King City City Council
September 9, 2025

2 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title:

Case Number:

Project Applicant:

Project Lead Agency:

Project Contact:

Project Description:

General Plan Amendment, Housing Element,
Land Use Element and Conservation, Open
Space and Safety Element.

GPA 2015-001
City of King
212 South Vanderhurst Ave
King City, CA 93930
City of King
(See above for address)
Maricruz Aguilar, Assistant City
Planner
(See address above)
Phone: (831) 385-3281
Fax:

Phone: (831) 385-3281
Phone: (831) 386-5916
Fax: (831)386-5968
Project Site and Land Uses Existing and Proposal:

The City of King is proposing various amendments to the City General Plan Housing, Land Use and Conservation/Open
Space/Safety Elements. The amendments are primarily to update the Housing Element to comply with California Government Code 65585 and to amend the Land Use and Conservation/Open
Space/Safety Elements of the General Plan to be consistent with the amendments to the Housing Element.

The ame'ndments also include the addition of the Multi-Modal Transit Center near First Street, consistent with the Historic Downtown Revitalization Plan, First Street Master Plan and Department of Transportation's Coast Corridor Improvements Plan. The MMTC proposed improvements were evaluated as part of the EIS/EIR of the Department of Transportation Plan.

The modifications also include a modification of the General Plan Map and Zoning Map of a small five (5) acre area located at 1023 Broadway Street (including a two (2) acre site on Franciscan Way south east of Broadway) from Planned Development (PD General Plan and Zoning designations) to Highway Service Commercial (HSC General Plan and HS Zoning Ordinance). This modification is proposed because the site is deemed to be too small to warrant the preparation of a Specific Plan and will result in the reduction of allowable uses at the site, eliminating industrial as a possible use.

The project, because it may have a potential significant affect on the environment, requires a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Initial Study indicates that while it may have significant affects, those affects can be mitigated or are potentially highly positive environ·mental affects. Therefore, Doreen Liberto-Blanck, Community Development Director, has determined that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. This Document comprises the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration.

The Lead Agency is the City of King. The City of King, Community 3 (
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Development Department, has reviewed the proposed
amendments and, on the basis of the Initial Study review, has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project, with mitigation measures as identified in the following Mitigated Negative Declaration, will have a significant effect on the environment. This Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. An Environmental Impact Report is not required.

This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations),.

Background, Summary of Housing Element proposed
amendments:

The 2015-2023 Housing Element of the City of King General Plan updates the approved 2007-2014 Housing Element. A Housing Element is a required element of the General Plan as identified in California Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article

10.6. The City of King is required to amend its Housing Element every eight (8) years.

The State Legislature has found that the "availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every California family is a priority of the highest order." (California Government Code §65580(a}).

The City of King Housing Element addresses housing
opportunities for present and future residents through the year 2023 and provides the primary policy guidance for local decisiohmaking as it relates to housing. The Housing Element has a shorter planning period than the other Geheral Plan elements and is the only General Plan element that requires review and certification by the State of California.

The Housing Element provides a detailed analysis of the City's demographic, economic, and housing characteristics as required by State Law. The Element also provides a comprehensive evaluation of the City's progress in implementing the past policies and programs related to housing production, preservation, and conservation. Based on the community's housing needs, available resources, constraints, and opportunities for housing production and preservation, and its past performance, the Housing Element identifies goals, policies, and programs that address the housing needs of present and future residents. The goals, policies, and programs are included in the Housing Element Policy Document.

State Housing Element Law (California Government Code §65580 et. seq.) requires regional Councils of Government (COG) to identify for each city and county its "fair share allocation" of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG}, the COG for the City of King Area, adopted the RHNA in December 2013. AMBAG took into account several factors in 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
preparing the RHNA, including projected household formation, job growth and regional income distribution. In turn, each city and county must address their local share of regional housing needs in their Housing Elements.

As such, the 2015 - 2023 Housing Element Update focuses in large part on the ways that the City will be able to meet its RHNA requirement over the next 8 years. As shown in Chapter 4 of the Housing Element Update, the City will be able to meet the requirements through a combination of previously approved projects and through development of previously zoned parcels. No additional land use or zoning changes are required. Previously approved projects will provide additional homes but are not required to meet the Cycle 5 RHNA requirements.

Previously approved projects include the Arboleda (formerly Creekbridge ), Mills Ranch and Downtown Addition Specific Plans, approved in 2004, 2005 and 2011, respectively. Zoning includes previous (2015) amendment to the General Commercial (C-2) zone to allow residential and uses and amendment (2011) to the land uses allowed in Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) District to allow medium high density residential uses. Residential units in the C-2 and C-N Districts are anticipated per the previous zone changes but are not required to meet the RHNA requirements.

Two High Density Residential (R-4) parcels, approximately 18.7 acres in size will, at buildout, provide housing that exceeds the RHNA requirement.

In addition, the City is in the process of amending the FSC and C2 Zones to allow agricultural worker housing in those zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The City Council is anticipated to review the change to allow agricultural worker housing in the FSC and C-2 Zoning Districts in spring 2016. That change in zoning district language is not a part of this document and will be subject to a separate environmental review. It should be noted that the addition of agricultural worker housing in the FSC and C-2 Zones is consistent with the Housing Element The 2015-2023 Update to the City of King Housing Element demonstrate the City's ability to meet its RHNA requirements without additional General Plan Amendment or Rezoning. Build out of previously approved Specific Plans and construction on the currently zoned R-4 parcels will allow the City to exceed its RHNA requirements.

Based on the above, no new approvals are required / proposed by the Update. Required projects have been previously approved with appropriate environmental review and approvals.

Background, Land Use Element proposed amendments:

Updates and amendments are primarily to make corrections and ensure consistency with the Housing Element. No significant changes are proposed. The Land Use Element amendment incorporates goals, policies and programs related to a proposed Multi-Modal Transit Center (MMTC) near First Street, new agricultural worker housing, and updates other information. The only land use amendment proposed is 5 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
a change of approximately five (5) acres of Planned Development designated property at 1023 Broadway, including a vacant two-acre site near Franciscan Way, southeast of Broadway.

An area near First Street was designated for the MMTC as part of the Historic Downtown Revitalization and Form Based Code plan. This location is within walking distance of nearby residents and provides a viable alternative to the use of the automobile. The MMTC is visualized as a measure that can reduce energy use and improve air quality by reducing vehicular trips. The MMTC is also listed as the Preferred Alterative in the Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvements Program Final EIS/EIR.

Environmental impacts will be either negligible or positive by providing better housing, reducing vehicular trips, reducing energy consumption, reducing use of fossil fuels and improving air quality.

The MMTC was approved as part of the Historic Downtown
Revitalization and Form Based Code plan as well as the First Street Corridor Master Plan and the impacts of the MMTC were evaluated as part of the approval of the environmental documents for the Historic Downtown Plan. The MMTC will provide opportunities for persons to utilize bus and train transportation to places of work and shopping in nearby cities, thereby reducing use of personal vehicles, reducing emissions, reducing energy use and facilitating better access for low and moderate income families.

Amendments to land use category descriptions include
recommendations to encourage mixed use in commercial zones.

Second floor apartments, for example, would be encouraged in commercial zones, particularly in the historic downtown and First Street planning areas of the City. Such changes will benefit the City and residents by making residential uses close to places of employment and shopping and thereby reducing vehicular ·trips and encouraging walking to work.

The Following is the text from the Preferred Alternative in the Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvement Plan EIS/EIR:
"Preferred Alternative (Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvement Plan EJSIEIR)
Based upon the analysis conducted in the Draft Program
EIS/EIR and public comments received, FRA, SLOCOG, TAMC, and Caltrans DOR have identified the Build Alternative (with modifications) as the Preferred Alternative for potential future implementatio'l on the Coast Corridor between Salinas and San Luis Obispo.

The Preferred Alternative modifies the Build Alternative as follows:
= Modifications requested by the City of King to siding 6 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
extension and station area
= Exclusion of four curve realignments in San Luis Obispo County
= Inclusion of "island" Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) between McKay and Santa Margarita
Modifications Requested by City of King
The City of King provided extensive written comments on the Draft Program EIS/EIR, advising that the City had updated its draft plans for the City of King siding extension and passenger station. These updates were not known to FRA, SLOCOG,
Caltrans DOR, or TAMC until the City of King provided its comments on the Draft Program EIS/EIR.

Siding Extension (King City)
Precise plans for new sidings or siding were not available prior to publication of the Draft Program EIS/EIR. Accordingly, the analysis in the Draft Program EIS/EIR made reasonable
assumptions regarding the extension of the existing sidings. It was assumed that the sidings extensions would result in sidings of about 10,000 feet in length (generally, enough to
accommodate a freight train) and that this length could potentially be achieved by adding all additional track to either the northern or southern end of each siding.

As a result, the Draft Program EIS/EIR examined a larger total area for the sidings than would have been necessary to achieve the desired 10,000 foot length.

Coast Corridor (MMTC stop in King City)
The existing City of King siding extends from mile post (MP) 159.19 to MP 160.64 and is about 1.45 miles in length (7,650 feet). The Draft Program EIS/EIR analyzed two siding extensions (between MP 158.5 and 159.19 to the north and MP 160.64 and 161.19 to the south). Either the northern or southern extension would have been sufficient to provide a 10,000 foot long siding.

Since publication of the Draft Program EIS/EIR and as noted in the City's comments, the City of King engaged a railroad engineer (RailPros) to consider modifications to rail facilities in the area. The RailPros study (prepared for and endorsed by the City of King in its comment letter) proposed that the siding extension be greater than 10,000 feet in length and that the extension would most feasibly be achieved by extending the siding on the north side exclusively. The RailPros study considered extending the siding from MP 156.38 to 159.19, resulting in a siding 2.81 miles or about 14,800 feet in length.

After review, FRA, SLOCOG, TAMC, and Caltrans DOR concur that the City's proposed revision to the siding extension would avoid or reduce the intensity of several potential environmental effects of the previously identified siding extension discussed in 7 {
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
the Draft Program EIS/EIR. The revised siding extension would avoid the need for a new creek crossing and would also avoid including any portion of the siding extension within a 100-year flood plain. The revised siding would also be located outside of populated areas, so would have .reduced potential for any community effects compared to the previously identified siding extension.· Because the City's proposed modification to the siding extension is reasonable and is likely to reduce the impacts of the project, FRA, SLOCOG, TAMC, and Caltrans DOR agree that it should be included and analyzed in the Final Program EIS/EIR.

Passenger Station (King City MMTC)
The analysis in the Draft Program EIS/EIR used conceptual plans from adopted City documents that proposed a station site near the intersection of First Street and Broadway. Operating details were assumed to include a station building; parking, and bus pull out areas.

However, as noted in the • City's comments, the Rail Pros plan shows a slightly smaller passenger station in generally the same part of downtown, with similar features, and an area set aside for military personnel transfers. The RailPros plan also calls for the relocation of an existing at-grade crossing (at Pearl Street) to move about one block northwest towards Broadway Street." Pursuant to Section 15150 of the California Environmental Quality Act, this Mitigated Negative Declaration includes by reference, the DOT Coast Route EIS/EIR, as it relates to the proposed King City MMTC, including train and bus station, identified as follows:

Coast Corridor Improvements
Record of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Environmental Impact Report (EIR}
From Salinas, CA.to San Luis Obispo, CA
SCH# 2012081045
Prepared by the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration and the
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
In Cooperation with the
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
and the
California Department of Transportation, Division of Rail and Mass Transportation
November 2015
Based on the comprehensive environmental evaluation of the proposed MMTC by the Department of Transportation's EIS/EIR, the MMTC will have no significant negative impacts on the environment. 8 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Background, Conservation, Open Space and Safety
Element proposed amendments:

Updates and amendments are primarily to make corrections and ensure consistency with the Housing Element. No significant changes are proposed. The Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element amendments incorporates goals, policies and programs that protect residents from flooding hazards by updating flood maps that incorporate the most recent Federal Emergency Management Agency flood mapping. Amendments also recommend the development of a proposed multi-modal transit center (MMTC) near First • Street.

Environmental impacts will be either negligible or positive by providing better housing, reducing vehicular trips, reducing energy consumption, reducing use of fossil fuels and improving air quality.

The DOT Coast Corridor Project EIS/EIR makes the following statement regarding the benefits of providing improved rail travel connections for the region (page 3.2-19:
"In terms of potential indirect effects, it should be noted that improved train service could result in an increase in ridership numbers. The increase in service, and corresponding increase in ridership, could be expected to decrease passenger travel by personal vehicle or bus, as well as freight transport by auto, truck or bus. These changes would collectively result in an overall decrease in air pollutant emissions. Potential emissions could be offset by implementation of the components
improvements, corresponding increase in ridership, and
subsequent reduction in emissions."
The MMTC, proposed near the downtown and east of First Street, will reduce vehicle travel by providing opportunities for persons to utilize bus and train transportation to places of work and shopping in nearby cities. Increased use of train and bus transit will result in reducing emissions, and, in turn should also help in reducing energy use and facilitating better access for low and moderate income families. The associated impacts of the MMTC were evaluated as the Preferred Alternative in the Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvement Final Plan EIS/EIR. The DOT's EIS/EIR indicates families living at or below the poverty rate in three of the City's census tracts of 27.5 percent, 4.7 percent and 10.3 percent. The MMTC will provide options of rail and bus travel for these families.

Amendments to the Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element also propose to coordinate any future stream and river restoration programs with State Fish and Wildlife Department, Federal Fish and Wildlife Service, Army Corps, CCRWQCB, Natural Resources Conservation Service and other agencies as appropriate. These changes will result in positive environmental impacts by improving the habitat conditions as well as improving stream function.

Amendments also include the addition of measures to protect historical buildings and thereby improving the aesthetics of the community by upgrading and restoring these important buildings of our 9 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element arid Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Lead Agency:

Project Location:
past, Scenic resources will also be improved by incorporating new improved City signage such as directional signs, wayfinding signs, new entry signs and better directions to nearby significant resources such as Pinnacles National Park.
_c�...... ·t, y __ o�f_K ____ ing.,__ � _______ Phone: 831.385.3281 212 $. Vanderhurst Avenue Fax: 831.386-5968
King City, CA 93930
Amendments apply Citywide.

The following exhibit, Figure 1, shows General Plan land uses.

The Generai Plan map rs not being amended except for a five (5) acre area located c;3t 1013 Broadway that is being proposed to change from Planned Development (PD) tci Highway Service Commercial (HSC).

The change will reduce . the n.umber of potential land uses thereby reducing, potential environmental impact�. The change will also elimin.ate the need for a Specific Plan preparation. The site is deemed to be too small for the preparation of. a Specific Plan. Uses will generally require the approval of the Planning Commission under a C6nditional Use Permit and Architectural Review. The visual integrity of the site will be maintained. The change in designation will result in a slight net beneficial improvement in the environment by eliminating potential industrial uses at this location.

The change will also include a zoning amendment of the five (5) acre area from Planned Development (PD) Zone to Highway Service (HS) Zone. This change in zoning will not result any significant change in potential land use and will eliminate the potential for industrial use. (Figures 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6)
10 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

GENERAL PLAN
LAND-USE . ',. � , ..
-..,,.-,,r•--_ __:...._,;
'TV K f,!G
Assessor Parcel Number(s)
i .L
--� ...... _ ------
----
-�Nll'I-.W.....,.,.,
Jlll,......,..,...flf ---
Figure 1: General Plan Land Use Map
Applies City-Wide
General Plan Designations: Are proposed amendments to land use boundaries or designations being proposed?
Only one land use change is proposed. That change proposes amending a five (5) acre area located at 1023 Broadway, including a lot fronting on Franciscan Way southeast of Broadway. The change will also include an amendment of the Zoning designation of this five (5) acre area from Planned Development (PD) Zone to Highway Service (HS} District.
11 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
/JO
PI.R, 1
,85 AC.
tJ.8.
t'-57
BJ.QBl'AT 10.1
Figure 2
Assessors Map Showing Properties Proposed for Change from Planned Development to Highway $ervlce Commercial Designation. This change wlll also result In a proposed zoning amendment from PD Zone to HS Zone.
12 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Figure 3
Detail of Proposed General Plan Change of Designation of 5 Acre Area from PD to HSC Figure 4. View of area proposed to change from PD to HSC designation 13 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Exi�ting
Designations
300 600
.ffiglnvay 101
(
900 Fat
Figure 5
, nd '
'(1'l )
l
IHl'Cial
Dc!itilF
�
a.-li&l
' ' '
�ill
•
11hl't
i!ml•Hith�., �liPI
�
ll!l--.�t
De\,--­. 111.�Mlit.
'-i!C::•--•1
•ii e ...... .,vr, •• m1wi1
• 111ttM""1Aar�.;
l!Clltlpl:tot'Wtf
......

Fig.LO◄:

Hospital SpeeiaJ Plannlag .Area
Area Proposed for Change from Planned Development to Highway Service Commercial 14 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Figure 6.

View of rear of property located at 1023 aroadway, area proposed to change from PD to HSC Figure 7
Scenic Programs in Conservation Element will help to restore Historical Downtown 15 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Figure 8
Photo of King City Typical Cluster Low and Moderate Cost Housing Figure 9
Artist Concept �f Multi-Modal Transit Center Proposal Near First Street 16 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Figure 10
Many buildings in King City date from the late 1800's and early 1900's such as this beautiful Episcopal Church. These buildings are a legacy for the City and provide much of the charm and cultural history of the City.

The area has been occupied for over 10,000 years, first by the indigenous Americans, Including the Salinan Indian tribe, later by the Spaniards, followed by the Mexicans and finally by other Europeans. Likely, Indian vlllages existed nearby, probably along the Salinas River, which provided a rich food supply of Salmon and Steelhead. Early homesteads and ranches were established along the rich soils of the Salinas Valley. 17 Miti9ated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

11. DETERMINATION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration is included to give notice to interested agencies and the public that it is the City of King's intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. This Mitigated Negative Declaration is subject to change based on comments received by interested agencies and the public. It should be noted that there are anticipated significant impacts and, therefore, there are special mitigations necessary to reduce the project to less than significant impact.

The City of King prepared the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and pending public review, ·expects to determine from this study that the project, if developed and operated consistent with the mitigation measures specified in this document, would not have a significa�t effect on the environment for the following reasons:
• The proposed project, with mitigations, would have no effect on: growth, fannland/timberland, the commu'nity, cultural resources, geology/soils/seismic/topography, hazardous waste or materials, air quality, noise or vibration, Land Use, Parks and Recreational Facilities, Utilities/ Emergency Services, Traffic and Transportation, Visual/ Aesthetics, Hydrology and Floodplain, Water and Stonn Water Runoff, Animal Species, Invasive Species, Construction Impacts, or Climate Change, or historical/archaeological/paleontological resources, natural communities, and threatened and endangered species because the following mitigation measures would reduce potential effects to insignificance. 18 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Ill. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The environmental factors checkecl below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the Environmental Checklist
X 1. Aesthetics 9. Land Use/Planninq

2. AQricultural Resources 10. Noise
X 3. Air Quality 11. Population/Housing

4. Biological Resources 12. Public Services
X 5. Cultural Resources 13. Recreation

6. Geoloav/Soils 14. Transportation/Circulation

7. Hazards/Hazardous Materials 15. Utility/Service Systems X 8. Hydrology/Water Quality 16. Mandatory Findings of Significance Surroundina Land:Use--. �
North: I NA I East: I NA
South: I NA I West: I NA
Environmental Setting:

The City of King is located in the center of Salinas Valley along the US Highway 101 freeway approximately in the center of Monterey County. The Salinas Valley is one of the most productive agricultural valleys in the world, producing many of the fruits and vegetables consumed throughout the United States. The Highway 101 corridor connects the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Coast.

The City is approximately 50 miles south of the City of Salinas, 145 miles south of San Francisco, 105 miles south of San Jose, and 50 miles north of Paso Robles. The City of King is a relatively small agriculture-based community located south of the small towns of Greenfield, Soledad, and Gonzales, other agricultural communities in the Salinas Valley.

The topography of the City and surrounding valley is flat alluvial plane between mountain ranges to the east and west of the City. San Lorenzo Creek and Salinas River floodplains are a potential hazard, bordering the southwestern portion of the City and traversing the City in a northeasterly direction to intersect the Salinas River.

The City is located near the edge of the Pacific and Continental Plates and is within an area known to have frequent seismic movement.

The proposed project applies citywide and only modifies one five (5) acre area at 1023 Broadway and an area on Franciscan Way from Planned Development to Highway Service Commercial larid use and PD Zone to HS Zone. The proposed change will result in the elimination of potential industrial land use at this site and not otherwise significantly amend other potential land uses.

The changes also include the MMTC, proposed train station southeast of the intersection of Broadway and First Streets. (See Figure 9 for artist concept of MMTC) This station was the Preferred Alternative in the Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvement Plan Final EIS/EIR. The station and railway improvements for a siding, were subject to the environmental review of the DOT's Final EIR/EIS. 19 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND IMPACT REVIEW
The following checklist indicates the potential level of impact and is abbreviated as follows:

Known Significant:

Unknown Potentially
Significant:

Potentially
Significant and
Mitigable:

Not Significant:

Impact Reviewed in
Previous Document:

Known significant environmental impacts.

Unknown potentially significant impacts, which need further review to determine significance level.

Potentially significant impacts which can be mitigated to less than significant levels.

Impacts which are not considered significant.

