AGENDA
GROVER BEACH CITY COUNCIL
GROVER BEACH CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBER
154 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
GROVER BEACH, CALIFORNIA
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2026, 6:00 PM
Next Resolution No .26-33
Next Ordinance No. 26-03
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office (805-473-4567) at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting.
CALL TO ORDER
CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL Council Members Jules Tuggle, Clint Weirick, Mayor Pro Tem Robert Robert, and Mayor Kassi Dee
CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS
On Monday, August 24, 2026 at 10:18 p.m., the Council met in Closed Session regarding the following items:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code: 1 case
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54957 Title: City Manager
Mayor Dee invited public comment on this matter. No comments were received at this time and the Mayor closed public comment.
Closed Session Announcements: At 11:00 p.m., The City Council voted unanimously to extend the City Council Meeting past 11:00 p.m.
At 11:08 p.m., Mayor Dee reconvened the meeting in open session with all Council Members present and announced there were no reportable actions taken during Closed Session.
Meetings can be viewed on cable Channel 20 in Grover Beach and are live streamed on www.slospan.org and YouTube.com/@GroverBeachMeetings. Members of the public may provide public comment via the phone during the meeting by calling (805) 321-6639 (the phone line will open just prior to the start of the meeting at 6:00 PM). Written public comments can be submitted via email to [email protected]. To ensure distribution to the City Council, please submit comments not later than 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. All correspondence will be distributed to the City Council, posted on the City’s website, and be made part of the official public record of the meeting. Please note, comments will not be read into the record.
Agenda: Grover Beach City Council Meeting Page 2
Monday, September 14, 2026
AGENDA REVIEW
At this time the City Council will review the order of business to be conducted and receive requests for, or make announcements regarding, any change(s) in the order of the day. The Council should adopt the agenda as presented or as revised by motion.
CEREMONIAL CALENDAR
1. Proclamation for National POW/MIA Recognition Month
2. Proclamation for National Recovery Month
PRESENTATIONS
None
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Any member of the public may address the Council for a period not to exceed three minutes total on any item of interest within the jurisdiction of this Council. The Council will listen to all communications; however, in compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot act on, or discuss, items not on the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. Recommendations for each item are noted in parentheses. Members of the audience may speak on any item(s) listed on the Consent Agenda. Any Council Member, the City Attorney, or the City Manager may request that an item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to allow for full discussion. Items withdrawn from the Consent Agenda will be heard after the rest of the Consent Agenda is approved.
3. Minutes of the City Council Meeting on Monday, August 24, 2026 – City Clerk Sims (Recommended Action: Adopt the minutes as submitted or revised.)
VOICE VOTE
4. Biennial Review of Conflict-of-Interest Code – City Clerk Sims and City Attorney Thompson (Recommended Action: Adopt the Resolution acknowledging there have been no substantial changes to the City’s organizational structured since 2024 which require the City’s Conflict of Interest Code to be amended.)
ROLL CALLL VOTE
5. Support for Gubernatorial Signature of AB 1761 – Assistant City Manager Eriksson (Recommended Action: Authorize the Mayor to send a letter supporting the gubernatorial signature of AB 1761 (Electricity: calculation methodology: non-bypassable charges: data disclosure) as requested by the Central Coast Community Energy Joint Powers Authority.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
Agenda: Grover Beach City Council Meeting Page 3
Monday, September 14, 2026
6. First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance to Amend Section 93.05 (Hours of Use) of Chapter 39 (Parks and Recreation) of Article IX (General Regulations) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code to Establish Hours for Sport Courts and Playgrounds at City Parks – Assistant City Manager Eriksson
(Recommended Action: Introduce and conduct a first reading, by title only, of an Ordinance Amending Section 93.05 (Hours of Use) of Chapter 93 (Parks and Recreation) of Article IX (General Regulations) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code (GBMC) to establish hours for sport courts and playgrounds at City parks; and schedule a public hearing and second reading to adopt the ordinance at the next regularly scheduled meeting.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
7. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code, Chapter 4), and Adoption of a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015) – Community Development Director Martin (Recommended Action: Conduct a second reading, by title only, and adopt an Ordinance to amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code), Chapter 4 (Standards for Specific Development and Land Uses); and adopt a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section
4.10.015).)
ROLL CALL VOTE
8. Temporary Stay of Enforcement of Grover Beach Municipal Code Provisions Regulating Poultry – Community Development Director Martin
(Recommend Action: Adopt a Resolution establishing a temporary stay of enforcement of Grover Beach Municipal code provisions regulating the keeping of poultry within city limits.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
9. Support for the City of Paso Robles Proposal for Emergency Medical Services – Five Cities Fire Chief Hallet
(Recommend Action: Adopt a Resolution expressing support for the City of Paso Robles in submitting a proposal for the San Luis Obispo County emergency medical services contract.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
10. Agreement for Construction Management Services for Measure K-14 Project CIP 2295-19 – Public Works Director/City Engineer Lee and CIP Manager Wiggin (Recommended Action: Approve an agreement with BKF Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $467,131 for construction management services associated with the CIP 2295-19 Measure K14 Street Rehabilitation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
PUBLIC HEARING
None
REGULAR BUSINESS
11. Presentation on San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan – Community Development Director Martin (Recommended Action: Receive a presentation by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan and provide input to SLOCOG and City staff.)
Agenda: Grover Beach City Council Meeting Page 4
Monday, September 14, 2026
12. Position on Policy Resolution to be Considered at the League of California Cities Annual Conference – Assistant City Manager Eriksson
(Recommended Action: Provide direction to the City’s voting delegate and alternate on a potential position on the policy resolution to be considered at the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Annual Conference regarding local authority over housing and land use matters.)
ROLL CALL VOTE
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
This item gives the Mayor and Council Members the opportunity to present reports to the other members regarding committees, commissions, boards, or special projects on which they may be participating.
SLO Council of Governments/SLO Regional Transit Authority Kassi Dee (Alt: Robert Robert) (SLOCOG / SLORTA)
South County Transit Committee Kassi Dee (Alt: Robert Robert) South SLO County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) Kassi Dee (Alt: Clint Weirick) Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) Vacant (Alt: N/A)
REACH Vacant (Alt: Robert Robert)
Visit SLO CAL Advisory Committee Vacant (Alt: Robert Robert) Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Robert Robert (Alt: Kassi Dee) Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) Robert Robert (Alt: Vacant) Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC) Jules Tuggle (Alt: Clint Weirick) SLO County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) Jules Tuggle (Alt: Robert Robert) South County Chambers of Commerce Jules Tuggle (Alt: Robert Robert) Zone Three Advisory Committee Jules Tuggle (Alt: Robert Robert) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) Clint Weirick (Alt: Vacant) Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County Clint Weirick (Alt: Kassi Dee) (CAPSLO)
Five Cities Fire Joint Powers Authority Clint Weirick and Kassi Dee
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
This item gives individual Council Members the opportunity to seek consensus for scheduling a specific item on a future agenda, authorizing staff time to provide background information and prepare a staff report for a future agenda, or to comment on upcoming Council business, City operations, projects or other items of community interest.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS AND COMMENTS
CLOSED SESSION
It is the intention of the City Council to meet in Closed Session concerning the following item:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION - Grover H2O et al. v. City of Grover Beach et al. [ Trial Court Case No: 24CV-0264 ] Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1)
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54957 Title:
City Manager
Agenda: Grover Beach City Council Meeting Page 5
Monday, September 14, 2026
ADJOURNMENT
* * * * *
Per Resolution No. 17-21, the public portion of City Council meetings will be scheduled to start at 6:00 p.m. and conclude no later than 11:00 p.m. Any open session items remaining on the agenda at 11:00 p.m. that have not been discussed or considered by the City Council will be continued to an adjourned meeting of the City Council (scheduled before the next regular meeting). However, the City Council may choose to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. upon a proper motion and a 4/5ths vote in favor of such an action.
* * * * *
Staff reports or other written materials relating to each item of business referred to on this agenda are available from the City website www.groverbeach.org and on file in the City Clerk’s Office. A public counter copy is available for public inspection and reproduction during normal business hours at City Hall, 154 South 8th Street, Grover Beach, CA. Related materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available in the City Clerk's Office during normal business hours. If you have questions regarding any agenda item, please contact the appropriate City Department. Any writings or documents regarding any item on this agenda, not exempt from public disclosure, provided to a majority of the City Council and distributed subsequent to distribution of the agenda packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office during normal business hours. * * * * *
Note: This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. This agenda is subject to amendment up to 72 hours prior to the date and time set for the meeting. Please refer to the agenda posted at City Hall for any revisions or call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 473-4567 for more information.
* * * * *
The agenda and staff reports are also available on the City’s website: www.groverbeach.org
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCT AND DECORUM AT COUNCIL MEETINGS (Pursuant to Resolution No. 07-44, adopted 04-16-07, revised 02-18-2020) The City Council and staff welcomes and encourages civic participation and debate on issues. The Council values the public’s opinion and in every Council meeting invite and encourage the public to address the Council on any matter of interest. The Council adopted these policies and procedures for appropriate conduct and decorum at Council meetings and establish guidance for public participation during Council meetings.
These policies will foster and provide greater clarity to preserve the intent of open government and maintain a positive environment for public input and City Council decision-making.
1.0 DECORUM AND ORDER – IN GENERAL
1.1 The presiding officer is responsible for the maintenance of order and decorum at all times.
1.2 The presiding officer shall determine all points of order subject to the right of any Council member to appeal to the City Council by majority vote. If any appeal is taken, the question shall be “Shall the decision of the presiding officer be sustained” in which event a majority vote of the Council shall govern and conclusively determine such question of order.
1.3 All Council members, staff members and members of the public should speak respectfully and avoid the use of profanity, vulgarity and slanderous comments. Recognizing that the First Amendment precludes the City Council from prohibiting speakers from speaking based upon the content of their speech, the presiding officer shall use their best efforts, short of enforcement action, to remind and encourage all participating in the meeting to keep their speech respectful towards others and within bounds appropriate for children and persons of sensitivity toward course language as a courtesy to others present or otherwise viewing Council meetings.
2.0 DECORUM AND ORDER – COUNCIL MEMBERS
2.1 Manner of Speaking.
Any Council member desiring to speak shall first address the presiding officer. Upon recognition by the presiding officer, the Council member shall speak only to the question under debate.
U2.1(a) Questioning Staff.
A Council member desiring to question the staff should address his question to the City Manager, or, in appropriate cases, the City Clerk or City Attorney, who shall be entitled either to answer the inquiry or to designate some staff member for that purpose. Such a designation may be made at the time of any staff presentation or on the agenda listing for the item.
U2.1(b) Interruptions.
Once recognized, a Council member shall not be interrupted while speaking unless called to order by the presiding officer; unless a point of order is raised by another Council member, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to questions from another Council member.
3.0 DECORUM AND ORDER – STAFF
3.1 City Manager Responsibilities
The City Manager is responsible for ensuring that members of the administrative staff observe the rules of decorum and order set forth in this Policy.
3.2 AAddressing the City Council
Any administrative staff member desiring to address the City Council or members of the public shall first be recognized by the presiding officer. All remarks shall be addressed to the presiding officer and not to any individual Council Member or member of the public. Administrative staff members shall accord the utmost courtesy to the City Council, other administrative staff members and the public.
4.0 DECORUM AND ORDER – MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
4.1 AAddressing the City Council
Any member of the public desiring to address the City Council or members of the public shall first be recognized by the presiding officer at the appropriate place on the agenda. All remarks shall be addressed to the presiding officer and not to any individual Council Member, City Manager, City Attorney or member of the administrative staff or member of the public.
4.2 Time Limitation for Addressing the City Council
Public comment when addressing the City Council shall be generally limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. Depending on the extent of the agenda and the number of persons desiring to speak on an issue, the presiding officer may, at the beginning of the hearing, set a different time limit for each speaker. Any person may speak for a longer period of time upon approval from the presiding officer, when deemed necessary, for instance when a person is speaking on behalf of a group or has a graphic or slide presentation requiring more time.
4.3 Failure to Yield, Disruptions
Any person who refuses to relinquish the floor after their allotted time or while attending the City Council meeting engages in conduct or speech which disrupts the business of the meeting shall be brought to order and/or removed from the room if the sergeant-at-arms is so directed by the presiding officer.
Disruptive remarks from the audience, stamping of feet, clapping, whistles, yells and similar demonstrations shall not be permitted by the presiding officer who may direct the sergeant-at-arms to remove such offenders from the room.
4.4 Prosecution
Aggravated cases shall be prosecuted on appropriate complaint signed by the presiding officer.
5.0 ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM
5.1 The Chief of Police or his designee shall be the ex-officio sergeant-at-arms of the City Council. The sergeant-at-arms shall carry out all legal and valid orders and instructions given by the presiding officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum in the Council Chamber. Upon instructions from the presiding officer, it shall be the duty of the sergeant-at-arms to remove any disorderly person from the Council Chambers or place the disorderly person under arrest or both.
5.2 As set forth in Government Code Section 54957.9, in the event that any meeting is willfully interrupted by a person or group of persons so as to render the orderly conduct of such meeting unfeasible or impedes the ability of the Council to hold the meeting, and order cannot be restored by the removal of individuals who are willfully interrupting the meeting, the presiding officer may order the meeting room cleared and continue in session. Only matters appearing on the agenda may be considered in such a session. Duly accredited representatives of the press or other news media, except those participating in the disturbance, shall be allowed to attend any session held pursuant to this Section. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City Council from establishing a procedure for readmitting an individual or individuals not responsible for willfully disturbing the orderly conduct of the meeting.
No Documents for this Agenda Item
Proclamation for "National POW/MIA Recognition Month"
Agenda Item No. 1
Placement: Ceremonial
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
No Documents for this Agenda Item
Proclamation for "National Recovery Month"
Agenda Item No. 2
Placement: Ceremonial
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 2026
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Dee called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 154 South Eighth Street, Grover Beach, California.
FLAG SALUTE The flag salute was presented by Louis Baumgartner, a 9-year-old, 4th grade student at Fairgrove Elementary School.
Mayor Dee announced that Council Member McCorry Driscoll has stepped down from her seat on Council due to family needs and relocation.
ROLL CALL
City Council: Council Members Jules Tuggle, Clint Weirick, Mayor Pro Tem Robert Robert, and Mayor Kassi Dee were present.
City Staff: City Manager Matthew Bronson, City Attorney Jennifer Thompson, Assistant City Manager Kristin Eriksson, City Clerk Wendi Sims, Police Chief Jim Munro, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jeff Lee, Community Development Director Megan Martin, Five Cities Fire Battalion Chief Craig Angello and Senior Planner Kyle Bell were also present.
CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS
At 10:01 p.m. on Monday, July 27, 2026, the Council met in Closed Session concerning the following item:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of Litigation Pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code (Deciding Whether to Initiative Litigation): 2 cases
B. 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
At 10:31 p.m. the Council reconvened into open session with all Council present and Mayor Dee announced there were no reportable actions taken during closed session.
AGENDA REVIEW
Action: Upon unanimous consensus, the Council adopted the agenda as presented
CEREMONIAL CALENDAR
1. Proclamation for “Hunger Action Month” read by Council Member Weirick and accepted by Molly Kern, CEO of the SLO Food Bank.
Agenda Item No. 3
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 2
Monday, August 24, 2026
2. Police Sergeant Badge Pinning presented by Police Chief Munro and accepted by Sergeant Walid Elsayed.
PRESENTATIONS
3. Introduction of New City Employees - City Manager Bronson introduced new employees:
Ethan Davenport, Code Compliance Officer and Jeff Lee, Public Works Director/City Engineer.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS The Mayor opened the floor to any member of the public for comment on items of interest which were within the jurisdiction of the City Council but were not listed on the agenda.
• Bruce Carson
• Michael Arms
• Dr. Robert Newton
• Loren Westphal
• Stephanie Lacalle
• Michael Lacalle
• Dee Santos
• Brenda Auer
• Verenice White
• Pamela Storton
No further comments were received, and the Mayor closed the Public Communications segment for this portion of the meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA
Prior to consideration of the Consent Agenda, Mayor Dee opened public comment. • Loren Westphal
There being no additional public comments received, and the Mayor closed public comment.
It was motioned by Mayor Dee and seconded by Council Member Weirick to approve Consent Agenda Item Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 as recommended. The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members – Tuggle, Weirick, Mayor Pro Tem Robert and Mayor Dee NOES: Council Members – None
ABSENT: Council Members – None.
ABSTAIN: Council Members – None
4. Treasurer’s Reports for the Period of July 1, through July 31, 2026 Action: Approved the Treasurer’s Reports as submitted.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 3
Monday, August 24, 2026
5. Treasurer’s Reports for the 2025 Sewer Bond Account and the 2026 Street Bond Account for the Period of July 1, through July 31, 2026 Action: Approved the Treasurer’s Reports as submitted.
6. Minutes of the City Council Meeting on Monday, July 27, 2026 Action: Approved the minutes as submitted.
7. SLOCOG Letter of Support for Pilot Train Service
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-33 supporting the Coast Rail Coordinating Council (CRCC) in providing a pilot train service between the Los Angeles-San Luis Obispo-San Francisco Bay Area during the 2028 Olympics Games.
Resolution No. 26-33: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Grover Beach, California, Supporting Pilot Rail Service Connecting Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area for the 2028 Olympics Games
8. Selection of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the 2026 League of California Cities Annual Conference
Action: Selected Council Member Weirick to serve as delegate and Mayor Dee to serve as alternate for the upcoming annual business meeting to be held at the League of California Cities Annual Conference.
9. FY 2025-26 Council Goals and Priorities Year-End Implementation Report Action: Received and filed the year-end implementation report for FY 2025-26 Council Goals and Priorities.
PUBLIC HEARING
10. First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance to Amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code, Chapter 4), and Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015)
Mayor Dee read the title to the foregoing item and deferred to staff for a report.
Community Development Director Martin gave a presentation discussing the amendments to the Municipal Code.
Mayor Dee opened and invited public comments on this matter. • Kelvin Coveduck
• Dr. Robert Newton
• Pamela Storton
• Brenda Auer
No further public comments were received at this time and the Mayor closed public Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 4
Monday, August 24, 2026
comment.
Action: City Council received the 1) Introduction of the first reading of an ordinance to amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code), 2) Scheduled a second reading, by title only, to adopt the Ordinance at the next regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on September 14, 2026, and adopt a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015).)
RECESS: Mayor Dee requested a recess; upon consensus of the City Council the meeting recessed at 7:26 p.m.
RECONVENED: At 7:36 p.m. the meeting was reconvened with all members of Council present.
REGULAR BUSINESS
11. Long-Term Water Supply Study Draft Report
Mayor Dee read the title to the foregoing item and deferred to staff for a report.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Jeff Lee introduced Dan Heimel and his team (Charlotte Arnao, Ryan Aston, Tom McCarthy, Tracy Campbell and Carolyn Berg) with Confluence Engineering Solution, Santiago Water Strategies, CEA Strategies and Koble Collaborative who gave a PowerPoint Presentation discussing the water supply draft report.
Mayor Dee opened and invited public comments on this matter. • David Swift
• Debbie Peterson
• Dr. Robert Newton
• Loren Westphal
• Bob Perrault
• Amanda Rice
• Pamela Storton
No further public comments were received at this time and the Mayor closed public comment.
Action: City Council receive a draft report of the long-term water study and provide input and direction to staff to advance the top 3: purchase of state water, local/regional water purchase and Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) and Non-Potable recycled water also, encouraging a presentation on conservation efforts and continuing the outreach and engagement.
RECESS: Mayor Dee requested a recess; upon consensus of the City Council the meeting recessed at 9:46 p.m.
RECONVENED: At 9:52 p.m. the meeting was reconvened with all members of Council Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 5
Monday, August 24, 2026
present.
12. Procedure to Fill Vacant District 3 Council Seat
Mayor Dee read the title to the foregoing item and deferred to staff for a report.
City Attorney Thompson discussed the procedure, and options Council has to fill the vacant seat.
Mayor Dee opened and invited public comments on this matter. • Amanda Rice
• Pamela Storton
No further public comments were received at this time and the Mayor closed public comment.
Action: It was motioned by Mayor Dee and seconded by Council Member Weirick to fill the District 3 Council seat vacated by the resignation of Council Member Kathy McCorryDriscoll by appointment and display the traffic sign in District 3. The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members – Tuggle, Weirick, Mayor Pro Tem Robert and Mayor Dee NOES: Council Members – None
ABSENT: Council Members – None
ABSTAIN: Council Members – None
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Council Member Weirick stated he attended the Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County (CAPSLO) meeting.
B. Council Member Tuggle reflected that she attended the SLO County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) but discussed her update during item 11.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Dee requested that staff respond to the questions from public communications regarding the water meter reading issues. She also, requested and received concurrence from Council to add an item to a future agenda regarding the policy on chickens and include a Resolution at the next City Council meeting to add a stay to the code enforcement cases that are pending until the item has been agendized.
Council Member Tuggle mentioned attending the Pismo & 5 Cities Rotary event, Chapman Estate Fundraiser and the last concert of the Summer Concert Series. She gave a shout out to the neighbors who are adjacent to the park for being accommodating and welcoming to the large group during the concerts. She also stated the Grover Beach veterinarian clinic is a great addition for our community.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 6
Monday, August 24, 2026
Council Member Weirick expressed his appreciation to former Council Member McCorry-Driscoll for her service on Council and gave an early “thank you” to Mayor Pro Tem Robert for his time on Council. He discussed attending a few events, Summer Concerts, Grover Beach Police Department Night Out, Grover Beach Library Book Sale, Grover Beach Library Summer Reading Program Bonanza and the California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) training.
Mayor Pro Tem Robert mentioned the upcoming Stone Soup Festival and that he joined the Arroyo Grande Rotary in which he is now chair of the Rotary Youth Leadership Awards (RYLA).
Mayor Dee gave a shout out to Indo Jax Surf School and mentioned a few events she had attended, Grover Beach Night Out and Summer Concerts. She also stated Council Member Weirick and herself attended the 50th Anniversary South County Historical Society event.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS AND COMMENTS
City Manager Bronson gave a shout out to the Grover Beach Community Services staff, Larry Kim and Rosy Rodriquez, for coordinating and executing a successful eight concert summer concert this year. He also thanked Public Works staff and the Police Department for their support and presence at each concert as well.
CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORTS AND COMMENTS
None.
CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Thompson read the Closed session items into the record.
It is the intention of the City Council to meet in Closed Session concerning the following item:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code: 1 case
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54957 Title: City Manager
Mayor Dee invited public comment on this matter. Nol comments were received at this time and the Mayor closed public comment.
At 10:18 p.m., the Council met in Closed Session regarding the item above.
Closed Session Announcements: At 11:00 p.m., The City Council voted unanimously to extend the City Council Meeting past 11:00 p.m.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 7
Monday, August 24, 2026
At 11:08 p.m., Mayor Dee reconvened the meeting in open session with all Council Members present and announced there were no reportable actions taken during Closed Session.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Dee adjourned the meeting at 11:09 p.m.
_____________________________
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
Attest:
______________________________
WENDI SIMS, CITY CLERK
(Approved at CC Mtg ______)
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 4
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Wendi Sims, City Clerk
Jennifer Thompson, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Biennial Review of Conflict-of-Interest Code
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution acknowledging there have been no substantial changes to the City’s organizational structured since 2024 which require the City’s Conflict of Interest Code to be amended.
BACKGROUND
The Political Reform Act of 1974 as amended requires every local government agency to review its Conflict-of-Interest Code by October 1 of even-numbered years and determine whether it is upto-date or in need of revision. The Conflict-of-Interest Code sets out those job classifications within the City that are decision-making positions, but are not among those positions mandated by State law to file Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) pursuant to Government Code Section 87200.
As of January 1, 2025, Assembly Bill (AB) 1170 requires positions designated in Government Code Section 87200 (members of the City Council and Planning Commission, City Manager, City Attorney, and City Treasurer), to file statements directly with the FPPC through the State’s edisclosure filing system. This has been reflected in the proposed updated COI Code.
