowed limited commercial use in the proposed zoning code text amendment.

Motion by Chair Garcia that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed General Plan map amendment, Land Use Element text amendment, rezone, and Zoning Ordinance text amendments and direct the applicant to redesign the project in accordance with the existing General Plan designation and Zoning.

VOTE
Ayes: None
Noes: Garcia, Martinez, Zavala, Gallardo

Absent: Urquides
Motion approved 4-0-1
G. OTHER BUSINESS

1. Code Enforcement Efforts Status Report
a. Staff Report
b. Open/Close Public Comments
c. Planning Commission Discussion
Acting Chief Mixer addressed the Commission. He explained there are 2 Code Enforcement Officers and 2 Animal Control Officers. He also explained all four officers will be crossed trained to Community Services to have continuous people all 7 days a week.

Public comments opened by Chair Garcia.

Speaker 1: Jessica Bautista expressed her concerns with the dissolution of the code enforcement advisory board and code enforcement response in general. She recommended amendments to the City’s Municipal Code to improve Code Enforcement efforts.

Speaker 2: Laura (no last name given), expressed her concern about Code Enforcement response to complaints from residents.

Speaker 3: Gabby (no last name given), expressed a desire to have better follow-up on code enforcement complaints
82 City of Greenfield PO Box 127 / 599 El Camino Real
Greenfield CA 93937
Phone: 831-674-5591 Fax: 831-674-3149
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
September 8, 2022
Mr. David J. Elliott, AIA Via Email: [email protected] David J. Elliott & Associates
17800 Cunha Lane
Salinas, CA 93907
Mr. Eduardo Couttolenc Via Email: [email protected]
1054 University Ave.

Salinas, CA 93901
Re: Planning Commission Action – Palmas de Greenfield Mixed-Use Project General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, and Design Review; Planning Permits #20018 and #21034
Dear Mr. Elliott and Mr. Couttolenc:

On September 6, 2022, the Planning Commission considered the various planning entitlements for the Palmas de Greenfield Mixed-Use Project and recommended denial of the project to the City Council. The Planning Commission’s action was on a 4-0 vote, with the specific motion being:

That the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed General Plan map amendment, Land Use Element text amendment, rezone, and Zoning Ordinance text amendments and direct the applicant to redesign the project in accordance with the existing General Plan designation and Zoning.

The specific concerns expressed by the Commission in recommending denial of the planning entitlements included the following:
1) The loss of Commercial Zoning development opportunities (particularly along the Highway 101 Corridor) as a result of the proposed redesignation and rezoning of the project site;
2) The need for clarity on the proposed improvements to the 4th Street Right-of-Way via an exhibit more clearly depicting the existing ROW improvements and the proposed ROW, including all amenities (curb and gutters, planter areas, planter area, travel lanes, on-street parking areas, etc.);
3) The overall proposed density of the project and the adequacy of the proposed parking; Attachment 3
83 Mr. David Elliott and Mr. Eduardo Couttolenc
Planning Commission Action - Las Palmas Mixed-Use GPA, Rezone, CUP, and Design Review September 8, 2022

4) The impact of the project on local roadways and intersections, particularly for the 4th Street/Oak Avenue/Highway 101 intersections area;
5) The number of parking spaces proposed for a development of that scale as well as challenges in managing how parking is controlled with the proposed mix of residential and commercial uses;
6) The 3-BR, 1-BA units having only one bathroom;
7) The lack of in-unit clothes washer and dryer amenities for the proposed dwelling units; 8) The inclusion of the laundromat in the proposed project and the allowance for laundromats as a limited commercial use for the Multifamily Residential Zoning District; and
9) The proposal for alcohol sales from the convenience store.

The minutes of the September 6, 2022 will be transmitted separately once they are approved by the Commission. In the meantime, the applicant team should advise City staff on the desired next step(s) for the project. The options for the applicant team include the following:
1) Withdraw the project and its various planning applications from consideration. 2) Withdraw the General Plan Amendment application, the Zoning Ordinance Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit applications, and submit a revised project for Design Review consideration by the Planning Commission in accordance with the allowable uses and development standards of the project site’s existing Highway Commercial zoning. 3) Amend the project to address some or most of the Planning Commission concerns regarding the current proposal, and inform staff that you would like the revised project to be considered by the City Council.
4) Inform staff that you would like to have the project as currently proposed to be considered by the City Council.

For Option #2, staff would analyze the revised project and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission as appropriate. For Option #4, based on the Planning Commission’s unanimous motion, staff would be recommending denial of the proposed project to the City Council. For Option #3, staff would review the extent of the proposed project revisions and present these to the City Council. However, given the Planning Commission’s motion, which includes direction to redesign the project to conform with the Highway Commercial Zoning District, the staff recommendation to the City Council would likely be to deny the project.

Please advise the City on the applicant team’s designed next step. Once City staff has received this direction and has had a chance to review any resubmitted planning application materials, staff can advise you on the anticipated timing for scheduling the project for consideration by either the Planning Commission or the City Council.

The project is currently noticed for a public hearing before the City Council on September 13, 2022. However, given the Planning Commission’s recommendation for denial of the project and the need for guidance from the applicant team on next step(s), staff will be requesting a continuance of the item to a date uncertain and will re-notice either the Planning Commission or City Council hearing as a subsequent action.
84 Mr. David Elliott and Mr. Eduardo Couttolenc
Planning Commission Action - Las Palmas Mixed-Use GPA, Rezone, CUP, and Design Review September 8, 2022

Please let me or Community Development Director Paul Mugan know if you have any questions. I may reached at [email protected] or (805) 350-3282, and Mr. Mugan may be reached at [email protected] or (831) 304-0333. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert A. Mullane, AICP,
Consulting Planner
cc: Paul Mugan, Community Development Director
Paul Wood, CPA, City Manager
Jamie Tugel, Public Works Director
Gabe Martinez, CBO, Building Official
Travis Cochrane, City Attorney
Austin Arabia, Contract Permit Technician
85 City of Greenfield PO Box 127 / 599 El Camino Real
Greenfield CA 93937
Phone: 831-674-5591 Fax: 831-674-3149
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
November 11, 2022
Mr. David J. Elliott Via Email: [email protected]
David J. Elliott & Associates
17800 Cunha Lane
Salinas, CA 93907
Re: Project Modification – Palmas Mixed-Use Project General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Design Review; Planning Permits #20018 and #21034 Dear Mr. Elliott:

Thank you for your October 6, 2022 letter noting project revisions that the applicant team would like to make to the Las Palmas Project for Planning Commission reconsideration. The City received the requisite application payment on October 13, 2022, which initiated a 30-day application review of the revised application. City staff have reviewed the summary of proposed project revisions and have determined that the revised application is deemed incomplete, pending the submittal of additional information in support of the request. City staff have the following comments on the revised submittal, many of which we discussed in our recent phone conversation with you and Paul Mugan on Friday, November 4, 2022.

1. City staff continues to maintain that a commercial only project that meets the allowed uses for the site’s Highway Commercial zoning is what the Planning Commission is looking for, in view of the Commission’s comments from their September 6, 2022 review of the project. We recommend that you revise the project accordingly (to be a primarily commercial project, rather than a primarily residential project).