Adequate previous analysis exists regarding the issue; further analysis is not required due to tiering process (Section 21094 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines). Discussion should include reference to the previous documents and identification of mitigation measures incorporated from those previous documents. Where applicable, this box should be checked in addition to one indicating significance of the potential environmental impact.

1. AESTHETICS: Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within view of a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the X
area?
Impact Discussion:

General Discussion: The Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element updates as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, do not include any significant changes to land use designations, zoning, building heights and intensities, or residential densities.

Changes being proposed will not impact scenic resources. (Design examples, see Figures 7, 8 and 9)

1.a. Not Significant: The King City General Plan does not designate any scenic vista resources within the Project Area. The area is surrounded by scenic agricultural lands. These lands are not within the City's jurisdictional area.

1.b. Not Significant: There are no rock outcroppings or major hills in or near the City. There are no designated scenic highways within the City. Proposed modifications to General Plan policies encourage the protection of historic buildings. The Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek flow through a portion of the City.

General Plan policies promote the protection of riparian corridors.

1.c. Not Significant with Mitigation: The King City General Plan already contains existing programs to encourage the enhancement of new projects. The City's regulations require architectural review of new buildings, landscaping, parking lots and other improvements to ensure that new projects are architecturally handsome and that landscaping is tastefully done. New and modified policies will not alte.r or reduce City 20 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
standards and guidelines for visual quality. The primary change is to modify existing PD zoning of the rear half of 1023 Broadway Street and a 2-acre site on Franciscan Way to HSC designation. The proposed change will prohibit industrial uses permitted in the PD zone and will limit commercial uses to those identified in the HSC zone. The change will have no significant impact on the environment based on the following mitigation measure.

Mitigation Measure No. 1.c: Projects, including those in the new proposed HSC designation.at 1023 Broadway and Franciscan Way, will be required to obtain architectural review approval. (Single Family residences in residential zones will be exempt from this requirement unless required by a Specific Plan). A planting and irrigation plan will be prepared and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits.

The Zoning Regulations identify the criteria for architectural review and include evaluation of building design, landscaping, parking and other improvements.

1.d. Not Significant: The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element will not, in and of itself, create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: Potential Significant Significant Reviewed In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources Significant And in are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may Mitigated Previous refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Document Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.

Would the project:
a. Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance, as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring X
Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonaQricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract?
Involve other changes in the existing environment,
C. which, due to their location or nature could result in X conversion of farmland, to non-ac:iricultural use? Impact Discussion:

Agricultural worker housing is permitted in the Agriculture Zone with a Conditional Use Permit. The amendments, including pending changes to the FSC Zone, will allow agricultural worker housing in more land use designations and in close proximity to agricultural fields. Adequate numbers of farmworkers are needed to keep agriculture productive. If agricultural is productive and profitable, the pressure to convert it will be less.

Impacts will not be significant and the proposals for agricultural worker housing will help to retain agriculture as a local economic base by providing assurance of future farm workers available to help farm managers.

2.a. Not Significant: The proposed amendments will not alter any lands designated for agricultural uses.

2.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use. No lands designated for agricultural uses are proposed to be modified nor will the changes conflict with any Williamson Act contract.

2.c Not Significant: Proposed amendments, including pending changes to the FSC Zone to allow agricultural worker housing with a CUP, facilitate possible future agricultural worker housing and will serve to encourage the continuance of agricultural uses in and near King City. No conversions of agricultural lands are proposed. 21 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

3. AIR QUALITY Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air Quality plan? b. Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution X concentrations {emissions from direct, indirect, mobile and stationary sources)?
C. Violate any air quality stand�rd or contribute X
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
d. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non- X attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard {including releasing emissions, which exceed Quantitative thresholds for ozone orecursors)?
e. Create objectionable smoke, ash, dust or odors affecting X a substantial number of people? Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments will not create air quality impacts. The City is located within the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) in the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB). In addition, the amendments will locate agricultural worker housing closer to agricultural fields and thus helping to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG). The updated LUE amendments also propose a multimodal transit cente11 which will encourage alternative modes of transportation and reduction in GHG:

The addition of the MMTC will likely improve air quality by reducing the number of vehicular trips, as passengers will have the option of traveling by train or bus.

3.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

3.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of significant dust to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of air pollution into the environment. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any dust concentrations will be created.

3.c Not Significant with mitigation: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of dust emissions into the environment if mitigated as follows:

Mitigation Measure No. 3.c: A plan shall be prepared by each project applicant's engineer or Certified Professional Erosion Control Specialist (for dust, chemical pollution and erosion control) to ensure these measures are implemented. Where appropriate, said dust protection plan may be part of a project erosion and sediment control plan. All oew projects must comply with all Federal, State, Regional, and local air quallty standards. State law requires any facility that has the potential to emit air contaminants to apply for a permit from MBUAPCD. Additionally, if development within the Project includes other sources ·that are exempt from MBUAPCD permit authority (e.g., indlrect sources, fugitive area sources), all direct and indirect emissions should be compared to the appropriate threshold(s) of significance. When net emissions from a new or modified facility exceed State thresholds, the increase shall be offset. New businesses and/or tenants of the facility shall consult directly with the MBUAPCD for permitting requirements and cqmpliance with air quality standards.

3.d Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in significant changes in land uses nor do they result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non22 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

3.e Not Significant: The proposed amendments will not create objectionable smoke, ash, dust or odors affecting a substantial number of people. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified a.
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the X California department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or b. regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the X California Department of fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
C. Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, X coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native d. resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, X or imoede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting e. biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy X or ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
f. Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X
Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation olan?
Biological Resources Setting:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not, in themselves, result in any loss of biological resources. No significant impacts will occur as a result of the proposed amendments.

4.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not remove or substantially alter policies that protect the environment and do not result in a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Future p�ojects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on habitat will be created.

4.b. Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife service. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on habitat will be created. 23 (
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

4.c. Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.} through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on habitat will be created.

4.d. Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on habitat or migratory passages will be created.

4.e. Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. There are no forests in or near King City. Trees within the City are almost entirely those planted in properties, along streets and within parks.

There are no existing tree protection ordinances within the City. The City has an approved tree list that is used to identify appropriate (based on climate, tree form and other factors) trees for streets. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on biological resource protective ordinances will be created.

4.f. Not Significant: The proposed amendments will not conflict with any provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on biological resource protective ordinances will be created.

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines X Section 15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA X Guidelines Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or uniQue geoloQic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries?- Impact Discussion:

The proposal covers properties throughout the City as well as the proposed change of the Broadway and Franciscan Way properties from the current designation of PD to HSC. The impact of the changes will not reduce existing protections.:
�Not Significant with mitigation below: The proposed amendments do not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on historical resource will be created. (See Figure 10 for example of historical structure}

5.b. Not Significant with mitigation below: The proposed amendments do not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on archeological resource will be created.

5.c. Not Significant with mitigation below: The proposed amendments do not directly or Indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on paleontological resource will be created;

5.d. Not Significant with mitigation below: The . proposed amendments will not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts or adverse effect on human remains will be created. 24 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

6. a.

Mitigation Measure No. 5.a, 5.b, 5.c, 5.d: Cultural Resources: In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, archaeological resources, paleontological resources or historical resources on the project site, if said resources are found during excavation or construction, work will be halted at a minimum of 30 feet from the find and the area will be staked off. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie cultural resources, paleontological resources, historical resources or, in the case of adjacent human remains until the coroner of Monterey County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. A qualified professional (to be hired by the applicant and accepted by the City) in cultural resources, paleontological resources or historical resources shall evaluate the resources discovered at the site and provide recommendations for disposition of those resources. In the case of human remains, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent ("MLD•J from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or it's authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or it's authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner." GEOLOGY /SOILS Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And or Not in
Mitigated Applicable Previous
Document
Expose people or structures to potential substantial X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning X Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Publication 42)
ii) Stronq Seismic qround shakinq? X
iii) Seismic-related oround failure, including liauefaction? X iv) Landslides? X
b. Result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil? C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, X and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-8 X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems X where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
25 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the soils or geology. Measures to address safety will be addressed in each future project developed in the City. The amendments do not affect or reduce the requirements for future protection of safety. Soils, geology, and seismicity conditions are important aspects of all development within the City. Although most projects have little or no effect on geology, any project involving construction will have some effect on soils and topography; and all may be affected by certain geologic events, such as earthquakes, and are protected through existing building codes and regulations. Adoption of the amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element Will not have an impact on any geological or soil resources, as the amendments do not propose any development.

Buildings will continue to be required to meet the requirements of the seismic location which depends on soil conditions. proximity of ground water, potential for ground motion and other factors. Certain buildings, such as hospitals and schools, may be required to meet more strict structural criteria as defined by the building code.

6.a.i, a.II, a.iii, a.iv: Not Significant: Each future project will, be reviewed for consistency with issued related to its specific location. Measures for adequate safety will be evaluated as part of the building permit review process and all projects will be required to meet that applicable standard of the specific building and use type. The proposed amendments will have no significant impact.

6.b: Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not in themselves involve development proposals on specific sites, and thus will not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

6.c and d: Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not, in themselves, involve development proposals on specific sites, and thus will not result in a project on unstable or expansive sites. Specific development proposals would be subject to CEQA analysis of site-specific geotechnical investigation.

6.e: Not Significant: For the majority of the City, sewer systems are available for the disposal of wastewater.

New development is notallowed to use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems unless sewer is not available and the City and Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board accept a septic or other similar system can provide long-term safe disposal that can be shown to not degrade surface or subsurface water quality and capacity adequate for the use.

7. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and X
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste X
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
h'azardous materials sites complied pursuant to
Government Code Section 6596.2.5 and, as a result, X
would create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency '
evacuation plan?
26 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
f. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where X wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will have no impact on hazardous waste. Future project review will address any potential for hazards that may arise at that time.
7 .a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of hazards to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

7.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.
7 .c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

7.d Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of significant hazard on sites which are included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

7.e Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of significant hazard or Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

L!_Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of significant hazard to the public or expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

8. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste qischarge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of X the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been Qranted)?
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or area, including through the alteration of the X course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site? 27 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or substantially increase the rate or X amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would•result in flooding on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantiai additional sources of X
polluted runoff or fail to meet the new CCRWQCB
standards for stormwater control?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
g. Place housing within a 100-year _flood hazard area as mapped on a federal flood hazard boundary or flood
insurance rate map or other flood hazard delineaUon X
map?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a ' result of the failure of a levee or dam? X
i. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments, including the proposed amendment of the Broadway and Franciscan Way properties from PD to HSC designation, to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements will have no impact on hydrology or water quality. Future project review will address any potential for impacts to hydrology or water quality that may arise unique to a given project.

Cal Water Service Company has provided water utility services in King City since 1962. In servicing the City, Cal Water utilizes six wells, three storage tanks, four booster pumps, and over 29 miles of pipeline delivering 2.4 million gallons of Salinas Valley groundwater per day to more than 2,500 service connections within the City area.

King City obtains its water from the Salinas Valley groundwater basin. According to the "Greater Monterey County Integrated Regional Water Management, the Salinas groundwater basin is "located entirely within Monterey County and consists of one large hydrologic unit comprised of five subareas: Upper Valley, Arroyo Seco, Forebay, Pressure, and East Side. Total groundwater pumping from these subareas in 2007 was as follows: Upper Valley 137,017 AF, Arroyo Seco and Forebay 158,775 AF, Pressure 125,620 AF, and East Side 104, 183 AF, with agricultural pumping accounting for 90% of that total and urban uses accounting for the remaining 10%. These subareas have different hydrogeologic and recharge characteristics, though they are not separated by barriers to horizontal flow and water can move between them." Groundwater pumping for urban uses in King City was 3,847 acre feet in 1999, approximately 9.3 percent of the total pumping in the area. (Source: Salinas Valley Water Management Group, Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, May 2006}.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey and the California State Water Resources Control Board "Groundwater Quality in the Monterey Bay and Salinas Valley Groundwater Basins, California" written by Justin T. Kulongoski and Kenneth Belitz:
"The Salinas Valley is a large intermontane valley that extends southeastward from Monterey Bay to Paso Robles. It has been filled, up to a thickness of 2,000 feet, with Tertiary and Quaternary marine and terrestrial sediments that overlie granitic basement. The Miocene-age Monterey Formation and Pliocene- to Pleistocene-age Paso Robles Formation, and Pleistocene to Holocene-age alluvium contain freshwater used for supply. The primary aquifers in the study unit are defined as those parts of the aquifers corresponding to the perforated intervals of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health database. Public-supply wells are typically drilled to depths of 200 to 650 feet, consist of solid casing from the land surface to depths of about 175 to 500 feet, and are perforated below the solid casing. Water quality in the primary aquifers may differ from that in the shallower and deeper parts of the aquifer system. Groundwater movement Is generally from the southern part of the Salinas Valley north towards the Monterey Bay.

Land use in the study unit is about 44 percent (%} natural (mostly grassland and forests), 43% agricultural, and 13% urban. The primary agricultural uses are row crops, pasture, hay, and vineyards. 28 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
The largest urban areas are the cities of Santa Cruz, Watsonville, Monterey, Salinas, King City, and Paso Robles.

Recharge to the groundwater system is primarily from stream-channel infiltration from the major rivers and their tributaries, and from infiltration of water from precipitation and irrigation. The primary sources of discharge are water pumped for irrigation and municipal supply, evaporation, and discharge to streams."

8.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of measures that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards or impacts will be created.

8.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted).

8.c Not Significant with mitigation: The proposed amendments, with the mitigation measure below, do not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

8.d Not Significant with mitigation: The proposed amendments, with the mitigation measure below, do not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off�site. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

8.e Not Significant with mitigation: The proposed amendments, with the mitigation measure below, do not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff or fail to meet the new CCRWQCB standards for stormwater control. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

8.f Not Significant with mitigation: The proposed amendments, with the mitigation measure below, do not otherwise subst�ntiafly degrade water quality. Provisions are being proposed, including new policies to ensure that Low Impact Development (LID) and other Best Management Practices (BMPs) are included in new future developments. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.[Same issue as stated above with deferral of future groundwater quality issues.] Mitigation Measure 8.c, 8.d 8.e 8.f Stormwater Pollution Prevention:

Stormwater and water quality protection: Developers shall be required to meet all measures for stormwater pollution control, waste management, and provide public utility connections that comply with the City and other service providers. The United State Environmental Protection Agency has promulgated regulations requiring permits for stormwater discharges from small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s).

The City of King is an MS4 and therefore projects within the City shall meet the standards established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Since impermeable surfaces (such as paving and buildings) as well as bare unvegetated soil greatly increases runoff and the potential for erosion and pollution of waters within streams and the Salinas River, mitigation measures have been deemed necessary to reduce runoff and increase percolation within the urban area of the City.

Development in the City will be required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs), including erosion and sediment control, during construction and grading and include Low Impact Development (LID) design practices in the design and layout of the project. According to the RWQCB, LID "is an effective approach to managing stormwater to minimize the adverse effects of urbanization and development on watershed processes and beneficial uses resulting from changes in stormwater runoff conditions. LID strategies can achieve significant reductions in pollutant loading ahd runoff volumes as well as greatly enhanced 29 {
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
groundwater recharge rates. The proper implementation of LID techniques results in greater benefits than single purpose stormwater and flood control infrastructure." Therefore, controlling urban runoff pollution by using a combination of onsite source control and LID BMPs augmented with treatment control BMPs before the runoff enters the MS4 is important and will be required of each development project (unless specifically exempted by the RWQCB). Also, according to the RWQCB, "the risks associated with infiltration can be properly managed by many techniques, Including: 1) designing landscape drainage features that promote infiltration of runoff, but do not "inject" runoff (injection bypasses· the natural processes of filtering and transformation that occur in the soil}, 2} taking reasonable steps to prevent the illegal disposal of wastes, 3) protecting footings and foundations, and 4) ensuring that each drainage feature is adequately maintained in perpetuity. However, in some circumstances, site conditions (e.g., historical soil contamination) and the type of development (i.e., urban infill) can limit the feasibility of retaining, infiltrating, and reusing stormwater at sites. " The City Engineer shall review each project, unless exempted .by the RWQCB, to assure compliance with these requirements, including the RWQCB "POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN THE CENTRAL COAST REGION_;, These RWQCB standards include BMPs for erosion and sediment control during project construction and after completion of the project. LID measures include, but are not limited to: i} limiting disturbance of creeks and natural drainage features, minimizing compaction of highly permeable soils, limiting removal of native vegetation at the site to the minim.um area needed to build the project, limiting impermeable surfaces, including buildings and paving, and the use of innovative design layout that further increases permeable surfaces and landscaping.

Development shall minimize stormwater runoff by implementing one or more of the following site design measures identified by the RWQCB:
(1) Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse (2) Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code
(3) Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios. onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code (4) Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code (5) Construct bike lanes, driveways, uncovered parking lots, sidewalks, walkways, and patios with permeable surfaces
(6) The directing of runoff to bioretention basins,
(7) Other similar measures as determined by th_e City Engineer. !:s_Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal flood hazard boundary or flood insurance rate map or other flood hazard delineation map.

Map of FEMA hazards area has been updated. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

8.h Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created.

8.i Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not create inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any hazards will be created. 30 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Physically divide an established community? X
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) X
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural communitv conservation plan? Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on land use and planning within the City. The LUE amendments incorporates language regarding a MMTC located in the City. The MMTC would also service Fort Hunter Liggett (FHL). The MMTC site near First Street was designated an� evaluated in Negative Declaration and the site was designated in the Historic Corridor Revitalization and Form-Based Code approved in 2011. The MMTC is also recommended and designated in the First Street Corridor Master Plan, approved by the City Council on February 26, 2013. In addition, an extensive evaluation of the MMTC was conducted by RailPros and was attached as an appendix to the Coast Corridor Improvements Final Program EIS/EIR. The King City MMTC, as a part of that plan by the US Department of Transportation, was listed as the "Preferred Alternative" in the their EIS/EIR. The LUE amendments incorporate changes that the City implemented with provisions to encourage mixed development that include secondary and moderate income housing in the general commercial designation.

The proposed changes to the 1023 Broadway and Franciscan Way five (5) acre site are also not significant.

Those changes result in less potential land uses for the site, and therefore will not result in any changes in the potential traffic or land use of the site.

9.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the creation of any physical division in the City.

Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

9.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not substantially conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or·zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Future projects are evaluated for any potential conflicts.

9.c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

10. NOISE Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact
Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Expose people to, or generate, noise levels exceeding established standards in the local general plan, coastal X plan, noise ordinance or other applicable standards of
other agencies?
b. Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne X vibration or groundborne noise levels? 31 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
c. Cause a substantial permanent increase in ambjent X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d. Cause a substantial temporary or periodic increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the oroject?
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on noise or expose persons to significant levels of noise. Measures in the existing Noise Element address standards to protect exposure to noise. Those measures are not proposed for amendment.

10.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the exposure of people to, or generate, noise levels exceeding established standards in the local general plan, coastal plan, noise ordinance or other applicable standards of other agencies. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

10.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not substantially conflict with or result in the exposure of persons to or generate excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels. Future projects are evaluated for any potential conflicts.

10.c The proposed amendments do not conflict with or cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.
1 0.d Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not conflict with or cause a substantial temporary or periodi� increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created

11. POPULATION AND HOUSING Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere?
c. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or X
indirectly (e.g. through extension of roads or other
Infrastructure)?
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements will not create significant changes to or have impacts on population and housing. Proposeq measures will increase housing opportunities for low and moderate income families but will not increase the number of residences in the City from the current Housing Element and Land Use Element provisions.

11.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Amendments to the Housing Element and Land Use Element will provide additional opportunities for affordable housing in the general commercial designation and provide for possible agricultural worker housing. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.
32 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

11.b Not Significant: The proposed amendmerits do not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Future projects are evaluated for any potential conflicts.

11.c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g. through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Possible mixed use in the commercial area will result in benefits such as less vehicular trips and allow persons who don't own cars better access to jobs and shopping. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

12. PUBLIC SERVICES Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project result in a substantial adverse Significant And in physical impacts associated with the provision of new Mitigated Previous or physically altered governmental facilities, need for Document new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives tor any of the following public
services:
a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
C. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X
e. Other t:iovernmental services? X
Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on public services. The amendments do not have significant changes in public services. No significant changes are proposed.

12.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

12.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in a substantia.1 adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection.

Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

12.c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in a substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in Ofder to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

12.d Not Significant: The proposed amendments do n.ot result in a substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks and recreation.

Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created. 33 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element

12.e Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in a substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other governmental services. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

13. RECREATION Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would X occur or be accelerated?
b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have -- X an adverse physical effect on the environment?
lrripact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on recreational services. The amendments do not have significant changes in recreational services.

13.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in a substantial adverse increase in the need for new neighborhood and regional ·parks or the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantjal physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

Future projects will Individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

13.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

14. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Significant Unknown Potential Not Potential Significant Significant
Would the project: Significant And
Mitigated
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in X either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion X management agency for designated roads or
highways?
C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. limited sight visibility, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm X
equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
Impact
Reviewed
in
Previous
Document
34 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
g. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative trans ortation (e .. bus turnouts, bic cle racks ?
Impact Discussion:

X
The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5} acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on transportation services. The amendments do not have significant changes in proposed land use and therefore don't significantly change current or future transportation needs.