The City Council determines, with input from staff, what other job classifications entail the making or participation in the making of governmental decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on any financial interest (Government Code Section 82019). Such designated positions would then be included in the City's Conflict of Interest Code. Individuals identified as holding those positions would be required to file Statements of Economic Interests directly with the City Clerk. There is no electronic online filing option for these designated positions.
The City’s Conflict of Interest Code was last updated in September 2024. Upon review, there have been no substantial changes to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to this report.
Staff Report: Biennial Review of Conflict-of-Interest Code Page 2 September 14, 2026
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Adopt the Resolution acknowledging there have been no substantial changes to the City’s organizational structured since 2024 which require the City’s Conflict of Interest Code to be amended.;
2. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution regarding Conflict-of-Interest Code for the City of Grover Beach, Exhibit A - designated employees / classifications
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
RESOLUTION NO. 26-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN AMENDED CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
CONTAINING REVISED DESIGNATED FILERS
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act of 1974, California Government Code Sections 87300 et. seq., requires that governmental entities in the State of California adopt and promulgate Conflict of Interest Codes; and
WHEREAS, said Act requires that local governmental entities include within the provisions of Conflict-of-Interest Codes certain employees, commissioners, and committee members who make or participate in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests; and
WHEREAS, a Conflict of Interest Code adopted pursuant to the Political Reform Act consists of two basic parts, which are: (1) the body of the code which contains the basic provisions including the manner of reporting financial interests and the procedure for filing Statements of Economic Interests, and (2) the Appendix of the Code which lists the positions of designated filers of the agency and the corresponding disclosure categories for each position; and WHEREAS, The Fair Political Practices Commission (“FPPC”) has adopted a standard model Conflict of Interest Code codified in California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 18730 (“Section 18730”), containing the provisions for the body of a Conflict-of-Interest Code which may be incorporated by reference by the City as the City’s Conflict of Interest Code; and WHEREAS, incorporating Section 18730 by reference, as the body of the City of Grover Beach's Conflict of Interest Code, will ensure compliance with state law by automatically incorporating any changes to the financial disclosure provisions of the Political Reform Act and Section 18730; and
WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission gives notice of all changes to Section 18730, and the City would be given an opportunity to comment on the changes before adoption by the Commission; and
WHEREAS, there have been no substantial changes to the City’s organizational structured which require the Conflict of Interest Code to be amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the attached Appendix, contained in “Exhibit A" and “Exhibit B", accurately sets forth those classifications which should be designated and categories of financial interest which should be disclosed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Grover Beach as follows:
1. The terms of California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 18730, duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission, are hereby incorporated by reference and with the attached Appendix shall constitute the Conflict-of-Interest Code of the City of Grover Beach.
2. Persons holding designated job classifications as set forth in “Exhibit A” and disclosure categories as set forth in “Exhibit B” shall file Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) with Attachment 1
Resolution No. 26-__ Page 2
the City Clerk of the City of Grover Beach pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 18730.
Upon motion of Council Member, seconded by Council Member, and on the following rollcall vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
the foregoing Resolution was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 14th day of September 2026.
_______
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WENDI B. SIMS, CITY CLERK
City of Grover Beach
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
The Political Reform Act (Government Code Section 81000 et. seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes.
The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730, that contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code, which can be incorporated by reference in an agency's code. After public notice and hearing, the standard code may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act.
Therefore, the terms of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference. This regulation and the attached Appendix, designating positions and establishing disclosure categories, shall constitute the conflict-of-interest code of the City of Grover Beach.
Designated employees, committees, commissions and consultants shall file statements of economic interests with the City Clerk of the City of Grover Beach who will make the statements available for public inspection and reproduction (Gov. Code Section 81008).
Positions designated in Government Code Section 87200 (member of the City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager, City Attorney, and City Treasurer/Finance Director) shall file their statements directly with the Fair Political Practices Commission through the State’s edisclosure filing system. Statements of all other designated positions will be retained by the City Clerk in accordance with State Law.
# # #
154 S. 8th Street ❖Grover Beach, CA 93433 ❖(805) 473-4567 ❖ [email protected] Visit our website at www.groverbeach.org
"Exhibit A"
Resolution No. 26-__ Page 4
APPENDIX - EXHIBIT A
LIST OF DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES PER POSITION
Designated Employee / Board or Committee Member of the City Disclosure Category
1. Financing Authority Board Members A, B, C
2. Police Chief A, B, C
3. Administrative Services Director A, B, C
4. Community Development Director A, B, C
5. Public Works Director/City Engineer A, B, C
6. Assistant City Manager A, B, C
7. Senior Engineer A, B, C
8. Capital Improvement Project Manager A, B, C
9. Police Commander A, B, C
10. Senior Planner A, B, C
11. City Clerk A and C
12. Finance Manager A and C
13. Information Technology Specialist A and C
14. Building Official (contract services) A, B, C
15. Associate Planner A, B, C
16. Parks, Recreation & Beautification Commission A, B, C
17. Citizen Oversight Committee Members A, B, C
18. City Engineer A, B, C
19. Assistant City Attorney (contract services) A, B, C
20. Consultants1 Determined on case-by-case basis
1Consultants shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code subject to the following limitation: The City Manager may determine that a particular consultant, although a "designated position," is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The City Manager's determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict-of-interest code.
EXHIBIT B
CATEGORIES OF DISCLOSURE FOR
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
The following shall be the categories of disclosure covered by this Policy; A. Investments
Schedules A-1 and A-2
B. Interests in Real Property
Schedule B
C. Income & Business Positions
Schedule C, D, and E
The officials and employees covered by this policy shall each disclose the categories A, B, and C as designated herein above set forth.
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 5
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Kristin Eriksson, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Support for Gubernatorial Signature of AB 1761
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Mayor to send a letter supporting the gubernatorial signature of AB 1761 (Electricity:
calculation methodology: non-bypassable charges: data disclosure) as requested by the Central Coast Community Energy Joint Powers Authority.
BACKGROUND
In March 2023, the Council adopted the City’s first Legislative Platform (Platform) which outlines the City’s positions on priority issues that impact City operations. The Platform is updated annually by the Council with the current version shown in Attachment 1. Generally, the Platform is designed to authorize the Mayor or City Manager to take positions on legislation that are consistent with the platform to allow for quick response communications, through opposition or support letters, to legislators when time is of the essence. However, when there is legislation with application to the City that does not fall within the Platform, the Council must provide authorization to take an official position on behalf of the City.
Customers of Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs), such as the City which is a member agency of the Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) Joint Powers Authority as an energy service provider, pay their portion of legacy power costs from investor-owned utilities such as PG&E through a Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) fee. The PCIA fees are set by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the data available on how these PCIA fees are calculated has historically been inconsistent, making it difficult for CCAs to verify the accuracy of the charges that are passed along to customers. AB 1761 proposes amending the Public Utilities Code to require the CPUC and utilities to disclose all data used to calculate PCIA costs including when proposing changes to PCIA fees for greater transparency.
AB 1761 has been approved by the Legislature and is now awaiting signature by the Governor. 3CE has requested member agencies’ support for signature of this legislation which staff is bringing to the Council for approval as this policy issue is outside of the Platform.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no funding impacts to this staff report.
Staff Report: Support for Gubernatorial Signature of AB 1761 Page 2 September 14, 2026
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Authorize the Mayor to send a letter supporting the Governor’s singing AB 1761; or
2. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter of Support
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☒ Community Infrastructure ☒ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
City of Grover Beach
Mayor Kassi Dee Mayor Pro Tem Robert Robert
Council Member Vacant, Council Member Jules Tuggle, Council Member Clint Weirick Matthew Bronson
City Manager
154 South Eighth Street Grover Beach, California 93433 www.groverbeach.org (805) 473-4550 September 15, 2026
The Honorable Governor Gavin Newsom
1303 10th Street, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: Requesting Signature on AB 1761 (Rogers)
Via email to: [email protected]
Dear Governor Newsom,
On behalf of the City of Grover Beach, a member agency of Central Coast Community Energy, I write to support AB 1761 by Assemblymember Chris Rogers (D-Santa Rosa), a measure that supports energy affordability by improving transparency and certainty in how the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA), a charge on nearly all energy bills, is calculated.
Electricity bills in California are on the rise, in part due to challenging market conditions and outdated and inefficient regulatory policies. Families and businesses in our community are feeling the impact.
Affordability is a key priority for the City of Grover Beach, and lawmakers and regulators need practical, consumer-focused solutions that ensure customers do not pay more than their fair share.
One tool to ensure customers receive energy bills that are fair and accurate is increased transparency in how PCIA charges are calculated. The PCIA is a fee designed to ensure customers who leave utility generation service, like customers of a Community Choice Aggregator (CCA) or Energy Service Provider (ESP), pay their portion of legacy power costs. But since the PCIA was implemented, there has been no consistent standard for what data must be made available in any California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) process or proceeding where the PCIA or a related charge is set. Without adequate transparency, CCAs and ESPs are unable to verify the accuracy of the PCIA charges that their customers must pay and cannot confidently forecast rates – both of which are affordability tools needed to protect customers from unexpected rate increases. Additionally, the lack of consistent data creates costly disputes and inefficiencies in CPUC proceedings.
To address these problems, AB 1761 proposes amending the Public Utilities Code to require the CPUC and investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to disclose all data used to calculate PCIA costs, including cost inputs, forecasting assumptions, and methodologies. The bill would also ensure that when parties or the CPUC make proposals in a proceeding to change the PCIA, they provide all the underlying data informing that proposal. Sensitive information would remain protected through Commission-approved nondisclosure agreements, a practice already used to protect sensitive information in other compliance areas.
Greater transparency allows CCAs and ESPs to better advocate for their customers and assess proposals to change the PCIA. It reduces repeated fights over information, improves regulatory efficiency, and encourages utilities to verify calculations since the underlying data would be open to review. It can Attachment 1
also inform cost forecasts and shield customers from sudden rate swings, an important issue for the residents and local businesses we serve.
For these reasons, the City of Grover Beach strongly supports AB 1761, an important energy affordability tool which will strengthen confidence that customers pay their fair share – and not more.
Sincerely,
Kassi Dee, Mayor
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 6
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Kristin Eriksson, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance to Amend Section
93.05 (Hours of Use) of Chapter 93 (Parks and Recreation) of Article IX (General Regulations) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code to Establish Hours for Sport Courts and Playgrounds at City Parks
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a first reading and introduction, by title only, of an Ordinance Amending Section 93.05 (Hours of Use) of Chapter 93 (Parks and Recreation) of Article IX (General Regulations) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code (GBMC) to establish hours for sport courts and playgrounds at City parks; and schedule a public hearing and second reading to adopt the ordinance at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
BACKGROUND
On July 27, 2026, the Council heard an agenda item on the Mentone Basin Park Pickleball Courts and potential changes to City park hours and operations given concerns expressed about noise from both the pickleball courts and the new Ramona Garden Park playground. The Council’s discussion followed previous deliberation by the Parks, Recreation, and Beautification Commission (PRBC) on June 18, 2026 on the noise concerns at the pickleball courts at the direction of the Council. After deliberation of potential mitigation measures, the PRBC directed staff to bring two recommended actions to the Council for consideration. The first was to change the hours of the courts to allow play from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The second recommendation was to encourage the use of equipment with acoustic materials to reduce the sound of play with signage at the courts, which would include information on where to obtain such equipment.
During the July 26th meeting, the Council reviewed park hours in general, which are currently open to the public from 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. pursuant to Grover Beach Municipal Code Section
39.05, and also considered park hours in other cities within the county. The Council provided staff with direction to bring back an Ordinance to allow the public to use sport courts and playgrounds at all City parks from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. In addition, the Council provided further direction to post signs at playgrounds indicating they are intended to be used from dawn to dusk only. The Council also directed staff to install signage at the Mentone Basin Park Pickleball Courts to encourage the use of noise-mitigating equipment to reduce the sound of play. This signage was recently installed and the City will be promoting the use of this equipment through the City’s communication platforms. Lastly, the Council requested to receive a review of these changes in early 2027 to determine their results following an initial review by the PRBC.
Staff Report: Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance on Sports Courts and Playground Hours Page 2 September 14, 2026
Pending the first reading and introduction of this Ordinance, the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance will be scheduled for the September 28, 2026 meeting following a public hearing.
If adopted, the Ordinance would go into effect on October 28, 2026 at which point the City would install signage with these new hours.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no funding impacts to this staff report. Upon adoption of the Ordinance, updated signage displaying the new hours at sport courts and playgrounds are estimated to cost up to $2,000, which is included in the budget for parks maintenance.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Conduct a first reading and introduction, by title only, of an Ordinance Amending Section 93.05 (Hours of Use) of Chapter 93 (Parks and Recreation) of Article IX (General Regulations) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code (GBMC) to establish hours for sport courts and playgrounds at City parks; and schedule a public hearing and second reading to adopt the ordinance at the next regularly scheduled meeting; or
2. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance
Multi-Year Goals
☒ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
ORDINANCE NO. 26-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER
BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTION 93.05 (HOURS OF USE) OF CHAPTER 93 (PARKS AND RECREATION) OF ARTICLE IX
(GENERAL REGULATIONS) TO ESTABLISH HOURS FOR SPORT
COURTS AND PLAYGROUNDS AT CITY PARKS.
WHEREAS, Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX, Chapter 93, Section 93.05 prohibits persons from being in any park or facility between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.; and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2026, the City Council heard concerns from residents who live near parks with active sport courts and playgrounds indicating that use in early morning and late evening hours was disruptive; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to prohibit persons from being at any sport court or playground within parks between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. to prevent undue noise disruptions to residences neighboring parks;
WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a resolution to remove the job classification of Parks and Recreation Program Director and replace it with the job classification of Community Services Supervisor, and the City wishes to amend Section
93.05 to reflect this change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Grover Beach as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 93.05 (“Hours of Use”) of Chapter 93 (“Parks and Recreation”) of Article IX (“General Regulations”) of the Grover Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as shown on the attached Exhibit A.
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this Ordinance is held invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of the Ordinance if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted.
SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its final passage.
SECTION 4. PUBLICATION. Within fifteen (15) days after passage, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation.
Attachment 1
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held September 14, 2026.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council at a regular meeting held on September 28, 2026, on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
APPROVED:
__________________________
Kassi Dee, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Wendi Sims, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
Jennifer P. Thompson, City Attorney
§ 93.05 HOURS OF USE.
(A)No person shall be in any park or facility between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. unless written permission is obtained from the Community Services Supervisor, or his or her representative.
(B) No person shall be at any sport court or playground area within any park or facility between the hours of 9:00 pm. and 8:00 a.m.
(Prior Code, § 2513) (Ord. 92-2, passed 5-4-1992) Penalty, see § 93.99
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item: 7
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Megan Martin, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code, Chapter 4), and Adoption of a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015).
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a second reading, by title only, and adopt an Ordinance to amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code), Chapter 4 (Standards for Specific Development and Land Uses); and adopt a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015).
BACKGROUND
On August 25, 2025, the City Council (Council) adopted Ordinance No. 25-04, updating the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations to comply with State law. The Ordinance was subsequently certified by the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) on December 11, 2025. Following adoption, the City submitted the Ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), as required by State law (Government Code Section 66326, subd. (a)). HCD provided comments on January 2, 2026, requesting technical revisions to clarify certain provisions of the Ordinance and updates to reflect more recent changes with State law.
On July 7, 2026, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance and corresponding Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendments without changes. On August 24, 2026, the Council conducted the first reading and introduction of the Ordinance. Following public testimony and consideration of comments received from Coastal Commission staff, the Council directed staff to incorporate the Commission comments into the ordinance for the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance along with adoption of a Resolution to amend the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP).
Proposed Amendments
As shown to the Council on August 24, the proposed amendments are limited to addressing comments from HCD and primarily relate to HCD’s interpretation of Government Code Sections 66314 and 66323 governing ministerial ADU approval, including the number of ADUs that may be permitted on a single-family lot, the treatment of conversion ADUs, the applicability of front setback requirements for 66323 ADU units (commonly referred to as “State-exempt” ADUs), and Staff Report: 2026 ADU Ordinance Amendments Second Reading and Adoption Page 2 September 14, 2026
clarification that certain development standards apply only where authorized by State law.
Additional minor amendments were added following Coastal Commission staff’s review.
Section 4.10.015.D.1 – Maximum Number of ADUs and JADUs (Single Unit Dwelling Lots) Since adoption of the City’s ADU Ordinance, HCD has released additional guidance that clarifies how the ministerial approval provisions for ADUs and JADUs under Government Code Sections 66314 and 66323 interact on lots developed with a single-unit dwelling. Specifically, HCD clarified that ADUs subject to ministerial approval provisions of Section 66314 are permitted in addition to ADUs subject to Section 66323. The amended language clarifies that a property owner may develop ADUs subject to Section 66314 in addition to the approval requirements under Section 66323.
Section 4.10.015.D.2 – JADU Compliance
Senate Bill 543 (SB 543) was chaptered late 2025 and established new standards for ADUs and JADUs. HCD staff requested City staff update the City’s ADU Ordinance to address all requirements of SB 543. These sections have been amended to include the new JADU code reference section in accordance with SB 543.
Section 4.10.015.D.3.a. Definition. Interior ADU (converted space) HCD also requested that the City include language that explicitly states that a conversion ADU was possible within a proposed single-unit dwelling under the Government Code Section 66323 pathway. Previously, the unit would have had to have been constructed and would have been subject to Section 66314 as a newly constructed attached ADU. The amended language includes a new definition of an interior ADU (converted space) as allowed and defined by Government Code Section 66323.
Section 4.10.015.D.4.c.i – Minimum Front Setback (Attached ADUs) HCD stated that while the City’s ordinance did correctly incorporate the Government Code Section 66321 front setback exception, it did not clearly state that Section 66323 units are exempt from front setback requirements altogether, regardless of whether a front setback would preclude construction. The Ordinance has been amended to refer to the exemption under Section 66321 and expressly state that no front setback is required for ADUs authorized under Government Code Section 66323.
Section 4.10.015.F – Development Standards
As written, the City’s ADU Ordinance states that certain development standards apply to “all ADUs and JADUs,” unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66323. Under Section 66323, units are only subject to the development standards specifically authorized by that section.
HCD requested the City amend the Ordinance to make that distinction explicit. The Ordinance has been revised to clarify the applicability of Subsection F and to distinguish the development standards that apply to ADUs authorized under Section 66323 from those applicable to Section 66314.
Section 4.10.015.F.2 – Size of Units
As mentioned, SB 543 established new standards for ADUs and JADUs. HCD staff requested the City update the City’s ADU Ordinance to address all requirements of SB 543. This section has Staff Report: 2026 ADU Ordinance Amendments Second Reading and Adoption Page 3 September 14, 2026
been amended to include SB 543 standardized measurement requirement which stipulates the size limit of an ADU and JADU be based on interior livable space, excluding exterior wall thickness.
Section 4.10.015.G. (previously Section 4.10.015.F.9) – Objective Design Standards (ODS) HCD requested that the City’s ODS explicitly state that ODS do not apply to ADUs authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 66323, and to ensure that the ODS are fully objective.
HCD identified that the massing subsection was inconsistent with authority granted to local agencies under Gov Code Section 66315. The Ordinance has been revised to clarify that ODS apply to all other ADUs and JADUs under Section 66314, but not to ADUs subject to Section 66323, consistent with State law. To strengthen objectivity, the materials subsection now includes formal definitions of “primary material” and “accent material,”. Similarly, roof standards have been updated to replace subjective terminology with measurable, objective criteria in accordance with HCD guidance. The “Massing” section has been removed from the Ordinance.
Section 4.10.015.H.3.a – JADU Owner-Occupancy
Assembly Bill 1154 (AB 1154) was chaptered late 2025 and established clarification for when JADUs are subject to owner-occupancy requirements. HCD staff requested the City update the City’s ADU Ordinance to address all requirements of AB 1154. This section has been amended to require owner-occupancy only when the JADU shares sanitation facilities with the existing primary structure, in accordance with AB 1154.
Section 4.10.015.H.4-6 (previously subsection G.4-6) – General ADU and JADU requirements HCD noted that Sections 4.10.015.H.4 and H.5 references were outdated. Additionally, in accordance with SB 543, HCD staff requested the city update Section 4.10.015.H.4 and H.6 to address requirements of SB 543. The ordinance has been revised to reflect updated Government Code and the City’s Municipal Code references, and to be consistent with SB 543.
Section 4.10.015.I – Alternative Compliance
The existing ordinance establishes an order in which development standards may be modified to accommodate an ADU up to 800 square feet. Staff intended to encourage compliance with ODS to the extent feasible and avoid unnecessary deviations from those standards, particularly on constrained lots, in an attempt to maintain some level of local control over the siting and design of ministerial approval ADUs. However, HCD determined that State ADU law does not authorize a hierarchy for modifying development standards. This section has been revised to provide that any development standard, in accordance with State law, may be waived or modified, as necessary, while retaining the limitation that such waivers shall be only to the extent necessary to allow construction of the ADU.
Coastal Commission and Local Coastal Program Amendment
Staff has reviewed the proposed LCP Amendment with the policies in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and has determined the proposed amendments would have no effect on public access, recreation, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, or other coastal resources. The proposed technical changes are minor in nature, intended only to clarify the distinction between ADUs and JADUs subject to the provisions of Government Code Sections 66314 and 66323 and would not alter the type, location, intensity, or density of development allowed within the Coastal Zone. The Council is requested to adopt the Resolution shown in Attachment 2 to amend the LCP consistent with these revisions.
Staff Report: 2026 ADU Ordinance Amendments Second Reading and Adoption Page 4 September 14, 2026
Next Steps
If adopted, staff will forward the Ordinance and LCP Amendment (Attachment 2) to the Coastal Commission. The Coastal Commission’s review process will involve an evaluation of the ordinance to ensure it aligns with both State laws and the Coastal Act. The amended Ordinance would become effective the day after Coastal Commission action. Any recommended changes by the Coastal Commission to the LCP amendments would require review and acknowledgment by the Council before the changes would be considered effective.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) Section 15378(b)(5) and is therefore exempt from CEQA because it will not result in any direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Conduct a second reading, by title only, and adopt an Ordinance to amend the Grover Beach Municipal Code Article IX (Development Code), Chapter 4 (Standards for Specific Development and Land Uses); and adopt a Resolution to amend the Local Coastal Program to revise certain sections of the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Section 4.10.015); or
2. Do not adopt Ordinance and Resolution; or
3. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance
2. LCP Amendment Resolution
3. ADU Ordinance Amendments (Legislative Draft)
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☒ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
ORDINANCE NO. 26-03
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
CALIFORNIA ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE IX (DEVELOPMENT
CODE) OF THE GROVER BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 4, SECTION 4.10.015 (ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNIT ORDINANCE), THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT.
WHEREAS, the City of Grover Beach (“City”) is a general law city and a political subdivision of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an update to the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Ordinance No. 25-04) and Local Coastal Program amendment on August 25, 2025; and
WHEREAS, following local approval, staff forwarded the Local Coastal Program amendment to the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) for consideration and certification; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2025, the Coastal Commission adopted and certified the Local Coastal Program amendment; and
WHEREAS, State ADU law requires a City to submit an ADU Ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days after adoption; and WHEREAS, on January 2, 2026, HCD submitted a comment letter with additional requests for clarification and changes to the recently adopted ADU Ordinance based on interpretations of State ADU law and recent State law changes; and
WHEREAS, staff responded to HCD on January 26, 2026 with proposed amendments to address their comments and requests for clarification; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Grover Beach conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall on July 7, 2026, for the purpose of review and recommendation of the various amendments to the City’s ADU Ordinance and Local Coastal Program for consideration by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall on August 24, 2026, for the purpose of introducing the various amendments to the City’s ADU Ordinance and Local Coastal Program amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a regular meeting in the Council Chamber of City Hall on September 14, 2026, for the purpose of adopting the various amendments to the City’s ADU Ordinance and Local Coastal Program amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the proposed amendments are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and other applicable City goals and policies as amended; and
Attachment 1
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 2 of 10
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing 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 the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
WHEREAS, this amendment is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) Section 15378 and is therefore exempt from CEQA because it will not result in any direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
WHEREAS, this amendment requires a Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Part 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
Part 2. Article IX Development Code, any reference is made to any specific section, figure, or table, such reference shall hereby be amended to include the most recent updates made pursuant to this ordinance, ensuring consistency throughout the Development Code.
