Agenda — Marina City Council, August 3, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

AGENDA

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 5:00 P.M. Closed Session
6:30 P.M. Open Session

SPECIAL MEETING

CITY COUNCIL, AIRPORT COMMISSION,

MARINA ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, PRESTON PARK SUSTAINABLE

COMMUNITY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE FORMER

MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MARINA GROUNDWATER

SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY

Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California

Zoom Meeting URL: https://zoom.us/j/730251556
Zoom Meeting Telephone Only Participation: 1-669-900-9128 - Webinar ID: 730 251 556

In accordance with California Government Code §54953(e)(1)(A) and (C) and the Proclamation of a State of Emergency issued by Governor Newsom o n March 4, 2020, under the provisions of Go vernment Code §8625 related to the COVID -19 (coronavirus) pandemic, consistent with recommendations by State and local health officials regarding social distancing and in order to prevent an imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as determine d in Resolution 2022-94, public participation in City of Marina City Council public meetings shall be electronic only and without a physical location for public participation until the earlier of May 31, 2022, or such time as the City Council may ado pt a resolution in accordance with Government Code §54953(e)(3). This meeting is being broadcast “live” on Access Media Productions (AMP) Community Television Cable 25 and on t he City of Marina Channel and on the i nternet at https://accessmediaproductions.org/

PARTICIPATION
You may participate in the City Council meeting in real-time by calling Zoom Meeting via the weblink and phone number provided at the top of this a genda. Instructions on how to acce ss, vie w and participate in remote meetings are provided by visiting the City’s home page at https://cityofmarina.org/. Attendees can make oral comments during the meeting by usi ng the “Raise Your Hand” feature in the webinar or by pressing *9 on your telephone keypad if joining by phone only. If you are unable to participate in real-time, you may email to [email protected] with the subject line “Public Comment Item#__ ” (insert the item number relevant to your comment) or “Public Comment – Non Agenda Item.” Comments will be reviewed and distr ibuted before the meeting if received by 5:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. All com ments received will become part of t he record. Council will have the option to modify their action on items based on comments received.

AGENDA MATERIALS
Agenda materi als, staff reports and background information related to regular agenda items are available on the City of Marina’s websit e www.cityofmarina.org. Materials r elated to an item on this agenda submitted to the Coun cil after distribution of the agenda packet will be made available on the City of Mari na website www.cityofmarina.org subject to City staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting

Agenda for Special City Council Meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 2022 Page 2

VISION STATEMENT
Marina will grow and mature from a small tow n bedroom community to a small city which i s diversified, vibrant and through positive relationships with regional agencies, self-sufficient. The City will develop in a way that insulates it from the negative impacts of urban sprawl to become a desirable residential and business community in a natural setting. (Resolution No. 2006-112 - May 2, 2006)

MISSION STATEMENT
The City Council will provide the leadership in protecting Marina’s natural setting while developing the City in a way that provides a bala nce of housing, jobs and business opportuni ties that will result in a community c haracterized by a desirable quality of life, including recreation and cultural opportunities, a safe environment and an economic viability that supports a high level of munici pal services and infrastructure. (Resolution No. 2006-112 - May 2, 2006)

1. CALL TO ORDER

Cristina Medina Dirksen, David Burnett, Lisa Berkley, Mayor Pro -Tem/Vice Chair Kathy Biala, Mayor/Chair Bruce C. Delgado

3. CLOSED SESS ION: As permitted by Government Code Sect ion 54956 et seq., the (City Council, A irport C ommissioners, Marina Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation, Preston Park Sustainable Communities Nonpr ofit Corporation, Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency M embers and Ma rina Groundwater Sustainabili ty Agency) may adjourn to a C losed or E xecutive Session to consider specific matters dealing with litigation, certain personnel matters, property negotiations or to confer with the City’s Meyers -Milias- Brown Act representative.
a. Conference with Le gal Coun sel, Potential litigation, exposure to litiga tion per: “Conference with Legal Counsel – anticipated litigation, significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) (d) of CA Govt. Code s ec. 54956.9 – One potential case
b. Performance Evaluation of Public Empl oyee, Unrepresented Employee (CA Govt.