14.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in or cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections). Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created. The addition of the MMTC will result in a net reduction of vehicular trips. Travel option of train and bus will become available through the MMTC.

14.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the exceedance, either individually or cumulatively, of a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. No changes in land use designations are proposed. Amendments that encourage mixed use development as well as the proposed MMTC will potentially reduce automobile transportation and reduce vehicular trips. Currently, busses frequently have space for additional passengers.

Overall, the number of vehicular trips (both busses and automobiles) are expected to be reduced after completion of the MMTC. That is a factor in the addition of the addition of the MMTC as the preferred alternative in the Department of Transportation Coast Corridor Improvements Final EIS/EIR.

14.c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

14.d Not Significant: The proposed. amendments do not result in substantially increased hazards due to a design feature (e.g. limited sight visibility, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment}. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

14.e Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in inadequate emergency access. Future projects will·individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

14.f Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in inadequate parking capacity. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created. The MMTC site is adequate size to accommodate necessary parking and bus loading, and, if necessary, additional space can be added nearby to accommodate additional parking if found necessary. In addition, the HSC designation of the 1023 Broadway and Franciscan Way site provides for adequate parking for any future use of that site based on the Municipal Code parking standards.

14.g Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks). Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Unknown Potential Not Impact Potential Significant Significant Reviewed
Would the project: Significant And in
Mitigated Previous
Document
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X aoolicable Reoional Water Qualitv Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause
sionificant environmental effects?
35 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant X
environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are X new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves· or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected X demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal X
needs?
g. Comply with federal; state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Impact Discussion:

The proposed amendments to the Housing Element, L_and Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Elements as well as the proposed amendment for the five (5) acre PD area change to HSC, will not create significant changes to or have impacts on utilities and service systems. The amendments do not have significant changes in proposed land use and therefore don't significantly change current or future utility system needs.

15.a Not Significant: The proposed amendments: do not result in exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.b Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.c Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.d Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not significantly change impacts on sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, nor are likely to. change any expected future new or expanded entitlements. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.e Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not change existing land use designations and are not expected to have significant impacts on the wastewater treatment provider in addition to the provider's existing commitments. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.f Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not result significant changes in the waste needs of the City and that a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate future projecf s solid waste disposal needs should not be significant. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created.

15.g Not Significant: The proposed amendments do not significantly result in future increases in development and therefore should not result.in noncompliance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Future projects will individually be evaluated to determine if any impacts will be created. 36 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
V. INFORMATION SOURCES:

A. County/City/Federal Departments Consulted:
• City
Departments
B. General Plan
X
X
X
X
Land Use Element
Circulation Element
Seismic Safety/Safety Element
Zoning Ordinance
C. Other Sources of Information
X Field work/Site Visit
X Calculations
�
X Project Plans
Traffic Study
-X- Records
NA Grading Plans
X Elevations/architectural renderings
_X_ �
Published geological maps
Topographic maps
X
X
X
X
Conservation Element
Noise Element
Local Coastal Plan and Maps
Housing Element
� Ag. Preserve Maps
X Flood Control Maps
X Other studies, reports
X Zoning Maps
X Soils Maps/Reports
X Plant maps
X Archaeological maps and reports
X • (Others) Groundwater studies, well records
37 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
VI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (Cal.Pub. Res. Code §15065) A project may have a significant effect on the environment and thereby require a focused or full environmental impact report to be prepared for the project where any of the following corditions occur (CEQA § 15065):

Significant Unknown Potential Not Impact
Potential Significant Significant Reviewed in
Significant And Previous
MitiQated Document
Potential to degrade: Does the project have the
potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population_ to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or X animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California historv or orehistorv?
Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited but cumulatively considerable?
(Cumulatively considerable means that incremental
effects of a project are considerable when viewed in X
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future oroiects)?
Substantial adverse: Does the project have
environmental effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or X
indirectlv?
a. The proposed project does not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to ·eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species. It is possible during grading and construction activities that unknown cultural resources may be unearthed, which may result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the mitigation measures for Cultural Resources would ensure the proposed project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. b. During construction related activities, the proposed project would have the potential to generate stormrelated runoff pollutants. The project will be required to prepare a plan that addresses all potential pollutants, including but not limited to soil erosion and sediment, and that plan shall be followed during grading and construction as well as maintained for the entire term of the use of the property. Other measures to address the protection against all subsurface and surface pollution shall be implemented during construction and for the full duration of the use of the property.
c. The proposed project could result in construction dust and equipment exhaust emissions, and noise that could cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings. In addition, the primary uses of the site, which includes the storage, sale and distribution of chemicals related to agricultural products that are the business of the land owner. These impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation of the mitigation measures contained in this initial study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. 38 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
VII. INITIAL STUDY DETERMINATION
On the b1:1sis of the Initial Study evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. □
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
by or
will
agreed
not be
to
a
by
significant
the project
effect
proponent.
in this case

A MITIGATED
because revisions

NEGATIVE
in the project

DECLARATION
have been
will
made
be □X
prepared[
I find that the proposed project MAY have limited and specific significant effect on the □ environment, and a FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an □ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. □ Initial Study Determination With Public
Hearing
fx7 L_J Initial Study Determination Without
Public Hearing
Previous
Document:

Initial Study
Project Evaluator:

Signature
Printed Name

CITY OF KING
Lead Agency
Donald J. Funk CPESC, QSD/QSP
For Community Development Director, Doreen
Liberto-Blanck
February 16, 2016
Initial Study Date
39 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
VIII.MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OF THE MITIGATED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Following are the mitigation measures that will be incorporated into each future project In the City, including those in the new HSC Zoned Land at 1023 Broadway Street and will reduce the potential impacts of the project to less than significant. The criteria are applicable to all projects, including grading, excavation and construction unless specifically exempted by Federal, State or City Statute.

Mitigation Measure No. 1.c: Projects, including those in the new proposed HSC designation at 1023 Broadway and Franciscan Way, will be required to obtain architectural review approval. (Single Family residences in residential zones will be exempt from this requirement unless required by a Specific Plan). A planting and irrigation plan will be prepared and approved by the City prior to issuarice of building permits. The Zoning Regulations identify the criteria for architectural review and include evaluation of building design, landscaping, parking and other improvements.

Implementation Party: Applicant/Owner/Developers of each future development site Enforcement Agency: City of King
Timing: Measures to be implemented during development stage of the project.

Implementation Responsibility: Cost and materials are responsibility of Applicant/Owner Mitigation Measure No. 3.c: A plan shall be prepared by each project applicant's engineer or Certified Professional Erosion Control Specialist (for dust, chemical polh..1tion and erosion co_ntrol) to ensure these measures. are implemented. Where appropriate, said dust protection plan may be part of a project erosion and sediment control plan. All new projects must comply with all Federal, State, Regional, and local air quality standards. State law requires any facility that ha� the potential to emit air contaminants tci apply for a permit from MBUAPCD. Additionally, if development within the Pmject includes other sources that are exempt from MBUAPCD permit authority (e.g., indirect sources, fugitive area sources), all direct and indirect emissions should be compared to the appropriate threshold(s) of significance. When net emissions from a new or modified facility exceed State thresholds, the increase shall be offset. New businesses and/or tenants of the facility shall consult directly with the MBUAPCD for permitting requirements and compliance with air quality standards.

Implementation Party: Applicant/Owner/Developers of each future development site Enforcement Agency: City of King
Timing: Measures to be implemented during development stage of the project.

Implementation Responsibility: Cost and materials are responsibility of Applicant/Owner Mitigation Measure No. 5.a, 5.b, 5.c, 5.d: Cultural Resources: In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, archaeological resources, paleontological resources or historical resources on the project site, if said resources are found during excavation or construction, work will be halted at a minimum of 30 feet from the find and the area will be staked off. There shall be no further excavation m disturbance of the site -or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie cultural resources, paleontological resources, historical resources or, in the case of adjacent human remains until the coroner of Monterey County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. A qualified professional (to be hired by the applicant and accepted by the City) in cultural resources, paleontological resources or historical resources shall evaluate the resources discovered at the site and provide recommendations for disposition of those resources. In the case of human remains, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent ("MLD•J from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the 40 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097 .98. The landowner or it's authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or it's authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner."
From the California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistance Series #1, California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA ") and Historical Resources:
a. To the extent that unique archaeological resources are not preserved in place or not left in an undisturbed state, mitigation measures shall be required as provided in this subdivision. The project applicant shall provide a guarantee to the lead agency to pay one half the estimated cost of mitigating the significant effects of the project on unique archaeological resources. In determining payment, the lead agency shall give due consideration to the in-kind value of project design or expenditures that are intended to permit any or all archaeological resources or California Native American culturally significant sites to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. When a final decision is made to carry out or approve the project, the lead agency shall, if necessary, reduce the specified mitigation measures to those which can be funded with the money guaranteed by the project applicant plus the money voluntarily guaranteed by any other person or persons for those mitigation purposes. In order to allow time for interested persons to provide the funding guarantee referred to in this subdivision, a final decision to carry out or approve a project shall not occur sooner than sixty (60) days after completion of the recommended special environmental impact report required by this section.
b. Excavation as mitigation shall be restricted to those parts of the unique archaeological resource that would be damaged or destroyed by the project. Excavation as mitigation shall not be required for a unique archaeological resource if the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource, if this determination is documented in the environmental impact report.

Implementation Party: Applicant/Owner/Developers of each future development site Enforcement Agency: City of King
Timing: Primarily during the grading portion of the project, including the excavation of foundations, pipelines, underground utilities and other similar excavation.

Implementation Responsibility: Cost and materials are responsibility of Applicant/Owner Mitigation Measure 8.c, 8.d 8.e 8.f Stormwater Pollution Prevention:

Stormwater and water quality protection: Developers shall be required to meet all measures for stormwater pollution control, waste management, and provide public utility connections that comply with the City and other service providers. The United State Environmental Protection Agency has promulgated regulations requiring permits for stormwater discharges from small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). The City of King is an MS4 and therefore projects within the City shall meet the standards established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Since impermeable surfaces (such as paving and buildings) as well as bare unvegetated soil greatly increases runoff and the potential for erosion and pollution of waters within streams and the Salinas River, mitigation measures have been deemed necessary to reduce runoff and increase percolation within the urban area of the City.

Development in the City will be required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs), including erosion and sediment control, during construction and grading and include Low Impact Development (LID) design practices in the design and layout of the RrQject. According to the RWQCB, LID "is an effective approach to managing stormwater to minimize the adverse effects of urbanization and development on watershed processes and beneficial uses resulting from changes in stormwater runoff conditions. LID strategies can achieve significant reductions in pollutant loading and runoff volumes as well as greatly enhanced groundwater recharge rates. The 41 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
proper implementation of LID techniques results in greater benefits than single purpose stormwater and flood control infrastructure."
Therefore, controlling urban runoff pollution by using a combination of onsite source control and LID BMPs augmented with treatment control BMPs before the runoff enters the MS4 is important and will be required of each development project (unless specifically exempted by the RWQCB). Also, according to the RWQCB, "the risks associated with infiltration can be properly managed by many techniques, including: 1) designing landscape drainage features that promote infiltration of runoff, but do not "inject" runoff (injection bypasses the natural processes of filtering and transformation that occur in the soil), 2) taking reasonable steps to prevent the illegal disposal of wastes, 3) protecting footings and foundations, and 4) ensuring that each drainage feature is adequately maintained in perpetuity. However, In some circumstances, site conditions (e.g., historical soil contamination) and the type of development (i.e., urban infill) can limit the feasibility of retaining, infiltrating, and reusing stormwater at sites. " {Source: RESOLUTION NO. R3-2013-0032, APPROVING POSTCONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN THE CENTRAL COAST REGION, Central Coast R�gional Water Quality Control Board.) The City Engineer shall review each project, unless exempted by the RWQCB, to assure compliance with these requirements, Including the RWQCB "POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN THE CENTRAL COAST REGION." These RWQCB standards include BMPs for erosion and sedi.ment control during project construction and after completion of the project. LID measures include, but are not limited to: i) limiting disturbance of creeks and natural drainage features, minimizing compaction of highly permeable soils, limiting removal of native vegetation at the site to the minimum area needed to build the project, limiting impermeable surfaces, including buildings and paving, and the use of innovative design layout that further increases permeable surfaces and landscaping.

Development shall minimize stormwater runoff by implementing one or more of the following site design measures identified by the RWQCB:
(1) Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse (2) Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code
(3) Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code (4) Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas safely away from building foundations and footings, consistent with California building code (5) Construct bike lanes, driveways, uncovered parking lots, sidewalks, walkways, and patios with permeable surfaces
(6) The directing of runoff to bioretention basins,
(7) Other similar measures as determined by the City Engineer.

Implementation Party: Applicant/Owner/Developers of each future development site Enforcement Agency: State of California & City of King
Timing: Prior to grading, during grading, during construction and on-going after completion of project Implementation Responsibility: Cost and materials are responsibility of Applicant/Owner 42 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Attachment A
This Mitigated Negatlve Declaration Includes by reference:

Coast Corridor Improvements
Record of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
From Salinas, CA to San Luis Obispo, CA
SCH# 2012081045
Prepared by the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration and the
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
In Cooperation with the
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
and the
California Department of Transportation, Division of Rall and Mass Transportation November 2015
Copies of the OOT's Final Program EIS/EIR will be available at www.slocog.org and the following locations:

San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Office
1114 Marsh Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-781-4219
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
55-B Plaza Circle
Salinas, CA 93901
831-775-0903
43 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Attachment B
Final Amended Housing Element
(File available at City Hall Community Development Dept.) 44 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Attachment C
Final Amended Land Use Element
(File available at City Hall Community Development Dept.) 45 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Attachment D
Final Amended Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
(File available at City Hall Community Development Dept.) 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Amendments to General Plan Housing Element, Land Use Element and Conservation/Open Space/Safety Element
Attachment E

CORRESPONDENCE
47 Item No. 9 (F)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: OCTAVIO HURTADO, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY

ENGINEER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF FY 2025-26 RMRA FUNDING

ALLOCATION, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF FINDING OF A
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301

OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council: 1) adopt a Resolution designating street projects for revenues from SB 1 - The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 for FY 2025-26; and 4) adopt a finding of a categorical exemption, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.

BACKGROUND:

On May 27, 2025, Council adopted a Resolution designating street projects for revenues from SB 1 - The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 for FY 2025-26, approved the FY 2025-26 Street Improvement Projects, and approved a tentative 5-year plan for future street projects. The Resolution indicated the City proposes to carry over fiscal year 2025-26 funds into fiscal year 2026-27 but failed to indicate the specific project that will be utilizing FY2025-26 RMRA funds.

The State requires the City to specifically designate the projects proposed to be funded with SB 1 funding. The window for submitting proposed SB 1 expenditures for FY 2025-26 ends June 30, 2025 with a second deadline to submit of October 1, 2025. Updated Measure X and SB 1 revenue figures have been received for FY 2025-26.

DISCUSSION:

The staff report indicated the proposed projects and funding sources. The list of projects approved at the May 27, 2025 council meeting will remain the same and

CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF FY 2025-26 RMRA FUNDING ALLOCATION,

INCLUDING ADOPTION OF FINDING OF A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
PAGE 2 OF 3
are listed in the cost analysis. The new resolution will clearly identify the proposed project to utilize FY 2025-26 RMRA funds as required by RMRA guidelines.

The proposed project for this funding is repaving of Broadway Street from Russ Street to San Antonio Drive. The purposes of the delay are: 1) to schedule the project paving subsequent to the installation of the roundabouts, bike paths and other pedestrian improvements; and 2) accumulate enough funding to complete the entire segment.

COST ANALYSIS:

The current balance of SB 1 funds is $666,163 and Measure X is $1,299,245.

The projected funds from SB 1 in FY 2025-26 are $372,982, the projected funds from Measure X are $529,950, and the projected funds from RSTP Fair Share are $30,000.

The following are projected funding sources and expenditures for the programmed projects:

FY Project SB 1 Measure X RSTP
CDBG
25-26 CDBG
Project.
2025-26
Slurry
Project
Sidewalk
Project
$280,000
$180,000
$3,084,112
26-27 Broadway
St
$372,982 (25/26)
$372,982 (26/27)
$529,950 (25/26)
$529,950 (26/27)
$30,000 (25/26)
$30,000 (26/27)
27-28 N Third
Street.

Sidewalk
Repairs
$361,372 $503,120
$50,000
$30,000
28-29 Metz
Road –
San
Antonio
Rd to city
$372,214 $514,182 $30,000

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-5059

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KING ADOPTING A LIST OF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 FUNDED BY
SB 1: THE ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; and WHEREAS, SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of King City are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the City of King must adopt by resolution a list of projects proposed to receive fiscal year funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB 1, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and WHEREAS, the City of King, will receive an estimated $372,982 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2025-26 from SB 1; and
WHEREAS, this is the eighth year in which the City of King is receiving SB 1 funding and will enable the City to continue essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, repairing and replacing aging bridges, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB 1; and WHEREAS, the City used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the community’s priorities for transportation investment; and WHEREAS, the funding from SB 1 will help the City maintain and rehabilitate roads in the City that are in tremendous need of rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, the City has many streets in poor condition and this revenue will help the City establish an ongoing pavement management program that will significantly increase the overall quality of its road system over the next decade; and
WHEREAS, the SB 1 project list and overall investment in the City’s local street and road infrastructure will improve safety, road conditions, appearance of the City, and reduce future costs by enabling the City to maintain its street system in a more efficient manner.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the City Council of the City of King, State of California, as follows:

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

2. The following list of newly proposed projects will be funded in-part or solely with Fiscal Year 2025-26 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues:

Project Title: Broadway Street
Project Description: Street reconstruction
Project Location: Broadway Street from Russ Street to San Antonio Drive Estimated Project Schedule: Start (07/26)– Completion (06/27) based on the component being funded with RMRA funds
Estimated Project Useful Life: 20 years

3. The City proposes to carry over fiscal year 2025-26 funds into fiscal year 2026-27.

This resolution was passed and adopted this 9
th day of September, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES, Council Members:

NAYS, Council Members:

ABSENT, Council Members:

ABSTAIN, Council Members:

APPROVED:
______________________________
Mike LeBarre, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Erica Sonne, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Roy Santos, City Attorney
Item No. 9 (G)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH INFOSEND FOR

THE PRINTING AND MAILING OF THE CITY SEWER BILLS
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council 1) adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an agreement with Infosend for the printing and mailing of the City sewer bills; and 2) appropriate $24,000 from the Sewer Fund for the increased cost.

BACKGROUND:

For years the City has contracted with Cal Water to include the sewer fees with their water bills. Therefore, the City has never had the need for a Utility Billing Module as part of the financial suite of products.

In late 2024, Cal Water notified the City that effective September 30, 2025, Cal Water will no longer include the City sewer fees as part of the monthly water bills.

For the first time the City is now faced with producing utility bills for sewer services.

In November 2024, the City Council authorized the purchase of the Tyler Technologies Utility Billing Module, which will be integrated with the new ERP Pro 10 financial system. Staff have been working with Tyler Technologies to build the new system in order for the City to start the process and ensure we are able to begin billing in October 2025.

DISCUSSION:

With City Council’s approval of the Utility Billing Module, staff have been working with Tyler Technologies to build and implement the new Utility Billing System. As a part of that system, staff have worked with Infosend for the printing and mailing of the monthly sewer bills. Infosend is also the same company that prints and mails the utility bills for the City of Soledad and City of Gonzales. Infosend has

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-5060

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KING AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH INFOSEND FO RTHE

PRINTING AND MAILING OF THE CITY SEWER BILLS
WHEREAS, in late 2024 Cal Water notified that after several years Cal Water would no longer provide billing services for the City sewer charges with the Cal Water water bills; and WHEREAS, in November the City Council approved the purchase of the Tyler Technologies Utility Billing Module; and
WHEREAS, the City has received a quote and agreement from Infosend for the printing and mailing of the city sewer bills; and
WHEREAS, the Infosend agreement will have an approximate cost of $2,000 monthly or $24,000 annually depending on the number of bill produced on a monthly basis.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of King hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute agreement with Infosend for the printing and mailing of the city sewer bills. All costs associated with the agreement will be charged to the Sewer Enterprise Fund.

This resolution was passed and adopted this 9
th day of September 2025 by the following vote:

AYES, Council Members:

NAYS, Council Members:

ABSENT, Council Members:

ABSTAIN, Council Members:

APPROVED:

Mike LeBarre, Mayor
ATTEST:

Erica Sonne, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Roy Santos, City Attorney
EXHIBIT 1

Item No. 9 (H)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF PARTICIPATION IN THE SECONDARY

MANUFACTURERS OPIOID SETTLEMENT
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute forms necessary to participate in the opioid settlement with eight opioid manufacturers, including Alvogen, Amneal, Apotex, Hikma, Indivior, Mylan, Sun, and Zydus (the “Secondary Manufacturers”).

BACKGROUND:

At the December 14, 2021 meeting, the City Council approved participating in national opioid settlements, which included McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and AmerisourceBergen Corporation (“Distributors”) and Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. (“Manufacturer”). The settlements totaling $26 billion were designed to bring needed relief to people who have struggled with opioid addiction. Cities were provided the option of participating and receiving a portion of the funds distributed through the State of California, participating and allocating the funds to the County, or not participating. At the February 28, 2023 meeting, the City Council then approved participating in additional settlements with Teva, Allergan, CVS, Walgreens and Walmart. On July 9, 2024, the City Council approved participating in the settlement with Kroger Co. At the August 12, 2025 meeting, the City Council also approved participating in an additional national settlement with Purdue/Sacklers.