Part 3. Article IX Development Code, Chapter 4 Section 4.10.015 entitled “Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)” is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.10.015 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to allow and regulate Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs), both as defined in Section 9.10: Definitions) consistent with Government Code Sections 66310 - 66342. Implementation of this Section is meant to expand housing opportunities by increasing the number of smaller units available within the city.
For purposes of this Section, all terms shall have the same meaning as provided in Government Code Section 66313 unless otherwise defined by State law. Where any provision of this section conflicts with State ADU law, State law shall control. In all cases, ADUs in the coastal zone shall be consistent with the LCP, including the standards specified in Section
4.10.015.F.9.
B. Permit requirements. Any ADU or JADU that complies with all of the applicable development standards of this Section requires only a ministerial building permit. In the Coastal Zone, an Administrative Coastal Development Permit is required unless exempt consistent with Section 6.20.040.B.2, prior to issuance of building permits.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 3 of 10
C. Prohibited Locations. ADUs and JADUs shall be prohibited under the following circumstances.
1. Urban Lot Split. ADUs and JADUs shall be prohibited on properties associated with an Urban Lot Split (see Section 8.160) only when the number of dwelling units on that lot already equals or exceeds the two‑unit limit established by Government Code Section 65852.21 (see Section
4.25.060). ADUs and JADUs are allowed on Urban Lot Split parcels that have not yet reached this two‑unit cap.
D. Specific Standards for ADUs and JADUs on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling. ADU and JADU standards for lots with a proposed or existing single-unit dwelling shall comply with the following:
1. Maximum Number. The following number of ADUs and JADUs may be established on a qualifying legal lot:
a. One JADU;
b. One interior, attached, or detached ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66314; and
c. One interior ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66323; d. One detached ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66323; and
2. JADUs. JADUs shall comply with the requirements of Government Code Section 66333-66339.5.
3. Interior ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. An interior ADU (converted space) is either:
i. Within the space of an existing single-unit dwelling, ii. Within the existing space of an accessory structure; or iii. A conversion ADU as defined by Government Code Section 66323.
An Interior ADU may provide for up to 150 additional square foot addition if the expansion is limited to accommodating ingress and egress.
b. Access. An interior ADU shall have exterior access that is independent of that for the single-unit dwelling; and
c. Setbacks. An interior ADU shall have side and rear setbacks sufficient for fire and safety, as dictated by applicable building and fire codes.
4. Attached ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. An attached ADU consists of new construction that is attached to an existing or proposed structure and is not considered an interior ADU as defined in subsection D.3.a.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 4 of 10
b. Maximum Height. An attached ADU shall not exceed 25 feet in height.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, ADUs shall not exceed two stories. c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 15 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance). ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
d. Size. The total floor area of an attached ADU on a lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling shall not exceed 50 percent of the existing primary dwelling and shall comply with Section 4.10.015.F.2 (Size), except where such limitation must be waived or modified pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance) to allow construction of an ADU of at least 800 square feet.
5. Detached ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. A detached ADU consists of new construction that is detached from any existing structures and is not considered an interior or attached ADU as defined in subsections D.3.a and D.4.a b. Maximum Height. A detached ADU shall not exceed 16 feet in height, unless otherwise specified under Government Code Section 66321. c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 15 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance), or where front setbacks do not apply pursuant to Government Code Section 66323.
ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
E. Specific Standards for ADUs on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings. ADU standards for lots in a residential or mixed-use zone with existing or proposed multi-unit dwellings shall comply with the following:
1. Maximum Number.
a. Up to 25 percent of the number of existing units in a multi-unit development (rounded to the nearest whole number, plus one) shall be allowed as interior ADUs created within the space of the existing multifamily structure; and b. No more than eight detached ADUs per lot with an existing multi-unit development. However, the number of ADUs shall not exceed the number of existing units on the lot; or
c. No more than two detached ADUs per lot with a proposed multi-unit development.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 5 of 10
2. Interior ADU on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings.
a. Definition. An interior ADU (conversion of existing space) is created from space located within portions of existing multi-unit dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including but not limited to storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages (and shall not be created from space associated with commercial portions of mixed-use structures); and
b. Standards. An interior ADU shall comply with California Building Standards Code for dwellings.
3. Detached ADU on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings.
a. Definition. A detached ADU consists of new construction that is detached from any proposed or existing primary structures and is not considered an interior ADU as defined in subsection E.2.a. b. Maximum Height. A detached ADU shall not exceed 18 feet in height, unless otherwise specified under Government Code Section 66321. c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 10 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance), or where front setbacks do not apply pursuant to Government Code Section 66323.
ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
F. Development Standards. The standards in this Subsection shall apply to all ADUs and JADUs. ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66323 are only subject to the standards specifically authorized by that section.
1. Density. ADUs and JADUs shall not count towards the allowable density of units per acre prescribed per zone under Development Code Chapter 2 (Zones and Allowable Land Uses).
2. Size. Size limits of ADUs and JADUs are defined based on interior livable space, excluding exterior wall thickness.
a. Size Minimum. An ADU or JADU shall have a minimum floor area of 150 square feet.
b. ADU Size Maximum. An ADU shall not exceed 850 square feet for a studio or one-bedroom unit and 1,200 square feet for a unit with two or more bedrooms. However, no application of any setback or Objective Design Standard may require an ADU to be less than 800 square feet, as described in subsection I of this section.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 6 of 10
c. JADU Size Maximum. A JADU shall have a maximum floor area of 500 square feet.
3. Floor Area Ratio. ADUs shall be excluded from the calculation of Floor Area Ratio limitations (Section 2.30.040; Commercial Zones Development Standards).
4. Lot Coverage. ADUs and JADUs shall be excluded from the calculation of lot coverage (Section 3.10.035; Lot Coverage and Exceptions).
5. Open Space Requirements. ADUs and JADUs shall be excluded from the Open Space Requirements (Section 3.10.045; Open Space for Residential Uses).
6. Upper Story Open Spaces. Upper Story Open Spaces associated with the construction of an ADU or JADU shall comply with all requirements under Section 3.10.080 (Upper Story/Rooftop Decks and Open Spaces).
7. Trash Receptacles. JADUs and ADUs shall have direct access to trash receptacles for the property. Plans submitted for building permits shall identify locations of trash, green waste, and recycling receptacles, in compliance with Municipal Code Title V Chapter 52 Section 52.02.
Projects that include new ADUs that result in more than four dwellings on the property shall comply with Chapter 3, Section 3.10.075 (Trash Enclosures).
8. Parking. ADUs and JADUs are exempt from any additional vehicle parking requirements.
9. ADUs in the Coastal Zone. Where permissible in the coastal zone, accessory dwelling units that require approval of a coastal development permit shall be consistent with this section and shall be sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to coastal resources, including by conforming with all other applicable LCP policies and standards, including those that govern wetlands, streams, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, public views, and coastal bluffs.
G. Objective Design Standards. The standards in this Subsection shall apply to all ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66314. ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66323 are only subject to the standards specifically authorized by that section.
1. Building Orientation and Primary Entryway.
a. ADUs and JADUs shall have independent exterior access. b. ADUs and JADUs located within 20 feet from the front or street side property line shall:
i. Have the primary entrance oriented towards the street; and ii. Provide an entryway that consists of either of the following entryway types:
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 7 of 10
(1) A front porch with a minimum depth of five feet and a minimum length of eight feet; or
(2) A recess or stoop measuring at least four feet by four feet which is defined by a covered entry, distinct change in roof line, or recess.
(3) See Figure 4.3 in Subsection 4.25.020.D.4 for entryway examples.
2. Façade Articulation
a. New construction of any ADU or JADU (excluding conversion of existing space) shall carry the same theme on all elevations. For the purposes of this standard, a theme includes primary (nonaccent) materials and colors.
b. Blank and/or flat walls shall be prohibited for new ADUs or JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space). Exterior walls along the second story shall provide at least one of the following articulation strategies for every 15 feet along the façade:
i. Windows or other openings;
ii. Change in wall plane (two feet minimum depth for a length of at least five feet);
iii. A horizontal cornice, wainscot, or other type of banding that wraps along the sides the structure (the banding shall wrap around the entire structure or end along an inside corner that avoids exposed edges);
iv. A change in exterior color or material.
v. Exceed entryway minimum requirements (per Subsection
4.10.015.E.7.a.2) by an additional width equal to at least 10 percent of the length of the building façade on which the entryway is located.
3. Fenestration.
a. New detached or attached ADUs shall comply with at least one of the following fenestration strategies (or any combination thereof):
i. Provide window trim on all windows, with a minimum width of 3.5 inches.
ii. Inset all windows by at least two inches from face of glass to face of window trim (or to face of exterior wall if there is no trim). iii. Lintels or awnings applied over all window openings. iv. Windowsills projecting a minimum of two inches beyond the building façade on all windows.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 8 of 10
4. Materials.
a. Primary material means the exterior siding or cladding material that covers the largest contiguous surface area of the structure’s exterior walls.
b. Accent material means any exterior siding or cladding material used on the structure that is not the primary material.
c. New ADUs and JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space) that include two or more exterior materials shall ensure that exterior material transitions along an inside corner of the structure, avoiding exposed edges when viewed from the side.
d. The following exterior siding materials shall be prohibited; vinyl and aluminum siding, T-111 plywood, and exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS).
e. The following roofing materials shall be prohibited: corrugated metal, galvanized metal, or similar sheets and panels for the use of roofing materials are also prohibited.
5. Roofs. New ADUs and JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space) shall comply with at least one of the following:
a. An ADU shall have the same roof style (e.g., gable, hip, etc.) as the predominant roof style of the primary dwelling(s), with the predominant roof style defined as the style covering the largest contiguous area of the primary dwelling’s roof;
b. An ADU shall use a roof slope identical to the predominant roof slope of the primary dwelling(s), with the predominant roof slope being the slope shared by the largest portion of the roof;
c. An ADU shall have the same roof material and color as the primary dwelling(s).
H. General ADU and JADU requirements.
1. Separate Conveyance. No subdivision of property shall be allowed where an ADU (including JADUs) has been established and the resulting subdivision does not maintain the primary residence on the same lot as the ADU(s). Except as provided in Government Code Section 66341, ADUs may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence. JADUs may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
2. Short-Term Rental Prohibited. ADUs and JADUs shall not be rented for a period of less than thirty days. Short Term Rentals are prohibited within any ADU or JADU.
Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 9 of 10
3. Owner Occupancy.
a. JADUs. Owner-occupancy is required for properties on which a JADU includes shared sanitation facilities with the existing primary structure, unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66333. The owner may reside in the JADU or primary dwelling on the property. b. ADUs. ADUs are not subject to any owner-occupancy requirements unless the property has both an ADU and a JADU, in which case the JADU owner-occupancy requirements apply.
4. Utility Connections. ADUs and JADUs shall be connected to City water and sewer services. Separate utility connections and meters are not required for interior ADUs, JADUs, and any other ADU that complies with Government Code Section 66311.5 (d).
5. Fire Sprinklers and Access.
a. Fire sprinklers are required in an ADU (interior, attached, or detached) and JADU if sprinklers are required in the primary residence. b. The construction of an ADU (interior, attached, or detached) or JADU does not trigger a requirement for fire sprinklers to be installed in the existing primary residence.
c. ADUs or JADUs shall comply with all access requirements in compliance with Municipal Code Title XV, Chapter 150 (Building Regulations).
6. Development Impact Fees. Payment of development impact fees are required as follows:
a. ADUs and JADUs with floor area of 750 square feet of interior livable space or less shall not pay development impact fees.
b. ADUs with floor area greater than 750 square feet of interior livable space shall be charged development impact fees that are proportional in relation to the square footage of the primary structure, as shown on the Master Fee Schedule.
7. JADU Covenant Agreement. Prior to the issuance of building permits for a JADU, a covenant agreement shall be recorded against the title of the property in the County Recorder’s office and a copy filed with the Director which discloses the structure’s approved floor plan and status as a “Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit” and agreeing that the owner of the property will occupy either the primary residence or the JADU, unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66333. The covenant agreement must run with the land and bind all future owners. The form of the covenant agreement will be provided by the City.
I. Alternative Compliance. If application of any development standard in this Chapter would physically preclude the construction of one attached or detached ADU meeting the requirements of Government Code Section Ordinance No. 26-03 Page 10 of 10
66321(b)(3), the City shall waive or modify the development standard only to the extent necessary to allow construction of the ADU of at least 800 square feet of livable area, so long as it would not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources.
Part 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.
Part 5. Repeal of Conflicting Provisions. The provisions of this ordinance shall govern and supersede any other provisions of the Grover Beach Municipal Code as heretofore adopted by the City of Grover Beach that are in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance.
Part 6. Effective Date. This amendment shall not become effective and in full force and effect until 12:01 a.m. on the thirtieth day after adoption by the City Council, or 12:01 a.m. on the day after final certification by the California Coastal Commission, whichever occurs later.
However, within fifteen (15) days after adoption by the City Council, the Ordinance shall be published once, together with the names of the Council Members voting thereon, in a newspaper of general circulation within the City.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on August 24, 2026, and PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council on September 14, 2026, on the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
RECUSED: Council Members –
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
Attest:
WENDI B. SIMS, CITY CLERK
Approved as to Form
JENNIFER THOMPSON, CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION NO. 26-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR TO SUBMIT THE AMENDED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT ASSOCIATED WITH ORDINANCE 26-03 TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
COMMISSION FOR FINAL CERTIFICATION
WHEREAS, a Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendment is required for any amendment(s) to the City’s Development Code (Article IX of the City’s Municipal Code); and WHEREAS, the Local Coastal Program Amendment is intended to be carried out in a manner that is fully in conformity with the Coastal Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 2026, and recommended the City Council approve the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance Amendments and Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council at a public meeting on August 24, 2026 conducted a first reading and introduction of the ADU Ordinance Amendments, and adopted the ADU Ordinance Amendments at its meeting on September 14, 2026; and
WHEREAS, this action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) Section 15378(b)(5) and is therefore exempt from CEQA because it will not result in any direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
WHEREAS, the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment will take effect automatically upon final certification by the Coastal Commission unless revisions are made by the Coastal Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grover Beach resolves as follows:
The Community Development Director shall submit an amendment of Article IX Development Code associated with the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance No. 26-03, to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.
On motion by Council Member _____, seconded by Council Member ____, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
the foregoing Resolution 26-XX was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grover Beach, California this 14th day of September 2026.
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
Attest:
WENDI B. SIMS, CITY CLERK
Attachment 2
Page | 1
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
Prepared by
Community Development Department
SEPTEMBER 2026
Attachment 3
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 2 Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance - Legislative Draft Guide This legislative draft is intended to illustrate the recommended changes to the City of Grover Beach ADU Ordinance, for purposes of addressing HCD comments only. Any sections of the ADU Ordinance not provided below remain unchanged.
Red underline indicates amendments to the City’s Development Code Section 4.10.015 in accordance with California Housing and Community Development (HCD) comments.
Blue underline indicates amendments to the City’s Development Code Section 4.10.015 in accordance with Coastal Commission staff recommendations to ensure that all ADUs in the coastal zone are consistent with the City’s adopted LCP and that ADUs that require approval of a coastal development permit are sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to coastal resources.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 3 CHAPTER 4.STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USES
4.10 Standards for Specific Development and Land Uses
4.10.015 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to allow and regulate Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs), both as defined in Section 9.10: Definitions) consistent with Government Code Sections 66310 - 66342.
Implementation of this Section is meant to expand housing opportunities by increasing the number of smaller units available within the city.
For purposes of this Section, all terms shall have the same meaning as provided in Government Code Section 66313 unless otherwise defined by State law. Where any provision of this section conflicts with State ADU law, State law shall control. In all cases, ADUs in the coastal zone shall be consistent with the LCP, including the standards specified in Section 4.10.015.F.9.
B. Permit requirements. Any ADU or JADU that complies with all of the applicable development standards of this Section requires only a ministerial building permit. In the Coastal Zone, an Administrative Coastal Development Permit is required unless exempt consistent with Section 6.20.040.B.2, prior to issuance of building permits.
C. Prohibited Locations. ADUs and JADUs shall be prohibited under the following circumstances.
1. Urban Lot Split. ADUs and JADUs shall be prohibited on properties associated with an Urban Lot Split (see Section 8.160) only when the number of dwelling units on that lot already equals or exceeds the two‑unit limit established by Government Code Section 65852.21 which also include Urban Dwelling Units (see Section 4.25.060)., ADUs and JADUs are allowed on Urban Lot Split parcels that have not yet reached this two‑unit cap as described by Government Code Section 65852.21(f).
D. Specific Standards for ADUs and JADUs on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
ADU and JADU standards for lots with a proposed or existing single-unit dwelling shall comply with the following:
1. Maximum Number. The following number of ADUs and JADUs may be established on a qualifying legal lot:
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 4 a. One JADU;
b. One interior, attached, or detached ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66314; and
c. One interior ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66323; d. One detached ADU authorized by Government Code Section 66323; and No more than one JADU, one Interior or Attached ADU, and one Detached ADU shall be allowed per legal lot.
2. JADUs. JADUs shall comply with the requirements of Government Code Section 66333-66339.5.
3. Interior ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. An interior ADU (converted space) is either:
i. Within the space of an existing single-unit dwelling,; or ii. Within the existing space of an accessory structure,; or iii. A conversion ADU as defined by Government Code Section 66323.
An Interior ADU may provide for up to 150 additional square foot addition if the expansion is limited to accommodating ingress and egress. b. Access. An interior ADU shall have exterior access that is independent of that for the single-unit dwelling; and
c. Setbacks. An interior ADU shall have side and rear setbacks sufficient for fire and safety, as dictated by applicable building and fire codes.
4. Attached ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. An attached ADU consists of new construction that is attached to an existing or proposed structure and is not considered an interior ADU as defined in subsection D.3.a.
b. Maximum Height. An attached ADU shall not exceed 25 feet in height.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, ADUs shall not exceed two stories. c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 15 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance). ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
d. Size. The total floor area of an attached ADU on a lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling shall not exceed 50 percent of the existing primary dwelling and shall comply with Section 4.10.015.F.2 (Size), except where such limitation must be waived or modified pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance) to allow construction of an ADU of at least 800 square feet.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 5
5. Detached ADU on a Lot with a Single-Unit Dwelling.
a. Definition. A detached ADU consists of new construction that is detached from any existing structures and is not considered an interior or attached ADU as defined in subsections D.3.a and D.4.a
b. Maximum Height. A detached ADU shall not exceed 16 feet in height, unless otherwise specified under Government Code Section 66321. c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 15 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance), or where front setbacks do not apply pursuant to Government Code Section 66323. ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
E. Specific Standards for ADUs on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings. ADU standards for lots in a residential or mixed-use zone with existing or proposed multi-unit dwellings shall comply with the following:
1. Maximum Number.
a. Up to 25 percent of the number of existing units in a multi-unit development (rounded to the nearest whole number, plus one) shall be allowed as interior ADUs created within the space of the existing multi-family structure; and b. No more than eight detached ADUs per lot with an existing multi-unit development. However, the number of ADUs shall not exceed the number of existing units on the lot; or
c. No more than two detached ADUs per lot with a proposed multi-unit development.
2. Interior ADU on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings.
a. Definition. An interior ADU (conversion of existing space) is created from space located within portions of existing multi-unit dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including but not limited to storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages (and shall not be created from space associated with commercial portions of mixed-use structures); and b. Standards. An interior ADU shall comply with California Building Standards Code for dwellings.
3. Detached ADU on a Lot with Multi-Unit Dwellings.
a. Definition. A detached ADU consists of new construction that is detached from any proposed or existing primary structures and is not considered an interior ADU as defined in subsection E.2.a.
b. Maximum Height. A detached ADU shall not exceed 18 feet in height, unless otherwise specified under Government Code Section 66321.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 6 c. Minimum Setbacks.
i. Front setback: 10 feet except where a lesser setback is permitted pursuant to Section 4.10.015.I (Alternative Compliance), or where front setbacks do not apply pursuant to Government Code Section 66323. ii. Interior and street side setback: 4 feet
iii. Rear setback: 4 feet
F. Development Standards. The standards in this Subsection shall apply to all ADUs and JADUs. ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66323 are only subject to the standards specifically authorized by that section., unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66323
1. Density. ADUs and JADUs shall not count towards the allowable density of units per acre prescribed per zone under Development Code Chapter 2 (Zones and Allowable Land Uses).
2. Size. Size limits of ADUs and JADUs are defined based on interior livable space, excluding exterior wall thickness.
a. Size Minimum. An ADU or JADU shall have a minimum floor area of 150 square feet.
b. ADU Size Maximum. An ADU shall not exceed 850 square feet for a studio or one-bedroom unit and 1,200 square feet for a unit with two or more bedrooms.
However, no application of any setback or Objective Design Standard may require an ADU to be less than 800 square feet, as described in subsection IH of this section.
c. JADU Size Maximum. A JADU shall have a maximum floor area of 500 square feet.
3. Floor Area Ratio. ADUs shall be excluded from the calculation of Floor Area Ratio limitations (Section 2.30.040; Commercial Zones Development Standards).
4. Lot Coverage. ADUs and JADUs shall be excluded from the calculation of lot coverage (Section 3.10.035; Lot Coverage and Exceptions).
5. Open Space Requirements. ADUs and JADUs shall be excluded from the Open Space Requirements (Section 3.10.045; Open Space for Residential Uses).
6. Upper Story Open Spaces. Upper Story Open Spaces associated with the construction of an ADU or JADU shall comply with all requirements under Section
3.10.080 (Upper Story/Rooftop Decks and Open Spaces).
7. Trash Receptacles. JADUs and ADUs shall have direct access to trash receptacles for the property. Plans submitted for building permits shall identify locations of trash, green waste, and recycling receptacles, in compliance with Municipal Code Title V Chapter 52 Section 52.02Article V Chapter 4 Section 5401. Projects that include new ADUs that result in more than four dwellings on the property shall comply with Chapter 3, Section 3.10.075 (Trash Enclosures).
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 7
8. Parking. ADUs and JADUs are exempt from any additional vehicle parking requirements.
9. ADUs in the Coastal Zone. Where permissible in the coastal zone, accessory dwelling units that require approval of a coastal development permit shall be consistent with this section and shall be sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to coastal resources, including by conforming with all other applicable LCP policies and standards, including those that govern wetlands, streams, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, public views, and coastal bluffs.
G. 9. Objective Design Standards. The standards in this Subsection shall apply to all ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66314. ADUs and JADUs subject to Government Code Section 66323 are only subject to the standards specifically authorized by that section.
1. Building Orientation and Primary Entryway.
a. ADUs and JADUs shall have independent exterior access. b. ADUs and JADUs located within 20 feet from the front or street side property line shall:
i. Have the primary entrance oriented towards the street; and ii. Provide an entryway that consists of either of the following entryway types:
(1) A front porch with a minimum depth of five feet and a minimum length of eight feet; or
(2) A recess or stoop measuring at least four feet by four feet which is defined by a covered entry, distinct change in roof line, or recess. (3) See Figure 4.3 in Subsection 4.25.020.D.4 for entryway examples.