2. In support of Item #2 in the City’s September 8, 2022 letter regarding the Planning Commission consideration of the project, provide a clear site plan enlargement and a cross section of the project’s 4th Street frontage showing, noting, and dimensioning as appropriate all existing and proposed improvements in the Right of Way. The additional exhibits should clearly denote, the property line, centerline of 4th Street, and the Caltrans Right-of-Way, in addition to existing and proposed improvements.

3. City staff recommend in addition to the additional exhibit noted in Item 2, that the applicant team provide a revised narrative of the proposed project revisions, as the October 6, 2022 letter has a few typos and should also respond to this letter.

4. To address Planning Commission concerns regarding the impact of the project on local Attachment 4
86 Mr. David Elliott
Revised Las Palmas Mixed-Use Project - GPA, Rezone, CUP, and Design Review November 11, 2022

roadways and intersections, City staff recommend that the applicant team provide a summary of the traffic report’s analysis of these impacts. Should the applicant team not provide this, City staff will provide such a summary for the staff report; however, it may be best to have the project traffic engineer provide this information.

5. Please provide a revised floor plan for any units that are revised in response to Planning Commission comments on the September 2022 proposed project. For example, since the accessible units are now proposed to include 1 ½ baths, provide a revised floor plan exhibit for these units. If other units are modified, an exhibit with the modified floor plan should be provided.

6. For the proposed change in the intended users for the laundromat facilities, a revised project description should be provided noted theses changes. As discussed with you on November 4, 2022, a convenience store with or without alcoholic beverage sales would not be allowed in the Highway Commercial zoning district. The other 1,600-sq ft space should be noted as a community center or other allowed residential-serving use, and a revised project description should be submitted for staff, Planning Commission, and City Council review. The convenience store use should be removed from the proposal, as should the beer and wine sales. Having these uses available only to the residents of the project is still a commercial use and is not allowed in the proposed Highway Commercial Zoning District.

We look forward to receiving and reviewing these additional clarifications and application materials, and once received and reviewed, can advise you on a tentative date for reconsideration by the Planning Commission. It is our understanding that such a review by the Planning Commission would be conceptual in scope, and if received well, a full revised submittal, including a revised environmental analysis, would be required prior to formal consideration of the project’s planning entitlements by City decision-makers. Please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or (805) 350-3282 should you have any questions regarding this letter. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert A. Mullane, AICP,
Consulting Planner
cc: Paul Mugan, Community Development Director
Jamie Tugel, Public Works Director
Doug Pike, PE, City Engineer
Gabriel Martinez, CBO, City Building Official
Jim Langborg, Fire Chief
Jim Dias, Contract Fire Marshal
87 Mr. David Elliott
Revised Las Palmas Mixed-Use Project - GPA, Rezone, CUP, and Design Review November 11, 2022

Bill Mixer, Acting Police Chief
Paul Wood, CPA, City Manager
Austin Arabia, Contract Permit Technician
Eduardo Couttolenc, Property Owner and Applicant
88 Attachment 5
89 90
Attachment 6
91 92
93 City Council Minutes
September 26, 2023
Page | 1

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2023

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor White called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mayor White, Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez and Councilmembers Martinez and Ortiz ABSENT: None
STAFF: City Manager Wood, Chief Langborg, Public Works Director Tugel, Community Development Director Mugan, IT Director Espinosa, City Attorney Thompson, Assistant Planner Meza, Management Analyst de la Torre, City Clerk Rathbun GUESTS: Gail Stewart-White, Avelina Torres, Ernest Gallardo, John Huerta, Jr., Beatriz Diaz, Stephanie Garcia, Diana Salinas, Javier Sanchez, Jesus Suarez, Jessica Bautista, Liz Valenzuela, Juergen Smith

INVOCATION BY PASTOR DIANA SALINAS
Invocation was given by Mr. Valenzuela.
.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
All recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9
Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code - 1 case
Meeting adjourned to closed session at 6:03 p.m.

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
Meeting reconvened to open session at 6:56 p.m.

There was no reportable action.

AGENDA REVIEW
None.

CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
Attachment 7
94 City Council Minutes
September 26, 2023
Page | 3
reported on the events that were happening at the parks such as movie night and would like for staff to continue doing these events. He stated that the area near Rancho San Miguel was cleared from the homeless and asked if the people were offered services and what services were offered. She reported that she was happy that a flag was up at Patriot Park. She stated that she would be attending, with Council’s approval, an event with Assemblyman Rivas in Salinas. Council concurred that Councilmember Ortiz would be able to attend the event.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez stated that she met with a person today and would be meeting with someone else tomorrow one on one. She stated that she would be happy to do that and asked if anyone would like to meet with her to please contact her. She asked about the Harvest Festival booth fee of $650. She stated that there were local vendors that previously had a booth that were very surprised about how much the fee was. City Manager Wood stated that the fee was more than in previous years and that anyone would be able to call Mr. Victor Garcia to discuss the fee. Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez asked if they could get a report on this matter.

Mayor White announced that clean up day on October 7th and stated that residents could bring their items to the Corporation Yard. She also reminded everyone that Tri-Cities did have a service that they would pick up large items from your home if residents call to schedule an appointment. He stated that on October 9th Supervisor Lopez would be having a listening session at 5:30 p.m. He also announced the Harvest Festival would be on October 15th.

Councilmember Ortiz stated that she had cancelled her District meeting on October 7th.

CONSENT ITEMS
A MOTION by Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz to approve the consent Items including Warrants #319363 through #319466 and Bank Drafts #5631 through #5649 in the amount of $1,038,519.47; Minutes of the September 12, 2023 City Council Meeting, Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance #567, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Cancelling of the Existing Development Agreement for Cannabis Cultivation and Distribution Facilities for Second Sun, LLC and Golden State Alternative Care Inc. (Developer and Licensee) at 721 and 700 El Camino Real” and Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance #568, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Cancelling of the Existing Development Agreement for Cannabis Cultivation and Distribution Facilities for Dave Bos Detail, LLC and Emerald Mission (Developer and Licensee) at 801 El Camino Real”. AYES: Mayor White Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, Councilmembers Ortiz and Tipton. ABSTAIN: Councilmember Martinez. Motion carried.

Mayor White stepped down at 7:31 p.m. due to a conflict of interest.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD DENYING A DESIGN REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A PROPOSED THREE-STORY, 36,410-SQ FT BUILDING WITH 24 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 2,700-SQ FT COMMON AREA, AND 8,885 SQ FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A 1.42-ACRE UNDEVELOPED SITE ON THE EAST SIDE OF 4TH STREET BETWEEN APPLE AND PALM AVENUES
(APN: 024-151-011)
RESOLUTION #2023-120
Staff report was given by Community Development Director Mugan.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez opened the public hearing at 7:51 p.m.

David Elliott, representing the applicant, gave a brief description of the project. 95 City Council Minutes
September 26, 2023
Page | 4
Christine Kemp, legal counsel for the applicant, explained the development agreement and asked that the Council consider and approve the project.

Laura Mireles stated that this project would be good for the community and businesses like these were needed and not like the cannabis businesses.

Mr. Elliott asked that the Council approve option #2 in order to be able to come back with a reduced number of units and new design.