Last year, Attorney General Bonta announced proposed multistate settlements with the Secondary Manufacturers for up to $806 million. California stands to receive up to $70 million in abatement funding from these settlements. Like with earlier settlements, local government support and sign-on is required to maximize the amount coming to our communities and eligible cities may elect to

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF PARTICIPATION IN THE SECONDARY

MANUFACTURERS OPIOID SETTLEMENT
SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
PAGE 2 OF 3
receive direct payment or have their allocated share go to the county in which they are located. The majority of abatement funds (85%) will go directly to cities and counties, and any funds left on the table go back to the Secondary Manufacturers.

DISCUSSION:

Staff has set up a portal with the settlement administrators and the City received a number of small annual payments that will continue over an 18-year period.

The Purdue settlement will be issued over a 15-year period.

Funds must be used for activities to: 1) address the misuse and abuse of opioid products; 2) treat or mitigate opioid use or related disorders; or 3) mitigate other alleged effects of, including on those injured as a result of, the opioid epidemic.

The City is utilizing the funding to help cover a small portion of costs associated with the contract with Sun Street Centers for the diversion program and other local drug prevention efforts.

Given the small amount of the City’s allocations, staff have been uncertain whether it has been worth the administrative time associated with processing the payments and complying with the settlement requirements. However, since the City is already participating, staff recommend joining the new settlements. This will result in a minor increase in revenues and will not create a meaningful amount of additional work since the process should be consistent with the other settlements. The City has participated in enough settlements now that it adds up to a helpful amount of revenue.

COST ANALYSIS:

The amount of this settlement to King City is projected to be less than $10,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

This action is not a “project” for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change to the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. No further action is required under CEQA for City Council action.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for City Council consideration:

EXHIBIT 1

Item No. 9 (I)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION FOR EMERGENCY

OPERATIONS PLAN UPDATE AND CICLOVIA EVENT
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council: 1) appropriate $30,000 for consultant services to prepare an update to the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to be funded from an approved grant; 2) appropriate $7,500 for the Ciclovia event to be funded from approved sponsorships; and 3) appropriate additional funds for Ciclovia equal to any additional sponsorships received.

BACKGROUND:

The City has received approval of a grant from the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) for $30,000 for consultant services to update the City’s EOP and to add a cybersecurity response plan. Staff have selected the consultant to prepare the update of the EOP, and proposals have been received from firms for the cybersecurity response plan.

Staff are also working on planning for the 2025 Ciclovia event to take place on October 19th, which involves soliciting sponsorships. Thus far, the City has received commitments from the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC), Ecology Action, and Mee Memorial Healthcare System.

DISCUSSION:

It is necessary for City Council to approve and appropriate the grant and sponsorship revenues so staff can issue payments for the associated expenses.

Work to solicit sponsorships for Ciclovia is still under way. Therefore, staff also recommend approving any future sponsorship revenue received so additional appropriations will not be necessary.

Item No. 9 (J)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF ECOLOGY ACTION AGREEMENT TO

RELANDSCAPE THE BROADWAY CIRCLE ROUNDABOUT
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council: 1) authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Ecology Action for a relandscaping project at the Broadway Circle roundabout; and 2) approve the proposed design.

BACKGROUND:

The landscaping at the roundabout at Broadway Circle is composed of grass, trees and a fountain feature. The turf requires a large amount of water for irrigation. It also deters visitors from utilizing the landscaped area because it is often wet and difficult to walk on. As a result, staff have proposed to relandscape the site.

Unfortunately, the project was deferred due to funding constraints in the FY 2025-26/ FY 2026-27 Biennial Budget. The City now has an opportunity to complete the project at no cost due to a proposal from Ecology Action and King City in Bloom.

DISCUSSION:

Ecology Action recently relandscaped the Canal Street median through a grant program they have to replace turf with drought tolerant landscaping. They provide the design at no cost, work is performed by the California Conservation Corp, and the City is only responsible for paying for supplies. The City has received compliments for the Canal Street median project, and staff is pleased with the design and outcome.

In the case of Broadway Circle, King City in Bloom has proposed to sponsor the project so it can move forward despite the City’s budget constraints. The

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF ECOLOGY ACTION AGREEMENT TO RELANDSCAPE

THE BROADWAY CIRCLE ROUNDABOUT
SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
PAGE 2 OF 3
Ecology Action grant program is about to expire, so there is a limited opportunity to complete the project through this cost-effective option.

The proposed design will maintain turf around the perimeter of the roundabout.

The central area will include drought tolerant plants and decomposed granite (DG) walking paths leading to the existing fountain feature. King City in Bloom is in discussions with the King City Rotary Club regarding a funding contribution.

Therefore, they have asked for consideration of the addition of a potential small recognition marker.

Item No. 10 (A)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DOREEN LIBERTO, AICP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING

TEMPORARY USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council introduce to be read by title only an Ordinance amending Chapter 7.60 of Title 7 of the King City Municipal Code pertaining to temporary use Permit requirements.

BACKGROUND:

At the September 24, 2024 meeting, staff presented a summary of issues and recommendations involving food trucks in response to inquiries that have been received. One of the issues identified is that the City allows food trucks on a temporary basis with a temporary use permit (TUP), but the requirements are not clearly identified in the Municipal Code. Therefore, staff were directed to prepare an Ordinance that would more clearly establish standard requirements.

DISCUSSION:

The proposed Ordinance will amend the TUP Ordinance to set forth the process, locations allowed, time allowed for operation, and the number of days operation is allowed. Staff have not received additional inquiries or experienced other issues since the discussion with City Council
COST ANALYSIS:

There are no costs associated with staff’s recommendation.

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-837

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KING, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 7.60 OF TITLE 7 OF

THE KING CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, TEMPORARY USE AND

SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS
WHEREAS, the City of King (“City”) is authorized by the California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7 to make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; and
WHEREAS, the City of King establishes regulations regarding a temporary use permit (TUP) and special event permit (SEP) to regulate those uses and activities of a temporary nature that may affect the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, issues have been identified involving use of food trucks that require clarification.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KING FINDS AND ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are all true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings.

SECTION 2. The Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that it will have a significant effect on the environment. (CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3).) Further, the adoption and implementation of this Ordinance is not a project, as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15378, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, either directly or indirectly, and is therefore not subject to environmental review under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(3).

SECTION 3. The Sub-Section of Chapter 7.60, Section 7.60.020 of the King City Municipal code is hereby amended to read as follows; all other portions of Chapter 7.60 remain in full force and effect.

Section 7.60.020. Definitions
The following definitions shall apply to this chapter:
“Applicant” means any person, firm, association, corporation, organization, club or ad hoc committee who or which seeks a temporary use permit from the city through the community development director, or a special event permit from the city, through the chief of police, to conduct or sponsor events governed by this chapter. An applicant must be eighteen years of age or older.

The applicant shall be the individual who is directly responsible for organizing and/or conducting the temporary use or special event and/or the facility manager. -2-
“Assembly” means any meeting, demonstration, picket line, rally, gathering, or group of one hundred or more persons, animals, or vehicles, or a combination thereof, having a common purpose, design, or goal, upon any public street, sidewalk, alley, park, or other public place, which assembly substantially inhibits the usual flow of pedestrian or vehicular travel or which occupies any public area, other than a parade, as defined in this section.
“Bounce house” means temporary inflatable structures, buildings and similar items, such as inflatable trampolines, inflatable waterslides, bouncy houses, bouncy castles, moon bounce, and moonwalks.
“Chief building official” means the building and safety director or designee. “Chief of police” means the police chief or designee.
“Circus” means any transient, travelling, or transportable show or exhibition where a variety of performances by acrobats, clowns, and/or trained animals and restricted animals are a substantial attraction or principle business.
“City clerk” means the city clerk of the city or designee. “City manager” means the city manager of the city or authorized deputy or designee. “Commercial filming use” means and includes all activity attendant to staging or shooting commercial motion pictures, television programs, or commercials. “Community development director” means the community development director or designee. “Entertainment” means providing to the public food and/or beverages; live or recorded music; dancing; mechanical, animal or carnival rides; games of chance; performances and/or plays; animal or restricted animal performances; audiovisual presentations; amplified sound; competitive or sporting events; and/or promotional events.
“Event” means uses subject to either a temporary use permit or special event permit. “Event sponsor” means any person, entity, business, or group who operates or conducts, or shares in the revenue of, an event subject to this chapter.
“Extraordinary police services” means responsive police services which are in addition to and in excess of the normal police services provided to the facility or off-site as a direct result of the event at the facility.
“Facility” means the building, room, location or place where the special event is to take place. “Farmers market” or “seasonal sale of agricultural goods” means certified farmers’ markets as California agricultural point of sale locations for the purposes of California Food and Agricultural Code Section 47004(a) as may be amended. Generally, this is a multi-stall market location where certified California farmers sell fresh products that they have grown and harvested themselves -3-
directly to consumers who intend to consume the products. It may also include meat and dairy products.
“Fee” means the nonrefundable fee to be paid by the permit applicant at the time the application is filed for a temporary use permit or special event permit per a fee schedule approved by the city council addressing the actual costs of processing the applications. “Food cart” means a mobile kitchen that is set up on the street to facilitate the sale and marketing of street food to people from local pedestrian traffic. “Manufactured home” means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities.
“Open air market” means any outdoor place, in an approved location, or for an approved activity where new or used goods or secondhand personal property is offered for sale or exchange to the general public by a multitude of individual licensed vendors, usually in compartmentalized spaces.

The “open air market” is interchangeable with and applicable to: swap meet, flea markets, auctions, or other similarly named or labeled activities; but the term does not include farmers markets, supermarket or department store retail operations.
“Open to the public” means an event not limited to invitees and otherwise open to any member of the public with or without an admission fee or charge.
“Parade” means any march, demonstration, procession, motorcade, or promenade consisting of persons, animals, or vehicles, or a combination thereof, having a common purpose, design, destination, or goal, upon any public place, which parade, march, demonstration, procession, motorcade, or promenade does not comply with normal and usual traffic regulations or control. “Public benefit” means if the nonprofit provides a benefit to the public generally, or a sufficient section of the public, of a type acceptable to the city to promote public health, safety or welfare. “Push cart” means any of the various types of wheeled light cart to be pushed by hand, as one used by street vendors.
“Recreational vehicle” means a vehicle which is: (1) built on a single chassis; (2) four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection; (3) designed to be selfpropelled or permanently towable by a light-duty truck; and (4) designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.
“Responsible party” means, for the purpose of determining liability for damage to city or public facilities as a result of a special event and liability for the cost of extraordinary police services, any person or entity (including those who caused the damage, as well as those acting in a supervisory capacity or hosting the event including applicant(s), event sponsor(s), and/or promoter(s) and/or facility operator(s) and their respective designees) responsible for creating, causing, committing, or contributing to said damage.
-4-
“Restricted animal” means those animals listed in Fish and Game Code Section 2119 and Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 671 et seq. “Security officer” means a state-licensed uniform security guard, or off-duty law enforcement. “Sidewalk sales” means a retail event in which a group of four or more merchants within a defined business district is allowed to display merchandise for sale outside of the merchants’ places of business during normal business hours.
“Small photography shoot” means the act of taking photos where: (1) three or fewer persons are engaged in the staging or shooting of photographs or operating the photography equipment, not including the subjects of the shoot; (2) the photographer uses no more than three pieces of photography equipment; (3) the photography equipment used is of a size and weight that each piece can be carried by one person; and (4) the entire production is finished in one calendar day. “Special event” means an event sponsored by any person, entity, business or group including at any special event venue or public right-of-way within the city and open to the public. “Temporary food trucks” mean a large vehicle equipped with facilities for cooking and selling of food.
“Temporary portable storage container” means any temporary structure that is a reusable, enclosed, or open vessel, cargo container or truck trailer which is used for the storage of freight, articles, goods, solid waste, personal belongings, commodities, or similar uses, including metal cargo containers, steel cargo containers, shipping containers, freight containers, portable storage containers, ISO containers, cargo boxes or sea vans.
“Temporary use” means temporary utilization of property for a special, unique or limited duration not otherwise either authorized by this code or permits granted for uses normally operated on that property.

SECTION 4. The Sub-Section of Chapter 7.60, Section 7.60.040 of the King City Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows; all other portions of Chapter 7.60 remain in full force and effect:

Section 7.60.040. Uses requiring temporary use permit.
(a) Temporary Use Permit Required. A temporary use permit shall be required for any temporary use(s) not expressly exempt pursuant to this chapter or which are specifically authorized by this code.
(b) Temporary Assembly (e.g., Circuses, Carnivals, Rodeos, Open Air Market). Temporary assemblies shall require a temporary use permit. Those temporary assemblies that are traveling amusements shall be limited to not more than fifteen days, or more than three weekends, of operation in any one-hundred-eighty-day period. If adjacent to residential uses, issues such as noise and traffic shall be evaluated to determine incompatible impacts on a residential neighborhood. If incompatible impacts are identified which cannot be resolved, the application may be denied.
-5-
Adequate provisions for traffic circulation, off-street parking and pedestrian safety shall be provided to the satisfaction of the community development director including accommodations for deliveries and employee parking. Restroom facilities shall be provided.

All lighting for temporary assemblies shall be directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way. Noise attenuation for generators and carnival rides shall be provided to the satisfaction of the community development director and be consistent with the city’s noise standards. All food preparation areas shall be inspected by the Monterey County Health Department and obtain an active permit prior to operating the event. (c) Temporary Food Trucks. Temporary food trucks shall apply for a temporary use permit.

Food trucks shall be parked on private property from which operators sell prepared food and beverages to the public (hereafter “food trucks”) shall comply with the following conditions and requirements:
(1) Property Owner Consent. A signed letter shall be submitted with the temporary use permit application from the property owner allowing the location of a temporary food truck.
(2) Approval Restrictions. Temporary food trucks are allowed at a single location for up to 180 days per calendar year with an additional 180 days extension, which must be approved by the community development director. A request for extension beyond the 180 days must be submitted to the community development department at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the 180 days. Food trucks are allowed to operate a maximum of two days a week. Food trucks shall not operate for more than five (5) hours per site per day.
(3) Each business is allowed one temporary use permit. After the approved temporary use permit expires, food trucks cannot relocated to another area and ask for a new temporary use permit.
(4) Food trucks shall only operate between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. (5) Registration. Food trucks shall be registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles and shall be permitted by the Monterey County Environmental Health Division, and operators shall possess a valid City of King business license and food vendors permit.
(6) Locations. Food trucks shall be permitted only in commercial zoning districts. Food trucks shall be permitted only on developed sites with existing occupied or unoccupied buildings permitted for commercial, industrial or public and semipublic uses. Food truck operations, including seating areas but excluding customer parking, shall not utilize more than ten (10%) percent of on-site parking spaces. (7) Rubbish. Food trucks shall maintain trash receptacles on-site and pick up any trash left on-site prior to ceasing daily operations.

SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE.
-6-
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) calendar days after its final passage and adoption. Within fifteen (15) calendar days after its adoption, the Ordinance, or a summary of the Ordinance, shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced by the City Council after waiving reading, except by Title, at a regular meeting thereof held on the _____ day of _________________ 2025, and adopted the Ordinance after the second reading at a regular meeting held on the ____ day of _______________ 2025, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST
ERICA SONNE, City Clerk

CITY OF KING
By:

MIKE LEBARRE, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

ROY C. SANTOS, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
I, ______________________________, City Clerk of the City of King, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of the Ordinance passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of King on the date and by the vote indicated herein.

Item No. 11 (A)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE CITY AND CDA
SUCCESSOR AGENCY’S AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council and the Board of Directors of the King City CDA Successor Agency accept the City and CDA Successor Agency’s Audited Financial Statements for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024.

BACKGROUND:

The State of California Government code (sections 25250 & 25253) require all general-purpose local government to issue an annual report on the financial position and activities of that government. The report must be presented in conformance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and must be audited by an independent firm of certified public accountants (CPA) in conformance with generally accepted auditing standards (GAGAS). The goal of the audit by an independent firm is to provide reasonable assurance that the accounting transactions, practices, and procedures result in fair presentation of the financial position of the organization. In addition, the audit provides the same type of assurance about management’s assertions about the adequacy of internal accounting controls to safeguard the assets of the entities.

DISCUSSION:

The independent auditor has rendered an unqualified audit opinion indicating that the City and Successor Agency are materially in compliance and have accounting records that properly reflect the financial position of those entities.

The final numbers for FY 2023-24 demonstrate continued positive movement for the City, particularly in the General Fund. The General Fund ended the Fiscal Year with an increase to the Fund Balance of $1,839,318. This is due to the receipt of several grants in FY 2023-24, which were expended in FY 2024-25.

CITY OF KING CITY
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
AND

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2024
EXHIBIT 1

C O N T E N T S
Page
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT 1 – 3
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:

Government-Wide Financial Statements
Statement of Net Position 4
Statement of Activities 5
Fund Financial Statements
Balance Sheet – Governmental Funds 6
Reconciliation of Total Governmental Fund Balance to
Net Position of Governmental Activities 7
Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in
Fund Balance – Governmental Funds 8
Reconciliation of Statement of Revenue, Expenditures
and Changes in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds
to the Statement of Activities 9
Statement of Net Position – Proprietary Funds 10
Statement of Revenue, Expense and Changes in Fund Net
Position – Proprietary Funds 11
Statement of Cash Flow – Proprietary Funds 12 – 13
Statement of Fiduciary Net Position – Private-Purpose
Trust Fund – Successor Agency 14
Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position – Private-Purpose Trust Fund – Successor Agency 15
Notes to Basic Financial Statements 16 – 44
C O N T E N T S (Continued)
Page
Required Supplementary Information
Budgetary Comparison Schedule – General Fund 45
Budgetary Comparison Schedule – American Rescue Plan Act 46 Budgetary Comparison Schedule – Gas Tax Fund 47
Budgetary Comparison Schedule – Measure X Fund 48
Schedule of the City’s Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability 49 Schedule of Contributions 50
Supplemental Only Information
Combining Balance Sheet – Nonmajor
Governmental Funds 51 – 54
Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balance – Nonmajor
Governmental Funds 55 – 58
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL

OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER

MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS 59 – 60 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE FOR

EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM GUIDANCE 61 – 63
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 64
Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 65
Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 66
Summary Schedule of Prior Audit Findings 67
BRYANT L. JOLLEY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Bryant L. Jolley C.P.A.

Ryan P. Jolley C.P.A.

Darryl L. Smith C.P.A.

Luis A. Perez C.P.A.

Lan T. Kimoto
901 “N” STREET, SUITE 104 FIREBAUGH, CALIFORNIA 93622 PHONE 559.659.3045 FAX 559.659.0615 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of King City, California
Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements
Opinions
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of King City (the “City”), California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2024, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City, as of June 30, 2024, and the respective changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinions
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions.

Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the City’s ability to continue as a going concern for twelve months beyond the financial statement date, including any currently known information that may raise substantial doubt shortly thereafter.
2 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinions.

Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements.

In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, we:
 Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit.  Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.  Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements.  Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the City’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time.

We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control-related matters that we identified during the audit.

Required Supplementary Information
Management has omitted the management’s discussion and analysis that accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require to be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such missing information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. Our opinion on the basic financial statements is not affected by this missing information.

Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the budgetary comparison information on pages 45–48 and the Schedule of the City’s Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability and the Schedule of Contributions pages 49 and 50 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. 3 Supplementary Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements. The accompanying combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and schedule of expenditures of federal awards, as required by Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and the schedule of expenditures of federal awards are fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.

Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated August 26, 2025, on our consideration of the City’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering City’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance.