2. Massing. The square footage of any story of an ADU or JADU constructed above the first story (excluding conversion of existing space) shall have a maximum floor area that is no more than 80 percent of the floor area of the first story. a. First floor calculation shall include all interior living areas, including interior and exterior staircases, attached garages, and covered porches connected to the first floor.
b. The floor area of upper stories is inclusive of all interior living area with walls; all staircases; porches, decks, and balconies that are covered by a roof structure; as well as any mezzanines, lofts, or other partial floor areas. The upper story of the structure shall not cantilever a distance of more than three feet beyond the façade of the first story of the structure.
3. Façade Articulation.
a. New construction of any ADU or JADU (excluding conversion of existing space) shall carry the same theme on all elevations. For the purposes of this standard, a theme includes primary (nonaccent) materials and colors.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 8 b. Blank and/or flat walls shall be prohibited for new ADUs or JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space). Exterior walls along the second story shall provide at least one of the following articulation strategies for every 15 feet along the façade:
i. Windows or other openings;
ii. Change in wall plane (two feet minimum depth for a length of at least five feet);
iii. A horizontal cornice, wainscot, or other type of banding that wraps along the sides the structure (the banding shall wrap around the entire structure or end along an inside corner that avoids exposed edges); iv. A change in exterior color or material.
v. Exceed entryway minimum requirements (per Subsection 4.10.015.E.7.a.2) by an additional width equal to at least 10 percent of the length of the building façade on which the entryway is located.
4. Fenestration.
a. New detached or attached ADUs shall comply with at least one of the following fenestration strategies (or any combination thereof):
i. Provide window trim on all windows, with a minimum width of 3.5 inches. ii. Inset all windows by at least two inches from face of glass to face of window trim (or to face of exterior wall if there is no trim). iii. Lintels or awnings applied over all window openings. iv. Windowsills projecting a minimum of two inches beyond the building façade on all windows.
5. Materials.
a. Primary material means the exterior siding or cladding material that covers the largest contiguous surface area of the structure’s exterior walls. b. Accent material means any exterior siding or cladding material used on the structure that is not the primary material.
c. New ADUs and JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space) that include two or more exterior materials shall ensure that exterior material transitions along an inside corner of the structure, avoiding exposed edges when viewed from the side.
d. The following exterior siding materials shall be prohibited; vinyl and aluminum siding, T-111 plywood, and exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS). e. The following roofing materials shall be prohibited: corrugated metal, galvanized metal, or similar sheets and panels for the use of roofing materials are also prohibited.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 9
6. Roofs. New ADUs and JADUs (excluding conversion of existing space) shall comply with at least one of the following:
a. An ADU shall have the same roof style (e.g., gable, hip, etc.) as the predominant roof style of the primary dwelling(s), with the predominant roof style defined as the style covering the largest contiguous area of the primary dwelling’s roof;
b. An ADU shall have the same use a roof slope as identical to the predominant roof slope of the primary dwelling(s), with the predominant roof slope being the slope shared by the largest portion of the roof;
c. An ADU shall have the same roof material and color as the primary dwelling(s).
H. G. General ADU and JADU requirements.
1. Separate Conveyance. No subdivision of property shall be allowed where an ADU (including JADUs) has been established and the resulting subdivision does not maintain the primary residence on the same lot as the ADU(s). Except as provided in Government Code Section 66341, ADUs may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence. JADUs may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
2. Short-Term Rental Prohibited. ADUs and JADUs shall not be rented for a period of less than thirty days. Short Term Rentals are prohibited within any ADU or JADU.
3. Owner Occupancy.
a. JADUs. Owner-occupancy is required for properties on which a JADU includes shared sanitation facilities with the existing primary structure is proposed, unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66333. The owner may reside in the JADU or primary dwelling on the property. b. ADUs. ADUs are not subject to any owner-occupancy requirements unless the property has both an ADU and a JADU, in which case the JADU owneroccupancy requirements apply.
4. Utility Connections. ADUs and JADUs shall be connected to City water and sewer services. Separate utility connections and meters are not required for interior ADUs, JADUs, and any other ADU that if the ADU/JADU complies with Government Code Section 66311.5 (d). 66324 (d) and (e)
5. Fire Sprinklers and Access.
a. Fire sprinklers are required in an ADU (interior, attached, or detached) and JADU if sprinklers are required in the primary residence. b. The construction of an ADU (interior, attached, or detached) or JADU does not trigger a requirement for fire sprinklers to be installed in the existing primary residence.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 10 c. ADUs or JADUs shall comply with all access requirements in compliance with Municipal Code Title XV, Chapter 150 Municipal Code Article 8 (Building Regulations).
6. Development Impact Fees. Payment of development impact fees are required as follows:
a. ADUs and JADUs with floor area of 750 square feet of interior livable space or less shall not pay development impact fees.
b. ADUs with floor area greater than 750 square feet of interior livable space shall be charged development impact fees that are proportional in relation to the square footage of the primary structure, as shown on the Master Fee Schedule.
7. JADU Covenant Agreement. Prior to the issuance of building permits for a JADU, a covenant agreement shall be recorded against the title of the property in the County Recorder’s office and a copy filed with the Director which discloses the structure’s approved floor plan and status as a “Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit” and agreeing that the owner of the property will occupy either the primary residence or the JADU, unless otherwise exempt under Government Code Section 66333. The covenant agreement must run with the land and bind all future owners. The form of the covenant agreement will be provided by the City.
I. H. Alternative Compliance. If application of any development standard in this Chapter would physically preclude the construction of one attached or detached ADU meeting the requirements of Government Code Section 66321(b)(3), the City shall waive or modify the development standard only to the extent necessary to allow construction of the ADU of at least 800 square feet of livable area, so long as it would not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources.
1. General. The standards under this Section shall not physically preclude the construction of one ADU (attached or detached) of up to 800 square feet, in accordance with Government Code Section 66321(b)(3).
2. Exemption from Standards. To allow for an ADU of up to 800 square feet, development standards shall be modified in the following order and only as necessary to enable the construction of an ADU of up to 800 square feet:
a. Primary Entryway
b. Rear and side setbacks
c. Front setback
3. Application. In an application where standards are requested to be waived, the applicant shall demonstrate that there are no feasible alternatives to redesign the project to comply with the required standards due to existing physical constraints, and that the requested reduction to the relevant standard is the minimum deviation necessary to allow the construction of an ADU of a minimum size of 800 square feet. For the purpose of these requirements, existing structures are not considered a physical constraint.
City of Grover Beach Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendments – Public Draft Page | 11
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 8
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Megan Martin, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Temporary Stay of Enforcement of Grover Beach Municipal Code Provisions Regulating Poultry
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution establishing a temporary stay of enforcement of Grover Beach Municipal Code provisions regulating the keeping of poultry within city limits.
BACKGROUND
The City of Grover Beach (City) first adopted regulations governing the keeping of animals in 1970. These regulations have been periodically updated over time to address changing community conditions, health and safety considerations, and regulatory needs. The City’s enforcement of animal regulations includes provisions governing the keeping of poultry, including chickens, on property within the city as defined by the Grover Beach Municipal Code (GBMC) Title IX, Chapter 91, Section 91.11. Enforcement is primarily carried out by the City’s Code Compliance program, with animal-related services also supported through the City’s contract with San Luis Obispo County Animal Services. The Code Compliance program is responsible for responding to complaints, investigating potential violations, and taking appropriate enforcement action or referring certain cases to the appropriate agency (i.e., San Luis Obispo County Animal Control Services, County Public Health Department, or Grover Beach Police Department), to ensure compliance with the GBMC.
In FY 2023-24, the City undertook a comprehensive update of its animal regulations and adopted an ordinance intended to provide greater consistency with the San Luis Obispo County’s Uniform Animal Regulations. As part of that update adopted by the Council in July 2024, the City’s regulations regarding the limitation and keeping of poultry were revised to prohibit the keeping of poultry within city limits. At the August 24, 2026 Council meeting, public speakers expressed concern regarding enforcement action and notices to remove the chickens from their properties in compliance with the GBMC. The public speakers requested that the Council consider whether and how chickens should be permitted and regulated within the community and to not continue with the prohibition as currently stipulated in the GBMC.
During Council communications at the August 24th meeting, the Council directed staff to return to Council with a policy discussion on this issue at a future meeting which staff will schedule for October 26. The Council also directed staff to bring a resolution at the September 14th meeting that would establish a temporary stay of enforcement of the City’s poultry prohibition. The stay would provide staff the opportunity to research the City’s existing regulations, approaches used Staff Report: Resolution on a Stay of Enforcement of Code Provisions Regarding Poultry Page 2 September 14, 2026
by other similar jurisdictions, and develop recommendations for the Council regarding how the keeping of chickens may best be regulated and enforced within the City.
Pursuant to this direction, the attached Resolution would temporarily stay, pause, and refrain from initiating or pursuing enforcement actions based solely upon violations of the GBMC provisions regulating the keeping of poultry until such time that the City’s Animal Regulations are amended on this issue. Any pending code compliance cases based solely upon the keeping of poultry will be placed on hold during the effective period of the stay and no additional enforcement action shall be taken on such cases unless otherwise directed by the Council to address an independent violation.
Lastly, staff would note that the Resolution does not create a permanent legal right to keep poultry within the City, waive any existing GBMC requirements, or prevent the Council from subsequently determining that enforcement of the City’s existing regulations should resume.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no funding impacts to this staff report.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Adopt the Resolution establishing a temporary stay of enforcement of GBMC provisions regulating the keeping of poultry; or,
2. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Staff contacted individuals involved with pending enforcement cases related to keeping of poultry to inform them of this agenda item.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution
Multi-Year Goals
☒ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☒ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
RESOLUTION NO. 26-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING A TEMPORARY STAY OF ENFORCEMENT OF
GROVER BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS REGULATING THE
KEEPING OF POULTRY ON PROPERTY WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
WHEREAS, the City of Grover Beach (“City”) Municipal Code (“GBMC”) contains provisions regulating the keeping of poultry, including chickens, within the City (GBMC Title IX, Chapter 91, Section 91.11, subsection (B)); and
WHEREAS, the City has recently undertaken enforcement activities related to the keeping of chickens within the City pursuant to the applicable provisions of the GBMC; and WHEREAS, following enforcement activities, the City Council (“Council”) at a regular meeting on August 24, 2026, received public comment expressing concern regarding the City’s prohibition and enforcement of regulations concerning chickens, and a desire among members of the community to retain their chickens; and
WHEREAS, the public comments received by the Council prompted the Council to further consider the City’s existing regulations governing the keeping of chickens and whether those regulations continue to appropriately reflect community interests and City policy objectives; and WHEREAS, the Council directed staff to evaluate existing regulations and consider potential amendments to the Animal Regulation provisions regarding the City’s regulation of chickens before additional enforcement activities are undertaken; and WHEREAS, the Council directed staff to return to the next Council meeting with a resolution establishing a temporary stay of enforcement while staff explores amendments that more appropriate reflect community interest and the City’s policy objectives; and WHEREAS, the temporary stay is not intended to repeal, amend, or invalidate any provision of the GBMC, nor does it authorize the keeping of chickens or poultry in violation of other applicable laws, regulations, or requirements.
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grover Beach, California, does hereby direct staff on the temporary stay of enforcement as follows:
SECTION 1. To temporarily stay, pause, and refrain from initiating or pursuing enforcement actions based solely upon violations of the GBMC provisions regulating the keeping of chickens or poultry.
SECTION 2. This resolution shall not repeal, amend, suspend, or otherwise alter the text or legal effect of any provision of the GBMC. The City's regulations governing chickens and poultry shall remain in effect unless and until amended or repealed by subsequent action of the City Council.
SECTION 3. The enforcement stay applies to enforcement activities based solely upon the keeping of chickens or poultry in violation of the City's regulations. This Resolution does not prevent the City from taking enforcement action when chickens or poultry are associated with Attachment 1
Resolution No. 26- Page 2
other independent violations of law, including public health, sanitation, nuisance, animal welfare, or other applicable requirements.
SECTION 4. Any pending code compliance cases based solely upon the keeping of chickens or poultry shall be placed on hold during the effective period of the stay. No additional enforcement action shall be taken on such cases unless otherwise directed by the Council to address an independent violation.
SECTION 5. Staff are directed to evaluate the City's existing regulations concerning chickens and poultry and return to the City Council with recommendations regarding whether amendments to the GBMC are warranted.
SECTION 6. Duration. The enforcement stay established by this resolution shall remain in effect until the earliest of:
1. The City Council adopts subsequent legislation or a resolution terminating the stay; or
2. The City Council adopts amendments to the applicable GBMC provisions and establishes a new enforcement direction.
SECTION 7. Nothing in this Resolution shall be construed as creating a permanent legal right to keep chickens or poultry within the City, waiving any existing Municipal Code requirement, or preventing the Council from subsequently determining that enforcement of the City’s existing regulations should resume.
SECTION 8. This Resolution is affected immediately upon its adoption.
On motion by Council Member _____, seconded by Council Member ____, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
RECUSED: Council Members –
the foregoing Resolution was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grover Beach, California this 14th day of September, 2026.
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
Attest:
WENDI B. SIMS, CITY CLERK
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 9
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Scott Hallett, Five Cities Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Support for the City of Paso Robles Proposal for Emergency Medical Services
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution expressing support for the City of Paso Robles in submitting a proposal for the San Luis Obispo County emergency medical services contract.
BACKGROUND
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors holds the statutory authority to contract for ambulance services within the County under the State Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Act.
The County is preparing to release a Request for Proposals (RFP) competitive process to award the ambulance services contract, which represents a critical opportunity to modernize and improve EMS delivery countywide. Currently, the City of Grover Beach, through the Five Cities Fire Authority, is responsible for providing fire, EMS first-response, hazardous materials mitigation, and rescue operations within the city’s jurisdictional boundary. However, ambulance transport services are contracted through the County.
To enhance the current EMS system, the City of Paso Robles is seeking to change the EMS system from the current “private-for-profit” based emergency transportation model to a subcontracting-based “public-private partnership” known as the “Alliance” model. The Alliance Model is a partnership approach to delivering emergency medical services. This model combines the strengths of public agencies to subcontract with a private ambulance provider under one coordinated system.
The city managers of the seven incorporated cities and the San Luis Obispo County Fire Chiefs Association have unanimously expressed their support for the City of Paso Robles, acting as the Lead Agency, to submit a proposal for the County ambulance services contract. This initiative is intended to foster a community-based EMS model with stronger accountability and transparency.
The Paso Robles-led model will:
• Provide an innovative EMS delivery model, where the City of Paso Robles serves as the lead agency, subcontracting to a private ambulance provider, with oversight provided by an executive committee made up of the seven cities’ city managers, ensuring transparency and accountability.
• Enhance service delivery with greater local involvement and oversight.
Staff Report: Support for City of Paso Robles Proposal for Emergency Medical Services Page 2 September 14, 2026
• Provide additional funding for EMS-centric programs and allow reinvestment into City EMS services.
• Foster regional cooperation by uniting the cities, community service districts, and fire agencies in a shared vision for EMS improvement.
• Support proactive and preventative programs addressing mental health, substance abuse, and services for unhoused community members.
• Reinvest excess revenues after operational costs back into local communities to improve public health outcomes.
By adopting the prepared Resolution, the City Council is supporting an opportunity for enhanced ambulance services and a more sustainable EMS system that is responsive to the evolving needs of our community. This Resolution allows Grover Beach to join other cities in the county in expressing policy support to Paso Robles in submitting a proposal in this competitive process, without committing the City to any further action at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT
No financial impact is projected for this action. Should the proposal submitted by Paso Robles be selected, the participating cities would fund the start-up until reimbursements from Medicare, insurance, and self-pay revenues are received. The estimated cost to the participating cities depends on details ultimately contained in the County’s RFP.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Adopt a Resolution expressing support for the City of Paso Robles in submitting a proposal for the San Luis Obispo County emergency medical services contract; or
2. Adopt a modified version of the Resolution; or
3. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
4. Provide alternative direction to the City’s voting delegate and alternate.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution
Multi-Year Goals
☒ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
RESOLUTION NO. 26-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE CITY OF PASO ROBLES IN SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO’S AMBULANCE
SERVICES CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grover Beach controls, through statutory authority, policy, and the Five Cities Fire Authority, the provision of fire suppression, emergency medical services (EMS), hazardous materials mitigation, and rescue operations within its jurisdictional boundaries; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State law, the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors holds authority over the regulation and contracting of ambulance transport services within San Luis Obispo County; and
WHEREAS, the current opportunity to bid for the County of San Luis Obispo’s ambulance services contract allows for significant improvements to the ambulance transport system through a more dynamic, community-based model; and
WHEREAS, the City Council supports an enhanced ambulance transport system that is robust, transparent, accountable, and reinvests revenues back into local communities after expenses to support proactive programs addressing mental health, substance abuse, and the needs of unhoused community members; and
WHEREAS, this proposed model will also provide additional funding for EMS-centric programs and allow direct reinvestment into local EMS operations, including the Five Cities Fire Authority, thereby improving overall public safety and service delivery within the city; and WHEREAS, the seven city managers representing the incorporated cities of San Luis Obispo County, as well as the San Luis Obispo County Fire Chiefs Association, have unanimously endorsed and expressed support for the City of Paso Robles submitting a bid for the County ambulance services contract; and
WHEREAS, a Paso Robles-led model would foster strong local partnerships, accountability, and transparency, as well as encourage collaborative governance across jurisdictions that directly benefit all communities within San Luis Obispo County, including the City of Grover Beach; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that this approach offers an opportunity to build an EMS system that is more responsive to community needs and better aligned with modern public safety practices, while ensuring that revenues are invested back into the people and services of San Luis Obispo County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Grover Beach as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Grover Beach hereby expresses its strong support for the City of Paso Robles to submit a bid for the County of San Luis Obispo’s ambulance services contract.
Attachment 1
Resolution No. 26- Page 2
SECTION 2. The City Council further supports the pursuit of a comprehensive, transparent, and accountable EMS system that prioritizes community needs, reinvests revenues locally, and provides sustainable funding for EMS-related and preventative public health programs.
SECTION 3. The City Council encourages the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors and all relevant decision-makers to give favorable consideration to this model, which will yield direct and meaningful benefits to residents of Grover Beach and all communities throughout the county.
Upon motion of Council Member _______, seconded by Council Member ______ , and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members –
NOES: Council Members –
ABSENT: Council Members –
ABSTAIN: Council Members –
the foregoing Resolution 26-XX was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grover Beach, California this 14th day of September 2026.
KASSI DEE, MAYOR
Attest:
WENDI B. SIMS, CITY CLERK
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 10
Placement: Consent
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Erin Wiggin, CIP Manager
Jeff Lee, Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Agreement for Construction Management Services for Measure K-14 Project CIP 2295-19
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an agreement with BKF Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $467,131 for construction management services associated with the CIP 2295-19 Measure K-14 Street Rehabilitation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND
The City Council has identified Community Infrastructure as one of its multi-year City goals and Street Improvements and Maintenance as a top priority for FY 2026-27. These goals focus on long-range planning and the upkeep of well-maintained infrastructure, including city streets.
Voters approved Measure K-14 in November 2014 which authorized the sale of up to $48 million in bond funds for repair of residential streets. The first 17 Measure K-14 funded projects are complete with the 18th project underway and collectively have provided maintenance and repair of nearly 320 city blocks which represents over 70% of all residential streets.
The next Measure K-14 street project is Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 2295-19 which includes pavement repair and concrete improvements of approximately 28 blocks on portions of N. 2nd Street, N. 5th Street, N. 6th Street, N. 7th Street, Brighton Avenue and Ramona Avenue.
Construction bids for this project were received on September 3, 2026 and a construction contract award recommendation will be brought to Council as a future meeting.
A construction manager provides the direct, day-to-day link between a contractor and city staff on City projects. The construction manager assures the project is constructed in accordance with the approved plans, provides a constructability review prior to the construction, reviews project submittals, records daily construction activities, monitors daily construction progress, and administers and evaluates pay requests and changes in work, while also working directly with the contractor and project manager to resolve disputes.
To select the construction manager, the Public Works Department worked through the Consultant shortlist of Construction Management firms that Council approved on June 22, 2026. This allows staff to seek cost and scope proposals from the construction management firms on this list. For this project, the City received proposals from BKF Engineers, Inc. and Cannon Corporation. After a review of the proposals, staff is recommending the Council award a construction management Staff Report: Construction Manager Agreement for CIP Project 2295-19 Page 2 September 14, 2026
contract to BKF Engineers, Inc. for this project. BKF Engineers, Inc. has successfully worked on several prior Measure K-14 projects and continues staff’s practice of rotating through the Council approved list of consultants when cost and experience are comparable.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is funded with Measure K-14 bond funds which are sufficient for construction management and materials testing associated with the project. The construction management work will be performed on a time and materials basis and will not be allowed to exceed the consultant’s estimated cost without written approval by the City.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Approve an agreement with BKF Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $467,131 for construction management services associated with the CIP 2295-19 Measure K-14 Street Rehabilitation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City; or
2. Provide direction to staff to seek the services of other consultants to provide construction management services; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Agreement
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☐ Economic Development and Housing ☒ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☒ Street Improvements and Maintenance
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR CIP 2295-19 MEASURE K-14 PROJECT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF GROVER BEACH, CALIFORNIA
AND BKF ENGINEERS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective the 1 st day of September, 2026 (“Effective
Date”), by and between the CITY OF GROVER BEACH, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and BKF ENGINEERS, a corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
CITY and CONSULTANT are referred to herein singularly as a “Party” and collectively as “Parties.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY desires to obtain professional services for the CIP 2295-19 Measure K-14 Project (hereinafter referred to as the “PROJECT”), more specifically identified in the Proposal, Scope of Work and Fee Schedule, jointly attached as “Exhibit A” to this Agreement, and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is engaged in the business of professional design and construction management services and hereby represents that it desires to and is professionally and legally capable of performing the services called for by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which CONSULTANT shall provide professional services, to be paid by the City; and WHEREAS, this Agreement will be administered for CITY by the Director of Public Works, (hereinafter referred to as “DIRECTOR”) or his/her designee.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the covenants, conditions, promises and agreements herein contained to be kept and performed by the respective Parties, it is mutually agreed as follows:
ARTICLE I. SCOPE OF SERVICES
CONSULTANT shall complete said PROJECT described herein, and more fully described in Exhibit A, diligently; to the best of their talents, skills, and expertise; and in accordance with local, State and Federal laws. This shall include all work incidental to, or necessary to perform, such services even though not specifically described in Exhibit A.
ARTICLE II. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
A. CONSULTANT’S sole compensation for satisfactory performance of all services required or rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be in an amount not to exceed four hundred sixty-seven thousand one hundred thirty-one dollars $467,131. Any annual modification to the fee structure as defined in Exhibit A, shall be subject to this not-to-exceed amount of $0 unless mutually agreed upon and amended by both Parties in a written amendment to this Agreement. CONSULTANT is not entitled to, nor will CONSULTANT receive any additional consideration, compensation, or other remuneration.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC Attachment 1
B. CONSULTANT shall invoice CITY on a monthly basis, via detailed statement, which will be processed and payable in the normal course of CITY business, typically within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice unless otherwise identified in this Agreement. The CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks above. CONSULTANT shall support its costs by properly executed payrolls, time records, attendance records, billing statements, contracts, detailed ledgers, vouchers, orders, or any other documents pertaining in whole or in part to this Agreement.
C. The Parties may modify this Agreement to increase or decrease the scope of services or provide for the rendition of services not required by this Agreement, which modification shall include an adjustment to CONSULTANT’S compensation. Any change in the scope of services must be made by written Contract Amendment to the Agreement signed by an authorized representative for each Party. CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to any additional compensation if services are performed prior to a signed written Contract Amendment.
D. At any time prior to issuance of final payment, the CITY may conduct a cost audit of CONSULTANT’S invoices/statements. Any payment may be reduced by amounts found by CITY not to constitute allowable costs and/or adjusted for prior overpayments or underpayments. Upon CONSULTANT’S compliance with all terms of this Agreement, CITY shall promptly pay any balance of allowable costs.