Councilmember Tipton asked how they were going to ensure that only one family would be living in each unit. Mr. Elliott stated that they would ensure that only one family was in each unit. Councilmember Tipton asked if the laundromat and store were public. Mr. Elliott stated that it would depend on the zoning and that a development agreement would be the best way to go. Councilmember Tipton asked how many commercial units were available. Mr. Elliott stated that the space could be for one to nine tenants depending on how large the tenants were.

Councilmember Ortiz asked what they were charging for the apartments. He stated that he was not sure; however, they would have five units allocated for Greenfield teachers.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez closed the public hearing at 8:17 p.m.

Councilmember Martinez stated that a lot of cities were looking at open space land to be utilized for something good and stated that she fully supported this project.

Councilmember Tipton stated that the City Council appointed the Planning Commission and that this project had been denied by the Planning Commission twice.

Councilmember Ortiz stated that she had a lot of concerns with the three story units. She stated that the people in that neighborhood had lived there for 30 years and they would not have the privacy that they have had. She also expressed concern that there was only a chain link fence that was between the apartments and the highway. She stated that these apartments were upscale housing and most people in Greenfield would not be able to afford them. She stated that she believed that this was not good for the City and wanted to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision.

A MOTION by Councilmember Tipton, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz to adopt Resolution #2023-120, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Denying a Design Review and Development Agreement for a Proposed Three-Story, 36,410-sq ft Building with 24 Multi-Family Residential Units, a 2,700-sq ft Common Area, and 8,885 sq feet of Commercial Development on a

1.42-acre Undeveloped Site on the East Side of 4th Street between Apple and Palm Avenues (APN:
024-151-011)”. AYES: Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, Councilmember Ortiz and Councilmember Tipton.

NOES: Councilmember Martinez. ABSTAIN: Mayor White. Motion carried.

Mayor White returned to the meeting at 8:28 p.m.

City Council adjourned for a 10 minute recess
City Council reconvened the meeting at 8:38 p.m.

ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW 20,000-SQ FT PRE-FABRICATED STEEL BUILDING FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS CULTIVATION OPERATIONS, A NEW PAVED PARKING LOT WITH 24 PARKING SPACES, AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON AN EXISTING 3.18-ACRE PARTIALLYDEVELOPED LOT AT 689 EL CAMINO REAL (APN: 109-162-012) RESOLUTION #2023-121
96 City Council Minutes
September 26, 2023
Page | 6
Staff report was given by City Clerk Rathbun.

A MOTION by Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz to appoint Councilmember Tipton and adopt Resolution #2023-124, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Greenfield Making Appointments to the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority (SVSWA)”. All in favor. Motion carried.

BRIEF REPORTS ON CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND MEETINGS ATTENDED BY MAYOR AND

CITY COUNCIL
Mayor White reported on the AMBAG meeting and stated that they reviewed the growth predictions.

Mayor Pro-tem Rodriguez reported on the MST meeting and stated that the biggest news was that the line between Salinas and Gilroy would be starting up again.

Mayor White reported on the Monterey County Mayors’ Association and stated that Supervisor Alejo was in attendance and gave an update on the water projects and the City of Pajaro.

Mayor White reported on the Salinas Valley Mayors/Managers Group and stated that they discussed ag mitigation. City Manager Wood stated that they were working with all five cities in order to have all cities on the same program.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
City Attorney Thompson stated that the Council could, if they would like, pass an ordinance on how City Council vacancies could be filled in the future. She stated that currently the City followed State Law, however, State Law allowed cites to adopt their own ordinance. She stated that if the Council was interested, she could look into it. She also reported that she attended the League of California Cities conference and stated that she learned that Greenfield was one of 27 cities in the State of California that met its Cycle 5 Housing RHNA numbers.

CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Wood stated that he attended the League of the California Cities Conference and stated that he would be putting out a report on the sessions that he attended.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor White adjourned the meeting in memory of Juan Salinas.

Meeting adjourned at 9:28 p.m.
_________________________
Mayor of the City of Greenfield
____________________________
City Clerk of the City of Greenfield
97 City of Greenfield PO Box 127 / 599 El Camino Real
Greenfield CA 93937
Phone: 831-674-5591 Fax: 831-674-3149 www.ci.greenfield.ca.us December 8, 2023
Mr. David J. Elliott
David J. Elliott & Associates
17800 Cunha Lane
Salinas, CA 93907
Via Email: [email protected]
Re: City Council Denial for Permit No. PLN 20018
Dear Mr. Elliott:

On September 26, 2023, the Greenfield City Council denied the Design Review and Development Agreement for the Palmas de Greenfield Mixed-Use Project PLN 20018. The Council adopted Resolution 2023-120, denying the requested Design Review and Development Agreement. Despite staff request to do so, the City Council failed to deny the project with prejudice. This means you may submit a different project. A different project requires a new development project application and attendant fees. There remains a $4,500 overdraft from the previous work done on the denial, therefore, we would appreciate remittance to the city to cover those costs. A new project requires a new application and associate fees, and deposit.

I remain concerned that use of a Development Agreement to circumvent the requirements of the Highway Commercial zoning district could result in an invalid project approval, even if the City Council approves something on its merits. The densities contemplated by your client appear to require a zoning code and general plan amendment to designate the underlying zoning multifamily residential, or other zoning which captures the density you propose. According to the Greenfield City Attorney, a project which circumvents the underlying zoning may not use a DA to authorize development standards inconsistent with the underlying zoning. Neighbors in Support of Appropriate Land Use v. County of Tuolumne is the controlling case law on this issue. According to the formula in the Mixed Use Overlay and Highway Commercial district, 30,000 sq. ft of ground floor commercial would be required in order to also have 20 residential units above the commercial area, in a monolithic three-story building.

Use of the DA could present a problem for you, should a future project submittal fail to meet the development standards of the Mixed Use Overlay District. The proper approach for a project that exceeds six residential units would be a zoning change and General Plan amendment. Once we receive a proper development application, we may need the lawyers to 98 reconcile opinions as to the proper permitting tool to advance your proposal. I am confident we can find common ground.

Attached for your records is City Council Resolution No. 2023-120. Please contact me should you have questions regarding this matter. You may contact me at [email protected] or 831-601-2452.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Paul Mugan
Paul Mugan, Director
Community Development Department
Encl. City Council Resolution No. 2023-120
cc: Brent Slama, AICP
Eduardo Couttolenc, Property Owner and Applicant
Christine Kemp, Attorney
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
Attachment 9
Palmas de Greenfield Project Plan Set
The revised (2024) Palmas de Greenfield Project Plan Set is available on the City’s webpage at the following link:

For comparison, the prior (September 2023) project plan set is at the following link:
https://ci.greenfield.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/3508/Plan-Set---1439-052523 Please note that the Plan Set files are large, so they may take a few minutes to download. 109
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 1
Space above this line for Recorder’s use
Fee Waived per Government Code § 27383

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE

CITY OF GREENFIELD
(City)
AND
EDUARDO A. COUTTOLENC and HELIA R. COUTTOLENC, Trustees of the

EDUARDO AND HELIA COUTTOLENC FAMILY TRUST
(Owner)

FOR THE

PALMAS DE GREENFIELD PROJECT
CITY PLANNING NUMBER 21034
APN 024-151-011
(Project)
Attachment 10
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

CITY OF GREENFIELD
When Recorded Mail To:

City Clerk
City of Greenfield
599 El Camino Real
P.O. Box 127
Greenfield, CA 93927
110
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 2
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement” or this “Development Agreement”) is made and entered in the City of Greenfield on this ____ day of ___________, 20___ by and among the City of Greenfield, a Municipal Corporation (hereafter “City”), and Eduardo A. Couttolenc and Helia R. Couttolenc, Trustees of the Eduardo and Helia Couttolenc Family Trust (hereafter “Owner” or “Couttolenc”), pursuant to the authority of Section 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code and Greenfield Municipal Code, Section 17.16.160.