August 26, 2025
See accompanying notes. 4

CITY OF KING CITY

STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
JUNE 30, 2024
Governmental Business-Type
Activities Activities Total
ASSETS
Cash and investments 7,518,273 $ 9,410,537 $ 16,928,810 $ Restricted cash and investments - 5,668 5,668
Accounts receivable 64,125 286,454 350,579
Due from other governments 4,445,770 - 4,445,770
Interest receivable 1,062,200 39,400 1,101,600
Notes receivable 3,000,000 - 3,000,000
Capital assets (net of allowance
for depreciation and amortization) 13,783,741 17,600,107 31,383,848 Total assets 23,525,800 33,690,475 57,216,275
DEFERRED OUTFLOW OF RESOURCES 508,047 3,273,622 3,781,669

LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued expenses 1,178,159 127,060 1,305,219 Accrued interest - 25,911 25,911
Deposits 400,869 - 400,869
Noncurrent liabilities
Due within one year 149,380 337,054 486,434
Due in more than one year 551,248 4,039,403 4,590,651
Compensated absences 720,989 - 720,989
Lease liability 13,148 25,433 38,581
Net pension liability 808,927 7,496,249 8,305,176
Total liabilities 5,363,788 10,510,042 15,873,830
DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES 34,198 316,913 351,111

NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets 16,899,479 9,407,284 26,306,763 Restricted for debt service - 5,668 5,668
Restricted for capital projects 4,871,522 - 4,871,522
Restricted for long-term notes receivable 3,000,000 - 3,000,000 Restricted for specific projects and programs 630,089 - 630,089 Unrestricted (deficit) 9,222,909 736,052 9,958,961
Total net position $ 18,635,861 26,137,142 $ 44,773,003 $ See accompanying notes. 5
CITY OF KING CITY STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Operating Capital
Charges for Grants and Grants and Governmental Business-Type Expense Services Contributions Contributions Activities Activities Total Primary Government
Governmental activities
General government $ 364,243 2,197,352 $ 1,776,344 $ 356,562 $ 299,797 $ - $ 299,797 $ Public safety 6,582,792 152,976 263,770 - (6,166,046) - (6,166,046)Public works 4,714,549 20,232 3,422,675 38,775 (1,232,867) - (1,232,867)Culture and recreation 856,619 201,903 1,570 738,041 84,895 - 84,895Community development 2,156,154 306,046 565,412 - (1,284,696) - (1,284,696)Debt service Interest expense - 25,493 - - (25,493) - (25,493)
Total governmental activities 1,045,400 16,532,959 6,029,771 1,133,378 (8,324,410) - (8,324,410) Business-type activities
Sewer 3,265,938 3,979,964 - 1,801 - 715,827 715,827Power 5,426,913 5,123,704 - - - 303,209 303,209 Total business-type activities 9,406,877 8,389,642 - 1,801 - 1,019,036 1,019,036 Total primary government $ 10,452,277 24,922,601 $ 6,029,771 $ 1,135,179 $ (8,324,410) 1,019,036 (7,305,374) General Revenue
Property taxes - 1,518,840 1,518,840
Franchise taxes - 1,455,060 1,455,060
Sales taxes - 5,295,970 5,295,970
Transient occupancy taxes - 444,661 444,661Utility users tax - 536,660 536,660Business licenses - 304,789 304,789Motor vehicle in-lieu - 1,274,632 1,274,632 Investment income 346,015 457,335 803,350Gain on sale of property - 1,500 1,500Other revenues - 160,439 160,439Transfers (240,500) 240,500 - Total general revenue and transfers 105,515 11,690,386 11,795,901 Change in Net Position 1,124,551 3,365,976 4,490,527Net Position Beginning of year 17,511,310 22,771,166 40,282,476End of year $ 18,635,861 26,137,142 $ 44,773,003 $ Program Revenue Primary Government
Net Revenue/(Expense) and Changes in Net Position
Functions/Programs
See accompanying notes. 6
CITY OF KING CITY BALANCE SHEET – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2024 American Formerly Nonmajor Formerly Major Formerly Major Other Total Rescue Plan Gas Tax CDBG Development Governmental Governmental General Act HOME Grant Measure X Fund Grant Impact Fees Funds Funds ASSETS
Cash and investments 2,247,660 $ 371,659 $ - $ 529,678 $ - $ - - $ 4,369,276 $ 7,518,273 $ Accounts receivable 16,104 - - - - - - 48,021 64,125
Due from other governments 1,299,614 - - 141,721 1,031,595 - - 1,972,840 4,445,770 Interest receivable 18,892 - 1,020,000 2,256 - - - 21,052 1,062,200 Due from other funds 2,408,796 - - - - - - - 2,408,796
Notes receivable - - 3,000,000 - - - - - 3,000,000
Total assets $ 371,659 5,991,066 $ 4,020,000 $ 673,655 $ 1,031,595 $ - $ - $ 6,411,189 $ 18,499,164 $

LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES,
AND FUND BALANCEAccounts payable and accrued expense 584,264 $ 37,794 $ - $ 13,754 $ 153,101 $ - $ - $ 389,246 $ 1,178,159 $ Deposits 400,869 - - - - - - - 400,869
Due to other funds - - - - 773,229 - - 1,635,567 2,408,796 Total liabilities 37,794 985,133 - 13,754 926,330 - - 2,024,813 3,987,824 Deferred inflows of resources
Deferred loans - - 4,020,000 - - - - 1,411,029 5,431,029 Total deferred inflows of resources - - 4,020,000 - - - - 1,411,029 5,431,029

FUND BALANCE
Restricted
Circulation improvements - - - - 105,265 - - 1,026,774 1,132,039 Community services - - - - - - - 226,549 226,549
Capital improvement projects - 333,865 - 659,901 - - - 2,745,717 3,739,483 Public safety - - - - - - - 599,983 599,983
Landscape maintenance - - - - - - - 30,106 30,106
Unassigned - 5,005,933 - - - - - (1,653,782) 3,352,151
Total fund balance 5,005,933 333,865 - 659,901 105,265 - - 2,975,347 9,080,311 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balance $ 371,659 5,991,066 $ 4,020,000 $ 673,655 $ 1,031,595 $ - $ - $ 6,411,189 $ 18,499,164 $ Special Revenue Funds
See accompanying notes. 7

CITY OF KING CITY

RECONCILIATION OF TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL FUND BALANCE TO NET POSITION

OF GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
JUNE 30, 2024
Total governmental fund balances $ 9,080,311
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net position are different because:

Capital assets used in Governmental Activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the governmental funds 17,600,107 Certain revenues in Governmental Funds are deferred because they are not collected within the prescribed time period after fiscal year end.

Those revenues are recognized on the accrual basis in Governmental Activities 5,431,029
Net pension liability applicable to Governmental Activities are not due and payable in the current period and accordingly is not reportable in the Governmental Funds (7,496,249)
Deferred inflows/outflows of resources related to net pension liability, represent an acquisition/consumption of net position or fund balance that applies to future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow/outflow of resources (revenue/expenditure) until that time 2,956,709
Governmental long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the funds (713,776) Compensated absences are not due and payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the Governmental Funds (720,989) Net position of governmental activities $ 26,137,142
See accompanying notes. 8
CITY OF KING CITY STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 American Formerly NonMajor Formerly Major Formerly Major Other Total Rescue Plan Gas Tax CDBG Development Governmental Governmental General Act HOME Grant Measure X Fund Grant Impact Fees Funds Funds Revenue
Taxes 8,686,080 $ - $ - $ 566,522 $ 366,981 $ - $ - $ 556,892 $ 10,176,475 $ Intergovernmental 1,825,768 - - - 1,508,720 - - 2,029,448 5,363,936 Charges for services 19,854 - - - - - - 153,415 173,269 Licenses, permits and impact fees 1,253,884 - - - - - - 326,900 1,580,784 Fines and forfeitures 26,682 - - - - - - - 26,682
Interest and rent 149,051 43,765 - 25,137 347 - - 185,630 403,930 Other - 389,400 - - 44,462 - - 864 434,726
Total revenue 43,765 12,350,719 - 591,659 1,920,510 - - 3,253,149 18,159,802 Expenditures
Current
General government 1,432,272 468,414 - - - - - - 1,900,686Public safety 5,509,960 - - - - - - 686,236 6,196,196 Public works 1,176,631 - - 673,303 997,723 - - 1,358,386 4,206,043 Culture and recreation 741,386 - - - - - - - 741,386Community development 1,806,004 - - - - - - 409,985 2,215,989 Capital outlay 45,951 1,630,695 - - 1,337,982 - - 1,011,596 4,026,224Debt Service Principal 86,801 - - - 28,583 - - 57,532 172,916
Interest and fiscal charges - 17,374 - - 8,119 - - - 25,493 Total expenditures 2,099,109 10,816,379 - 673,303 2,372,407 - - 3,523,735 19,484,933 Revenue over/(under) expenditures 1,534,340 (2,055,344) - (81,644) (451,897) - - (270,586) (1,325,131) Other Financing Sources/(Uses)
Transfers in/(out) - net - 304,978 - - 475,000 - - (539,478) 240,500 Total other financing sources/(uses) - 304,978 - - 475,000 - - (539,478) 240,500 Change in Fund Balance (2,055,344) 1,839,318 - (81,644) 23,103 - - (810,064) (1,084,631)Fund Balance Beginning of year, previously stated 3,166,615 2,389,209 - 741,545 - 2,007,873 765,799 1,093,901 10,164,942Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) - - - - - (2,007,873) (765,799) 2,773,672 - Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) - - - - 82,162 - - (82,162) - Beginning of year, restated 2,389,209 3,166,615 - 741,545 82,162 - - 3,785,411 10,164,942 End of year $ 333,865 5,005,933 $ - $ 659,901 $ 105,265 $ - $ - $ 2,975,347 $ 9,080,311 $ Special Revenue Funds
See accompanying notes. 9

CITY OF KING CITY

RECONCILIATION OF STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN

FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Net change in fund balance - total governmental funds $ (1,084,631) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because:

Repayment of long-term debt and lease liabilities is an expenditure in the Governmental Funds, but the repayment reduces long-term liabilities in the Statement of Net Position 172,916 Revenues in the statement of activities that do no provide current financial resources are not reported as revenues in the funds 1,501,029
Governmental Funds report capital outlay as expenditures. However, in the Statement of Activities the cost of those assets are capitalized as an asset and depreciated over the period of service 4,026,224 Pension expenses reported in the Statement of Activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in the Governmental Funds (995)
Compensated absence costs in the Statement of Activities does not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, is not reported as expenditures in Governmental Funds (176,820) Depreciation and amortization expense on capital assets is reported in the Statement of Activities, but they do not require the use of current financial resources. Therefore, depreciation expense is not recorded as expenditures in Governmental Funds (1,071,747)
Change in net position of governmental activities $ 3,365,976 See accompanying notes. 10

CITY OF KING CITY
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION – PROPRIETARY FUND
JUNE 30, 2024
Sewer Community Power Total
ASSETS
Current assets
Cash and investments 9,116,169 $ 294,368 $ 9,410,537 $
Restricted cash and investments 5,668 - 5,668
Accounts receivable 286,454 - 286,454
Interest receivable - 39,400 39,400
Total current assets 294,368 9,447,691 9,742,059
Non-current assets
Property, plant and equipment
(net of allowance for depreciation and amortization) - 13,783,741 13,783,741 Total noncurrent assets - 13,783,741 13,783,741
Total assets 294,368 23,231,432 23,525,800
DEFERRED OUTFLOW OF RESOURCES - 508,047 508,047

LIABILITIES
Current liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued expense 127,060 - 127,060
Accrued interest 25,911 - 25,911
Current portion of long-term debt - 337,054 337,054
Total current liabilities - 490,025 490,025
Noncurrent Liabilities
Long-term debt 4,039,403 - 4,039,403
Lease liability 25,433 - 25,433
Net pension liability - 808,927 808,927
Total liabilities - 5,363,788 5,363,788
DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES - 34,198 34,198

NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets 9,407,284 - 9,407,284
Restricted for debt service 5,668 - 5,668
Unrestricted 294,368 8,928,541 9,222,909
Total net position $ 294,368 18,341,493 $ 18,635,861 $
Business-Type Activities - Enterprise Fund
See accompanying notes. 11

CITY OF KING CITY
STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSE, AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION –

PROPRIETARY FUND
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Sewer Community Power Total
Operating Revenue
Charges for services $ 5,426,913 3,979,964 $ 9,406,877 $ Total operating revenue 5,426,913 3,979,964 9,406,877
Operating Expense
Contractual services and utilities 1,193,473 5,036,360 6,229,833 Personnel 823,507 - 823,507
Supplies and materials 721,637 - 721,637
Depreciation and amortization - 402,859 402,859
Total operating expense 5,036,360 3,141,476 8,177,836
Operating income/(loss) 390,553 838,488 1,229,041
Nonoperating Revenue/(Expense)
Interest income 340,134 5,881 346,015
Interest expense (87,344) (124,462) (211,806)
Total nonoperating revenue/(expense) (81,463) 217,473 136,010 Net income/(loss) before transfers 1,055,961 309,090 1,365,051 Operating Transfers In/(Out) - (240,500) (240,500)
Change in Net Position 309,090 815,461 1,124,551
Net Position
Beginning of year (14,722) 17,526,032 17,511,310
End of year $ 294,368 18,341,493 $ 18,635,861 $
Business-Type Activities - Enterprise Fund
See accompanying notes. 12

CITY OF KING CITY

STATEMENT OF CASH FLOW - PROPRIETARY FUND
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Sewer Community Power Total
Operating Activities
Receipts from customers and users 3,931,639 $ 5,426,913 $ 9,358,552 $ Payments for contractual services and utilities (1,271,430) (5,411,208) (6,682,638) Payments to employees (408,324) - (408,324)
Payments to suppliers - (721,637) (721,637)
Net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities 15,705 1,530,248 1,545,953
Non-capital Financial Activities
Cash received from (paid to) other funds - (240,500) (240,500) Net cash provided by (used in)
noncapital financing activities - (240,500) (240,500)
Capital and Related Financing Activities
Principal paid on long-term debt and lease liabilities (322,085) - (322,085) Interest paid on long-term debt (87,344) (124,462) (211,806) Net cash provided by (used in)
capital and related financing activities (87,344) (444,746) (532,090) Investing Activities
Interest received 5,881 334,117 339,998
Net cash provided by (used in)
investing activities 5,881 334,117 339,998
Net Increase/(Decrease) in Cash (65,758) 1,179,119 1,113,361 Cash
Beginning of year 360,126 7,942,718 8,302,844
End of year $ 294,368 9,121,837 $ 9,416,205 $
Business-Type Activities - Enterprise Fund
See accompanying notes. 13

CITY OF KING CITY

STATEMENT OF CASH FLOW - PROPRIETARY FUND (CONTINUED)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Sewer Community Power Total
Reconciliation of Cash to Financial Statements
Cash and investments 9,116,169 $ 294,368 $ 9,410,537 $
Restricted cash and investments - 5,668 5,668
Total cash and investments $ 294,368 9,121,837 $ 9,416,205 $ Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Operating income (loss) 838,488 $ 390,553 $ 1,229,041 $ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss)
to net cash provided (used) by operating activities:

Depreciation and amortization 402,859 - 402,859
(Increase) Decrease in Deferred Outflow of Resources (287,807) - (287,807) (Increase) Decrease in Accounts Receivable (48,325) - (48,325) Increase (Decrease) in Deferred Inflows of Resources 23,558 - 23,558 Increase (Decrease) in Net Pension Liability 679,432 - 679,432 Increase (Decrease) in Accounts Payable
and Accrued Expense (374,848) (77,957) (452,805)
Net Cash Provided by/(Used in) Operating Activities $ 15,705 1,530,248 $ 1,545,953 $ Business-Type Activities - Enterprise Fund
See accompanying notes. 14

CITY OF KING CITY

STATEMENT OF FIDUCIARY NET POSITION
PRIVATE-PURPOSE TRUST FUND – SUCCESSOR AGENCY
JUNE 30, 2024
Assets
Cash and investments
Cash and investments 729,149 $
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 699,807
Interest Receivable 3,273
Total assets 1,432,229
Liabilities
Interest payable 64,420
Long-term debt
Due within one year 893,172
Due in more than one year 3,662,356
Total liabilities 4,623,098
Net Position
Held in trust for other governments (3,190,869) $
See accompanying notes. 15

CITY OF KING CITY

STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION
PRIVATE-PURPOSE TRUST FUND – SUCCESSOR AGENCY
JUNE 30, 2024
Additions
Property taxes 802,273 $
Investment earnings and other 36,231
Total additions 838,504
Deductions
Administrative costs 51,064
Interest and fiscal agency expenses of former redevelopment agency 161,231 Total deductions 212,295
Change In Net Position 626,209
Net Position
Beginning of year (3,817,078)
End of year $ (3,190,869)
16 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The financial statements of the City of King City (the City) have been prepared in conformity with Accounting Principles Generally Accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) as applicable to governmental entities. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles.

Reporting Entity
The City of King City, State of California (the "City"), was incorporated as a general law city in 1911. In June 2010, the voters of the City approved a Charter, which gives the City Council greater self-rule. The City is governed by a City Council of five members. The City's major operations include public safety; highways and streets; sewer services; parks and recreation; building inspection; public improvements; planning and zoning, and general administrative services.

Basis of Presentation – Fund Accounting
Government-Wide Financial Statements - The Government-Wide Financial Statements (the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities) report information of all of the nonfiduciary activities of the primary government and its component units. For the most part, eliminations have been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities. These statements distinguish between the governmental and business-type activities of the City and between the City and its discretely presented component unit. Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and inter-governmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely significantly on fees charged to external parties.

The Statement of Activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each segment of the business-type activities of the City and for each function of the City’s governmental activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated with a program or function and are clearly identifiable to a particular function. Program revenues include 1) charges paid by the recipients of goods or services offered by the programs and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular program. Revenues that are not classified as program revenues, including all taxes, are presented as general revenues.

Net position are restricted when constraints placed on them are either externally imposed or are imposed by constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Internally imposed designations of resources are not presented as restricted net position. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, generally, it is the City’s policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed.

Governmental Fund Financial Statements - The Governmental Fund Financial Statements provide information about the City’s funds, including fiduciary funds. Separate statements for each fund category - governmental, proprietary and fiduciary - are presented. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major governmental and enterprise funds, each displayed in a separate column. All remaining governmental funds are separately aggregated and reported as non-major funds. 17 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Proprietary fund operating revenues, such as charges for services, result from exchange transactions associated with the principal activity of the fund. Exchange transactions are those in which each party receives and gives up essentially equal values. Non-operating revenues, such as subsidies and investment earnings, result from non-exchange transactions or ancillary activities.

The City reports the following major governmental funds:
 General Fund – The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used for all financial resources except those required legally, or by sound financial management to be accounted for in another fund. Generally, the General Fund is used to account for those traditional governmental services of the City, such as police and fire protection, planning and general administrative services.  American Rescue Plan Act – This fund is used to account for American Rescue Plan Act funding received from the State.
 HOME Grant Fund – The fund is used to account for receipts and expenditures for the Home Investment Partnerships Program for the City to fund a wide range of activities including building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income people.
 Measure X Fund – The fund is used to account for the City’s Transportation Safety and Investment Plan activities, which include transportation safety and mobility projects such as the Bishop Street project and the slurry application project.
 Gas Tax Fund – The fund is used to account for monies from gas tax from the State of California to be used for street maintenance and projects.

The City reports the following major proprietary fund:
 Sewer Fund – The fund accounts for the maintenance, operation and capital improvements of the municipal sewage system. Financing is provided by user fees from residences, businesses, and industries.
 Community Power Fund – The fund provides electricity and special programs with the common goal of utilizing cleaner energy and lower rates to the City.

The City reports the following additional fund types:
 Private-Purpose Trust Fund – The Private-Purpose Trust Fund accounts for assets held by the City as trustee for the Successor Agency.
18 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Basis of Accounting
The Government-Wide and Proprietary Fund Financial Statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred, regardless of when the related cash flows take place. Nonexchange transactions, in which the City gives (or receives) value without directly receiving (or giving) equal value in exchange, include property and sales taxes, grants, entitlements and donations. On an accrual basis, revenue from property taxes is recognized in the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied. Revenues from sales tax are recognized when the underlying transactions take place.

Revenues from grants, entitlements and donations are recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligible requirements have been satisfied.

Governmental Funds are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when measurable and available. Property and sales taxes, interest, certain state and federal grants and charges for services are accrued when their receipt occurs within sixty days after the end of the accounting period so as to be both measurable and available. Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred, as under accrual accounting. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated absences and claims and judgments are recorded only when payment is due. General capital asset acquisitions are reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Proceeds of general long-term debt and capital leases are reported as other financing sources.

Proprietary Funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from non-operating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a Proprietary Fund’s principal ongoing operations. Revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as non-operating.

Financial Statement Amounts
Cash and Investments – Cash and investments represent the City's cash bank accounts including but not limited to certificates of deposit, money market funds and cash management pools for reporting purposes in the Statement of Cash Flows.

The City maintains a cash and investment pool that is available for use by all funds, except for assets held by fiscal agents. Interest earnings as a result of this pooling are distributed to the appropriate funds based on month end cash balances in each fund.

Investments of the pool include only those investments authorized by the California Government Code such as, United States Treasury securities, agencies guaranteed by the United States Government, registered state warrants, and other investments. Investments primarily consist of deposits in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund and certificates of deposit. Investments are recorded at amortized cost or fair value. Fair value is based upon quoted market prices.

Accounts Receivable – Billed but unpaid services provided to individuals or non-governmental entities are recorded as accounts receivable. The Proprietary Funds include a year end accrual for services through June 30, 2024, which have not yet been billed. Accounts receivable are reported net of an allowance for uncollectibles.
19 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Monterey County is responsible for the assessment, collection and apportionment of property taxes for all taxing jurisdictions. Property taxes are levied in equal installments on November 1 and February 1. They become delinquent on December 10 and April 10, respectively. The lien date is March 1 of each year.

Property taxes are accounted for in the General Fund. Property tax revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available to finance current liabilities. The City considers property taxes as available if they are collected within 60 days after year end. Property tax on the unsecured roll are due on the March 1 lien date and become delinquent if unpaid on August 31. However, unsecured property taxes are not susceptible to year end accrual.

The City is permitted by Article XIIIA of the State of California Constitution (known as Proposition 13) to levy a maximum tax of $1.00 per $100 of full cash value.

Interfund Receivables/Payables – Items classified as interfund receivable/payable represent short-term lending/borrowing transactions between funds. This classification also includes the current portion of an advance to or from another fund.

Advances To/From Other Funds – This classification represents non-current portions of any long-term lending/borrowing transactions between funds. This amount will be equally offset by a reserve of fund balance which indicates that it does not represent available financial resources and therefore, is not available for appropriation. The current portion of any interfund long-term loan (advance) is included as an interfund receivable/payable.