ARTICLE III. TERMINATION, REMEDIES, FORCE MAJEURE AND CONSOLIDATION OF DISPUTES A. This Agreement commences on the Effective Date and shall remain and continue in effect until all tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than July 2027 (“Term”), unless otherwise terminated sooner in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
B. This Agreement shall terminate without any liability of CITY to CONSULTANT upon the earlier of:
(i) CONSULTANT’S filing for protection under the federal bankruptcy laws, or any bankruptcy petition or petition for receiver commenced by a third party against CONSULTANT; (ii) Seven (7) calendar days written notice, with or without cause, by either the CITY or CONSULTANT; or
(iii) Expiration of this Agreement.
C. Upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall (i) Immediately stop all work hereunder;
(ii) Immediately cause any and all of its subcontractors to cease work; and (iii) Return to CITY any and all unearned payments and all properties and materials in the possession of CONSULTANT that are owned by CITY. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be paid compensation for services satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination. CONSULTANT shall not be paid for any work or services performed or costs incurred which reasonably could have been avoided.
D. In the event of termination due to failure of CONSULTANT to satisfactorily perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, CITY may withhold an amount that would otherwise be payable as an offset to, but not in excess of, CITY’S damages caused by such failure. In no event shall any payment by CITY pursuant to this Agreement constitute a waiver by CITY of any breach of this Agreement which Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
may then exist on the part of CONSULTANT, nor shall such payment impair or prejudice any remedy available to CITY with respect to the breach.
E. Upon any breach of this Agreement by CONSULTANT, CITY may:
(i) Exercise any right, remedy (in contract, law or equity), or privilege which may be available to it under applicable laws of the State of California or any other applicable law; (ii) Proceed by appropriate court action to enforce the terms of the Agreement; and/or (iii) Recover all direct, indirect, consequential, economic and incidental damages for the breach of the Agreement. If it is determined that CITY improperly terminated this Agreement for default, such termination shall be deemed a termination for convenience.
F. CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with adequate written assurances of future performance, upon the request of the Director or his/her designee, in the event CONSULTANT fails to comply with any terms or conditions of this Agreement.
G. CONSULTANT shall be liable for default unless nonperformance is caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of CONSULTANT and without its fault or negligence such as, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of CITY in its contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, unusually severe weather, and delays of common carriers. CONSULTANT shall notify the Director or his/her designee in writing as soon as it is reasonably possible after the commencement of any excusable delay, setting forth the full particulars in connection therewith, and shall remedy such occurrence with all reasonable dispatch, and shall promptly give written notice to the Director or his/her designee of the cessation of such occurrence.
H. CONSULTANT agrees that, notwithstanding any contrary provision in this Agreement, any dispute arising from or relating to this Agreement (including, without limitation, disputes based on contract, tort, equity or statute) may, at CITY’S option, be joined and consolidated with any other dispute or disputes arising from or relating to the PROJECT so that all disputes arising from or relating to the PROJECT may be resolved in a single proceeding. CONSULTANT hereby specifically waives any objection it may otherwise have to such joinder and consolidation and specifically consents to mediation, arbitration or any other dispute resolution mechanism, forum or proceeding necessary to effectuate the joinder and consolidation contemplated by this provision.
ARTICLE IV. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE A. All CITY information disclosed to CONSULTANT during the course of performance of services under this Agreement shall be treated as confidential and shall not be disclosed to any other persons or parties except as authorized by CITY, or required by law. Upon termination of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall turn over to CITY all records related to the Services provided to this Agreement.
B. CONSULTANT agrees to keep confidential the Services performed under this Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees not to post on social media, the internet, or otherwise publish the Services performed under this Agreement without express written consent by the CITY.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
C. Any reports, information, or other data prepared or assembled by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall not be made available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT without the prior written approval of CITY. During the Term of this Agreement, and thereafter, CONSULTANT shall not, without the prior written consent of CITY, disclose to anyone any Confidential Information. The term Confidential Information for the purposes of this Agreement shall include all proprietary and confidential information of CITY, including but not limited to business plans, marketing plans, financial information, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, compilations, documents, instruments, models, source or object codes and other information developed pursuant to this Agreement, disclosed or submitted, orally, in writing, or by any other medium or media, (otherwise referred to as “work”). All Confidential Information shall be and remain confidential and proprietary in CITY.
D. CONSULTANT shall not reproduce (such as photographs and prints), duplicate, distribute reproductions, or incorporate into any trademark or service mark, the work without the prior written consent of CITY.
Any rights of the CONSULTANT in the work terminate upon the death of such CONSULTANT and do not extend to such CONSULTANT’S heirs, successors or assigns.
E. Title to the work shall pass to CITY upon final acceptance by CITY. CITY reserves the right to donate, transfer or sell the work or any portion thereof. CITY shall have the exclusive right to publicly display the work and shall have a license to reproduce (such as photographs and prints) or create three-dimensional reproductions of the work for any noncommercial purpose (including, but not limited to, books, slides, postcards, film, Internet sites, reproductions for advertising, and other media). Prior to public display, the CITY shall consider the sensitive nature and potential security risk of releasing the information to the general public. Such reproductions shall contain if legally necessary a copyright notice. Reproductions for commercial purposes are only to be made with the mutual written consent of CONSULTANT and CITY.
All references and reproductions or adaptations of the work will credit the work to the CONSULTANT unless CONSULTANT requests to the contrary. CITY reserves the right to modify,remove and/or relocate the work at any time, and after consultation with CONSULTANT, shall have the right to determine when and if modifications, repairs and/or restorations are needed. If City makes modifications, repairs or restoration not approved by the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall have the right to sever its association with the work. CONSULTANT agrees to give CITY written notice prior to asserting any claim pertaining to the work, and CITY shall have not less than 90 days from the date of receipt of claim to cure any such claim. CITY may incorporate the work into any trademark or service mark to be utilized by CITY to register the same in accordance with Federal, state or local law.
F. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Article (IV).
This Article (IV) shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE V. PROFESSIONAL SKILL
It is further mutually understood and agreed by and between the Parties hereto that inasmuch as CONSULTANT represents to CITY that CONSULTANT and its subcontractors, if any, are skilled in the profession and shall perform in accordance with the standards of said profession necessary to perform the services agreed to be done by it under this Agreement, CITY relies upon the skill of CONSULTANT and any subcontractors to do and perform such services in a skillful manner and CONSULTANT agrees to thus perform the services and require the same of any subcontractors. Therefore, any acceptance of such Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
services by CITY shall not operate as a release of CONSULTANT or any subcontractors from said professional standards.
ARTICLE VI. INDEMNIFICATION AND DEFENSE
A. Indemnification and Defense for Professional Services: To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY and any and all of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including legal counsel’s fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’S duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by CITY in direct proportion to the CONSULTANT’S proportionate percentage of fault.
CONSULTANT’S percentage of fault shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability or damage is incurred by way of settlement or resolution without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determination of the CONSULTANT’S percentage of fault, the Parties agree to mediation with a third party neutral to determine the CONSULTANT’S proportionate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the CITY.
B. For All Other Liabilities: Notwithstanding the foregoing and without diminishing any rights of CITY under this Article (VI), for any liability, claim, demand, allegation against CITY arising out of, related to, or pertaining to any act or omission of CONSULTANT, but which is not a design professional service, CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its officials, employees, and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses (including reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees), judgments, settlements, and/or arbitration awards, whether for personal or bodily injury, property damage, or economic injury, and arising out of, related to, any concurrent or contributory negligence on the part of the CITY, except for the sole or active negligence of, or willful misconduct of the CITY.
C. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph.
This Article (VI) shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.
ARTICLE VII. INSURANCE
A. Throughout the life of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all insurance as required in Exhibit B, attached and incorporated into and part of this Agreement by reference, with an insurance company(ies) either:
(i) Admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and rated no less than “A-VII” in the Best’s Insurance Rating Guide; or (ii) As may be authorized in writing by CITY'S Administrative Services Director, or his/her successor, or his/her designee at any time and in his/her sole discretion. The required policies of insurance as stated in Exhibit B shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those amounts stated therein.
B. If at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension, CONSULTANT or any of its subcontractors/sub-consultants fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all services and work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
that become due to CONSULTANT shall be withheld until notice is received by CITY that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to CITY. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for CITY to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by CITY pursuant to this Article (VII) shall in any way relieve CONSULTANT of its responsibilities under this Agreement. The phrase “fail to maintain any required insurance” shall include, without limitation, notification received by CITY that an insurer has commenced proceedings, or has had proceedings commenced against it, indicating that the insurer is insolvent.
C. The fact that insurance is obtained by CONSULTANT shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONSULTANT, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify CITY shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by CONSULTANT. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under the supervision of CONSULTANT, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-consultants, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them.
D. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor/sub-consultant to provide insurance protection, as an additional insured, to the CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of this section, except that any required certificates and applicable endorsements shall be on file with CONSULTANT and CITY prior to the commencement of any services by the subcontractor. CONSULTANT and any subcontractor/sub-consultant shall establish additional insured status for CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.
E. Certificates of Insurance and properly executed endorsements in a form acceptable to the CITY evidencing the coverage required by the clauses set forth above shall be filed with the CITY at the time of execution of this Agreement. Each such policy shall be endorsed with the following language, except as otherwise provided:
(i) The City is named as additional insured for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured, and this policy protects the additional insured, its officers, agents, and employees against liability for personal and bodily injuries, deaths or property damage or destruction arising in any respect, directly or indirectly, in the performance of the contract. (For Public Liability Only)
(ii) The insurance provided is primary and no other insurance held or owned by the CITY shall be called upon to contribute to a loss.
(iii) The inclusion of more than one insured shall not operate to impair the rights of one insured against another insured, and the coverage afforded shall apply as though separate policies had been issued to each insured.
(iv) The coverage provided by this policy shall not be canceled, non-renewed, or substantially reduced in amount or scope, without thirty (30) days prior written notice given to CITY by certified mail. (v) All rights of subrogation are hereby waived against the CITY, its officers, and employees when acting within the scope of their appointment or employment.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
ARTICLE VIII. CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND NON-SOLICITATION A. Prior to CITY’S execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall complete a City of Grover Beach Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement in the form attached as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference. During the Term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall have the obligation and duty to immediately notify CITY in writing of any change to the information provided by CONSULTANT in such statement.
B. CONSULTANT shall comply, and require its subcontractors to comply, with all applicable (i) Professional canons and requirements governing avoidance of impermissible client conflicts; and
(ii) Federal, state and local conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, California Government Code Section 1090 et. seq., the California Political Reform Act (California Government Code Section 87100 et. seq.), and the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning disclosure and disqualification (2 California Code of Regulations Section 18700 et. seq.).
At any time, upon written request of CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide a written opinion of its legal counsel and that of any subcontractor that, after a due diligent inquiry, CONSULTANT and the respective subcontractor(s) are in full compliance with all laws and regulations. CONSULTANT shall take, and require its subcontractors to take, reasonable steps to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. Upon discovery of any facts giving rise to the appearance of a conflict of interest, CONSULTANT shall immediately notify CITY of these facts in writing.
C. In performing the work or services to be provided hereunder, CONSULTANT shall not employ or retain the services of any person while such person either is employed by CITY or is a member of any CITY council, commission, board, committee, or similar CITY body. This requirement may be waived in writing by the City Manager, if no actual or potential conflict is involved.
D. CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has not paid or agreed to pay any compensation, contingent or otherwise, direct or indirect, to solicit or procure this Agreement or any rights/benefits hereunder.
E. Neither CONSULTANT, nor any of CONSULTANT’S subcontractors performing any services on this Project, shall bid for, assist anyone in the preparation of a bid for, or perform any services pursuant to, any other contract in connection with this Project. CONSULTANT and any of its subcontractors shall have no interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract with a third-party in connection with this PROJECT unless such interest is in accordance with all applicable law and fully disclosed to and approved by the City Manager, in advance and in writing.
F. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed or services to be provided under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of this Article in each subcontract and require its subcontractors to comply therewith.
This Article (VIII) shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
ARTICLE IX. GENERAL TERMS
A. Except as otherwise provided by law, all notices expressly required of CITY within the body of this Agreement, and not otherwise specifically provided for, shall be effective only if signed by the Director or his/her designee.
B. Records of CONSULTANT’S expenses pertaining to the Project shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis and shall be available to CITY or its authorized representatives upon request during regular business hours throughout the life of this Agreement and for a period of three (3) years after final payment or, if longer, for any period required by law. In addition, all books, documents, papers, and records of CONSULTANT pertaining to the Project shall be available for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions for the same period of time. If any litigation, claim, negotiations, audit or other action is commenced before the expiration of said time period, all records shall be retained and made available to CITY until such action is resolved, or until the end of said time period whichever shall occur later. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this paragraph. This Article IX section (B) shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement.
C. Prior to execution of this Agreement by CITY, CONSULTANT shall have provided evidence to CITY that CONSULTANT is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required). CONSULTANT and any subcontractors shall agree to obtain any local licensing or certifications necessary to perform services within the City, including but not limited to City Business Tax Certificates. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the work or services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor to provide evidence to CITY that subcontractor is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required) before beginning work.
ARTICLE X. NONDISCRIMINATION
To the extent required by controlling federal, state and local law, CONSULTANT shall not employ discriminatory practices in the provision of services, employment of personnel, or in any other respect on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Subject to the foregoing and during the performance of this Agreement, CONSULTANT agrees as follows:
A. CONSULTANT will comply with all applicable laws and regulations providing that no person shall, on the grounds of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity made possible by or resulting from this Agreement.
B. CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identification, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. CONSULTANT shall ensure that applicants are employed, and the employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, religious Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identification, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Such requirement shall apply to CONSULTANT’S employment practices including, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this nondiscrimination clause.
C. CONSULTANT will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT in pursuit hereof, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era.
D. CONSULTANT will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice advising such labor union or workers' representatives of CONSULTANT’S commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment.
E. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Article (X).
ARTICLE XI. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
A. In the furnishing of the services provided for herein, CONSULTANT is acting solely as an independent contractor. Neither CONSULTANT, nor any of its officers, agents or employees shall be deemed an officer, agent, employee, joint venture, partner or associate of CITY for any purpose. CITY shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which CONSULTANT shall perform its work and functions. However, CITY shall retain the right to administer this Agreement so as to verify that CONSULTANT is performing its obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof.
B. This Agreement is not evidence of a partnership or joint venture between CONSULTANT and CITY.
CONSULTANT shall have no authority to bind CITY absent CITY’S express written consent. Except to the extent otherwise provided in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall bear its own costs and expenses in pursuit thereof.
C. Because of its status as an independent contractor, CONSULTANT and its officers, agents and employees shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to CITY employees. CONSULTANT shall be solely liable and responsible for all payroll and tax withholding and for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees all employee benefits including, without limitation, health, welfare and retirement benefits. In addition, together with its other obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible, indemnify, defend and save CITY harmless from all matters relating to employment and tax withholding for and payment of CONSULTANT'S employees, including, without limitation:
(i) Compliance with Social Security and unemployment insurance withholding, payment of Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
workers’ compensation benefits, and all other laws and regulations governing matters of employee withholding, taxes and payment; and
(ii) Any claim of right or interest in CITY employment benefits, entitlements, programs and/or funds offered employees of CITY whether arising by reason of any common law, de facto, leased, or co-employee rights or other theory. It is acknowledged that during the Term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT may be providing services to others unrelated to CITY or to this Agreement.
ARTICLE XII. NOTICES
All notices, including notices of address changes, required to be sent hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when mailed to the addresses listed below:
A. CITY: City of Grover Beach, Jeff Lee, Director of Public Works, 154 South Eighth Street, Grover Beach, CA 93433
B. CONSULTANT: Greg Chelini, Vice President, 811 El Capitan Way, Suite 130, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
ARTICLE XIII. BINDING
Subject to Article XIV, below, once this Agreement is signed by all Parties, it shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, all Parties, and each Party's respective heirs, successors, assigns, transferees, agents, servants, employees and representatives.
ARTICLE XIV. ASSIGNMENT
A. This Agreement is personal to CONSULTANT and there shall be no assignment by CONSULTANT of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the Grover Beach City Council. Any attempted assignment by CONSULTANT, its successors or assigns, shall be null and void unless approved by the Grover Beach City Council.
B. CONSULTANT hereby agrees not to assign the payment of any monies due to CONSULTANT from CITY under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual(s), corporation(s) or entity(ies). CITY retains the right to pay any and all monies due to CONSULTANT directly to CONSULTANT.
ARTICLE XV. COMPLIANCE THE LAW
In providing the services required under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California and CITY, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by federal, state, regional, or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the Term of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XVI. WAIVER
The waiver by either Party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. No provisions of this Agreement may be waived unless in writing and signed by all Parties to this Agreement. Waiver of any one provision herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision herein.
ARTICLE XVII. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding, however, any conflict of laws rule which would apply the law of another jurisdiction. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement and any rights and duties hereunder shall be San Luis Obispo County, California.
ARTICLE XVIII. HEADINGS
The section headings in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not be construed or held in any way to explain, modify or add to the interpretation or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XIX. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this Agreement are severable. The invalidity, or unenforceability of any one provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions.
ARTICLE XX. INTERPRETATION
The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement in its final form is the result of the combined efforts of the Parties and that, should any provision of this Agreement be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing this Agreement in favor of or against either Party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning. Accordingly, any rule of law, including, but not limited to, Section 1654 of the Civil Code of California, or any other statutes, legal decisions, or common-law principles of similar effect, that would require interpretation of any ambiguities in this Agreement against the party that drafted this Agreement is of no application and is hereby expressly waived.
ARTICLE XXI. ATTORNEY’S FEES
If either Party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other Party its reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses.
ARTICLE XXII. EXHIBITS
Each exhibit and attachment referenced in this Agreement is, by reference, incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement
ARTICLE XXIII. PRECEDENCE OF DOCUMENTS
In the event of any conflict between the body of this Agreement and any Exhibit or Attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Agreement shall control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the Exhibit or Attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any Exhibit or Attachment attached hereto, which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the Parties, provided for within the body of this Agreement, shall be null and void.
ARTICLE XXIV. CUMULATIVE REMEDIES
No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity.
ARTICLE XXV. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES
The rights, interests, duties and obligations defined within this Agreement are intended for the specific Parties as identified in the preamble of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
in this Agreement, it is not intended that any rights or interests in this Agreement benefit or flow to the interest of any third parties.
ARTICLE XXVI. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT
Each Party acknowledges that they have read and fully understand the contents of this Agreement and any documents issued that resulted in selection of CONSULTANT for entry into this Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be modified only by written instrument duly authorized and executed by both CITY and CONSULTANT.
ARTICLE XXVII. INTEGRATION
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties and supersedes all previous and/or contemporaneous understanding or agreement between the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
ARTICLE XVIII. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE
The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the Parties hereto warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of their entity and has/have the authority to bind their Party to the performance of its obligations hereunder. This Agreement may be executed electronically.
ARTICLE XXIX. COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts with each counterpart being deemed an original. No counterpart shall be deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterparts executed by the other Parties hereto are in the physical possession of the Party or Parties seeking enforcement thereof. Digital signatures meeting the requirements of Government Code section 16.5 shall also be considered original signatures.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
AGREEMENT SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have entered into this Agreement effective as of the day and year first written above.
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
Kassi Dee, Mayor Date
Attest:
Wendi Sims, City Clerk Date
Approved as to Form:
Jennifer Thompson, City Attorney Date
BKF ENGINEERS
Greg Chelini, Vice President Date
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A - Scope of Services and Fee Schedule
2. Exhibit B - Insurance Requirements
3. Exhibit C - Disclosure of Conflict of Interest
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC 9/3/2026
9/4/2026
EXHIBIT A
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES
CONSULTANT SCOPE OF WORK AND FEE SCHEDULE
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC City of Grover Beach
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation Project, CIP 2295-19 with numerous Measure K-14 projects. Additionally, our Project Manager, Aaron Hilton, resides in Arroyo Grande. We are available to respond to any project concerns that may arise at any time.
Work Plan/Scope of Work
BKF will provide the following Scope of Work:
PHASE 1.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION/BID PHASE SERVICES
Task 1.1 Project Review and Pre-Job Coordination
Upon receipt of the Notice to Proceed from the City, BKF will contact the key individuals involved in the project and establish a clear protocol for the contract administration, lines of communication, and levels of authorization. BKF’ Project Manager, Aaron Hilton, PE, QSD/QSP and our Resident Engineer, June Kim PE will coordinate with the City’s Project Manager to establish a firm foundation of communication and understanding of the project.
Task 1.2 Bid Assistance
BKF will be available prior to the bid of the project to assist in answering any bidder inquiries a will be available to assist the City in evaluating the bid when they are received.
Task 1.3 Project Setup
The BKF team will set up documentation and filing systems consistent with the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM) and meet the City’s needs as well. BKF will maintain an electronic set of files that can be shared with the City as needed. This project will utilize BKF’s document management software, CMIS. This Software will assist in the management of project documents between BKF, the Contractor and the City. The City will be given real-time, read-only access to the project files.
Task 1.4 Pre-Construction Conference
BKF will organize and conduct a pre-construction meeting. The Resident Engineer will prepare an agenda and submittal list for the City’s review and send to the contractor prior to the meeting. All appropriate parties will be invited including the selected contractor, City staff, and any other involved entities at the City’s discretion. At the preconstruction conference, we will discuss the hierarchy of both the City and the contractor as well as establish the protocol to be used throughout the project. The meeting will set the tone of cooperation for the project and elaborate on contract requirements and concerns. BKF will distribute meeting minutes to all parties in attendance.
PHASE 2.0 CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES
Task 2.1 Contract Administration/Document Control
BKF will implement the project administration system discussed in Task 1.3. Our system will contain a method for organizing files and computer-generated forms and spreadsheets to assist in tracking correspondence, submittals, requests for information (RFIs), contract change orders (CCOs), progress payments, and documenting materials testing results. Contract administration includes:
• Daily diaries
• Labor compliance and certified payrolls
• Logs for submittals, RFIs, CCOs, and materials testing results • Correspondence, permits, and agreements
• Progress schedule/Weekly Statement of Working Days (WSWDs) • Progress Pay Estimates and quantities
• Potential claims
• Safety and traffic control
• Public relations
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC City of Grover Beach
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation Project, CIP 2295-19 • Weekly meetings agenda and minutes
Task 2.2 Project Communication and Coordination
The Resident Engineer will oversee project communication and coordination with the City, Design Engineer, emergency services, residents, utility companies, contractor, and materials technicians throughout the construction phase. The pre-construction conference and weekly progress meetings will help the construction team to stay abreast of project issues and progress. The Resident Engineer will act as the project liaison for the City and will keep the City informed of any disputes or unknown conditions that arise during the work.
Task 2.3 Public Relations
This project entails construction on residential streets and will affect residents within that area; it will be imperative for the contractor to properly notify each area in a timely manner. BKF will ensure the “NO PARKING” signs posted by the contractor will comply with City parking regulations; the City Police department will be able to assist with towing if needed. BKF will also ensure proper notifications are posted prior to any planned water outages during construction.
BKF will support the City with the public relations effort:
• Be available to attend any information meetings designed to get the word out to the public • Review and verify the required notifications are posted and comply with City regulations • Meet with and listen to public/community concerns
• Work with the contractor to resolve complaints promptly Task 2.4 Project Schedule Adherence
The Resident Engineer will review and approve the contractor’s baseline schedule at the start of the project. The contractor will be required to submit updates, which will also be reviewed by the Resident Engineer. The contractor will be required to correct any discrepancies prior to approval. Baseline schedule review will include the following:
• Baseline schedule adheres to the contract specifications • Relationships and durations are appropriate and realistic The Resident Engineer will require and review the three-week-look-ahead schedule from the contractor on a weekly basis. This schedule will assist in managing the contractor’s progress and allows our team to schedule materials and soils testing and coordinate with the City’s Public Information Officer in updating social media. The contractor will be issued WSWDs to document the progress of the work and the number of working days expended.