City and Owner are, from time-to-time, individually referred to in this Agreement as a “Party,” and are collectively referred to as “Parties.”

RECITALS AND FINDINGS
A. California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. (“Development Agreement Statute”) and Section 17.16.160 of the Greenfield Municipal Code (hereafter “Section

17.16.160”) authorize the City to enter into a Development Agreement for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property.

B. This Development Agreement has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 17.16.160.

C. Owner has an interest in that certain real property consisting of approximately

1.42 acres of land located on Fourth Street between Apple Avenue and Palm Avenue in the City, also known as APN 024-151-011, and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“the Property”).

D. Owner proposes to develop the Property with new 24 multi-family residential units with commercial area and resident common room, as more particularly described on the Site Plan, Building Elevations and Project Plans (see Plan Sheets A0.1; A0.2; A1.1; A2.1; A2.2; A2.3; A2.4; A2.5; A3.1; A3.2; A3.3; A3.4) attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference, and the final approved plans on file with the City (“the Project”).

E. The applicable base zoning district for the property is Highway Commercial (C-H) City Code Chapter 17.32 (section 17,32,020.C; 17.32.030; 17.32.040; Table 17.32-2) with a Mixed Use Overlay (MUO) City Code Chapter 17.42 (section 17.42.030), which MUO allows an increased residential density in the C-H zoning district with a Development Agreement (section

17.42.030(D)), adopted pursuant to section 17.16.160. The City’s General Plan Goal 21,Policy 2-19 also encourages infill development, which allows the Project to be developed as proposed, and such development is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning, even though the Project includes more residential development than would normally be allowed in the C-H zoning district. The Project complies with the City zoning code and C-H zoning standards set forth in Chapters: 17.32 (C-H Zoning District), 17.26 (Allowable Land Uses), 17.46 (Accessory Structures), 17.52 (Fences and Walls), 17.54 (Landscaping), 17.55 (Resource Efficiency), 17.56 (Lighting), 17.58 (Parking), 17.60 (Performance Standards), 17.62 (Signs), and 17.63 (Undergrounding of Utilities) of the Greenfield Municipal Code, except as otherwise set forth on the Project plans, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The applicable City Zoning Codes as set forth above and as codified by the City through Ordinance 556, passed April 12, 2022, along with the Project Plans described in Exhibit B, attached hereto, constitute the Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards (“Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards”).
111
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 3
F. City and Owner desire the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of the Project site.

G. Owner and the City have created this Agreement in order to facilitate the buildout the Project. The Project as proposed will create a beneficial physical impact as set forth in the City’s adopted General Plan and the Mixed Use Overlay purpose and intent to provide housing opportunities without reducing available land for commercial uses professional offices. The Project is intended to blend residential and commercial uses where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, allows people to live and work in the same area, increases the presence of people during extended hours, and provides a greater housing variety.

H. As part of this Development Agreement adoption process the City Council has required the preparation of a CEQA Evaluation to identify any potentially significant environmental effects arising from the Project. The City has carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) of 1970, as amended. The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement, the Project, and all such approvals collectively, together with any approvals or permits now or hereafter issued with respect to the Project, are referred to as the “Project Approvals”.

H-1 On _________, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the CEQA ______by adoption of its Resolution No. ____ and making the findings of fact thereto;
H-2 On _________, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project by adoption of its Resolution No. ____ and making the findings of fact thereto; H-3 On _________, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement by adoption of its Resolution No. ____ and making the findings of fact thereto;
H-4 On ____________, 2023, following a duly noticed public hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the CEQA _________ by adoption of its Resolution No. ____ and making the findings of fact thereto; H-5 On _________, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Council approved the Project by adoption of its Resolution No. ____ and making the findings of fact thereto;
H-6 On ____________, 2023, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the City, made the findings of fact thereto, and introduced Ordinance No.________ approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement; and on ____________, 2023, the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk of the City, and the findings and conditions pertaining thereto. Said ordinance will become effective on _________________, 2023 (“the Effective Date”). 112
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 4
I. City and Owner have reached agreement and desire to express herein a Development Agreement that shall facilitate development of the Project within the City.

J. Pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, City has agreed that, except as provided for by this Agreement, the rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of land, governing density, and governing design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications, applicable to development of the Property shall be those rules, regulations, and official policies of the City of Greenfield in force as of the Effective Date.

NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and findings, and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations, and covenants herein contained, City and Owner agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Description of Property and Project

1.1. The Property that is the subject of this Agreement is described in Exhibit A.

1.2. The Project that is the subject of this Agreement is described in Exhibit B.

2. Interest of Owner

2.1. The Owner has a legal interest in the Property.

3. Relationship of City and Owner

3.1. It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by the City and Owner, and that the Owner is not an agent of the City.

The City and Owner hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between or among them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Owner joint ventures or partners.

4. Effective Date and Term

4.1. Effective Date. The effective date of this Agreement shall be as set forth H-6 above.

4.2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and extend ten (10) years thereafter, which term may be extended for another 10 years, unless said term is otherwise terminated or modified by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. The Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards set forth herein shall run with the land and shall continue in force and effect beyond termination of this Agreement.

4.3. Extension. Owner may request up to, and upon receipt of a written request from Owner, the City shall grant the ten (10) year extension, that extends the Term of this Agreement for a total of ten (10) additional years.
113
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 5

5. Use of the Property

5.1. Right to Develop. Owner shall have the vested right to develop the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including the Project Specific Zoning Standards, the Project Approvals, and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement (such amendments once effective shall become part of the law Owner is vested into without an additional amendment of this Agreement). For any discrepancies or conflicts between City Zoning and the Project Approvals, the terms of this Agreement and Project Approvals shall take precedence.

5.2. Permitted Uses. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, provisions for parking, landscaping, setbacks, lot coverage, and location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements, location of public utilities (operated by the City), and other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be as set forth in the City’s zoning code and as set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals, and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project Approvals. For any discrepancies or conflicts between City Zoning and the Project Approvals, the terms of this Agreement and Project Approvals shall take precedence.

6. Applicable Rules, Regulations and Official Policies

6.1. Rules Regarding Permitted Uses. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, including Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for the term of this Agreement, the City’s ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, governing density and intensity of use of the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings shall be those set forth in the City Zoning code and in this Agreement, including Exhibit B, the Project Approvals, and those in force and effect on the earlier of either the Effective Date of the Agreement or the date the City approves the first discretionary approval for the Project. For any discrepancies or conflicts between City Zoning and the Project Approvals, the terms of this Agreement and Project Approvals shall take precedence.

6.2. Rules Regarding Design and Construction. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, including Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, the ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Property shall be those set forth in the City’s Zoning Code and in this Agreement, including Exhibit B, the Project Approvals, and those in force and effect on the earlier of either the Effective Date of the Agreement or the date the City approves the first discretionary approval for the Project.

Ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to public improvements to be constructed by Owner shall be those set forth in the City Codes and this Agreement, including Exhibit B, the Project Approvals, and those in force and effect on the earlier of either the Effective Date of the Agreement or the date the City approves the first discretionary approval for the Project. For any discrepancies or conflicts between City Zoning and the Project Approvals, the terms of this Agreement and Project Approvals shall take precedence.

6.3. Uniform Codes Applicable. Unless expressly provided in this Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the California Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations in effect in 2022, relating to Building Standards, when the Project Building Plans 114
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 6
were submitted to the City in 2022 for approval of the appropriate building, grading, or other construction permits for the Project.

7. Subsequently Enacted Rules and Regulations

7.1. New Rules and Regulations. During the term of this Agreement, the City may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies of the City to the Property or the Project which were not in force and effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement to ensure that the operation of the Project is consistent with the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the community and will not adversely affect the surrounding uses.

However, any such new requirements will not be applied to the Property, the Project or the Project Subdivision if: (a) the application of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies would impose a substantial burden on, or materially delay development, or unreasonably impair development or completion of the Project as contemplated by this Agreement and the Project Approvals, (b) if such ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies impose a limit on the number of units that can be constructed, or place a moratorium, ban, or other prohibition on the development and construction of the Project, and (c) if such ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies do not have general applicability.

7.2. Approval of Application. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the City from denying or conditionally approving any subsequent new land use permit or authorization for the Property that is not in substantial compliance with this Agreement or the Project on the basis of such new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and policies, except that such subsequent actions shall be subject to any conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements expressly set forth herein.

7.3. Moratorium Not Applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event an ordinance, resolution or other measure is enacted, whether by action of the City, by initiative, referendum, or otherwise, that imposes a building moratorium, a limit on the rate of development, or a voter-approval requirement which affects the Project on all or any part of the Property, the City agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement, or the Project Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration of a local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code Section 8558.

8. Fees and Subsequently Enacted or Revised Fees, Assessments and Taxes

8.1 Application/Regulatory Permit Fees. Owner agrees to pay application, processing, inspection and plan check fees, and charges, including but not limited to permit issuance fees for the Project that are required by the City of Greenfield, unless otherwise specifically addressed in Exhibit C (“Application/Regulatory Permit Fees”).

8.2 Development Mitigation Fees. Owner agrees to pay applicable development fees, impact fees, and other such fees levied or collected by the City or other regional authorities, to offset or mitigate the impacts of development of the Project and Project Subdivision that are required by the City or other agencies, unless otherwise specifically addressed in Exhibit C ("Development Mitigation Fees").

8.3 New Taxes. Any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes shall apply to the Property provided: (1) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and (2) the 115
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 7
application of such taxes would not prevent, impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development or operation of the Project in accordance with this Agreement.

8.5 Assessments. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the Property from assessments levied against it by the City pursuant to any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property.

8.6 Vote on Future Assessments and Fees. In the event any tax, assessment, fee, or charge which is applicable to the Property is subject to Article XIIIC or XIIID of the California Constitution and Owner does not return its ballot, Owner agrees, on behalf of itself and its successors, that the City may count Owner’s ballot as affirmatively voting in favor of such tax, assessment, fee, or charge.

9. Amendment or Cancellation

9.1. Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws. In the event state or federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, or require changes in plans, maps or permits for the Project approved by the City, or prevent or preclude the development of the Project as provided for in this Agreement, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment of this Agreement shall be subject to approval by the City Council in accordance with Section 17.16.160 of the Municipal Code.

9.2. Amendment by Mutual Consent. This Agreement, including, but not limited to, the term of this Agreement, may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of State law and Section 17.16.160 of the Municipal Code.

9.3. Insubstantial Amendments. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Section 9.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the term of the Agreement, as provided in Section 4.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in Section 5.2; (c) provisions for “significant” reservation or dedication of land; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the Project Approvals or the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by Owner as provided in this Agreement (collectively “Insubstantial Amendments”), shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the City Planning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall be delegated the authority to determine whether a reservation or dedication is “significant” and to execute Insubstantial Amendments.

9.4. Amendment of Project Approvals. Any amendment of Project Approvals relating to: (a) the permitted use of the Property; (b) provision for reservation or dedication of land; (c) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (d) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (e) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; (f) monetary contributions by the Owner or City; or (g) public improvements to be constructed by Owner, shall require an amendment of this Agreement. Such amendment shall be limited to those provisions of this Agreement which are implicated by the amendment of the Project Approvals. Any other amendment of the Project Approvals, or any of them, shall not require 116
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 8
amendment of this Agreement unless the amendment of the Project Approval(s) relates specifically to some provision of this Agreement.

9.5. Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.16.160 of the Municipal Code.

10. Annual Review

10.1. Review Date. The first annual review date for this Agreement shall be within twelve (12) months of its execution by all parties hereto, and at least every twelve (12) months thereafter during the Term as required under Section 17.16.160 of the Greenfield Municipal Code.

10.2. Initiation of Review. The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 17.16.160 of the Greenfield Municipal Code, by giving to Owner sixty (60) days’ written notice that the City intends to undertake such review. Owner shall provide evidence to the City Manager, or his or her designee, prior to the hearing on the annual review, as and when reasonably determined necessary by the City Manager, or his or her designee, to demonstrate good faith compliance with the provisions of the Agreement. The burden of proof by substantial evidence of compliance is upon the Owner.

10.3. Staff Reports. To the extent practical, the City shall deposit in the mail and email to Owner a copy of all staff reports and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least five (5) days prior to any annual review.

10.4. Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by the City in connection with the annual review shall be paid by Owner in accordance with the City’s schedule of fees in effect at the time of review, or paid as otherwise determined by the City.

11. Default

11.1. Other Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the City’s regulations governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement.

11.2. Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default by either party, the non-defaulting Party shall serve written notice of such default upon the defaulting Party. If the default is not cured by the defaulting Party within sixty (60) days after service of such notice of default, the non-defaulting Party may then commence any legal or equitable action to enforce its rights under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the default cannot be cured within such sixty (60) day period, the non-defaulting Party shall refrain from any such legal or equitable action so long as the defaulting Party begins to cure such default within such sixty (60) day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion.

12. Estoppel Certificate

12.1. Either Party may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that: (a) this Agreement is in full force 117
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 9
and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party, the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the Parties. The City Manager shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Owner. Should the Party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default, provided that such Party shall be deemed to have certified that the statements in clauses (a) through (c) of this section are true, and any Party may rely on such deemed certification.

13. Severability

13.1. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provisions, covenant, condition or term of this Agreement shall not render the other provisions, covenants, conditions or terms unenforceable, invalid or illegal.

14. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

14.1. If the City or Owner initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the Parties shall cooperate in defending such action. Owner shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse the City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys’ fees expended by the City in defense of any such action or other proceeding.

15. Transfers and Assignments

15.1. The Owner may transfer, delegate, or assign its or their interest, rights, duties and obligations under this Agreement, whether in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the City.

16. Agreement Runs with the Land

16.1. All provisions, rights, terms, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property hereunder, or with respect to any owned property, (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties, (b) runs with such properties, and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. 118
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 10

17. Bankruptcy

17.1. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy.