Restricted Assets – Certain proceeds of the King City Public Financing Authority’s Certificates of Participation, as well as certain resources set aside for their repayment, are classified as restricted assets on the Statement of Net Position because they are maintained in separate bank accounts and their use is limited by debt covenants.

Capital Assets – Capital outlays are recorded as expenditures of the General, Special Revenue, and Capital Projects Funds and as assets in the Government-Wide Financial Statements to the extent the City’s capitalization threshold are met.

Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment, and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks, and similar items), are reported in the applicable governmental or business-type activities columns in the Government-Wide Financial Statements. Capital assets are defined by the government as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 (amount not rounded) and an estimated useful life in excess of one year. Such assets are recorded at historical cost or estimated historical cost if purchased or constructed. Donated capital assets are recorded at estimated fair market value at the date of donation.

The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend assets lives are not capitalized. Betterments and major improvements which significantly increase values, change capacities or extend useful lives are capitalized. Upon sale or retirement of fixed assets, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts and any resulting gain or loss is included in the results of operations.
20 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Major outlays for capital assets and improvements are capitalized as projects are constructed. Interest incurred during the construction phase of capital assets of business-type activities is included as part of the capitalized value of the assets constructed.

Property, plant, and equipment of the primary government, as well as the component units, are depreciated using the straight line method over the following estimated useful lives:

Years
Infrastructure 20 - 50
Structures and Improvements 10 - 50
Equipment 5 - 30
Compensated Absences – It is the City's policy to permit all employees to accumulate earned but unused vacation, sick pay and compensatory time benefits. Those employees on shift work schedules may also accumulate hours for holiday time benefits.

Vested or accumulated vacation, holiday and eligible sick leave along with any compensation time that is expected to be paid with expendable available financial resources is reported as an expenditure in the fund financial statements of the Governmental Fund that will pay for it. Amounts not expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources are reported in the Government-Wide Financial Statements.

Vested leave of Proprietary Funds are recorded as an expense and liability as the benefits accrue.

Leases – The City is a lessee for a noncancellable lease of equipment. The City recognizes a lease liability and an intangible right-to-use lease asset (lease asset) in the government-wide and enterprise fund financial statements. The City recognizes lease liabilities with an initial, individual value of $5,000 or more.

At the commencement of a lease, the City initially measures the lease liability at the present value of payments expected to be made during the lease term. Subsequently, the lease liability is reduced by the principal portion of lease payments made. The lease asset is initially measured as the initial amount of the lease liability, adjusted for lease payments made at or before the lease commencement date, plus certain initial direct costs. Subsequently, the lease asset is amortized on a straight-line basis over its useful life.

Key estimates and judgments related to leases include how the City determines (1) the discount rate it uses to discount the expected lease payments to present value, (2) lease term, and (3) lease payments.  The City uses the interest rate charged by the lessor as the discount rate. When the interest rate charged by the lessor is not provided, the City generally uses its estimated incremental borrowing rate as the discount rate for leases.
 The lease term includes the noncancellable period of the lease. Lease payments included in the measurement of the lease liability are composed of fixed payments and purchase option price that the City is reasonably certain to exercise.

The City monitors changes in circumstances that would require a remeasurement of its lease and will remeasure the lease asset and liability if certain changes occur that are expected to significantly affect the amount of the lease liability.
21 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Long-Term Obligations – In the Government-Wide Financial Statements, and Proprietary Fund types in the fund financial statements, long-term debt and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities in the applicable governmental activities, business-type activities, or Proprietary Fund Type Statement of Net Position. Debt principal payments of both government and business-type activities are reported as decreases in the balance of the liability on the Statement of Net Position. Bond premiums and discounts are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds using the effective interest method. Bonds payable are reported net of the applicable bond premium or discount.

In the fund financial statements, however, debt principal payments of Governmental Funds are recognized as expenditures when paid. Governmental Fund types recognize bond premiums and discounts, as well as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuances are reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures.

Pension – For purposes of measuring the net pension liability and deferred outflows/inflows of resources related to pensions, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the City’s California Public Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) plan and additions to/deduction from the Plan’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by CalPERS.

For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value.

Non-Current Governmental Assets/Liabilities – GASB Statement No. 34 eliminates the presentation of account groups, but provides for these records to be maintained and incorporates the information into the Governmental Activities column in the Government-Wide Statement of Net Position.

Net Position – The government-wide and business-type activities fund financial statements utilize a net position presentation. Net position are categorized as net investment in capital assets, restricted and unrestricted.
 Net Investment in Capital Assets - This category groups all capital assets, including infrastructure, into one component of net position. Accumulated depreciation and the outstanding balances of debt that are attributable to the acquisition, construction or improvement of these assets reduce the balance in this category.
 Restricted Net Position - This category presents external restrictions on net position imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors or laws or regulations of other governments and restrictions imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation.  Unrestricted Net Position - This category represents net position of the City, not restricted for any project or other purpose.
22 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Fund Balance – In the fund financial statements, governmental fund balance is made up of the following components:
 Nonspendable fund balance typically includes inventories, prepaid items, and other items that must be maintained intact pursuant to legal or contractual requirements, such as endowments.  Restricted fund balance category includes amounts that can be spent only for specific purposes imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments or through enabling legislations.
 Committed fund balance classification includes amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the City Council. The City Council has the authority to establish, modify, or rescind a fund balance commitment.  Assigned fund balance are amounts designated by the City Council for specific purposes and do not meet the criteria to be classified as restricted or committed.  Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification that includes all spendable amounts in the General Fund not contained in other classifications.

When expenditures are incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted (committed, assigned, or unassigned) fund balances are available, the City’s policy is to apply restricted first. When expenditures are incurred for purposes for which committed, assigned, or unassigned fund balances are available, the City’s policy is to apply committed fund balance first, then assigned fund balance, and finally unassigned fund balance.

Use of Estimates – The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenditures/expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. 23 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 2 – Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability
California law authorizes the City to invest in obligations of the United States Treasury, agencies and instrumentalities, certificates of deposit of time deposits in banks and savings and loan associations which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

In accordance with applicable sections of the California Government Code and the King City Municipal Code, the City prepares and legally adopts an annual balanced budget on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Annual appropriated budgets are adopted for the General Fund, specific Special Revenue Funds, and specific Capital Projects Funds.

Budget plans are adopted for Proprietary Funds. A proposed budget is presented to the City Council during June of each year for review. The Council holds public hearings and may add to, subtract from, or change appropriations within the revenues and reserves estimated as available. Expenditures may not legally exceed budgeted appropriations at the fund level. Supplementary appropriations which alter the total expenditures of any fund, or expenditures in excess of total budgeted fund appropriations, must be approved by the City Council. All annual appropriations lapse at fiscal year end to the extent they have not been expended or encumbered.

Note 3 – Cash and Investments
The City pools all of its cash and investments except those funds required to be held by outside fiscal agents under the provisions of bond indentures. Interest income earned on pooled cash is allocated to the various funds on average cash balances. Interest income from cash investments held with fiscal agents is credited directly to the related funds.

Cash and investments as of June 30, 2024 are classified in the accompanying financial statements as follows:

Statement of Net Position:

Cash and Investments 16,928,810 $
Restricted Cash and Investments 5,668
Fiduciary Funds:

Cash and Investments 729,149
Cash and Investments with fiscal agent 699,807
Total Cash and Investments $ 18,363,434
Cash and investments as of June 30, 2024 consist of the following:

Cash on hand $ 905
Deposits with Financial Institutions 15,092,024
Local Agency Investment Fund 2,565,029
Held by Fiscal Agent:

US Government Issues 705,476
Total Cash and Investments $ 18,363,434
24 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Fair Value Measurements
The framework for measuring fair value provides a fair value hierarchy that categorizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:

Level 1: Inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that a government can access at the measurement date.

Level 2: Inputs to valuation methodology include inputs – other than quoted prices included within Level 1 – that are observable for an asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.

Level 3: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

The asset’s or liability’s fair value measurement level within a fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used need to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. 25 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for assets measured at fair value.

LAIF is valued based on the City’s pro-rata share of the fair value provided by LAIF for the entire LAIF portfolio (Level 2 input).

The City had the following recurring fair value measurements as of June 30, 2024:

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
June 30, 2024
Balance
Investments by fair value level:

Debt Securities:

U.S. Treasury Obligations - $ $ 705,476 $ - $ 705,476
Total Debt Securities - 705,476 - 705,476
Equity Securities:

LAIF - 2,565,029 - 2,565,029
Total Equity Securities - 2,565,029 - 2,565,029
Cash and cash equivalents carried at amortized cost:

Deposits 15,092,929
Total Investments amortized at cost 15,092,929
Total Cash and Investments 18,363,434 $
Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the City’s Investment Policy The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized for the City by the California Government Code (or the City’s investment policy, where more restrictive). The table also identifies certain provisions of the California Government Code (or the City’s investment policy, where more restrictive) that address interest rate risk, credit risk, and concentration of credit risk. This table does not address investments of debt proceeds held by bond trustee that are governed by the provisions of debt agreements of the City, rather than the general provisions of the California Government Code or the City’s investment policy.
26 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Minimum Maximum
Maximum Credit Percentage
Maturity Quality Allowed
U.S. Treasury Obligations None None None
U.S. Agency Securities None AAA None
Banker's Acceptances 1 year None None
Commercial Paper None A-1 None
Money Market Mutual Funds None A None
Investment Contracts None None None
Certificates of Deposits 1 year A-1 None
Repurchase Agreements 30 days None None
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) N/A None None
Municipal Bonds None None None
Authorized Investment Type
Investments Authorized by Debt Agreements
Investments of debt proceeds held by bond trustee are governed by provisions of the debt agreements, rather than the general provisions of the California Government Code or the City’s investment policy.

The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized for investments held by the bond trustee. The table also identifies certain provisions of these debt agreements that address interest rate risk, credit risk, and concentration of credit risk.

Minimum Maximum
Maximum Percentage Percentage
Maturity of Portfolio of Portfolio
Local Agency Bonds 1 year None None
U.S. Treasury Obligations 1 year A None
U.S. Agency Securities 1 year None None
Banker's Acceptances 180 days None 40%
Commercial Paper 270 days None 25%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 1 year None 30%
Repurchase Agreements 90 days None None
Reverse Repurchase Agreements 92 days None 20% of base value Medium-Term Notes 5 years A 30%
Mutual Funds N/A A 20%
Money Market Mutual Funds N/A A 20%
Mortgage Pass-Through Securities 5 years AA 20%
Authorized Investment Type
27 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Disclosures Relating to Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an investment. Generally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the sensitivity of its fair value to changes in market interest rates. As of June 30, 2024 the City had the following investments:
12 Months 13 to 24 25 to 84
or less Months Months Total
LAIF 2,565,029 $ - $ - $ 2,565,029 $
US Government Issues - 705,476 - 705,476
Total Investments $ - 3,270,505 $ - $ 3,270,505
Cash in bank and on hand 15,092,929
Total Cash and Investments $ 18,363,434
Investment Type
Disclosures Relating to Credit Risk
Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the holder of the investment. This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization. Presented below is the minimum rating required by (where applicable) the California Government Code, the City’s investment policy, or debt agreements, and the actual rating as of year-end for each investment type.

Not rated:

LAIF $ 2,565,029
US Government Issues 705,476
Cash in bank and on hand 15,092,929
Total Cash and Investments $ 18,363,434
Concentration of Credit Risk
The investment policy of the City contains no limitations on the amount that can be invested in any one issuer beyond that stipulated by the California Government Code. There are no investments in any one issuer (other than U.S. Treasury securities, mutual funds, and external investment pools) that represent 5% or more of total City investments.
28 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Custodial Credit Risk
Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, a government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. The California Government Code and the City’s investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure to custodial credit risk for deposits, other than the following provision for deposits: The California Government Code requires that a financial institution secure deposits made by state or local governmental units by pledging securities in an undivided collateral pool held by a depository regulated under state law (unless so waived by the governmental unit). The market value of the pledged securities in the collateral pool must equal at least 110% of the total amount deposited by the public agencies. California law also allows financial institutions to secure City deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the secured public deposits.

The custodial risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of its investment or collateral securities that are in the possession of another party. The California Government Code and the City’s investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure to custodial credit risk for investments. With respect to investments, custodial credit risk generally applies only to direct investments in marketable securities. Custodial credit risk does not apply to a local government’s indirect investment in securities through the use of mutual funds or government investment pools (such as LAIF).

GASB Statement No. 40 requires that the following disclosures be made with respect to custodial credit risks relating to deposits and investments: The City did not have any deposits with financial institutions in excess of federal depository insurance limits and held in uncollateralized accounts. As of June 30, 2024, the City investments in the following investment types were held by the broker-dealer that was used by the City to buy the securities:

Reported Amount
US Government Issues 705,476 $
Investment Type
Investment in State Investment Pool
The City is a voluntary participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) that is regulated by the California Government Code under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of California. The fair value of the City’s investment in this pool is reported in the accompanying financial statements at amounts based upon the City’s pro-rata share of the fair value provided by LAIF for the entire LAIF portfolio (in relation to the amortized cost of that portfolio). The balance available for withdrawal is based on the accounting records maintained by LAIF, which are recorded on an amortized cost basis. 29 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 4 – Interfund Receivables and Payables, and Transfers Interfund Receivables and Payables
Interfund receivables and payables consist of short-term loans resulting from regular transactions. These loans are expected to be repaid as soon as the borrowing fund has cash, and carry an interest rate equal to the rate earned on pooled cash.

Individual fund interfund receivables and payables balances as of June 30, 2024 are as follows:

Due From Due To
Major Funds
General Fund 2,408,796 $ - $
Gas Tax - 773,229
Nonmajor Funds
Police Grants - 41,144
CDBG Pro Youth - 205,397
SB 1 Multimodal Grant - 30,542
SB 2 Planning Land Use Element Grant - 52,997
State Grants - 436,724
LEAP Grant - 29,766
Prop 68 Grant - 297,269
Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program 85,595 - FEMA Storm Event Grant - 338,117
Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Grant - 118,016
$ 2,408,796 2,408,796 $
The interfund payable balance due to the General Fund, Gas Tax, Police Grants, CDBG Pro Youth, SB 2 Planning Land Use Element Grant, SB 1 Multimodal Grant, State Grants, LEAP Grant, FEMA Storm Event Grant, Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Grant, Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program, and Prop 68 Grant is a result of deficits in certain funds and temporary cash flow assistance in others. The balances due will be repaid as funds are available.

Transfers
In general, the City uses interfund transfers to (1) move revenues from the funds that collect them to the funds’ that statute or budget requires to expend them, (2) use unrestricted revenues collected in the General Fund to help finance various programs and capital projects accounted for in other funds in accordance with budgetary authorization, and (3) move cash to debt service funds from the funds responsible for payment as debt service payments become due. In general, the effect of the interfund activity has been eliminated from the government-wide financial statements.
30 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 4 – Interfund Receivables and Payables, and Transfers (continued) Transfers (continued)
Transfers In Transfers Out
Major Governmental Funds:

General Fund 304,978 $ - $
Gas Tax Fund 475,000 -
Enterprise Funds:

Sewer Fund - (240,500)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds:

CDBG Grant 12,088 -
Prop 1B - (15)
UUT-Public Safety Fund (551,551) -
$ (792,066) 792,066 $
 Transfers of $475,000 from the Gas Tax Fund to the General Fund was to reimburse for street related capital projects.
 Transfer from the UTT-Public safety fund of $551,551 to the General Fund was to cover public safety costs.
 Transfer of $240,500 from the Sewer Fund to the Genral Fund was to cover related overhead costs. 31 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 5 – Capital Assets
Capital asset activities for the year ended June 30, 2024 were as follows:

Balance Balance
July 1, 2023 Additions Retirements June 30, 2024
Governmental Activities
Capital assets, not being depreciated
Land 653,060 $ - $ - $ 653,060 $
Construction in progress - - - -
Total capital assets, not being depreciated - 653,060 - 653,060 Capital assets, being depreciated
Buildings and improvements 10,298,091 200,212 - 10,498,303 Infrastructure 19,551,168 3,755,325 - 23,306,493
Machinery and equipment 70,687 4,382,433 - 4,453,120
Total capital assets, being depreciated 4,026,224 34,231,692 - 38,257,916 Less accumulated depreciation for:

Buildings and improvements (7,737,625) (234,664) - (7,972,289) Infrastructure (9,123,188) (506,185) - (9,629,373)
Machinery and equipment (271,516) (3,478,296) - (3,749,812) Total accumulated depreciation (1,012,365) (20,339,109) - (21,351,474) Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 3,013,859 13,892,583 - 16,906,442 Right of use assets, being amortized
Vehicles 296,910 - - 296,910
Less: accumulated amortization (59,382) (196,923) - (256,305) Total right of use assets, net of amortization (59,382) 99,987 - 40,605 Governmental activities capital assets, net $ 2,954,477 14,645,630 $ - $ 17,600,107 $ Business-Type Activities
Capital assets, not being depreciated
Land $ - 764,093 $ - $ 764,093 $
Total capital assets, not being depreciated - 764,093 - 764,093 Capital assets, being depreciated
Building and improvements 19,444,364 - - 19,444,364
Plant and equipment - 1,574,179 - 1,574,179
Total capital assets, being depreciated - 21,018,543 - 21,018,543 Less: accumulated depreciation (387,469) (7,634,512) - (8,021,981) Total capital assets, being depreciated, net (387,469) 13,384,031 - 12,996,562 Right of use assets, being amortized
Vehicles 76,951 - - 76,951
Accumulated amortization (15,390) (38,475) - (53,865)
Total right of use assets, net of amortization (15,390) 38,476 - 23,086 Business-type activities capital assets, net $ (402,859) 14,186,600 $ - $ 13,783,741 $ 32 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 5 – Capital Assets (Continued)
Depreciation and amortization expense was charged to the following functions in the Statement of Activities:

Governmental Functions:

General Government 62,212 $
Public Safety 385,926
Public Works 508,407
Culture and Recreation 115,202
$ 1,071,747
Business-Type Functions:

Sewer $ 402,859
Note 6 – Notes Receivables
Notes receivable and deferred loans consisted of the following at June 30, 2024:

King City Pacific Associates, L.P. - The HOME Investment Partnership Grant program approved $3,000,000 of grant funds to be made available for local development of an affordable housing project.

The City entered into an agreement with King City Pacific Associates, L.P. to loan such funds for the construction of the San Antonio Apartments. Funds were provided in the form of a deferred payment loan.

If not paid sooner, the unpaid principal balance of this note, plus any unpaid interest thereon shall be due and payable in full fifty-five years from the date of the note. The note bears 3% interest and the face amount of the note at June 30, 2024 was $3,000,000. Accrued interest receivable at June 30, 2024 was $1,020,000.

Note 7 – Long-Term Debt
The City generally incurs long-term debt to finance projects or purchase assets which will have useful lives equal to or greater than the related debt. The City’s debt transactions are summarized below and discussed in detail thereafter:

Balance Balance Current
July 1, 2023 Additions Retirements June 30, 2024 Portion Governmental Activities Long Term Debt
Direct Borrowings:
2019 Street Sweeper Financed Purchase 90,383 $ - $ (34,857) $ 55,526 $ 36,571 $ Solar Energy Financed Purchase - 692,254 (76,578) 615,676 83,383 Total Governmental Activities Long-term Debt $ - 782,637 $ (111,435) $ 671,202 $ 119,954 $ 33 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 7 – Long-Term Debt (Continued)
Long-term debt payable at June 30, 2024 was comprised of the following individual issues:

Balance Balance Current
July 1, 2023 Additions Retirements June 30, 2024 Portion Business-Type Activities Long Term Debt
Direct Borrowings:

Solar Energy Financed Purchase 1,036,281 $ - $ (114,635) $ 921,646 $ 124,821 $ Direct Placements:
2021 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds - 3,646,691 (191,880) 3,454,811 196,190 Total Business-Type Activities Debt $ - 4,682,972 $ (306,515) $ 4,376,457 $ 321,011 $ Compensated Absences
Governmental Activities $ 176,820 544,169 $ - $ 720,989 $ Net Pension Liability
Governmental Activities $ - 7,547,191 $ (50,942) $ 7,496,249 $ Business-Type Activities $ 679,432 129,495 $ - $ 808,927 $ 2019 Street Sweeper Financed Purchase – On March 15, 2019, the City entered into a purchase agreement for a street sweeper. The lease bears an interest rate of 4.829% and terminates on December 1, 2025.

Solar Energy Financed Purchase – On July 10, 2016, the City started making payments on a solar lease arrangement. The amount financed was $2,644,187. Annual payments are from $94,649 to $156,907 and terminates on January 10, 2030. Interest rate is 3.231%. 2021 WasteWater Revenue Refunding Bonds - In May 2021, the City issued the 2021 WasteWater Revenue Refunding Bonds for the principal amount of $4,012,670. The issuance was to refund the outstanding principal balance of the 2018 Enterprise Revenue Bonds described above. The reacquistion price exceeded the net carrying amount of the old debt by $77,193. The City refunded the above debts to reduce its total debt service over 17 years by $99,551 and to obtain an economic gain (difference between the present values of debt service payments on the old and new debt) of $310,178. The bonds bear interest

2.250% and are payable semi-annually commencing September 2022 through March 2038.