Task 2.5 Cost Control
The project’s document control system will track and monitor the actual project construction costs. The tracking of contract item payments and quantities is incorporated into the progress payment spreadsheet. Contract change order payments, extra work, and item overruns and underruns will also be tracked. The project contingency balance will be verified as part of the monthly progress pay estimate review and submittal. BKF will proactively identify any areas that do not appear to coincide with the expected item quantities listed in the specification. The Resident Engineer will work closely with the City Project Manager and the contractor to resolve all change orders and/or disputes.
Task 2.6 Quantity Calculations and Progress Estimate
BKF will prepare accurate and complete quantity calculations (Q-sheets) for each contract item and each progress pay estimate. The Construction Inspector will track any extra work and supplemental work costs to be compared against the authorized change order amounts. We will review the contractor’s monthly Request for Payment and recommend approval for payment to the City.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC City of Grover Beach
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation Project, CIP 2295-19 Task 2.7 Submittals/RFIs
BKF will perform timely review of submittals and RFIs; all submittals and RFIs will be logged and distributed as necessary. The Resident Engineer will monitor the log to verify responses are submitted in a timely manner. Initial submittals to be reviewed and approved as the first order of work include:
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)/Permit registration documents • Project schedule
• Traffic Control Plan
• Mix designs
• Signs/striping materials
Task 2.8 Change Orders and Claims Management
Prior to beginning any contract work, we will coordinate with the City to define the CCO process. All CCOs must define the project scope of work and limits and comply with the project documents. Our construction management team will be proactive in identifying actual and potential problems and work towards a timely and cost-effective solution.
The Resident Engineer will:
• Determine the validity and justification for all change orders • Notify the City if a change order is needed
• Negotiate costs with the contractor
• Process through the City
• Track all CCOs against project contingency balance
The Resident Engineer will work closely with the City Project Manager, Design Engineer, and contractor to resolve all change orders and/or disputes. That said, if a dispute has been filed BKF will work diligently to thoroughly understand the nature and extent of the dispute and resolve it as quickly as possible. We will act on and process any Notice of Potential Claims (NOPCs) submitted by the contractor in a timely manner and in accordance with the contract documents and the City’s procedures.
Task 2.9 Construction Inspection
The Resident Engineer will implement inspection guidelines for monitoring the quality of the contractor's work. The Construction Inspector will be onsite daily to inspect and ensure the work is performed safely and in accordance with the contract documents.
The Construction Inspector’s responsibilities will also include:
• Daily Inspection. Inspect the construction for compliance to the plans and specifications. Any non-conforming work will not be accepted and will require correction prior to acceptance. • Traffic Control/No Parking Zones. Inspect the contractor’s daily traffic control per approved standards. Notify the contractor of any perceived unsafe conditions.
• Notifications. Verify pre-work postings and placement of notifications in a timely manner. Meet with businesses as needed to address their concerns and provide adequate notification of potential impacts to them. • Daily Reports. Prepare daily inspection reports, daily quantities, note any safety issues, and include an accurate description of the work, labor, and equipment. Note any extra work or changes to the plans. Maintain photographic record of construction.
• Materials. Verify approved materials are incorporated into the project.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC City of Grover Beach
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation Project, CIP 2295-19 • Acceptance/Performance Testing. Coordinate testing with Earth Systems to ensure the material comply with the Contract
• Materials Testing. Coordinate Earth Systems to ensure the materials are installed in compliance with the City’s QAP
• Punch List. Prepare punch list and inspect for completion of punch list work items. Perform final walkthrough with the City Project Manager and the contractor.
Task 2.10 Site Documentation
BKF will take pre-construction site photos to document the existing condition of the project limits and any haul routes prior to construction. Our team will also document construction throughout the life of the project. All photos will be logged and filed in the project files.
Task 2.11 Permit Management
BKF will monitor the construction to ensure all items of work are performed in accordance with the encroachment permit and stormwater pollution control permit requirements. BKF will review and recommend approval of the contractor’s SWPPP for the City prior to the start of any earth-disturbing activities.
Task 2.12 Safety
The contractor has sole responsibility for compliance with safety requirements on the construction contract, but the construction management team will monitor compliance with their safety program and advise the City Project Manager of observed deficiencies. The contractor’s approved Safety Plan, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and Cal/OSHA Safety Orders will guide our inspectors in monitoring the contractor’s work.
Task 2.13 Materials Testing
BKF will coordinate as needed Earth Systems for all needed testing.
PHASE 3.0 POST-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES
Task 3.1 Close-Out
The Resident Engineer, with the assistance of the Construction Inspector, will prepare and submit a final punch list of outstanding contract items to the contractor. A final walk through of the project will be scheduled with the City and any other involved entities at the City’s discretion. BKF will ensure all concerns are addressed prior to recommending final acceptance of the contract to the City. Once the contractor provides all required documentation, BKF will submit a Final Pay request for final payment. BKF will submit all job files and final reports to the City upon completion of the contract.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC City of Grover Beach
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation Project, CIP 2295-19 • Measure K-14 Light Maintenance Project, City of Grover Beach 2295-3 • South County Overlay Project, County of San Luis Obispo • Laurel Lane Complete Streets Project, City of San Luis Obispo • Various Street Repairs, Street Resurfacing, and Concrete Repair Projects, City of Arroyo Grande Schedule and Fee
BKF proposes to provide construction management services as outlined in the Work Plan/Scope of Work on a time and materials, not-to-exceed basis. The estimated cost of services is shown in the attached Staffing Plan. Actual costs billed to the City will be on actual time spent; the budget will require prior written approval from the City if it exceeds the original total.
Based upon the project duration of 130 working days, with additional time project startup and closeout, BKF estimates the total service fee for construction management for the duration of this project is $467,131. Our proposed construction professionals are committed to delivering quality services and protecting your interests while maintaining the momentum of construction to deliver a timely, cost-effective project. The inspection time that has been proposed is enough to cover the full allotted contract time, BKF will be available to manage this work even if there is a break in the work for weather.
Acknowledgements
• This proposal is within our on-call contract and subject to all provision previously agreed to. • BKF can provide the required insurance coverages.
• BKF can match the invoice formatting requirements.
Closing
BKF appreciates the opportunity to propose on this project and work with the City once again. Please contact me at 805.279.6864 or at [email protected] should you have any questions or would like to further discuss our qualifications.
Sincerely,
BKF Engineers, Inc.
Aaron Hilton, PE, QSP/QSD
Regional Construction Manager
Attachments: Staffing Plan
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC ROLE Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
TASK 1.0: PRE-CONSTRUCTION /Set up
Project Manager 8 8 320.00 2,560.00
Resident Engineer 8 8 285.00 2,280.00
Construction Inspector 8 8 220.00 $1,760.00
Adminstrative Assistant 0 130.00 $0.00
TASK 2.0: CONSTRUCTION
Project Manager 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 320.00 $ 8,960.00
Resident Engineer 32 32 32 32 32 32 16 208 285.00 $ 59,280.00 Construction Inspector 172 172 172 172 172 172 80 1112 220.00 $244,640.00 Adminstrative Assistant 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 130 130.00 $16,900.00 TASK 3.0: POST CONSTRUCTION
Project Manager 4 4 320.00 $ 1,280.00
Resident Engineer 32 32 64 285.00 $ 18,240.00
Construction Inspector 80 80 220.00 $17,600.00
Adminstrative Assistant 20 20 40 130.00 $5,200.00
24 228 228 228 228 228 228 246 52 1690 $373,860.00
Earth Systems Pacific (Materials Testing)
Notes:
1. Hours based on a construction period start date of November, 2026 and a duration of 130 working days, and no overtime.
2. Inspection hourly rate may adjust should there be any increase in DIR prevailing wage rates.
3. Any Subconsultant and direct costs will be billed at cost plus 15%. (included in total cost) 2026
Staffing Plan and Cost Proposal for
TOTAL COST TOTAL
HOURS
Construction Management Services for the
Measure K-14 Street Repair and Rehabilitation, CIP 2295-19 City of Grover Beach
HOURLY
RATE STAFF
Direct Expenses
Aaron Hilton, PE, QSD/QSP
Aaron Hilton, PE, QSD/QSP
Chris Cooper
Chris Cooper
Chris Cooper
Laurie Jones
Laurie Jones
June Kim, PE
June Kim, PE
June Kim, PE
TOTAL COST
Laurie Jones
SUB-TOTAL
Aaron Hilton, PE, QSD/QSP
$93,270.75
$93,270.75
$467,131
TOTAL COST
SUB-TOTAL
Cost Proposal 2295-19.xlsx
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
EXHIBIT B
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting CONSULTANT’S indemnification of CITY, and prior to commencement of Work, CONSULTANT shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the Term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to CITY.
General liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.
Automobile liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.
Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this Agreement.
Workers’ compensation insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).
Consultant shall submit to CITY, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of CITY, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.
Umbrella or excess liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
• A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason; • Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; • Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; • Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and • Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance to CITY as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by CITY’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with CITY at all times during the Term of this Agreement. CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
Duration of coverage. CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.
Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by CONSULTANT shall be primary and any insurance or selfinsurance procured or maintained by CITY shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance.
Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of CITY before the CITY’S own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
CITY’S rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, CITY has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by CITY will be promptly reimbursed by CONSULTANT or CITY will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from CONSULTANT payments.
In the alternative, CITY may cancel this Agreement.
Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the CITY’S Risk Manager.
Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against CITY, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow CONSULTANT or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. CONSULTANT hereby waives its own right of recovery against CITY, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the CITY to inform CONSULTANT of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the CITY nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the CONSULTANT maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the CITY requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
higher limits maintained by the CONSULTANT. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the CITY.
Notice of cancellation. CONSULTANT agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to CITY with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.
Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that CITY and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.
Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to CITY and approved of in writing.
Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply to all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any crossliability exclusions.
Pass through clause. CONSULTANT agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the PROJECT who is brought onto or involved in the PROJECT by CONSULTANT, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of CONSULTANT.
CONSULTANT agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. CONSULTANT agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the PROJECT will be submitted to CITY for review.
CITY’s right to revise specifications. The CITY reserves the right at any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the CONSULTANT ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the CONSULTANT, the CITY and CONSULTANT may renegotiate CONSULTANT’S compensation.
Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY. CITY reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by CITY.
Timely notice of claims. CONSULTANT shall give CITY prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from CONSULTANT’S performance under this AGREEMENT, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.
Additional insurance. CONSULTANT shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC
EXHIBIT C
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICE
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Explanation:
Signature
Date
Name
Company
Address
Additional page(s) attached.
City, State, Zip
YES* NO
1 Are you currently in litigation with the City of Grover Beach or any of its agents?
2 Do you represent any firm, organization or person who is in litigation with the City of Grover Beach?
3 Do you currently represent or perform work for any clients who do business with the City of Grover Beach?
4 Are you or any of your principals, managers or professionals, owners or investors in a business which does business with the City of Grover Beach, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Grover Beach? 5 Are you or any of your principals, managers or professionals, related by blood or marriage to any City of Grover Beach employee who has any significant role in the subject matter of this service? 6 Do you or any of your subcontractors have, or expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract in connection with this Project? * If the answer to any question is yes, please explain in full below.
Docusign Envelope ID: 43DAD418-DCAB-83F6-813D-E915E7C8C9AC X
201 N. Calle esar Chavez, Ste 300
X
9/3/2026
Greg Chelini
X
X
X
NA
BKF
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
X
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 11
Placement: Business
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Megan Martin, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Presentation on San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan and provide input to SLOCOG and City staff.
BACKGROUND
At the direction of the City Council at the June 8, 2026, meeting, staff invited representatives from the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) to provide an overview of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process and its role in the preparation of the City’s Housing Element update. SLOCOG is the regional Council of Governments for San Luis Obispo County and serves as a regional planning and transportation agency. SLOCOG coordinates the county’s regional RHNA process, which establishes the overall housing need for the region and ultimately informs each jurisdiction’s housing planning requirements. As part of the RHNA process, the State first determines the overall housing need for the region using a methodology established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). That regional allocation is then distributed among the jurisdictions within the region by SLOCOG based on factors established through the RHNA methodology.
For the upcoming 7th Cycle Housing Element Update (7th Cycle) covering 2028-2036, the State originally identified a regional need of 15,284 units which SLOCOG objected to on June 3, 2026 as shown in the letter in Attachment 1. SLOCOG’s objection expressed concerns with the State’s methodology, particularly surrounding the cost-burden analysis, and requested the allocation be reduced to 7,023 units based on an updated methodology. At the direction of the Council, staff submitted a letter to the State (shown in Attachment 2) in support of SLOCOG’s concerns and the request to reduce the regional allocation. On July 17, 2026 HCD sent a letter to SLOCOG shown in Attachment 3 that denied SLOCOG’s request and identified 14,577 units as the regional housing need that the County’s jurisdictions must plan for during the 7th Cycle.
The RHNA allocation for the City will be a significant component of the upcoming 7th Cycle Housing Element process which will cover a wide range of policy issues including building heights and commercial spaces. SLOCOG staff will provide Council with an overview of the RHNA process, the State methodology and regional distribution process, and the anticipated timeline and next steps in determining the jurisdictional allocation of the regional housing units. City staff Staff Report: SLOCOG RHNA Presentation Page 2
September 14, 2026
can provide comment on policy or technical issues specific to the City. Staff would also note that an agreement with an outside consultant to lead the upcoming Housing Element Update process is being finalized for the Council’s approval at a future meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no funding impacts to this staff report.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Receive a presentation by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan and provide input to SLOCOG and City staff; or
2. Provide alternative direction to staff.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. SLOCOG RHNA Objection Letter
2. City of Grover Beach SLOCOG RHNA Objection Support Letter
3. HCD Objection Response Letter
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☒ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☒ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
Attachment 1
S/\N I u,s ()RISP() r OI JN( II OF (iOVI ��IHrnrs
CONNECTING COMMUNITIES
ARROYO GRANDE ATASCADERO GROVER BEACH
MORRO BAY PASO ROBLES PISMO BEACH
SAN I UIS OBISPO SAN I UIS OBISPO COUNTY
Cost-Burdened Adjustment Multiglier Should Be Ag_glied to the Preliminary Regional Housing Need R.athe Than DOF's Total Occugied Units
As mentioned previously, there have been changes to the number of adjustment factors.
Looking at it on a simple need basis, HCD has calculated that Projected Households (row 4a) subtracting occupied units (row 14) would equate to 2,868 units (115,912 - 113,044 = 2,868 units) as seen in Figure 1. Yet the eleven adjustment factors in HCD's May 15th Determination amount to 81 % of the total determination (12,416 units). We recognize that some of these adjustment factors are required by Government C.ode 65584.01. However, there are more housing unit add-ons than projected need and SLOCOG staff suggests a cap on add-ons if the totals severely outpace the projected need as it currently calculates out (Suggestion 2).
One of the largest add-ons to HCD's current determination is the Cost-Burdened Adjustment accounting for 62% of SLO County's RHNA allocation. SLOCOG staff is aware that this adjustment is required to be compared using national rate due to the change in statute.
However, statute does not dictate the calculation equation.
In Cycle 6, the Cost-Burdened Adjustment was calculated using the difference between the cost-burden rate from a comparable region and the County's rate. This difference was then multiplied by the region's calculated RHNA Cycle 6 need. In the current spreadsheet, the national difference is multiplied by DOF's total occupied units. Since legislation changed, the national rate must be used, but the practice of multiplying the rate difference by the calculated need should stand. SLOCOG staff suggests that HCD maintain the practice of multiplying the rate difference by the calculated need (Suggestion 3). Looking at Figure 1, multiply the preliminary regional housing need (6,512) by the difference (7.85%). If the standard is to use total occupied units every cycle, this becomes an untenable calculation because it does not consider prior development progress by multiplying that factor in perpetuity. If population is projected to decline, a cost burden add-on that outpaces the actual need is unrealistic.
As written in statute, "cost burdened means the share of very low, low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income households that are paying more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs." See Government Code sectLo.n 6 5584.01 (.b)(1 ){H). This definition is exclusive of the 30% not inclusive. As it is calculated, the County's percentage is using ACS tables B25070 and B25091 including the households paying 30% or less. SLOCOG staff suggests using ACS 5-year 2024 Table B25140 which is exclusive of the households paying 30% or less (Suggestion 4). This methodology results in a national average of 30. 71 % and a county average of 38.57%, with a difference of two 7 .85% as seen in Figure 4.
1114 Milrsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 I t (805) 781-4219 f (805) 781-5703 I [email protected] SLOCOG.ORG
City of Grover Beach
Mayor Kassi Dee Mayor Pro Tem Robert Robert
Council Member Kathy McCorry-Driscoll, Council Member Jules Tuggle, Council Member Clint Weirick Matthew Bronson
City Manager
154 South Eighth Street Grover Beach, California 93433 www.groverbeach.org (805) 473-4550 July 8, 2026
Marissa Prasse
Fair Housing Section Chief
California Department of Housing and Community Development 651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
RE: Support for San Luis Obispo Council of Government’s Objection to the Final RHNA Determination for the San Luis Obispo County 7th Cycle Housing Element Dear Marissa Prasse,
The City of Grover Beach (City) respectfully submits this letter in support of the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ (SLOCOG) formal objection letter dated June 3, 2026, to HCD regarding the final RHNA determination for the 7th Cycle Housing Element Update.
The City recognizes California's housing affordability crisis and remains committed to doing its part to facilitate housing production. Over the past several years, Grover Beach has taken significant steps to increase housing opportunities through Housing Element implementation, local development code amendments, permit streamlining, support for accessory dwelling units, and the approval of residential and mixed-use developments along our main commercial corridor. The City remains committed to planning for and accommodating its fair share of housing consistent with State housing law.
At the same time, the Regional Housing Need Assessment process is most effective when it is based on reasonable assumptions, reliable demographic data, and methodologies that accurately reflect regional conditions. Local governments depend on the RHNA process to establish housing planning obligations that are achievable, and most importantly, supported by objective data.
The City agrees with SLOCOG’s objection and that it presents a well-supported alternative methodology consistent with Government Code Section 65584.01(c)(2). Specifically, where the current methodology and determination appear to overstate regional housing needs. Housing allocations should accurately reflect demonstrated need while recognizing actual demographic trends and planned housing growth. Realistic allocations are essential to maintaining public confidence in the RHNA process and ensuring that local planning efforts remain focused on implementing housing solutions that can be successfully delivered.
Attachment 2
The City appreciates HCD’s continued partnership with local governments and shares HCD’s commitment to expanding housing opportunities. We respectfully request that you carefully consider SLOCOG’s objection letter and the proposed alternative methodology during your review of the Final RHNA determination.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Kassi Dee
Mayor
Cc: Peter Rodgers, Executive Director of SLOCOG,
James Worthley, Deputy Executive Director of SLOCOG
STATE OF CALIFORNIA – CALIFORNIA HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Ste. 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
July 17, 2026
Peter Rodgers
Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
1114 Marsh Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Peter Rodgers:
RE: Final Regional Housing Need Determination Objection Response The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has received and reviewed your objection to the San Luis Obispo Council of Government’s (SLOCOG)’s final Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND), which was provided to HCD on June 3, 2026.
Pursuant to Government Code (Gov. Code) section 65584.01(c)(3), HCD reports the results of its evaluation and consideration of SLOCOG’s proposed alternatives, along with its final written determination of SLOCOG’s RHND and an explanation of the information and methodology upon which HCD’s determination was made.
HCD began the consultation period with a meeting with SLOCOG on February 9, 2026, and requested that SLOCOG provide data to HCD for use in the region’s RHND, pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1-2). SLOCOG did not provide HCD with any relevant data pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1-2) during the consultation period.
Nevertheless, further consultation with HCD and the Department of Finance (DOF) resulted in modified population projections. Accordingly, HCD issued SLOCOG their determination on May 15, 2026, of 15,284 units.
Objections to the RHND must be based on or substantiate either of the following, pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(c)(2)(A-B):
• The department failed to base its determination on the population projection for the region established pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(a). If such failure is asserted, the council of governments shall identify the population projection which they believe should instead be used for the determination and explain the basis for its rationale.
• The regional housing need determined by the department is not a reasonable application Attachment 3
of the methodology and not based on reasonable assumptions determined pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b). The objection shall include a proposed alternative determination of its regional housing need, including analysis of why the proposed alternative would be a more reasonable application of the methodology and assumptions determined pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b).
HCD based its determination on population and household projections supplied by the California Department of Finance (DOF) Demographic Research Unit, pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(a). The RHND for a region shall be based on DOF population and household projections, unless the region can provide HCD with an alternative population and household projections within the statutory parameters of Government Code section 65584.01(a). SLOCOG failed to provide HCD with alternative population and household projection data to provide the basis for an alternative population forecast. Therefore, HCD used DOF population and household projections in SLOCOG’s RHND.
In calculating the RHND, HCD adhered to the clear mandates of Government Code section 65584.01(b). Consequently, HCD will not alter its RHND methodology based on Suggestion 1 in SLOCOG’s objection letter. HCD has updated the ACS table used to calculate the cost burden adjustment (Suggestion 4) to Table B25140 so that the calculation is no longer inclusive of households paying exactly 30% of their income on housing costs. This reduced the cost burden adjustment while decreasing the preliminary RHND that is used to calculate the replacement adjustment for seasonal, recreational and occasional-use homes. Attachment 1 displays the minimum RHND of 14,577 total housing units among six income categories for SLOCOG to distribute among its local governments. Attachment 2 explains the methodology applied pursuant to Gov. Code section 65584.01. An updated Final Regional Housing Needs Determination letter has been included with this objection response letter.
First and foremost, the increase in SLOCOG’s 7th cycle Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) as compared to the 5th and 6th cycles is based on state housing law. Most notably, SLOCOG’s 6th cycle RHND did not include several adjustments required by statute to account for pent-up demand within the existing population, including the cost burden adjustment. In most regions of the state, including SLOCOG, the housing needs of the existing population account for the largest share of a region’s RHND. This is particularly true in regions where incidents of pent-up demand for housing are especially high. SLOCOG’s vacancy rate for rental households is 4.56%,
2.44% lower than the healthy standard of 7% as defined by academic research. SLOCOG’s cost burden rate is 38.57%, 7.85% higher than the national average of 30.71%, signaling a lack of affordable housing units for the county’s existing population. Additionally, according to the HUD’s 2024 Point-In-Time estimates of homelessness, San Luis Obispo County had 1,175 unhoused residents.
The RHND methodology establishes the minimum number of homes needed to house the region’s anticipated growth and address the housing needs of the existing population. Further, the RHND requires the region to implement zoning so that the minimum number of homes have the potential to be built. Therefore, the RHND assigned by HCD is already a reasonable application of the methodology and assumptions required under Government Code section 65584.01(b).
The following further explains HCD’s determination on each of SLOCOG’s objections:
SLOCOG Objection: “Population Projections Decrease in Cycle 7” Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(a), HCD’s SLOCOG determination is based on population projections produced by DOF. After initial consultations with HCD, SLOCOG staff consulted with DOF on multiple occasions during the consultation period and provided additional information that DOF considered, resulting in amended population data. Additionally, HCD extended the SLOCOG RHND deadline by 30 days in order for SLOCOG staff to review the newly available DOF data.
This objection notes that SLO County’s population projection in the upcoming 7th cycle is 278,000 which is lower than the 6th cycle projection of 300,000. The objection argues that despite slower population growth, the RHND increased from roughly 11,000 units in the 6th cycle to 15,000 units in the 7th cycle which “will be difficult to explain” to local communities.