18. Indemnification

18.1. Owner agrees to indemnify, defend with counsel acceptable to City and hold harmless the City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liabilities of any kind for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the Owner, or any actions or inactions of Owner’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation or maintenance of the Project, except to the extent such costs and liabilities are caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City.

19. Insurance

19.1. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. At the time of the issuance of the Building Permit under this Agreement and until the final Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the last building on the Property, or this Agreement terminates, whichever occurs first, Owner shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with a peroccurrence combined single limit of not less than two-million-dollars ($2,000,000.00) with a twenty-five-thousand-dollar ($25,000) self-insurance retention per claim. The limit requirement above may be met with a combination of general, excess, and/or umbrella liability. The policy so maintained by Owner shall name the City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross-liability endorsement.

19.2. Worker’s Compensation Insurance. At the time of the issuance of a Building Permit under this Agreement and until the final Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the last building on the Property, or this Agreement terminates, whichever occurs first, Owner or his agents, shall maintain Worker’s Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Owner for work at the Project site. Owner shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Worker’s Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Owner agrees to indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Owner’s failure to maintain any such insurance during the term of this provision.

19.3. Evidence of Insurance. At the time of the issuance of a Building Permit under this Agreement, Owner shall furnish the City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 19.1 and 19.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the City, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives and to Owner performing work on the Project, as named additional insureds.

20. Notices

20.1. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing.

Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows:
119
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 11
City Manager
City of Greenfield
599 El Camino Real
P.O. Box 127
Greenfield, CA 93927

20.2. Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows:

Eduardo and Helia Couttolenc
1054 University Avenue
Salinas, CA 93901

20.3. A Party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other Party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the following day or by email transmission which shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt.

21. Agreement is Entire Understanding

21.1. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties.

22. Exhibits

22.1. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full:

Exhibit A – Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B – Project Site Plan, Elevations, and Project Plans Exhibit C – Applicable Application and Development Fees Exhibit D – Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards

23. Counterparts

23.1. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.

24. Recordation

24.1. The City shall record a copy of this Agreement within ten (10) days following the Effective date.
120
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date and year first above written.

CITY OWNER
City of Greenfield EDUARDO AND HELIA COUTTOLENC

FAMILY TRUST
By: By:

Eduardo A. Couttolenc, Trustee
By:

Helia R. Couttolenc, Trustee
Attest:

City Clerk
Approved as to form:

City Attorney
121
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 13
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF ____________ 
On______________, 2023 ,before me ___________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared EDUARDO A. COUTTOLENC and HELIA R.

COUTTOLENC, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Seal)
Signature
122
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 14

EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Property
123
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 15
124
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 16
125
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 17

EXHIBIT B
Project Site Plan, Elevations & Project Plans
(Plan Sheets A0.1; A0.2; A1.1; A2.1; A2.2; A2.3; A2.4; A2.5; A3.1; A3.2; A3.3; A3.4) 126
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 30

EXHIBIT C

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEES
The Owner will pay all applicable City approved Application Fees as of the effective date of this Agreement.

MITIGATION FEES

1. WATER AND SEWER FEES. Owner will pay all applicable City approved water and sewer connection fee at the time of obtaining building permits.

2. OTHER PERMIT AND IMPACT FEES. Owner will pay all applicable City approved development fees and statutory fees at the time of obtaining building permits from the City, including park fees, school fees and inclusionary housing fees, if required.

3. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES. Owner will pay the City’s approved standard traffic mitigation fees at the time of obtaining building permits.

4. POLICE FACILITIES FEES. Owner will pay the City’s approved standard police fees at the time of obtaining building permits.

5. FIRE MITIGATION FEES. Owner will pay the City’s approved standard fire fees at the time of obtaining building permits.
127
30348\003\1713014.8:41823 31
Exhibit D
Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards
The applicable base zoning district for the property is Highway Commercial (C-H) City Code Chapter 17.32 (section 17,32,020.C; 17.32.030; 17.32.040; Table 17.32-2) with a Mixed Use Overlay (MUO) City Code Chapter 17.42 (section 17.42.030), which MUO allows an increased residential density in the C-H zoning district with a Development Agreement (section

17.42.030(D)), adopted pursuant to section 17.16.160. The City’s General Plan Goal 21,Policy 2-19 also encourages infill development, which allows the Project to be developed as proposed, and such development is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning, even though the Project includes more residential development than would normally be allowed in the C-H zoning district.

The Project complies with the City zoning code and C-H zoning standards set forth in Chapters:

17.32 (C-H Zoning District), 17.26 (Allowable Land Uses), 17.46 (Accessory Structures), 17.52 (Fences and Walls), 17.54 (Landscaping), 17.55 (Resource Efficiency), 17.56 (Lighting), 17.58 (Parking), 17.60 (Performance Standards), 17.62 (Signs), and 17.63 (Undergrounding of Utilities) of the Greenfield Municipal Code, except as otherwise set forth on the Project plans, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference.

The applicable City Zoning Codes as set forth above and as codified by the City through Ordinance 556, passed April 12, 2022, along with the Project Plans described in Exhibit B, attached hereto, constitute the Project Specific Zoning and Development Standards. 128
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Palmas de Greenfield Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND) is available on the City’s webpage in two separate documents: one for the main Draft MND document and the other for the MND appendices. The link to the Draft MND page is:
https://ci.greenfield.ca.us/472/CEQA
Please note that the Draft MND files are large, so they may take a few minutes to download. 1 Attachment 11
129
130
ATTACHMENT 12
131
AGENDA DATE: March 22, 2024
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
PREPARED BY: City Attorney’s Office
TITLE: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENCE FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2024,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
RECOMMENDATION:

Determine whether to excuse Councilmember Martinez’ absence from the February 27, 2024, City of Greenfield (“City”) Council meeting.

BACKGROUND:

On February 27, 2024, Councilmember Martinez was absent from the City Council meeting. As is their long-standing past practice immediately after roll call when a Councilmember is absent from a meeting, the City Council voted whether to excuse Councilmember Martinez’ absence.

The City Council voted on a motion to “excuse the absence of Councilmember Martinez,” which resulted in a 2-2 vote. According to Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, the rules of procedure adopted by the City, a tie vote equates to no action, meaning Councilmember Martinez’ absence was not excused.

On February 28, 2024, the City received a self-described “official notice to cure incorrect (sp)…violations of the Brown Act” (“Demand”) (Attachment A). In short, the Demand states that the City Council should not have voted to excuse Councilmember Martinez’ absence because the action was not on the Council meeting agenda.

DISCUSSION:

As mentioned, it is the City Council’s long-standing practice to vote to excuse Council members who are absent from City Council meetings. This vote has not traditionally been agendized because whether a Councilmember will be absent is not known in advance of the meeting. More City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
132
2 importantly, though, voting to excuse a City Councilmember’s absence is a procedural vote that, similar to various other procedural items that arise throughout a City Council meeting, is not required to appear on the agenda. One other such example, is a vote to extend a City Council meeting past 10 p.m. When it appears that a City Council meeting may last beyond 10 p.m. a City Councilmember will make a motion, which is then voted upon, to extend the meeting past 10 p.m. This vote does not appear on the City Council meeting agenda because it is not known until after the meeting begins whether the vote will be required.