Debt service is secured by a pledge of net revenues of the City’s WasteWater Systems. The City covenants that it shall prescribe, revise and collect such charges for the services and facilities of the wastewater systems which shall produce revenues sufficient in each fiscal year to provide gross revenues which are sufficient to pay all wastewater operation and maintenance costs and all bond installment payments and produce net wastewater revenues equal to at least 1.15 times debt service coming due and payable during such fiscal year. The City is in compliance with those covenants as of June 30, 2024.

Cash basis debt service paid during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 totaled $271,716. Total wastewater system net revenues and net revenue available for debt was 5.82 at June 30, 2024. 34 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 7 – Long-Term Debt (Continued)
2022 WasteWater Revenue Refunding Bonds (continued)
The annual requirement to amortize the principal and interest on all long-term debt at June 30, 2024 was:

Years ending June 30, Principal Interest Principal Interest 2025 119,954 $ 21,250 $ 321,011 $ 104,304 $
2026 109,529 16,817 336,196 95,721
2027 98,171 13,485 352,078 86,685
2028 106,194 10,249 368,708 77,173
2029 114,662 6,750 386,105 67,163
2030-2034 122,692 2,981 1,330,530 214,328
2035-2039 - - 1,281,829 73,385
$ 71,532 671,202 $ 4,376,457 $ 718,759 $
Government-Wide Activities Business-Type Activities
Note 8 – Lease Liability
Balance Balance Current
July 1, 2023 Additions Retirements June 30, 2024 Portion Lease Liabilities:

Governmental Activities 104,055 $ - $ (61,481) $ 42,574 $ 29,426 $ Business-Type Activities 41,003 - 25,433 (15,570) 16,043 $ - 145,058 $ (77,051) $ 68,007 $ 45,469 $
The City entered into several sixty (60) month lease agreements as lessee for the acquisition and use of vehicles. An initial lease liability was recorded in the amount of $346,911 during the year the lease was entered. As of June 30, 2024, the value of the lease liability was $191,396. The City is required to make monthly principal and interest payments of $335 to $857. The lease has an interest rate of 3%. The equipment has a five-year estimated useful life. The value of the right-to-use asset as of the end of the current fiscal year was $63,691 and had accumulated amortization of $310,170.

The future principal and interest lease payments as of June 30, 2024, were as follows:

Years ending June 30, Principal Interest Principal Interest 2025 29,426 $ 725 $ 16,043 $ 544 $
2026 5,480 316 9,390 94
2027 5,647 150 - -
2028 12 2,021 - -
$ 1,203 42,574 $ 25,433 $ 638 $
Government-Wide Activities Business-Type Activities
35 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 9 – Deficit Fund Balances
Fund Balance Deficits - The following is a summary of deficit fund balances as of June 30, 2024:

Governmental Funds
Leap Grant (15,312) $
FEMA Storm Event Grant (359,503) $
Prop 68 Grant (581,856) $
Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (85,595) $ Police Grants (41,144) $
State Grants (436,724) $
Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Grant (133,648) $
These deficits are are expected to be relieved from future revenues or transfers from other funds.

Note 10 – Deferred Outflows and Deferred Inflows of Resources In addition to assets, the statement of net position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position or fund balance that applies to future period(s) and thus, will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense/expenditure) until then. The City has two items to report in this category:
 The City has $3,626,881 in pension related items that qualify to be reported in deferred outflows of resources. The pension related deferred outflows of resources are described in Note

10.  The City has $154,788 in unamortized deferred amount of refunding related to the 2024 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds.

In addition to liabilities, the statement of financial position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represent an acquisition of net position or fund balance that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time. The City has one item to report in this category:
 The City has $351,111 in pension related items that qualify to be reported in deferred inflows of resources. The pension related deferred inflows of resources are described in Note 10.

The City also has one type of item, which arises only under a modified accrual basis of accounting that qualifies for reporting as deferred inflows of resources. Accordingly, that item, deferred loans, is reported only in the governmental funds balance sheet. The City reports in the HOME Grant fund, $3,000,000, deferred loans and accrued interest of $1,020,000.

Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) Plan Description - The City contributes to the California Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS), an agent multiple-employer public employee defined benefit pension plan. PERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost-of-living adjustments and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. PERS acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by state statute and city ordinance. Copies of PERS' annual financial report may be obtained from their Executive Office - 400 P Street - Sacramento, CA 95814.
36 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) Funding Policy – The City pays 7.680% - 19.950% of annual covered salary for active plan members in the City’s defined pension plan. The City is required to contribute the actuarially determined remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits for its members. The actuarial methods and assumptions used are those adopted by the CalPERS Board of Administration. The contribution requirements of plan members are established by State statute and the employer contribution is established and may be amended by PERS.

The Plans’ provisions and benefits in effect at June 30, 2024, are summarized as follows:

Miscellaneous Safety
Hire Date
Prior to
January 1, 2013
Prior to
January 1, 2013
Benefit Formula 2.0% at 55;
maximum 2%
COLA

2.0% at 50;
maximum 2%
COLA
Benefit Vesting Schedule 5 years service 5 years service Benefit Payments monthly for life monthly for life
Retirement Age 55 50
Monthly Benefits, as a % of Eligible Compensation 2.00% 2.00% Required Employee Contribution Rates 7.00% 9.00%
Required Employer Contribution Rates 11.84% 19.95%
PEPRA
Miscellaneous PEPRA Safety
Hire Date
On or after
January 1, 2013
On or after
January 1, 2013
Benefit Formula 2.0% at 62;
maximum 2%
COLA

2.7% at 57;
maximum 2%
COLA
Benefit Vesting Schedule 5 years service 5 years service Benefit Payments monthly for life monthly for life
Retirement Age 62 57
Monthly Benefits, as a % of Eligible Compensation 2.00% 2.70% Required Employee Contribution Rates 7.75% 13.75%
Required Employer Contribution Rates 7.68% 13.54%
Contributions – Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution rates for all public employers be determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on July 1 following notice of a change in the rate. Funding contributions for both Plans are determined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CalPERS. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs of benefits earned by employees during the year, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued liability. The City is required to contribute the difference between the actuarially determined rate and the contribution rate of employees. 37 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) For the year ended June 30, 2024, $942,927 in contributions was recognized as part of the pension expense.

Pension Liabilities, Pension Expenses, and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions
As of June 30, 2024, the City reported net pension liabilities for its proportionate shares of the net pension liability of each Plan as follows:

Proportionate Share of
Net Pension Liability
Miscellaneous $4,312,117
Safety $3,993,059
The City’s net pension liability for each Plan is measured as the proportionate share of the net pension liability. The net pension liability of each of the Plan is measured as of June 30, 2022, and the total pension liability for each Plan used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2022 rolled forward to June 30, 2023 using standard update procedures. The City’s proportion of the net pension liability was based on a projection of the City’s long-term share of contributions to the pension plans relative to the projected contributions of all participating employers, actuarially determined. The City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability for each Plan as of June 30, 2023 and 2024 was as follows:

Miscellaneous Safety
Proportion - June 30, 2023 0.08648% 0.05282%
Proportion - June 30, 2024 0.08624% 0.05342%
Change -0.00024% 0.00060%
38 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) For the year ended June 30, 2024, the City recognized pension expense of $1,444,540. At June 30, 2024, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pension from the following sources:

Deferred Outflows
of Resources
Deferred Inflows of
Resources
Pension contributions subsequent to $ - 1,039,419 $
measurement date
Differences in expected and actual experience 59,270 513,450 Change in employer's proportion 18,269 261,706
Changes of assumptions - 493,382
Differences between employer's contributions and
proporationate share of contributions 273,572 74,303
Differences between projected and actual
investment earnings - 1,244,621
Total $ 351,111 3,626,881 $
The $1,039,419 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended June 30, 2025. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized as pension expense as follows:

Year Ended
June 30
2025 697,691 $
2026 511,292
2027 992,082
2028 35,286
Total 2,236,351 $
39 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) Actuarial Methods and Assumptions – The collective total pension liability for the June 30, 2023 measurement period was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2022, with update procedures used to roll forward the total pension liability to June 30, 2023. The collective total pension liability was based on the following assumptions:

Valuation Date June 30, 2022
Measurement Date June 30, 2023
Actuarial Cost Method Entry-Age Normal Cost Method in
accordance with the requirements of
GASB Statement No. 68
Actuarial Assumptions:

Discount Rate 6.90%
Inflation 2.30%
Payroll Growth 2.30%
Salary Increases Varies by Entry Age and Service
Mortality Rate Table Derived using CalPERS' Membership
Data for all Funds
1 Post Retirement Benefit Increa Contract COLA up to 2.30% until Purchasing Power Protection
Allowance Floor on Purchasing Power
applies
1 The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS-specific data. The table includes 15 years of mortality improvements using Society of Actuaries Scale 90% of scale MP 2016. For more details on this table, please refer to the December 2017 experience study report (based on CalPERS demographic data from 1997 to 2015) that can be found on the CalPERS website.

All other actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2017 valuation was based on the results of an December 2017 experience study report (based on CalPERS demographic data from 1997 to 2015), including updates to salary increase, mortality and retirement rates. The Experience Study can be obtained at CalPERS’ website.

Change of assumptions – None.
40 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) Discount rate – The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability for PERF C was 6.90%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members will be made at the current member contribution rates and that contributions from employers will be made at statutorily required rates, actuarially determined. Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability.

In determining the long-term expected rate of return, CalPERS took into account long-term market return expectations as well as the expected pension fund cash flows. Projected returns for all asset classes are estimated and, combined with risk estimates, are used to project compound (geometric) returns over the long term. The discount rate used to discount liabilities was informed by the longterm projected portfolio return.

The long-term expected real rates of return by asset class can be found in CalPERS’ Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023.

The table below reflects long-term expected real rates of return by asset class. The rate of return was calculated using the capital market assumptions applied to determine the discount rate and asset allocation. The geometric rates of return are net of administrative expenses.

Asset Class
Assumed
Allocation
Real Return
Years 1-10
1,
2 Global equity - cap-weighted 30% 4.65%
Global equity - cap-weighted 12% 3.84%
Private equity 13% 7.28%
Treasury 5% 0.27%
Mortgage-backed securities 5% 0.50%
Investment grade corporates 10% 1.56%
High yield 5% 2.27%
Emerging market debt 5% 2.48%
Private debt 5% 3.57%
Real assets 15% 3.21%
Leverage -5% -0.59%
Total 100%
1 An expected inflation of 2.30% used for this period.
2 Figures are based on the 2021-22 Asset Management Study. 41 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 11 – City Employees’ Retirement Plan (Defined Benefit Pension Plan) (Continued) Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability for each Plan, calculating using the discount rate of each Plan, as well as what the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage point lower (5.90%) or 1-percentage point higher (7.90%) than the current rate:
1% Decrease
(5.90%)
Current Discount
Rate
(6.90%)
1% Increase
(7.90%)
Miscellaneous 6,348,514 $ 4,312,117 $ 2,635,988 $
Safety 5,988,251 $ 3,993,059 $ 2,361,842 $
Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position – Detailed information about each pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued CalPERS financial reports.

Payable to the Pension Plan – At June 30, 2024, the City has no outstanding amount of contributions to the pension plan required for the year ended June 30, 2024.

Note 12 – Risk Management
The City provides for workers' compensation and liability through a self-funded joint powers agency, Monterey Bay Area Self Insurance Authorities. Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) accounts are not separately maintained for each participant.

Description of Self-Insurance Pool Pursuant to Joint Powers Agreement The City is a member of the Monterey Bay Area Self Insurance Authority (MBASIA). MBASIA is composed of 10 California public entities and is organized under a joint powers agreement pursuant to California Government Code 6500 et seq. The purpose of MBASIA is to arrange and administer programs for the pooling of self-insured losses, to purchase excess insurance or reinsurance, and to arrange for group-purchased insurance for property and other coverage.

General Liability: The City has a deductible of $10,000 for each liability claim. Claims above $10,000 up to $1,000,000 are paid by MBASIA. Claims above $1,000,000 up to $29,000,000 are covered by insurance purchased by MBASIA.

Workers’ Compensation: The City does not retain deductible for workers’ compensation claims. Annual premiums for coverage up to statutory levels are paid to MBASIA based on a Board approved Budget methodology. A third party claims administrator is contracted by MBASIA to manage claims activity. 42 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 12 – Risk Management (Continued)
Adequacy of Protection

During the past three fiscal (claims) years none of the above programs of protection have had settlements or judgments that exceeded insured coverage. There have been no significant reductions in insured liability coverage from coverage in the prior year. Audited financial statements for MBASIA can be obtained from their management at 100 Pine Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111.

Note 13 – Excess of Expenditures over Appropriations
The excess of expenditures over appropriations are as follows:

General Fund:

Current:

Public safety $ 185,801
Community development $ 218,148
Capital Outlay $ 45,951
Debt Service
Principal $ 3,948

American Recovery Plan Act Fund:

Current:

General government $ 378,414

Measure X:

Current:

Public works $ 152,083
Gas Tax Fund:

Current:

Public works $ 639,765
Capital Outlay $ 1,337,982
Debt Service
Principal $ 28,583
Interest $ 8,119
The excess of expenditures over appropriations are covered by the available fund balance in the corresponding funds.
43 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 14 – Contingencies
Federal and State Government Programs - The City participates in several federal and state grant programs. These programs have been audited, as needed, in accordance with the provisions of the federal Single Audit Act of 1984 and applicable state requirements. No cost disallowances were proposed as a result of these audits. However, these programs are still subject to further examination by the grantors and the amount, if any, of expenditures, which may be disallowed by the granting agencies, cannot be determined at this time. The City expects such amounts, if any, to be immaterial.

Landfill Postclosure Costs – Since the closure of the City’s landfill in 1976, the City has been incurring postclosure care costs, and annual monitoring tests since 1996. The City is planning to initiate the process with regulators to stop the semi-annual testing and have the former landfill officially declared as closed. The City expects the process to be completed within the next few years.

Note 15 – Subsequent Events
The City evaluated subsequent events for recognition and disclosure through August 26, 2025, the date which these financial statements were available to be issued. Management concluded that no material subsequent events have occurred since June 30, 2024 that required recognition or disclosure in such financial statements.

Note 16 – Restatement of Net Position/Fund Balance
Fund Reclassifications – Major and Nonmajor Funds
During the fiscal year ended 2024, the City conducted an annual review of its fund structure. As part of this review and in compliance with GASB Statement No. 100, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, the City identified necessary reclassifications to enhance transparency, improve financial reporting accuracy, and ensure consistency with updated accounting standards. As a result, the following funds were reclassified:

Fund Name
Previous
Classification New Classification Reason for Classification Gas Tax Fund Nonmajor Major The increase in activity in the current year met the criteria for a major fund designation
CDBG Grant
Fund
Major Nonmajor The decrease in overall activity caused the fund to no longer meet the criteria for a major
fund, resulting in its reclassification as
nonmajor
Development
Impact Fees Fund
Major Nonmajor The decrease in overall activity caused the fund to no longer meet the criteria for a major
fund, resulting in its reclassification as
nonmajor
44 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 16 – Restatement of Net Position/Fund Balance (continued) Fund Reclassifications – Major and Nonmajor Funds (continued) These reclassifications have been applied retrospectively to prior-period financial statements for comparability. The following table summarizes the impact of these reclassifications on beginning fund balances and net position:

Gas Tax Fund CDBG Grant Fund
Development Impact
Fees Fund
Beginning of year, previously stated $ 765,799 - $ 2,007,873 $ Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) (765,799) - (2,007,873) Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) 82,162 - - Beginning of year, restated $ 82,162 - $ - $
Fund Financial Statements

REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
45 CITY OF KING CITY

BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE

GENERAL FUND
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive/
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenue
Taxes 8,587,878 $ 8,587,878 $ 8,686,080 $ 98,202 $
Intergovernmental 240,000 240,000 1,825,768 1,585,768
Charges for services 23,500 23,500 19,854 (3,646)
Licenses and permits 1,111,400 1,111,400 1,253,884 142,484 Fines and forfeitures 28,500 28,500 26,682 (1,818)
Interest and rents 3,000 3,000 149,051 146,051
Other - - 389,400 389,400
Total revenue 9,994,278 9,994,278 12,350,719 2,356,441
Expenditures
Current
General government 1,509,273 1,509,273 1,432,272 77,001 Public safety 5,324,159 5,324,159 5,509,960 (185,801)
Public works 1,377,840 1,377,840 1,176,631 201,209
Culture and recreation 1,844,782 1,844,782 741,386 1,103,396 Community development 1,587,856 1,587,856 1,806,004 (218,148) Capital outlay - - 45,951 (45,951)
Debt service
Principal 82,853 82,853 86,801 (3,948)
Interest and fiscal charges 17,374 17,374 17,374 -
Total expenditures 11,744,137 11,744,137 10,816,379 927,758 Revenue over (under) expenditures (1,749,859) (1,749,859) 1,534,340 3,284,199 Other Financing Sources
Transfers in (out), net (332,000) (332,000) 304,978 636,978 Total other financing sources/(uses) (332,000) (332,000) 304,978 636,978 Net Change in Fund Balance $ (2,081,859) (2,081,859) $ 1,839,318 $ 3,921,177 Fund Balance
Beginning of year 3,166,615
End of year $ 5,005,933
46 CITY OF KING CITY

BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE

AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive/
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenue
Interest and rents $ - - $ 43,765 $ 43,765 $
Total revenue - - 43,765 43,765
Expenditures
Current
General government 90,000 90,000 468,414 (378,414)
Capital outlay 2,570,511 2,570,511 1,630,695 939,816
Total expenditures 2,660,511 2,660,511 2,099,109 561,402 Net Change in Fund Balance $ (2,660,511) (2,660,511) $ (2,055,344) $ 605,167 Fund Balance
Beginning of year 2,389,209
End of year $ 333,865
47 CITY OF KING CITY

BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE

MEASURE X
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive/
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenue
Taxes $ 521,220 521,220 $ 566,522 $ 45,302 $
Interest and rent - - 25,137 25,137
Total revenue 521,220 521,220 591,659 70,439
Expenditures
Current
Public works 521,220 521,220 673,303 (152,083)
Total expenditures 521,220 521,220 673,303 (152,083)
Net Change in Fund Balance $ - - $ (81,644) $ (81,644)
Fund Balance
Beginning of year 741,545
End of year $ 659,901
48 CITY OF KING CITY

BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE

GAS TAX FUND
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Variance with
Final Budget
Budgeted Amounts Actual Positive/
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenue
Taxes 371,304 $ 371,304 $ 366,981 $ (4,323) $
Intergovernmental - - 1,508,720 1,508,720
Interest and rents - - 347 347
Other - - 44,462 44,462
Total revenue 371,304 371,304 1,920,510 1,549,206
Expenditures
Current
Public works 357,958 357,958 997,723 (639,765)
Capital outlay - - 1,337,982 (1,337,982)
Debt service
Principal - - 28,583 (28,583)
Interest and fiscal charges - - 8,119 (8,119)
Total expenditures 357,958 357,958 2,372,407 (2,014,449) Revenue over (under) expenditures 13,346 13,346 (451,897) (465,243) Other Financing Sources
Transfers in (out), net - - 475,000 475,000
Total other financing sources/(uses) - - 475,000 475,000 Net Change in Fund Balance $ 13,346 13,346 $ 23,103 $ 9,757 Fund Balance
Beginning of year 82,162
End of year $ 105,265
49 CITY OF KING CITY SCHEDULE OF THE CITY’S PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY LAST 10 YEARS* YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Proportion of the net
pension liability
Proportionate share
of the net pension
liability
Covered - employee
payroll
Proportionate share of the net
pension liability as a
percentage of coveredemployee payroll Plan's fiduciary net position Plan's fiduciary net position
as a percentage of the Total
Pension Liability
2015 0.09668% 2,389,457 $ 834,582 $ 286.31% 7,090,204 $ 77.58%2016 0.08862% 2,431,259 $ 936,886 $ 259.50% 8,223,238 $ 77.18%2017 0.08541% 2,967,126 $ 978,018 $ 303.38% 7,817,932 $ 72.49%2018 0.08489% 3,346,536 $ 1,019,404 $ 328.28% 8,822,837 $ 72.50%2019 0.08484% 3,197,346 $ 763,963 $ 418.52% 9,315,620 $ 74.45%2020 0.08418% 3,371,043 $ 845,215 $ 398.84% 9,771,801 $ 74.35%2021 0.08366% 3,528,942 $ 1,077,863 $ 327.40% 10,124,046 $ 74.15%2022 0.10242% 1,944,690 $ 1,058,867 $ 183.66% 12,310,030 $ 86.36%2023 0.08648% 4,046,815 $ 1,167,034 $ 346.76% 10,483,347 $ 72.15%2024 0.08624% 4,312,117 $ 2,056,347 $ 209.70% 10,744,895 $ 71.36% Proportion of the net
pension liability
Proportionate share
of the net pension
liability
Covered - employee
payroll
Proportionate share of the net
pension liability as a
percentage of coveredemployee payroll Plan's fiduciary net position Plan's fiduciary net position
as a percentage of the Total
Pension Liability
2015 0.04336% 1,626,559 $ 1,087,897 $ 149.51% 6,567,188 $ 80.15%2016 0.04014% 1,653,870 $ 939,684 $ 176.00% 6,832,315 $ 80.51%2017 0.04024% 2,084,204 $ 829,185 $ 251.36% 6,292,887 $ 75.12%2018 0.04119% 2,461,421 $ 1,262,109 $ 195.02% 7,510,467 $ 75.32%2019 0.04242% 2,488,981 $ 1,298,268 $ 191.72% 8,149,726 $ 76.60%2020 0.04381% 2,860,960 $ 1,359,578 $ 210.43% 8,489,785 $ 74.79%2021 0.04586% 3,055,582 $ 1,346,512 $ 226.93% 8,944,101 $ 74.54%2022 0.04880% 1,712,772 $ 1,270,072 $ 134.86% 11,028,079 $ 86.56%2023 0.05282% 3,629,871 $ 1,709,047 $ 212.39% 9,944,910 $ 73.26%2024 0.05342% 3,993,056 $ 1,907,011 $ 209.39% 10,551,070 $ 72.55% Miscellaneous
Safety
50 CITY OF KING CITY SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS LAST 10 YEARS* YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Contractually required
contribution
(actuarially
determined)
Contributions in
relation to the
actuarially determined
contributions
Contributions
deficiency (excess) Covered-employee payroll
Contributions as a
percentage of coveredemployee payroll
2015 145,093 $ (145,093) $ - $ 834,582 $ 17.39%
2016 187,302 $ (187,302) $ - $ 936,886 $ 19.99%2017 257,596 $ (257,596) $ - $ 978,018 $ 26.34%2018 257,638 $ (257,638) $ - $ 1,019,404 $ 25.27%2019 306,385 $ (306,385) $ - $ 763,963 $ 40.10%2020 345,470 $ (345,470) $ - $ 845,215 $ 40.87%2021 402,008 $ (402,008) $ - $ 1,077,863 $ 37.30%2022 309,017 $ (309,017) $ - $ 1,058,867 $ 29.18%2023 353,638 $ (353,638) $ - $ 1,167,034 $ 30.30%2024 421,628 $ (421,628) $ - $ 2,056,347 $ 20.50% Contractually required
contribution
(actuarially
determined)
Contributions in
relation to the
actuarially determined
contributions
Contributions
deficiency (excess) Covered-employee payroll
Contributions as a
percentage of coveredemployee payroll
2015 279,368 $ (279,368) $ - $ 1,087,897 $ 25.68%
2016 213,094 $ (213,094) $ - $ 939,684 $ 22.68%2017 182,185 $ (182,185) $ - $ 829,185 $ 21.97%2018 219,036 $ (219,036) $ - $ 1,262,109 $ 17.35%2019 285,131 $ (285,131) $ - $ 1,298,268 $ 21.96%2020 306,024 $ (306,024) $ - $ 1,359,578 $ 22.51%2021 384,434 $ (384,434) $ - $ 1,346,512 $ 28.55%2022 397,596 $ (397,596) $ - $ 1,270,072 $ 31.30%2023 449,391 $ (449,391) $ - $ 1,709,047 $ 26.29%2024 521,299 $ (521,299) $ - $ 1,907,011 $ 27.34% Safety
Miscellaneous