To the contrary, the increase in SLOCOG’s RHND was in part due to statutory amendments that added new and necessary adjustments since SLOCOG’s 6th Cycle RHND. These legislative changes and resulting adjustments are intended to account for pent-up need for housing in the existing population. Furthermore, DOF projects total population to increase over the course of SLOCOG’s 7th Cycle. While the projected household population drops from 259,158 in 2028 to 257,968 in 2037, household formation rates increase from 55.5% in 2028 to 55.8% 2037. This growth will absolutely require additional housing units. HCD’s calculations use statutorily mandated DOF household population and household formation rates, resulting in anticipated household growth of 2,868 units from 113,044 to 115,912 over the projection period. State law requires the region to plan for the full extent of both existing and projected housing needs. Therefore, HCD rejects SLOCOG’s rationale for this objection.
SLOCOG Objection: “DOF Projections Do Not Account for Upcoming Permitted Housing Units” As stated above, the RHND methodology establishes the minimum number of homes needed to house the region’s anticipated growth and meet current, pent-up demand for housing within the existing population.
Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(a), HCD’s SLOCOG determination is based on population projections produced by DOF, or on population projections produced by the COG if within 1.5% of DOF’s projection. HCD utilizes the data provided by DOF when calculating the RHND. As per the methodology used to determine the E-5 Population and housing estimates, DOF uses the Housing Unit Method (HUM) to estimate the number of households. DOF projections use historical demographic and housing data. Core variables include household counts, total population, fertility rates, death rates, net migration rates, and the percentage of new housing completions. New housing completions are reported directly to DOF in the annual Housing Unit Survey that is submitted by every city and county. As a result, DOF considers constructed units, not issued building permits in HCD’s Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) data. DOF estimates and projections do not consider permitted units to estimate actual existing and projected households and housing units since permits are not guarantees of actual construction and realized units. The annual change in housing units is reported by local jurisdictions through the annual Housing Unit Survey forms administered by DOF. Therefore, HCD will not consider this objection as grounds for an alternative determination.
SLOCOG Objection: “Cost-Burdened Adjustment Multiplier Should Be Applied to the Preliminary Regional Housing Need Rather Than DOF’s Total Occupied Units” As noted above, HCD adheres to Government Code section 65584.01 when calculating the RHND. Neither HCD nor SLOCOG has authority to limit statutorily required adjustments. There is no credible basis to establish a “cap on add-ons if the totals severely outpace the projected need” (Suggestion 2). The cost burden adjustment is one of the adjustments that illustrate the housing needs of the existing population that must be reflected in the RHND.
Regarding SLOCOG’s Suggestion 3 in the objection letter, HCD will not be changing how the 7th cycle methodology is applied for the cost-burden adjustment. High rates of cost burdened households are one of the key indicators of a limited housing stock and pent-up demand in the existing population, leading existing households to spend a greater share of their income on housing costs. Per the California’s Housing Future 2040: The Next RHNA report, HCD consulted with demographers and other subject matter experts on best practices and determined that for the 7 th cycle and beyond, the cost burden and overcrowding adjustments should be applied to the existing population, rather than the projected population. Cost burden and overcrowding are issues that impact the existing population, and if the RHND is fully realized, future households should not experience cost burden and overcrowding at rates higher than the national average.
The overcrowding and cost burden adjustments compare the regional rate to the national average, which is required pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(C)&(H). While the housing crisis is experienced nationwide, the national average does not reflect a desirable rate of cost burden; thus, by comparing regional rates against the national average, HCD is modest in its estimates of regional housing needs. The cost burden adjustment in the RHND does not obviate cost burden in the region – it merely requires the region to plan for enough housing so that the cost burden rate would be brought down to a level equal to that of the national average.
SLOCOG Objection: “SLOCOG staff suggests using ACS 5-year 2024 Table B25140” for Cost Burden Adjustment
SLOCOG’s objection letter notes that the cost burden factor in Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(H) provides: “…the share of very low, low-, moderate-, and above moderateincome households that are paying more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs [emphasis added].” HCD acknowledges that this is exclusive of households paying exactly 30 percent of their income on housing cost, not inclusive. HCD’s initial SLOCOG RHND used ACS data table DP04 which includes the number of households that are paying exactly 30 percent or more of their income on housing costs. This table was initially utilized because it provided additional context on the percent of cost burdened households by tenure. SLOCOG’s objection letter instead recommended the use of the ACS table B25140, which is exclusive of households paying 30 percent or less, and more accurately represents the statutory definition of households that experience housing cost-burden (Suggestion 4). As a result, HCD has updated SLOCOG’s Final RHND to utilize ACS table B25140 for the calculation of the cost burden adjustment (see attachments).
In contrast to its other suggestions, HCD has determined that SLOCOG’s request to use ACS Table B25140 is a reasonable application.
The recalculated cost burden adjustment results in an adjustment of 8,769 units rather than 9,433 units. Based on ACS table B25140, the national cost burden rate is 30.71% while the SLOCOG rate is 38.57%. Please also note that this change alters the preliminary RHND that is used for the Replacement (Seasonal, Recreational, and Occasional Use) adjustment. As a result, that adjustment is now 895 units rather than 938 units.
(A) DOF 2025 E5 Estimates: Occupied
Housing Units
111,638
Table DP04: Cost Burden Results Table B25140: Cost Burden Results National Average 32.21% National Average 30.71%
County Average 40.66% County Average 38.57%
(B) Difference 8.45% (B) Difference 7.85**%
Cost Burden
Adjustment (A*B)
9,433 Cost Burden
Adjustment (A*B)
8,769
** - Rounding to two digits
SLOCOG Objection: Remove Row 4b (Remove the Apartment-Style Student Housing Household Projection)
HCD is charged pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01 with the ultimate determination of existing and projected regional housing needs for each region of the state. While the statute anticipates fruitful, data driven consultation with each council of governments, it does not abdicate HCD’s statewide authority to make the final determination for each region. As noted above, HCD’s determination is based on methodology and assumptions grounded in state law and best practices.
Local government and other stakeholders have repeatedly requested that HCD allow for apartment-style student housing units to be counted in housing elements and APRs. Currently, these units are not eligible to be counted towards housing progress in housing elements or APRs because the Census Bureau includes any student housing in their estimates of group quarters, rather than household population, even though these units would otherwise meet the definition of a housing unit. For apartment-style student housing units to be eligible for credit towards a local government’s RHNA progress, that type of housing need must be present in the Regional Housing Needs Determination.
Thus, HCD has asked DOF to include the portion of the student population anticipated to live in apartment-style student housing in the total projected households estimate for the 7 th cycle. This
will allow local governments to claim credit for an additional type of housing in their community on their housing element and APR that was not available in the past, while maintaining alignment within the RHNA calculations and process. HCD has taken a conservative approach in estimating the number of future apartment-style student households by only applying the household formation rate for the 15-24 age group to all of these anticipated new households. If the apartment-style student household projection were to be omitted from SLOCOG’s RHND, local governments in the region would not be able to claim credit for these types of units in their housing element or APR.
Including apartment-style student housing need in the RHND in this way benefits both the City and County of San Luis Obispo, who have included student populations in their 6th cycle housing elements as a special housing need group that impact the broader housing supply in the region.
Therefore, HCD will not altogether delete the projected apartment style student household need row from SLOCOG’s 7th Cycle RHND (Suggestion 5). However, HCD has updated the formatting
of the Regional Housing Needs Determination summary table to clarify that the apartment-style student households are part of the region’s overall projected household estimates. Accordingly, the apartment-style student household projections are included in a separate line item to provide transparency into what portion of the overall projected households stem from apartment-style student households.
SLOCOG Objection: Replacement Adjustments
HCD is not changing the two replacement adjustments (Suggestion 6). Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(E) requires that the RHND include considerations for housing replacement needs.
Informed by subject matter experts and established research, HCD has determined this to include two types of replacement needs – replacement needs stemming from homes that will be lost to demolitions and homes that will be lost to non-primary residence uses (short-term rentals, second homes, etc.) during the projection period.
The Replacement (Demolitions) adjustment estimates the number of housing units needed to replace housing units that will likely be lost to demolition during the projection period. The calculation uses data from the DOF annual Housing Unit Survey, including the number of units demolished, the number of units lost due to a disaster during a State of Emergency (SoE), and the total number of existing housing units. First, HCD subtracts the number of units lost due to a disaster during a SoE from the total number of demolished units. Next, this difference is subtracted from the region’s total existing housing units. Using these figures, HCD calculates the average annual percentage of housing units lost to demolition. If the average annual percentage of housing units lost to demolition is lower than 0.1%, HCD applies a 0.1% minimum adjustment based on best practices to account for an increasingly aging housing stock across California and for any discrepancies in the state’s data collection methods that may result in an undercount in lost units.
Additionally, HCD notes that this adjustment is applied to projected households to ensure that a minimum number of homes are being added in the region to account for the natural aging and demolition of housing stock.
The Replacement (Seasonal, Recreational, Occasional Use) adjustment estimates the number of housing units needed to replace housing units that will be lost to uses such as short-term rentals and vacation homes. As described in the California’s Housing Future 2040 report, HCD heard from subject matter experts and other stakeholders that homes lost to non-primary residences are essentially demolitions, and that there is a need to account for this loss in the RHND process. HCD determined that an adjustment based on the estimated number of units lost to seasonal, recreational, and/or occasional use must be considered as part of the region’s housing replacement needs in the RHND. As a result, for the 7th cycle and beyond HCD will apply the Replacement (Seasonal, Recreational, Occasional Use) adjustment to the preliminary regional housing need for the region alongside the Replacement (Demolitions) adjustment. This is done to more fully capture the replacement housing needs of the region and so that the Final RHND is sufficiently large enough to plan for the number of units estimated to be lost to non-primary residences or commercial use over the projection period. As noted in the report, “in practice, the loss of units to short-term rentals and vacation homes has the same impact as a demolition: it results in a decrease in the number of housing units available for year-round occupancy.”
SLOCOG Objection: Jobs-Housing Adjustments
HCD will not change the Relationship Between Jobs and Housing adjustment nor the Feasible Jobs/Housing Balance adjustment. Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(G), HCD and the COG shall consider the relationship between jobs and housing, including any imbalance between jobs and housing. Additionally, pursuant to 65584.01(c)(1), HCD shall assess whether the region’s existing and projected housing need achieve a feasible balance based upon the assumptions and methodology determined pursuant to subdivision (b). These adjustments account for any existing jobs housing imbalance, as well as any projected imbalance based on regional job projections.
SLOCOG Objection: “Approved Housing Studies Should Be Valid for the Entire RHNA Cycle” While outside the RHND process, HCD will also not change its guidance at this time regarding the appropriate data to determine affordability for non-deed restricted new housing units (Suggestion 7). Government Code section 65400 requires each jurisdiction to prepare an APR using forms and definitions adopted by HCD. Using that statutory authority, HCD determined that any data used to determine affordability for non-deed restricted new housing must be no older than two years. This ensures the data used by local governments to justify affordability for new construction represents current market trends which reflect the dynamic nature of regional real estate economics and would not be reasonable to expect to be consistent over an eight-year period.
Next Steps
As you know, SLOCOG is responsible for adopting an allocation methodology and RHNA Plan for the projection period beginning June 30, 2028, and ending January 15, 2037. Pursuant to Gov.
Code section 65584(d), SLOCOG’s RHNA allocation methodology must further the following objectives:
(1) Increasing the housing supply and the mix of housing types, tenure, and affordability (2) Promoting infill development and socioeconomic equity, protecting environmental and agricultural resources, and encouraging efficient development patterns, and the achievement of the region’s greenhouse gas reductions targets provided by the State Air Resources Board pursuant to section 65080.
(3) Promoting an improved intraregional relationship between jobs and housing (4) Balancing disproportionate household income distributions (5) Affirmatively furthering fair housing.
Pursuant to Gov. Code section 65584.04(e), to the extent data is available, SLOCOG shall consider including the factors listed in Government Code section 65584.04(e) to develop its RHNA plan. Also, pursuant to Government Code section 65584.04(f), SLOCOG must explain in writing how each of these factors are incorporated into the RHNA plan methodology and how the methodology furthers the statutory objectives described above. Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.04(i), SLOCOG must consult with HCD and submit its draft allocation methodology to HCD for review.
HCD appreciates the active role of SLOCOG staff in providing data and input throughout the consultation period. HCD especially thanks Daniel Audelo, Jayden Hermansen, Sara Sanders, and James Worthley.
HCD looks forward to its continued partnership with SLOCOG to assist SLOCOG’s member jurisdictions meet and exceed the planning and production of the region’s housing needs. HCD encourages SLOCOG jurisdictions to consider the many affordable housing and community development resources available to local governments. HCD’s programs can be found at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grantsfunding/nofas.shtml. HCD is also available to provide technical assistance to jurisdictions as they begin their housing element updates.
If HCD can provide any additional assistance, or if you, or your staff, have any questions, please contact Balaji Balaganesan, Senior Specialist, at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Marisa Prasse
Fair Housing Section Chief
Enclosures
cc: Zachary McRae, Assistant Deputy Director, California Department of Housing and Community Development
James Worthley, Deputy Director, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Sara Sanders, Transportation Planner, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Jayden Hermansen, Transportation Planner, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Daniel Audelo, Transportation Planner, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments ATTACHMENT 1
HCD REGIONAL HOUSING NEED DETERMINATION
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG):
June 30, 2028 through January 15, 2037
INCOME CATEGORY PERCENT HOUSING UNIT NEED
Acutely Low 11.0% 1,606
Extremely Low 9.9% 1,449
Very-Low 12.5% 1,827
Low 17.0% 2,484
Moderate 17.3% 2,522
Above-Moderate 32.2% 4,689
Total 100.0% 14,577
Notes:
Income Distribution:
Income categories are prescribed by California Health and Safety Code (Section 50063.5, et. seq.). Percentages are derived based on Census/ACS reported household income brackets and county median income as determined by HCD.
ATTACHMENT 2
HCD REGIONAL HOUSING NEED DETERMINATION:
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG):
June 30, 2028 through January 15, 2037
Methodology
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG):
June 30, 2028 – January 15, 2037 (8 years)
HCD Determined Population, Households, & Housing Unit Need Reference
No.
Steps Taken to Calculate Regional Housing Need Amount
1. Population: January 15, 2037 (DOF June 30, 2036
projection adjusted + 6.5 months to January 15, 2037)
278,125
2. - Group Quarters Population: January 15, 2037 (DOF June 30, 2036 projection adjusted + 6.5 months to January 15, 2037) -20,368
3. Household (HH) Population 257,757
4a. + Projected Apartment Style Student Households +116 4b. Projected Households 116,028
5. + Vacancy Adjustment for Existing Households +1,055
5. + Vacancy Adjustment for Projected Households +166
6. + Overcrowding Adjustment +777
7. + Cost-burden Adjustment +8,769
8. - Adjustment to account for HHs that experience both overcrowding and cost-burden (DOF data)
-777
9. + Replacement Adjustment Demolitions (0.1%) +116
10. + Replacement Adjustment Seasonal, Recreational, and Occasional Use (2016 vs. 2024) (6.54%)
+895
11. + Jobs Housing Relationship Adjustment +0
12. + Homelessness Adjustment +592
13. + State of Emergency Adjustment +0
14. - Occupied Units (HHs) estimated projected June 30, 2028 (from DOF data)
-113,044
15. Preliminary Regional Housing Need (Not including
Replacement Adjustment Seasonal, Recreational, and
Occasional Use)
13,682
16. + Feasible Jobs/Housing Balance Adjustment +0
Total 7
th Cycle Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA) 14,577 Detailed background data for this table is available upon request.
Explanation and Data Sources
1-4. Population, Group Quarters, Household Population, & Projected Households:
Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01, projections were extrapolated from Department of Finance (DOF) projections. Population reflects total persons.
Group Quarter Population reflects persons in a dormitory, group home, institution, military, etc. that do not require residential housing. Household Population reflects persons requiring residential housing. Projected Households reflect the propensity of persons, by age-groups, to form households at different rates based on Census trends.
4a. Projected Apartment-Style Student Household Need: DOF provides projections of the student population expected to reside in apartment-style student housing by the end of the projection period. Under the US Census Bureau definitions, all student housing owned, leased, or managed by a college or university, including apartmentstyle units, are classified as group quarters (GQ) rather than as part of the household population. Because DOF household projections exclude the group quarters population, projected changes in the number of students living in apartment-style student housing are not captured in the baseline household forecast. HCD accounts for this by subtracting the student population residing in apartment-style student housing at the beginning of the projection period (2028) from the projected population at the end of the projection period (2037). The resulting net change in student population living in apartment-style student housing (+629) is then converted into projected households using the age 15-24 headship rate of 18.5 percent.
5. Vacancy Adjustment: HCD applies a vacancy adjustment based on the region’s current vacancy percentage to promote healthy market vacancies that facilitate housing availability and resident mobility. Healthy vacancy rates are 2% owner and 7% renter for MPO regions (6% for non-MPO regions). There are two methodologies utilized to calculate this adjustment. The first methodology is to calculate the vacancy adjustment for existing households. The adjustment for existing households is the difference between standard 2% and 7% vacancy rates and the region’s current vacancy rates based on the 2020-2024 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) data. That difference is then multiplied by the number of existing households by tenure (existing households multiplied by current rates of renter and owner). For SLOCOG, the existing household owner vacancy rate (1.97%) is below the healthy standard, resulting in a 0.03% adjustment. The existing household renter vacancy rate (4.56%) is also below the healthy standard, resulting in a 2.44% adjustment. The second methodology is to calculate the vacancy adjustment for projected households. The projected household vacancy adjustment is obtained by applying the standard 2% and 7% vacancy rates to the projected owner and renter households. The healthy vacancy rates (2% and 7%) are then multiplied by the number of projected households by tenure (projected households multiplied by current rates of renter and owner). Data is from the 2020- 2024 5-year ACS and DOF.
6. Overcrowding Adjustment: Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(C), HCD uses ACS data to consider the percentage of households that are overcrowded in the region compared to the United States national average of households that are overcrowded. In regions where the overcrowding rate is greater than the U.S. national average overcrowding rate (3.44%), HCD applies an adjustment based on the amount the region's overcrowding rate exceeds the U.S. overcrowding rate. For SLOCOG, the region’s overcrowding rate (4.14%) is higher than the national average (3.44%), resulting in a 0.70% adjustment. HCD then applies the 0.70% adjustment to total occupied households in the region (111,638).
Data is from the 2020-2024 5-year ACS and DOF 2025 E-5 Population Estimates.
7. Cost Burden Adjustment: Pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(H), HCD uses ACS data to consider the percentage of households that are cost burdened in the region compared to the United States national average of households that are cost burdened. In regions where the cost burdened rate is greater than the U.S. national average rate (30.71%), HCD applies an adjustment based on the amount the region’s cost burdened rate exceeds the U.S. rate. For SLOCOG, the region’s cost burdened rate (38.57%) is higher than the national average (30.71%), resulting in a 7.85% adjustment. HCD then applies the 7.85% adjustment to total occupied households in the region (111,638). Data is from the 2020-2024 5-year ACS and DOF 2025 E-5 Population Estimates.
8. Overcrowding and Cost Burden Adjustment: To minimize double counting the housing needs of households that are both overcrowded and cost burdened, HCD has implemented an additional overcrowding and cost burden adjustment. For regions with an adjustment for both overcrowding and cost burden, a downward adjustment is applied based on the number of households that are estimated to be both overcrowded and cost burdened according to an analysis of 2024 ACS Public Use Microdata Sample File data (PUMS) provided by DOF. If the DOF data for this adjustment exceeds the individual adjustments for overcrowding or cost burden, then this adjustment is limited to the lesser of the two. This double counting consideration resulted in a 777-unit reduction.
9. Replacement Adjustment (Demolitions): HCD applies a replacement adjustment between 0.1% to 5% to the total housing stock based on the current 10-year average percent of demolitions in the region's local government annual reports to DOF. Units lost during a state of emergency declaration are not included. For SLOCOG, the 10-year average was 0.03% so the minimum adjustment of 0.1% is applied to the projected occupied households.
10. Replacement Adjustment (Seasonal, Recreational, and Occasional Use Housing Units): In addition to the demolition replacement adjustment, HCD also applies a replacement adjustment to account for housing units that are not available for permanent year-round occupancy. This adjustment is calculated based on the change in the percentage of housing units that are for seasonal, recreational, and occasional use per ACS data. There are two methodologies utilized to calculate this adjustment, depending on changes in the housing stock over the period of analysis.
If both the total number of seasonal, recreational, and occasional use housing units and the overall housing stock increased over the relevant 8-year period, HCD calculates the adjustment based on the proportion of newly added housing units used for seasonal, recreational, or occasional purposes during that time frame. This proportion is then applied as a percentage increase to the preliminary housing need assessment. If, however, either the total number of seasonal, recreational, and occasional use housing units or the overall housing stock decreased, HCD instead compares the change in the share of seasonal, recreational, occasional use housing units to total housing units. For SLOCOG, the total number of recreational housing and total housing units increased from 2016 to 2024, therefore HCD used the first option. From 2016 to 2024, seasonal, recreational, occasional use housing unit growth (+410) made up 6.54% of new housing unit growth (+6,270). HCD then applies the 6.54% to the preliminary RHND of 13,682 units, resulting in an 895-unit adjustment. Data is from the 2016 and 2024 ACS 5-year estimates.
11. Jobs Housing Relationship Adjustment: HCD applies an adjustment based on the number of in-commuters to a region. The adjustment is calculated by dividing the number of in-commuters to the region by HCD's jobs/housing standard of 1.5. This adjustment does not include commuters entering from or leaving to states other than California. In SLOCOG, the number of employed residents exceeded the number of people employed in the region, resulting in no adjustment. Data is from the US Census Bureau LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, 2023 and 2020-2024 5-year ACS.
12. Homelessness Adjustment: HCD applies an adjustment based on the housing needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness. For non-COG regions and COGs that do not provide their own data, by default HCD uses the most recent Point-in-Time counts from the County's Continuum of Care and DOF household formation rates. An adjustment of 592 units was applied to SLOCOG using data from the San Luis Obispo County Continuum of Care 2024 Point-in-Time Count and DOF household formation rates. This adjustment is allocated to the acutely low- and extremely low-income categories, with 75% of the adjustment allocated to the acutely low-income category and 25% allocated to the extremely low-income category.
13. State of Emergency Adjustment: HCD used data provided by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) pursuant to Government Code section 65584.01(b)(1)(I) to adjust for units lost due to a declared state of emergency during the previous planning period (since 2020). Data is from 2025. To estimate the percentage of units lost that were originally occupied, HCD uses 2020-2024 ACS data to calculate the percentage of units in the region that are temporarily occupied by persons with a usual residence elsewhere. HCD then multiplies the occupancy rate by the units lost due to a state of emergency. For SLOCOG, this resulted in no adjustment to the RHNA. HCD uses the California Franchise Tax Board and CalOES list of disasters and emergency proclamations data to ensure that only units destroyed by a Governor-declared State of Emergency are utilized when calculating this adjustment.
14. Occupied Units: Reflects DOF's projected occupied units at the start of the projection period (June 30, 2028).
15. Preliminary Regional Housing Need Determination: Housing need calculated after applying factors described in Government Code section 65584.01(b). This preliminary Regional Housing Need Determination is used to evaluate feasible balance between jobs and housing and the Replacement Adjustment (Seasonal, Recreational, and Occasional Use).
16. Feasible Jobs/Housing Balance Adjustment: According to statute, the “region’s existing and projected housing need shall reflect the achievement of a feasible balance between jobs and housing within the region using the regional employment projections in the applicable regional transportation plan” (Gov. Code § 65584.01(c)(1)). After applying the adjustments noted above, HCD compared the 7th cycle RHNA determination and the region’s total occupied housing units to employment projections in SLOCOG’s Regional Growth Forecast to determine whether a feasible balance was achieved. This analysis resulted in a jobs housing balance of 1.14 (0.87 housing units for every projected job). Because this is below the healthy rate of 1.5, no additional adjustment is needed. Data is from the 2020- 2024 5-Year ACS data, US Census Bureau LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, 2022, and SLOCOG’s 2060 Regional Growth Forecast.
CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 12
Placement: Business
Meeting Date: September 14, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Kristin Eriksson, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Position on Policy Resolution to be Considered at the League of California Cities Annual Conference
RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to the City’s voting delegate and alternate on a potential position on the policy resolution to be considered at the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Annual Conference regarding local authority over housing and land use matters.
BACKGROUND
During the upcoming League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Annual Conference, the Cal Cities’ Annual Business Meeting and General Assembly will take place on September 25. Member cities can submit resolutions to the General Assembly on issues that have a direct bearing on municipal affairs beyond purely local or regional concern. If adopted by the General Assembly, resolutions are used to focus public or media attention on an issue of major importance to cities, establish a new direction for Cal Cities policy, consider important issues not addressed by Cal Cities policy committees, or amend the Cal Cities bylaws.
This year, one resolution has been referred to the Cal Cities policy committees for recommendations to the Assembly for review and action. Background information regarding the resolution is included in the Annual Resolution Packet shown in Attachment 1. This resolution was submitted by the City of Murrieta to direct Cal Cities to support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters within municipal boundaries. The proponents of the resolution note that the State has passed more than 500 housing-related laws since 2010 which have significantly shifted housing and land use authority away from local governments and that these changes restrict local review without delivering meaningful production of housing needed to address the housing crisis.
At the August 24, 2026 Council meeting, Council Member Weirick was selected as the City’s delegate for the Business Meeting and General Assembly with Mayor Dee selected as alternate.
The purpose of this agenda item is for the Council to provide input and direction to the City’s voting delegate regarding the resolution that will go before the General Assembly.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no funding impacts to this staff report.
Staff Report: Policy Resolution for League of California Cities Annual Conference Page 2 September 14, 2026
ALTERNATIVES
The Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Provide direction to the City’s voting delegate and alternate on whether to take a position on the policy resolution to be considered at the League of California Cities Annual Conference; or
2. Provide alternative direction to the City’s voting delegate and alternate.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2026 League Annual Conference Resolutions Packet
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☒ Economic Development and Housing ☐ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☐ Community Engagement ☐ Street Improvements and Maintenance
2025-2026
CAL CITIES OFFICERS
President
Gabe Quinto
Mayor
El Cerrito
First Vice President
Teresa Acosta
Council Member
Carlsbad
Second Vice President
David Cohen
Council Member
San Jose
Immediate Past President
Lynne B. Kennedy
Mayor Pro Tem,
Rancho Cucamonga
Executive Director
and CEO
Carolyn M. Coleman
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org August 10, 2026
TO: Cal Cities Members
RE: Cal Cities 2026 Resolution Packet
Sixty days before the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Cal Cities members may submit resolutions on issues of importance to cities. This year, Cal Cities received one resolution by the July 25 deadline.
The attached packet contains the proposed resolution, background information, supporting letters from cities and city officials, and an analysis of the resolution by Cal Cities. The packet includes detailed information on the resolution process and the next steps for the resolution.
We encourage each city council to consider the resolution and determine a position so your voting delegate can represent your city’s position on the resolution.
Voting Delegates: City councils must appoint a voting delegate to vote during the General Assembly. Each city may also appoint up to two alternate delegates. If your city has not already done so, please appoint your voting delegate by Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2026. The voting delegate packet contains more information.
The 2026 General Assembly will be held Friday, Sept. 25, at 8:30 a.m. in the Anaheim Convention Center during the Annual Conference and Expo.
For questions about resolutions, voting delegates, or the General Assembly, please contact Zach Seals.
Attachment 1
2026
Resolution
Packet
2026 Resolution Packet
Information on 2026 Resolutions Process
Consideration by Policy Committee (pre-conference)
Per the Cal Cities bylaws, Cal Cities President Gabe Quinto has referred the submitted resolution to the Housing, Community, and Economic Development Committee. The committee will meet on Thursday, Sept. 17, at 10 a.m. via Zoom to review the resolution and make a recommendation that will be sent to the Resolutions Committee. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Register for the meeting here.
A list of recommendations the policy committee may make during its meeting is on page two of this packet.
Consideration by Resolutions Committee (during conference) On Thursday, Sept. 24, at 1:00 p.m. the Resolutions Committee will meet to review the resolution and the recommendation of the policy committee.
The Resolutions Committee consist of one representative from each of Cal Cities caucuses, departments, divisions, and policy committees, as well as up to ten additional appointments made by the Cal Cities President. A public comment period will be held during the meeting. Refer to the onsite conference program for the location.
A list of recommendations the Resolutions Committee may make during its meeting is on page two of this packet.
Consideration by the General Assembly (during conference) The General Assembly will convene on Friday, Sept. 25, at 8:30 a.m. to consider any resolutions the Resolutions Committee has forwarded. To vote during the General Assembly, voting delegates must have checked in at the voting delegate booth.
Conference attendees will receive materials for the General Assembly on the evening of Thursday, Sept. 24. For more information on voting and discussion procedures during the General Assembly, see page three of this packet.
Petitioned Resolutions (during conference)
The petitioned resolution is an alternate method to introduce policy proposals during the annual conference. To initiate a petitioned resolution, voting delegates from 10% of member cities must sign the petition. The resolution and signatures are due at least 24 hours before the beginning of the General Assembly. Voting delegates who have checked in at the voting delegate booth can receive more information on petitioned resolutions at the booth onsite. 1 2026 Resolution Packet
Policy Committee and Resolutions Committee Actions
The submitted resolution will be heard by the policy committee to which it was assigned, and the Resolutions Committee. The table below shows what recommendations these bodies may make on the resolution.
Policy Committee Actions Resolutions Committee Actions
Approve Approve
Disapprove* Disapprove*
No Action No Action
Amend and approve Amend and approve
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Approve as amended
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Refer to appropriate policy committee
for further study*
Refer as amended to appropriate
policy committee for further study*
Approve with additional
amendment(s)
Additional amendments and refer to
appropriate policy committee for
further study*
*If a resolution is disapproved or referred for further study by all policy committees to which it is assigned and the Resolutions Committee, it will not proceed to the General Assembly. 2 2026 Resolution Packet
General Assembly Voting and Discussion Procedures
Discussion Procedures:
Discussion procedures during the General Assembly are guided by two calendars:
the Consent Calendar and the Regular Calendar. As seen below, resolutions are calendared by the recommendations they receive from policy committees and the Resolutions Committee.
For General Resolutions:
Policy Committee
Recommendation
Resolutions Committee
Recommendation Calendar
Approve Approve Consent Calendar
Approve Disapprove or refer Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or refer Disapprove or refer Does not proceed to General Assembly
For Petitioned Resolutions:
Policy Committee
Recommendation Resolutions Committee Action Calendar
N/A
Approve Regular Calendar
Disapprove or Refer Regular Calendar
Disqualified Does not proceed to General
Assembly
Items on the Consent Calendar will be presented as one motion during the General Assembly from the Resolutions Committee chair. Unless an item on the Consent Calendar is set aside by the majority of the General Assembly, a vote will be taken on the whole calendar. If an item is set aside, it will be opened for discussion, followed by a vote.
Items on the Regular Calendar will be presented individually by the Resolutions Committee chair. After a recommendation is presented by the Resolutions Committee chair, the resolution will be opened for discussion by the General Assembly. A vote will take place following discussion.
Voting Procedures:
Per Cal Cities Bylaws Article XII, Sec. 2, all votes will be conducted by voice vote first. If the presiding official cannot determine the outcome, a vote will be taken by an alternative method, typically a raise of voting cards by voting delegates. A roll call vote may be called for by delegates of ten percent or more of the General Assembly.
3 2026 Resolution Packet
2026 Resolution
1. Resolution No. 1 submitted by City of Murrieta
• Letters of concurrence submitted by:
i. City of Banning;
ii. City of Calimesa;
iii. City of Canyon Lake;
iv. City of Moreno Valley;
v. City of Norco;
vi. City of Torrance;
vii. Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto;
viii. Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
• Referred to Housing, Community, and Economic Development Committee
• Policy Committee Recommendation:
• Resolutions Committee Recommendation:
4 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1
Submitted by City of Murietta
5 2026 Resolution Packet
1. A RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
CALLING FOR A WORKING GROUP TO CONSIDER A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT OR OTHER FORM OF INITIATIVE TO ENSURE FINAL LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER
HOUSING AND LAND USE DECISIONS
Source: City of Murrieta
Concurrence of five or more cities/city officials
Cities/city officials: City of Banning; City of Calimesa; City of Canyon Lake; City of Moreno Valley; City of Norco; City of Torrance; Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto; Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
Referred to: Housing, Community, and Economic Development Policy Committee WHEREAS, California cities have historically been responsible for adopting general plans and zoning regulations, reviewing housing development proposals, and providing or coordinating the streets, water, wastewater, public safety, parks, transportation, and other infrastructure and services necessary to support responsible, environmentally sound, and well-planned residential growth; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities is dedicated to protecting and expanding local control for municipalities across the state to ensure their orderly growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the League of California Cities recognizes that local zoning is a primary function of cities and an essential component of home rule, and that a city’s general plan should guide its land use planning and strategic decision-making free from pre-emption by the state; and
WHEREAS, increasingly prescriptive statewide housing mandates and development approval requirements can override locally adopted plans, zoning standards, and public review procedures without adequately accounting for differences that exist in each unique jurisdiction in infrastructure capacity, water availability, wildfire and evacuation risks, environmental constraints, fiscal impacts, public service needs, and community priorities; and
WHEREAS, California’s housing goals can be more effectively advanced through state funding, streamlined environmental requirements, and voluntary partnerships that support housing production while preserving the authority of locally elected officials to determine how and where housing is best planned and approved; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities, assembled during the Annual Conference in Anaheim, California, on September 25, 2026, that the League of California Cities support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballotbased strategies that restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters within municipal boundaries, including general plans, housing elements, zoning, density, design and development standards, project siting, and the approval or denial of housing development applications; and
6 2026 Resolution Packet
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any constitutional amendment or alternative strategy should preserve the State’s authority to establish broad statewide housing goals and enforce constitutional and civil rights, fair housing requirements, building and life-safety standards, and generally applicable environmental protections, while protecting cities from state actions that compel, through funding conditions or state law, the approval of housing developments that are inconsistent with locally adopted requirements; override local zoning or density standards; or invalidate locally adopted housing or land use decisions when a city has planned in good faith to accommodate its regional housing needs allocation and maintains adequate capacity for housing at all income levels; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the League of California Cities consider establishing a statewide working group or other appropriate committee(s) to evaluate and develop a proposed constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters including but limited to: conducting appropriate legal, fiscal, and policy analyses; engaging cities and other stakeholders; and building a statewide coalition of proponent supporters in preparation for; the November 2030 General Election, or within another reasonable time frame as determined by the working group.
7 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Background
Information
8 2026 Resolution Packet
Background Information for Resolution
Source: City of Murrieta
Background:
California cities are responsible for planning residential growth, adopting general plans and zoning regulations, reviewing development proposals, and providing or coordinating the infrastructure and public services necessary to support new housing. Since 2010, the State has enacted more than 500 housing-related laws that have increasingly shifted housing and land use authority away from local governments. These laws have expanded by-right development, limited locally adopted standards and review processes, and established enforcement mechanisms, including the builder’s remedy, that may override local plans and zoning. Although these measures are frequently presented as solutions to housing affordability, many increase development capacity or restrict local review without delivering the meaningful production of housing needed to address the housing crisis.
At the same time, the State has continued to prioritize increased development capacity without adequately accounting for the infrastructure, public services, economic realities, and safety measures necessary to support housing growth.
State mandates often fail to reflect local conditions, including roadway and utility capacity, water availability, wildfire exposure, environmental limitations, fiscal impacts, and the availability of essential services. Cities are consequently required to accommodate additional housing while receiving no funding or assistance to address the resulting infrastructure and service demands.
Local elected officials are directly accountable to the residents who experience the effects of development decisions and are responsible for balancing housing production with infrastructure capacity, public safety, environmental protection, fiscal sustainability, and community needs. Cities of all types in California have been grappling with this dynamic, ranging from urban to rural, coastal to inland, small to large, northern to southern, voicing concerns to legislative representatives with minimal responsiveness. This is an issue of statewide concern that needs the strength and diversity of the League of California Cities to pursue a long-term solution.
The proposed resolution directs the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions. The working group would be tasked with developing a more balanced framework that preserves the State’s role in establishing broad housing goals and enforcing constitutional, civil rights, fair housing, building, life-safety, and environmental requirements, while restoring meaningful local authority to allow cities to determine how statewide housing 9 2026 Resolution Packet
objectives should be implemented in a manner that reflects local conditions and community priorities while continuing to support responsible housing production.
As the primary statewide organization representing California cities, the League is uniquely positioned to lead this effort. Its established policy, legal, legislative, communications, and advocacy networks enable it to convene municipalities, evaluate potential strategies, conduct legal and fiscal analyses, build consensus, engage stakeholders, and coordinate with statewide decision-makers. League leadership would help ensure that any recommendation reflects the collective interests of California municipalities and would provide the credibility, organizational capacity, and statewide reach necessary to advance a viable strategy.
10 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Letters of
Concurrence
11 12
13 July 23, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.
The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and
25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches for addressing the increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.
On behalf of the City of Canyon Lake, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.
Sincerely,
Arron Brown
City Manager
City of Canyon Lake
14 July 23, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.
The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and 25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches to address increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.
On behalf of the City of Moreno Valley, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.
Sincerely,
Brian Mohan
City Manager
City of Moreno Valley
15 July 22, 2026
President Gabe Quinto
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for a Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority
Dear President Quinto,
The City of Murrieta is sponsoring a resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities to establish a statewide working group to evaluate a constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use decisions.
The proposed resolution, together with the required background materials, will be submitted to Cal Cities for consideration at the 2026 Annual Conference in Orange County on September 24 and 25. The resolution would direct the League to convene a working group to evaluate potential approaches for addressing the increasingly broad and prescriptive state mandates affecting local housing, zoning, development standards, and project approval authority.
On behalf of the City of the Norco, this letter confirms our support for the City of Murrieta’s submission of the proposed resolution and its consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly at the 2026 Annual Conference.
Sincerely,
Kevin Bash
City Council Member
(951) 768-8981
16 17
18 19
20 July 23, 2026
Mr. Gabe Quinto, President
League of California Cities
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Support for the City of Murrieta's Resolution Establishing a Working Group to Evaluate a State Constitutional Amendment or Other Initiative to Restore Local Housing and Land Use Authority Dear President Quinto:
I am writing in my individual capacity as Mayor of the City of Temecula to express my strong support for the City of Murrieta's proposed resolution for consideration by the General Assembly of the League of California Cities at the 2026 Annual Conference.
The proposed resolution presents an important opportunity to thoughtfully evaluate the appropriate balance between California's statewide housing objectives and the constitutional principle of local governance. Establishing a statewide working group to examine a potential constitutional amendment, legislative reforms, or other policy initiatives will provide a meaningful forum to assess how local authority over housing and land use decisions can be strengthened while continuing to address the State's housing challenges.
Cities are uniquely positioned to understand the needs, opportunities, and constraints of their communities. Local elected officials are accountable to the residents they serve and are best equipped to make land use decisions that reflect a community's character, infrastructure capacity, economic development goals, environmental stewardship, and long-term vision. Equally important, local governments bear the primary responsibility for protecting public safety. Decisions regarding housing density, transportation, emergency access, wildfire preparedness, evacuation routes, police and fire service capacity, water availability, and critical infrastructure are inherently local matters that require the knowledge and judgment of those who serve their communities every day.
While the State has an important role in addressing California's housing needs, a collaborative approach that respects local expertise and preserves meaningful local discretion will produce stronger, safer, and more sustainable communities. The proposed working group offers an opportunity to evaluate policies that achieve these shared objectives while restoring an appropriate balance between state direction and local authority.
21 Mr. Gabe Quinto, President
League of California Cities
July 23, 2026
Although this letter reflects my personal position and is not an official action or policy of the City of Temecula or the Temecula City Council, I respectfully endorse the City of Murrieta's submission of this resolution and encourage its favorable consideration by the League of California Cities General Assembly.
Thank you for your leadership and your thoughtful consideration of this important issue.
Respectfully,
Jessica Alexander
Mayor, City of Temecula
Signing in her individual capacity
and not on behalf of the City of Temecula
or the Temecula City Council.
22 2026 Resolution Packet
Resolution No. 1: Staff Analysis
23 League of California Cities Staff Analysis on Resolution No. 1 Staff: Brady Guertin, Legislative Advocate
Committee: Housing, Community, and Economic Development Summary:
Resolution No.1 states that the League of California Cities (Cal Cities) will:
1. Support the development and advancement of a state constitutional amendment or legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategy that restores and strengthens local authority over housing and land use matters, including general plans, housing elements, zoning, density, design and development standards, project siting, and the approval or denial of housing development applications.
Pursuant to the resolution, the strategy should preserve the state’s authority to set broad, statewide housing goals and enforce civil rights, fair housing, building safety, and environmental standards while protecting local control by preventing the state from compelling the approval of developments that conflict with local requirements, override local zoning or density standards, or overturn local land use decisions where a city has planned for and maintained sufficient capacity to meet its housing obligations.
2. Consider establishing a statewide working group or other appropriate committee(s) to evaluate and develop a proposed constitutional amendment or other legislative, policy, or ballot-based strategies to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters.
The resolution states: “conducting legal, fiscal, and policy analyses; engaging cities and other stakeholders; and building a statewide coalition of proponent supporters in preparation for the November 2030 General Election, or within another reasonable time period.” Background:
As provided in the background information, the city of Murrieta is sponsoring this resolution in response to concerns over state laws that have increasingly reduced city discretion over housing and land use decisions, including legislation that requires ministerial or by-right approvals for housing projects, limits the application of local development standards, and strengthens state enforcement mechanisms against local governments.
Additionally, the city of Murrieta, in its background information, maintains that these legislative efforts have not resulted in sufficient housing production to address California's housing shortage and have not adequately accounted for 24 local infrastructure, public service needs, public safety, market, and fiscal considerations.
The resolution states that California’s housing goals are better advanced through state funding, streamlined environmental requirements, and voluntary partnerships, while preserving local authority over how and where housing is best planned and approved.
Consideration of the resolution may be informed by a brief examination of how the California Constitution allocates authority between the state and cities with respect to land use decisions.
The constitution grants cities the power to adopt local laws to protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare. This grant is called the “police power,” which is the basis for local land use regulation. The constitution grants charter cities the additional power to adopt local laws affecting “municipal affairs.” This power, commonly referred to as “home rule,” is based on the principle that a city, rather than the state, is in the best position to identify and satisfy the needs of the local community.
The constitution’s broad grant of police power contains a significant limitation.
Local law adopted under the police power is not valid if it “conflicts” with state law. A local law “conflicts” with state law when it regulates the same “field” in which the Legislature has stated its intent to occupy. In that case, state law is said to “preempt” the local law and it cannot be enforced.
An ordinance adopted by a charter city under the municipal affairs power cannot be enforced if it affects a “matter of statewide concern.” The subjects that have been identified as “matters of statewide concern” have changed over the years due to economic, social, and political circumstances.
Since the 1960s, the state has enacted numerous laws that limit or preempt aspects of local land use and zoning authority. These laws include the Fair Employment and Housing Act, Housing Element Law, Housing Accountability Act, Density Bonus Law, Permit Streamlining Act, accessory dwelling unit laws, California Environmental Quality Act, and others. In recent years, the state has enacted several laws that Cal Cities was the leading opposition force against, as many of the proposals pre-empted local land use authority, limited public review, and constrained local flexibility. In support of its housing and land use legislation, the Legislature has cited a statewide housing crisis and the need for increased housing production at all income levels while asserting that a uniform approach to local land use decision-making is required. 25 Discussion:
The resolution does not prescribe a specific policy mechanism. The eight letters in support recommend creating a working group or committee to evaluate potential approaches, including legislative proposals, constitutional amendments, or ballot initiatives to strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters.
A discussion of a strategy to restore and strengthen local authority over housing and land use matters will need to consider the California Constitution’s framework for both preemption of police power enactments and municipal affairs, discussed above. It will also need to determine whether changes to the California Constitution will be proposed, and whether they constitute an amendment or a revision, which require different processes.
A constitutional revision is a multistep process blending legislative consensus, voter support, and on occasion, a constitutional convention. It requires significant public engagement.
A constitutional amendment would require a ballot initiative, which includes gathering enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot, building large coalitions to support election efforts, and campaigning to voters to support the initiative. This process can involve significant costs. In the last major election for ballot initiatives in 2024, proponents spent $8-$18 million to qualify for the ballot and spent nearly $700 million for the full election cycle, averaging out to about $100 million per ballot initiative.
Cal Cities has been engaged in ballot advocacy for over 20 years. In the early 2000s, Cal Cities developed a ballot advocacy infrastructure that included forming an issue political action committee, fundraising, establishing a network of regional managers, and building a coalition with other organizations to ultimately advocate on a ballot measure. Ballot advocacy requires the approval of the Board of Directors with a supermajority vote.
In the Legislature, Cal Cities plays an active and influential role to ensure that local flexibility and autonomy in the land use and housing space is maintained by engaging on dozens of bills every legislative session to ensure that cities' voices are heard at the state Capitol. Below, you will find Cal Cities “Existing Policy” on local control, housing, and land use policies.
Fiscal Impact
The resolution itself would not have a significant direct fiscal impact. However, depending on what actions follow, the fiscal costs could be significant. 26 Existing Cal Cities Policy
Vision
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California's cities.
Mission Statement
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
We Believe
• Local self-governance is the cornerstone of democracy. • Our strength lies in the unity of our diverse communities of interest. • In the involvement of all stakeholders in establishing goals and in solving problems.
• In conducting the business of government with transparency, openness, respect, and civility.
• The spirit of honest public service is what builds communities. • Open decision-making that is of the highest ethical standards honors the public trust.
• Cities are vital to the strength of the California economy. • The vitality of cities is dependent upon their fiscal stability and local autonomy.
• The active participation of all city officials increases the League's effectiveness.
• Partnerships and collaborations are essential elements of focused advocacy and lobbying.
• Ethical and well-informed city officials are essential for responsive, visionary leadership and effective and efficient city operations.
Zoning
Cal Cities believes local zoning is a primary function of cities and is an essential component of home rule. The process of adoption, implementation and enforcement of zoning ordinances should be open and fair to the public and enhance the responsiveness of local decision-makers. State policy should leave local siting and use decisions to the city and not interfere with local prerogative beyond providing a constitutionally valid procedure for adopting local regulations. State agency siting of facilities, including campuses and office buildings, should be subject to local notice and hearing requirements in order to meet concerns of the local community. Cal Cities opposes legislation that seeks to limit local authority over parking requirements.
Housing Element
Housing issues should be addressed in the general plan as other planning issues are. The housing element should be prepared for the benefit of local 27 governments and should have equal status with the other elements of the general plan.
Encourage Full Community Participation
Foster an open and inclusive community dialogue and promote alliances and partnerships to meet community needs.
Well-Planned New Growth
Recognize and preserve open space, watersheds, environmental habitats, and agricultural lands, while accommodating new growth in compact forms, in a manner that:
• De-emphasizes automobile dependency;
• Integrates the new growth into existing communities;
• Creates a diversity of affordable housing near employment centers; • Provides job opportunities for people of all ages and income levels.
Support:
The following letters of concurrence were received:
City of Banning
City of Calimesa
City of Canyon Lake
City of Moreno Valley
City of Norco
City of Torrance
Crystal Ruiz, Mayor, City of San Jacinto
Jessica Alexander, Mayor, City of Temecula
28