In addition, there are other circumstances under which the Government Code allows the City Council to vote on items not on the agenda in analogous situations. Specifically, Gov. Code sections 54953 and 54954.2, subdivision (b) excuse actions to approve remote appearances not on the agenda when the council is notified after the agenda had been posted. (See Gov. Code, §§ 54953, subd. (f)(2)(A)(ii) [“The legislative body may take action on a request to participate remotely at the earliest opportunity. If the request does not allow sufficient time to place proposed action on such a request on the posted agenda for the meeting for which the request is made, the legislative body may take action at the beginning of the meeting in accordance with paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 54954.2”] and 54954.2, subd. (b) [“(4) To consider action on a request from a member to participate in a meeting remotely due to emergency circumstances, pursuant to Section 54953, if the request does not allow sufficient time to place the proposed action on the posted agenda for the meeting for which the request is made. The legislative body may approve such a request by a majority vote of the legislative body.”]) The Brown Act requires any party alleging a violation of the Brown Act to make a written demand to the legislative body to cure or correct the violation within thirty (30) days from the date the action was taken if the alleged violation was related to a meeting agenda posting requirement. (Gov. Code, § 54950.1, subd. (b), (c)(1).) The legislative body then has thirty (30) days to cure and correct the action. If the legislative body does not act, a lawsuit may be filed within the next fifteen (15) days. (Gov. Code, § 54960.1, subd. (c)(2)-(4).) An alleged violation that is cured or corrected by a subsequent action of the legislative body will be dismissed without prejudice. (Gov. Code, § 54950.1, subd. (f).)
To avoid litigation, but without admitting fault, the City Council may vote again whether to excuse Councilmember Martinez’ absence from the February 27, 2024, City Council meeting.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Demand
133
134
MEMORANDUM: March 22, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Fabiola Lopez
Community Engagement Coordinator
TITLE: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GREENFIELD APPROVING A DONATION OF (A SPECIFIC

AMOUNT OF MONEY) TO GREENFIELD HIGH SCHOOL
CLASS OF 2024 FOR THE SOBER GRAD EVENT
BACKGROUND:

According to Greenfield High School Staff, Sober Grad is to provide an event that is safe, sober, and fun. Since graduation can be one of the riskiest nights for high school students, sober grad is more than “just a party” it is a commitment by parents, school, and community to conduct a once in a lifetime celebration that is Alcohol and Drug free, this event would take place June 1st from 9pm-2am. This school year the Sober Grad Committee has a goal of raising $20,000 and has currently raised just over $6,000 and their ongoing efforts to fundraise include, T-shirt sales, reaching out to local businesses, they are also in the process of working with Greenfield Rotary Club for the community yard sale on May 4th, and the committee is in the beginning stages of partnering with Jamba Juice for an April 2024 fundraising effort. Their goal is to ensure that the 2024 Sober Grad Night is a highly desirable event that will keep our youth safe during such a momentous occasion.

BUDGET AND FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Greenfield High School class of 2024 is requesting a donation of $8,500 from the City.

These funds will be used to help pay for items of interest to GHS Seniors. Rental of entertainment, food, photo booth, and items that will be provided as college prep raffle prizes such as, small refrigerators, dorm supplies, gift cards and more.

City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93927 (831) 674-5591
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
135
In previous years, the City has donated the following amounts:

FY2014-15 $ 2,500
FY2015-16 $100
FY2016-17 $2,500
FY2017-18 $2,500
FY2018-19 $3,750
FY2019-20 $3,750
FY2020-21 $4,000
FY2021-22 -0- (the Committee was out of compliance with State of CA filing requirements) FY2022-23 $5,000
POTENTIAL MOTION:

I MOVE TO ADOPT/DENY RESOLUTION #2024-27, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING A DONATION FOR THE 2024 GREENFIELD SOBER GRAD EVENT
136
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-27

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD APPROVING A DONATION FOR THE 2024 GREENFIELD SOBER GRAD EVENT WHEREAS, Sober Grad Night is a unique graduation celebration that is alcohol and drug fee; and
WHEREAS, the philosophy and ideals behind Sober Grad Night are based on providing an event that is safe, sober, and fun; and
WHEREAS, Sober Grad Night events are held at high schools all over the country to provide high school graduates with a safe and sober graduation celebration; and WHEREAS, Sober Grad Night develops a sense of community as everyone works to keep the graduates entertained and safe on one of the most potentially dangerous nights of their lives; and
WHEREAS, Sober Grad Night celebrations succeed because of the commitments of the parents, the school, local government, and the community; and WHEREAS, Greenfield High School is seeking donations for this year’s event.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLOVED, by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Greenfield that the amount of $_______ shall be appropriated from the General Fund to donate for the 2024 Greenfield Sober Grad Event.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield at a regular meeting duly held on the 26th of March, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
__________________________
Mayor of the City of Greenfield
_____________________________
City Clerk of the City of Greenfield
137
MEMORANDUM: March 22, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul Wood, CPA
City Manager
TITLE: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GREENFIELD SUPPLEMENTALLY APPROPRIATING $49,733

FOR THE FUNDING OF THE POLICE CAPTAIN POSITION FOR
THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 (3 MONTHS).

BACKGROUND:

Our current Police Chief, Bill Mixer, occupied the position of Police Captain when former Chief Allen went on medical leave. Captain Mixer simultaneously filled the roll of Captain and interim Chief until he was ultimately selected as “permanent” Chief of Police. Since he has been the Chief of Police, the position of Police Captain has been vacant (April, 2023).

At this time, Chief Mixer would like to hire a Captain to fill this open position. To the extent that the position is filled before the end of the fiscal year, a supplemental appropriation is required, since no budget currently exists for Police Captain.

BUDGET AND FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The first step will be to approve a salary schedule for Police Captain. The currently posted salary ranges for neighboring cities for the same position (Captain/Commander/Deputy Chief) follow:

First Step Last Step
City of Monterey $77.71/hr $94.49/hr
City of Salinas 74.68/hr 95.32/hr
Greenfield (proposed) 73.57/hr 93.90/hr
City of Soledad 68.34/hr 81.44/hr
City Council Memorandum
599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93927 (831) 674-5591
www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
138
City staff feels that positioning Greenfield at this level is appropriate as it will attract the best candidates. We also feel that Greenfield’s work culture and dedication to training allows for reduced hiring costs as employee turnover rates are minimized.

Accounting for 3 months of salary (April-June) and a standard 30% tax and benefits multiplier, the total cost (at Step 1) would be approximately $49,733.

POTENTIAL MOTION:

I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2024-28, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD SUPPLEMENTALLY APPROPRIATING $49,733 FOR THE FUNDING OF THE POLICE CAPTAIN POSITION FOR THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2023-24.
139
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-28

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD SUPPLEMENTALLY APPROPRIATING $49,733 FOR THE FUNDING OF THE

POLICE CAPTAIN POSITION FOR THE REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024
WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to make a supplemental appropriation for the position of Police Captain; and
WHEREAS, City staff feels that positioning Greenfield at this level is appropriate as it will attract the best candidates and feels that Greenfield’s work culture and dedication to training allows for reduced hiring costs as employee turnover rates are minimized.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield approves the supplemental appropriation for the position of Police Captain in the amount of $49,733.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield at a public meeting of the City Council held on the 26th day of March 2024 by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, therefore, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

Robert White, Mayor
Attest:

Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
140
1 MEMORANDUM: March 19, 2024
AGENDA DATE: March 26, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jim Langborg, Fire Chief
TITLE: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GREENFIELD TO MAKE A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,900,088.80. TO THE 2023/ 2024 FISCAL

YEAR BUDGET FOR NEEDED REPAIRS TO THE FIRE

STATION

BACKGROUND
Identified in the recent Fire Station Needs Assessment report by HGE Architects, the following immediate needs were identified in the report:
• Installation of an emergency generator and transfer switch. • Replacement of all apparatus bay doors and motors.
• Installation of a seismic retrofit to the apparatus bay.