SUPPLEMENTAL ONLY INFORMATION
51 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2024 Riverview
SLESF/COPS Asset Gardens Prop State SB1 Road
Grant Seizure Landscape 1B Grants Maintenance
ASSETS
Cash and investments 82,716 $ 11,974 $ 31,052 $ - $ - $ 956,494 $ Accounts receivable - - - - - -Due from other governments 16,667 - - - 436,724 62,141Interest receivable 51 352 132 - - 4,074 Total assets $ 12,025 99,735 $ 31,184 $ - $ 436,724 $ 1,022,709 $

LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued expense - $ - $ 1,078 $ - $ - $ - $ Due to other funds - - - - 436,724 - Total liabilities - - 1,078 - 436,724 -

DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenues - - - - 436,724 -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - - 436,724 -

FUND BALANCE
Restricted
Circulation improvements - - - - - 1,022,709
Community services - - - - - -
Capital improvement projects - - - - - -
Public safety 99,735 12,025 - - - -
Landscape maintenance - - 30,106 - - -
Unassigned - - - - (436,724) -
Total fund balance 99,735 12,025 30,106 - (436,724) 1,022,709 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balance $ 12,025 99,735 $ 31,184 $ - $ 436,724 $ 1,022,709 $ Special Revenue Funds
52 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING BALANCE SHEET (CONTINUED) NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2024 SB2 Riverbed
Planning Wildfire
LEAP King City SB1 Land Use Prevention Plan
Grant Low Income Housing Multimodal Grant Element Grant Grant ASSETS
Cash and investments - $ 158,940 $ - $ - $ - $
Accounts receivable - - - - -
Due from other governments 21,707 - 153,760 71,917 133,648 Interest receivable 677 - - 346 23
Total assets $ 159,617 21,707 $ 153,760 $ 72,263 $ 133,671 $

LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued expense 2,490 $ - $ 804 $ - $ 15,655 $ Due to other funds - 29,766 30,542 52,997 118,016
Total liabilities - 32,256 31,346 52,997 133,671

DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenues - 4,763 61,207 9,574 133,648
Total deferred inflows of resources - 4,763 61,207 9,574 133,648

FUND BALANCE
Restricted
Circulation improvements - - - - -Community services - 159,617 - - -Capital improvement projects - - 61,207 9,692 -Public safety - - - - -Landscape maintenance - - - - - Unassigned - (15,312) - - (133,648)
Total fund balance (15,312) 159,617 61,207 9,692 (133,648) Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balance $ 159,617 21,707 $ 153,760 $ 72,263 $ 133,671 $ Special Revenue Funds
53 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING BALANCE SHEET (CONTINUED) NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2024 Formerly Nonmajor Formerly Major Formerly Major
Emergency Food and
Traffic FEMA Shelter National Gas CDBG Development
Safety Storm Event Board Program Tax Grant Impact Fees
ASSETS
Cash and investments 4,051 $ - $ - $ - $ 827,356 1,895,910 $ Accounts receivable - - - - - -Due from other governments - 359,503 - - - -Interest receivable - 14 - - 3,770 8,121 Total assets $ 359,503 4,065 $ - $ - $ 831,126 $ 1,904,031 $

LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued expense - $ 21,386 $ - $ - $ 41,181 $ 19,158 $ Due to other funds 338,117 - 85,595 - - - Total liabilities 359,503 - 85,595 - 41,181 19,158

DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenues 359,503 - - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources 359,503 - - - - -

FUND BALANCE
Restricted
Circulation improvements 4,065 - - - - -Community services - - - - - -Capital improvement projects - - - - 789,945 1,884,873Public safety - - - - - -Landscape maintenance - - - - - - Unassigned (359,503) - (85,595) - - -
Total fund balance 4,065 (359,503) (85,595) - 789,945 1,884,873 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balance $ 359,503 4,065 $ - $ - $ 831,126 $ 1,904,031 $ Special Revenue Funds
54 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING BALANCE SHEET (CONTINUED) NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2024 Total
Non-major
CDBG Airport Prop 68 UUT-Public Police Governmental
Pro Youth Operations Grant Safety Grants Funds
ASSETS
Cash and investments - $ 384,085 $ - $ 16,698 $ - $ 4,369,276 $ Accounts receivable - 48,021 - - - 48,021
Due from other governments 272,329 - 405,610 38,834 - 1,972,840 Interest receivable 1,625 - - 1,867 - 21,052
Total assets $ 433,731 272,329 $ 405,610 $ 57,399 $ - $ 6,411,189 $

LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued expense - $ 2,907 $ 284,587 $ - $ - $ 389,246 $ Due to other funds - 205,397 297,269 - 41,144 1,635,567 Total liabilities 2,907 205,397 581,856 - 41,144 2,024,813

DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Unavailable revenues - - 405,610 - - 1,411,029
Total deferred inflows of resources - - 405,610 - - 1,411,029

FUND BALANCE
Restricted
Circulation improvements - - - - - 1,026,774
Community services 66,932 - - - - 226,549
Capital improvement projects - - - - - 2,745,717
Public safety - 430,824 - 57,399 - 599,983
Landscape maintenance - - - - - 30,106
Unassigned - - (581,856) - (41,144) (1,653,782)
Total fund balance 66,932 430,824 (581,856) 57,399 (41,144) 2,975,347 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balance $ 433,731 272,329 $ 405,610 $ 57,399 $ - $ 6,411,189 $ Special Revenue Funds
55 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Riverview
SLESF/COPS Asset Gardens Prop State SB1
Grant Seizure Landscape 1B Grants Road Maintenace
Revenue
Taxes $ - - $ 20,232 $ - $ - $ - $
Intergovernmental 194,492 - - - 134,185 356,562Charges for services - - - - - -Licenses, permits and impact fees - - - - - -Other revenue - - - - - -Interest and rent 484 3,275 955 1 - 31,085 Total revenue 484 197,767 21,187 1 134,185 387,647
Expenditures
Public safety 74,183 - - - 570,909 -Public works - - 11,301 - - -Culture and recreation - - - - - -Community development - - - - - -Capital outlay 20,655 - - - -Debt service Principal 57,532 - - - - -Interest - - - - - -
Total expenditures - 152,370 11,301 - 570,909 -
Revenue over (under) expenditures 45,397 484 9,886 1 (436,724) 387,647 Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfers in/(out), net - - - (15) - -
Total other financing sources (uses) - - - (15) - -
Change in Fund Balance 484 45,397 9,886 (14) (436,724) 387,647 Fund Balance
Beginning of year, previously stated 11,541 54,338 20,220 14 - 635,062 Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) - - - - - -Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) - - - - - - Beginning of year, restated 11,541 54,338 20,220 14 - 635,062 End of year 99,735 $ 12,025 $ 30,106 $ - $ (436,724) $ 1,022,709 $ Special Revenue Funds
56 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 SB2 Riverbed
Planning Wildfire
LEAP King City SB1 Land Use Prevention Plan
Grants Low Income Housing Multimodal Grant Element Grant Grant Revenue
Taxes $ - - $ - $ - $ - $ Intergovernmental 70,137 - 29,201 53,368 -Charges for services - - - - -Licenses, permits and impact fees - - - - -Other revenues - - - - -Interest and rent 6,414 - - 1,893 23 Total revenue 6,414 70,137 29,201 55,261 23
Expenditures
Public safety - - - - -Public works - - 51,440 45,569 133,671Culture and recreation - - - - -Community development 74,900 - - - -Capital outlay - - - - -Debt service Principal - - - - -Interest - - - - -
Total expenditures - 74,900 51,440 45,569 133,671
Revenue over (under) expenditures (4,763) 6,414 (22,239) 9,692 (133,648) Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfers in/(out), net - - - - -
Total other financing sources (uses) - - - - -
Change in Fund Balance 6,414 (4,763) (22,239) 9,692 (133,648)Fund Balance Beginning of year, previously stated 153,203 (10,549) 83,446 - -Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) - - - - -Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) - - - - - Beginning of year, restated 153,203 (10,549) 83,446 - -End of year (15,312) $ 159,617 $ 61,207 $ 9,692 $ (133,648) $ Special Revenue Funds
57 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Formerly Nonmajor Formerly Major Formerly Major
Emergency Food and
Traffic FEMA Shelter National Gas CDBG Development
Safety Storm Event Board Program Tax Grant Impact Fees
Revenue
Taxes $ - - $ - $ - $ - $ - $
Intergovernmental - - - - 617,357 -
Charges for services - - - - - 26,358
Licenses, permits and impact fees - - - - - 326,900
Other revenues - - - - - -
Fines and forfeitures - - - - -
Interest and rent - 2,444 - - 31,062 79,439
Total revenue - 2,444 - - 648,419 432,697
Expenditures
Public safety - - - - - -
Public works 232,270 - - - 242,747 438,021
Culture and recreation - - - - - -
Community development - - 85,595 - 234,713 14,777
Capital outlay - - - - 158,901 102,899
Debt service
Principal - - - - - -
Interest - - - - - -
Total expenditures 232,270 - 85,595 - 636,361 555,697
Revenue over (under) expenditures 2,444 (232,270) (85,595) - 12,058 (123,000) Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfers in/(out), net - - - - 12,088 -
Total other financing sources (uses) - - - - 12,088 -
Change in Fund Balance (232,270) 2,444 (85,595) - 24,146 (123,000) Fund Balance
Beginning of year, previously stated (127,233) 1,621 - 82,162 - - Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) - - - - 2,007,873 765,799Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) - - - (82,162) - - Beginning of year, restated (127,233) 1,621 - - 765,799 2,007,873 End of year 4,065 $ (359,503) $ (85,595) $ - $ 789,945 $ 1,884,873 $ Special Revenue Funds
58 CITY OF KING CITY COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024 Total
Non-major
CDBG Airport Prop 68 UUT-Public Police Governmental
Youth Operations Grant Safety Grants Funds
Revenue
Taxes $ - - $ - $ 536,660 $ - $ 556,892 $
Intergovernmental 66,932 174,783 332,431 - - 2,029,448Charges for services - 127,057 - - - 153,415Licenses, permits and impact fees - - - - - 326,900Other revenue - 864 - - - 864Interest and rent 13,026 - - 15,529 - 185,630 Total revenue 315,730 66,932 332,431 552,189 - 3,253,149 Expenditures
Public safety - - - - 41,144 686,236Public works - 194,468 8,899 - - 1,358,386Community development - - - - - 409,985Capital outlay - - 729,141 - - 1,011,596Debt service Principal - - - - - 57,532
Interest - - - - - -Total expenditures 194,468 - 738,040 - 41,144 3,523,735 Revenue over (under) expenditures 66,932 121,262 (405,609) 552,189 (41,144) (270,586) Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfers in/(out), net - - - (551,551) - (539,478)
Total other financing sources (uses) - - - (551,551) - (539,478) Change in Fund Balance 121,262 66,932 (405,609) 638 (41,144) (810,064) Fund Balance
Beginning of year, previously stated 309,562 - (176,247) 56,761 - 1,093,901 Change within financial reporting entity (major to nonmajor) - - - - - 2,773,672Change within financial reporting entity (nonmajor to major) - - - - - (82,162) Beginning of year, restated 309,562 - (176,247) 56,761 - 3,785,411 End of year 66,932 $ 430,824 $ (581,856) $ 57,399 $ (41,144) $ 2,975,347 $ Special Revenue Funds
BRYANT L. JOLLEY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Bryant L. Jolley C.P.A.

Ryan P. Jolley C.P.A.

Darryl L. Smith C.P.A.

Luis A. Perez C.P.A.

Lan T. Kimoto
901 “N” STREET, SUITE 104 FIREBAUGH, CALIFORNIA 93622 PHONE 559.659.3045 FAX 559.659.0615 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER

FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS

BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED

IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of King City, California
We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of King City (the “City”), California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2024, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise City’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated August 26, 2025.

Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control.

A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements, on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.

Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or, significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified.

Report on Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements.

However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.

Purpose of This Report
The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the entity’s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose.

August 26, 2025
BRYANT L. JOLLEY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Bryant L. Jolley C.P.A.

Ryan P. Jolley C.P.A.

Darryl L. Smith C.P.A.

Luis A. Perez C.P.A.

Lan T. Kimoto
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM

AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE

REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM GUIDANCE
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of King City, California
Report on Compliance for Each Major Federal Program
Opinion on Each Major Federal Program
We have audited City of King City (the “City”), California’s compliance with the types of compliance requirements identified as subject to audit in the OMB Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of the City’s major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2024. The City’s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor’s results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs.

In our opinion, the City complied, in all material respects, with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2024.

Basis for Opinion on Each Major Federal Program
We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the audit requirements of Title 2 U.S.

Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Our responsibilities under those standards and the Uniform Guidance are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section of our report.

We are required to be independent of the City and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion on compliance for each major federal program. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of the City’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above.

Responsibilities of Management for Compliance
Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements referred to above and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective internal control over compliance with the requirements of laws, statutes, regulations, rules, and provisions of contracts or grant agreements applicable to the City’s federal programs.
62 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above occurred, whether due to fraud or error, and express an opinion on the City’s compliance based on our audit. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance will always detect material noncompliance when it exists. The risk of not detecting material noncompliance resulting from fraud is higher than for that resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above is considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, it would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user of the report on compliance about City’s compliance with the requirements of each major federal program as a whole.

In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance, we:
 Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit.  Identify and assess the risks of material noncompliance, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the City’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Obtain an understanding of the City’s internal control over compliance relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over compliance.

Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.

We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and any significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal control over compliance that we identified during the audit.

Report on Internal Control over Compliance
A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.

Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section above and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, 63 as defined above. However, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance may exist that were not identified.

Our audit was not designed for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.

The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based on the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose.

August 26, 2025
64 CITY OF KING CITY

SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Assistance Agency or
Federal Grantor/Pass-through Listing Pass-through Federal Grantor/Program Title Number Number Expenditures
U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development
Passed through State Department of Housing and
Communiy Development
Community Development Block Grants/State's Program 14.228 20-CDBG-12002 168,681 $ Community Development Block Grants/State's Program 14.228 20-CDBG-CV2-3-00005 246,250 Community Development Block Grants/State's Program 14.228 20-CDBG-CV2-3-00014 221,429 Total U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development 636,360 U.S. Department of Federal Emergency Management Agency
Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program 97.024 N/A 85,595 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance 97.036 N/A 232,271
Total U.S. Department of Federal Emergency Management Agency 317,866 U.S. Department of the Treasury
Passed through California Department of Finance
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
America Rescue Plan Act 21.027 N/A 2,099,108
Total U.S. Department of the Treasury 2,099,108
Total Federal Expenditures $ 3,053,334
65 CITY OF KING CITY

NOTES TO SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies
The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) presents the activity of all federal award programs of the City of King City, California (the City). Federal awards received directly from federal agencies as well as federal awards passed through other nonfederal agencies, primarily the State of California, are included in the SEFA. The City’s reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the City’s basic financial statements.

Note 2 – Basis of Accounting
The accompanying SEFA is presented using the modified accrual basis of accounting for grants accounted for in the governmental fund types and the accrual basis of accounting for grants accounted for in the proprietary fund types, as described in Note 1 to the City’s basic financial statements. The information in the SEFA is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Therefore, some amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the SEFA may differ from amounts presented in the basic financial statements.

Note 3 – Relationship to the Financial Statements
Expenditures of federal awards are reported in the City’s basic financial statements as expenditures/expenses in the General Fund, nonmajor special revenue funds, nonmajor capital project funds, and the enterprise funds.

Note 4 – Indirect Cost Rate
The City did not elect to use the 10% de minimus cost rate as covered in 2 CFR §200.414. 66 CITY OF KING CITY

SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
A. Summary of Auditor’s Results
Financial Statements
Type of auditor’s report issued: Unmodified

Internal control over financial reporting:
 Material weaknesses identified? Yes No
 Significant deficiencies identified that are
not considered to be material weaknesses? Yes None reported  Non-compliance material to financial
statements noted? Yes No
Federal Awards
Internal control over major programs:
 Material weaknesses identified? Yes No
 Significant deficiencies identified that are
not considered to be material weaknesses? Yes None reported Type of auditor’s report issued on compliance for
major programs: Unmodified
Any audit findings disclosed that are required to
be reported in accordance with 2CFR section
200.516? Yes No
Identification of Major Programs
Assistance Listing Number Name of Federal Program or Cluster

21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds

Dollar threshold used to distinguish between
Type A and Type B programs: $750,000
Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee? Yes No
B. Findings – Financial Statements Audit
None noted.

C. Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Award Programs Audit None noted.
67 CITY OF KING CITY

SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR AUDIT FINDINGS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Summary Schedule of Prior Audit Findings
None reported.

CITY OF KING CITY

MANAGEMENT REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
EXHIBIT 2

TABLE OF

CONTENTS
Page
Required Communications 1 – 3
BRYANT L. JOLLEY
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Bryant L. Jolley C.P.A.

Ryan P. Jolley C.P.A.

Darryl L. Smith C.P.A.

Luis A. Perez C.P.A.

Lan T. Kimoto
901 “N” STREET, SUITE 104 FIREBAUGH, CALIFORNIA 93622 PHONE 559.659.3045 FAX 559.659.0615 To the Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of King City, California
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of King City (the “City”) for the year ended June 30, 2024. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards and, if applicable, Government Auditing Standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated July 1, 2020.

Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit.

Significant Audit Matters
Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements.

The City adopted GASB Statement No. 100, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, and the application of other existing policies was not changed during 2024. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year that were both significant and unusual, and of which, under professional standards, we are required to inform you, or transactions for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance and consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.

We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.

Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the City’s financial statements were:

Management has determined the economic useful lives of fixed assets based on past history of similar types of assets, future plans as to their use, and other factors that impact their economic value to the City. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used by management in computing depreciation expense and believe that it is reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.
2 Management’s estimate of the net pension liability and related deferrals is based on actuarial valuations which include significant assumptions regarding discount rate, inflation, payroll growth, projected salary increases and investment rate of return. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the liability and related deferrals in determining that it is reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.

The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.

Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.

Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole.

Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.

Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated August 26, 2025.

Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. 3 Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as City of King City’s auditors.

However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.

Other Matters
We applied certain limited procedures to the Budgetary Comparison Schedules, Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability, and Schedule of Contributions which are required supplementary information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI.

We were engaged to report on supplementary information, as listed in the table of contents, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. With respect to this supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.

Restriction on Use
This information is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council and management of the City and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

Very truly yours,
August 26, 2025