Because the above require immediate attention and have the ability to negatively affect the fire department’s ability to quickly respond to emergencies in the city, the City Manager has directed the Fire Chief to prepare a staff report and presentation for the City Council’s consideration.

The needs assessment also identified other needs that staff have categorized as urgent/pending needs, needed for growth, and can wait. While these needs do not require immediate attention, they will likely become issues in the near future and require the city to act.

IMPACT TO THE GENERAL FUND:

According to the needs assessment report, the total amount needed to fund these projects is $1,900,088.80. The following is the breakdown of each project with the associated costs:
• Installation of an emergency generator and transfer switch o Permanent generator and wiring funded by the FEMA grant. $118,888 (the city is responsible for a 10% match 11,888.80)
o Interim Generator and security fencing. $157,000 ($40K fencing / $117k for portable generator).

City Council Memorandum 599 El Camino Real Greenfield CA 93937 831-674-5591 www.ci.greenfield.ca.us
141
2 • Replacement of all apparatus bay doors and motors. $152,051 • Installation of a seismic retrofit to the apparatus bay. $1,579,149 Note: The City Manager has stated that ARPA funds could be used to pay for these repairs not covered by grant funding.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend the City Council approve a supplemental appropriation to the budget in the amount of $1,900,088.80, to fund the immediately needed repairs. Staff also highly recommends additional discussion of how the city should address the other needs of the fire station by either creating an ad hoc committee to make recommendations to the City Council, Or the Council could schedule a series of workshops to better understand the needs of the fire station and discuss strategies to address them.

Staff prefer the formation of an ad hoc committee because it will be more respectful of the Council’s time. Ideally, the ad hoc committee would consist of a City Council member, a member of the public works management team, a member of the community, a member of the GFPD Board of Directors, a member of IAFF Local 4656, the Deputy Chief and Fire Chief. The Architect would also be consulted on an as needed basis.

PROPOSED MOTION
I MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #2024-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GREENFIELD TO MAKE A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,900,088.80. TO THE 2023/ 2024 FISCAL

YEAR BUDGET FOR NEEDED REPAIRS TO THE FIRE STATION AND CREATE AN

AD HOC COMMITTEE TO MAKE RECCOMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT HOW TO ADDRESS THE ADDITIONAL NEEDS OF THE FIRE STATION. 142
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-29

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GREENFIELD TO MAKE A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,900,088.80. TO THE 2023/ 2024 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR NEEDED

REPAIRS TO THE FIRE STATION
WHEREAS, the City of Greenfield has identified the need to make immediate repairs to the fire station identified in the Fire Station Needs Assessment report from HGE Architects; WHEREAS, the needed repairs could cause a delay in response to an emergency if not corrected;
WHEREAS, the amount needed to make these repairs is $1,900,088.80; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of Greenfield approves the supplemental appropriation to the 2023 / 2024 Fiscal Year Budget in the amount of $1,900,088.80.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Greenfield, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council held on the 26th of March 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, and all in favor, thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
__________________________________________
Robert White, Mayor
Attest:
______________________________
Ann F. Rathbun, City Clerk
143

GREENFIELD FIRE STATION BUILDING

NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT
City of Greenfield, California
HGE Project #23.13
Greenfield Fire Station – View from South
For:

CITY OF GREENFIELD
January 2024
144
Greenfield Fire Station
Facility Needs Assessment Report
City of Greenfield – January 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM PAGE
Summary 2
Project Team Directory 3
Building Findings/Narrative 4
Photo Log 9
Drawings (Existing)
Site Plan 16
Floor Plan 17-18
Structural Report 19
Mechanical/Plumbing/Electrical Report 44
Cost Estimates 58
145
January 22, 2024
City of Greenfield
Attn: Jim Langborg, Fire Chief
380 Oak Avenue
Greenfield, CA 93927
Sent via email - [email protected]
Re: City of Greenfield – Fire Department Needs Assessment Report Project #23.13
Dear Jim,
Find within our Needs Assessment Report. This is the result of several discussions and two site inspections of your facility. It has been a pleasure working with you, your staff, and the city. We look forward to the next step.

Regards,
HGE ARCHITECTS, Inc.

Joseph A. Slack, AIA, LEED AP
President/Principal Architect
JAS:tg

City of Greenfield – Fire Station Needs Assessment
PROJECT #: 23.13

BUILDING FINDINGS/NARRATIVE REPORT

SUMMARY
HGE Architects, Inc. was contracted in the Fall of 2023 to perform a Building/Facility Needs Assessment. The purpose of the report is to identify and quantify the existing conditions of the facility. Site, building, building envelope, functionality, ADA compliance, structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems. A conceptual cost estimate is provided to address and address and mitigate the building needs.

1. The building is ideally located in a central location to serve the city, and the size of the apparatus bays is adequate, but the support areas spaces fall well short of typical fire department needs.

2. Structural: The apparatus bay is not structurally adequate and should be strengthened or replaced. Monterey County is prone to seismic activity and structural damage to or failure of the apparatus bay is not only a safety concern, but will impede emergency response when it’s needed the most. Refer to Structural Report.

3. The existing staff sleeping area is an open area with poor ventilation. As learned during the Covid crisis multiple people occupancy a single area with poor ventilation increases the opportunity for exposure to airborne viruses. The space is also undersized to adequately accommodate for staff and periodic additional personnel during transport.

4. Non-functioning emergency generator. Fire stations are considered essential facilities and require emergency power to maintain services at all times. A 175kW generator is recommended for total power during an emergency.

5. Non-secure site – a secure fenced yard with gates for staff parking is needed for resident staff protection.

6. Turnout gear (PPE or Personal Protective Equipment), turnout coats, pants, helmets, boots, gloves, are stored in the Apparatus Bays where this expensive gear is exposed to diesel exhaust particulates, dirt from the typical open air, moisture, and UV and fluorescent lighting. This all leads to adverse impacts and integrity of the PPE fabric. This equipment should be stored in an environmentally controlled room with negative ventilation to control the spread of contamination throughout the facility.

7. The large bay doors are worn and have exceeded their life span and should be replaced.

8. Existing asphalt paving is deteriorating, beyond the concrete aprons, and should be replaced.

9. The cost estimate for addressing the needs assessment items, existing building only, is approximately $3,126,542. The cost to address all the needs assessment items, plus the building space needs is approximately $9,464,639.

This study started in February 2023 and consisted of several meetings. A detailed log of meeting notes and documents can be found in the Greenfield Fire Station Building Renovation and Addition – Concept Design Report, prepared by HGE Architects, dated May 2023.