Code Section 54957(b)(1) – City Manager
6:30 PM - RECONVENE OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN I N

CLOSED SESSION

4. MOMENT OF SILENCE & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Please stand)

5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None

Agenda for Special City Council Meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 2022 Page 3

7. CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FO RMER MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Background information has been provided to the S uccessor Agency of the former Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent Agenda, and these item s are considered to be routine. Al l items under the Consent Agenda ar e normally approved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may a sk a quest ion or make a c omment a bout an agenda item and s taff wil l provide a response. If discussi on or a lengthy explanation is requ ired, that item will b e removed from the Consent Agenda for Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency and placed at the end of Other Action Items Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency.

8. CONSENT AGENDA: Background information has been provid ed to the City Council, Airport Commission, Marina Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation, and Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent Agenda, and these items are considered to be routi ne. All items under the Consent Agenda are normally appro ved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may ask a question or make a comment about an agenda item and staff will provide a response. If di scussion or a lengthy ex planation is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed at the end of Other Action Items. a. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
(1) Accounts Payable EFT’s and Check Numbers 100349-100459, totaling $461,034.79 b. MINUTES:
(1) July 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting
(2) July 12, 2022, Special City Council Meeting
c. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: None
d. AWARD OF BID: None
e. CALL FOR BIDS: None
f. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS:
(1) City Council consider adopting Resolution No . 2022-, approving the update to the 2022 Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and; approve the update to V olume 2, Annex G, and; adopt the Monterey Count y Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan , including Annex G as an official plan of the City of Marina.
g. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS:
(1) City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 2022 -, approving Amendment No. 1 to the On-Call Landscape Architectural Services agreement between the City of Marina and Verde Design, Inc. (Verde) increasing the annual contract limit to $650,000 for fiscal year 2022-2023; and authorizing the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City subject to fina l review and approval by the City Attorney.
h. ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS:
(1) City Council consider adopting R esolution No. 2022 -, accepting the dedication of Public Improvements as shown on the approve d Sea Haven Phase 5 A Improvement Plans and Final Map, and; authorize the City Clerk to release bond securities, accept a warranty bond, and record acceptance with Monterey County Recorder’s Office.
i. MAPS: None
Agenda for Special City Council Meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 2022 Page 4

j. REPORTS: (RECEIVE AND FILE): None
k. FUNDING & BUDGET MATTERS: None
l. APPROVE ORDINANCES (WAIVE SECOND READING): None
m. APPROVE APPOINTMENTS: None

10. OTHER ACTIONS ITE MS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER MARINA R EDEVELOPMENT AGENC Y: Action listed for each Agenda i tem is that which is requested by staff. The Successor Agency may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The pu blic is invited to approach th e pod ium to provide up to four (4) minutes of public comment.

11. OTHER ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is requested by staff.

The City Council may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to four (4) minutes of public comment.

Note: N o additional major projects or prog rams should be undertaken withou t review of the im pacts on existing priorities (Resolution No. 2006-79 – April 4, 2006). a. City Council Consider adopting Resolution No. 2022 -, awarding a construction contract for the City Park Barracks and Cypress Knolls Buildings Blight Remo val 2022 Project to Unlimited Environmental Inc. of Long Beach, CA for the base bid in the amount of $4,245,000; and allocating and appropriating additional blight removal funding in the amount of $415,440 to project HSF 2101 and $161,560 to project HSF2103 for a total of $577,000; and authorizing the City Manager to execute contract documents subject to fin al review and approval by the City Attorney; and authorizing t he City Manager or his designee to expend up to an additional 10% of the contract amount for potential construction contingencies and to execute all construction change orders on behalf of the C ity; and authorizing the Finance Director to make necessary accounting and budgetary entries. b. City Council consider a dopting Resolution No. 2022- and Resolution No. 2022- (NPC), approving the approving the Abrams B Housing Area Budget for FY 2022- 2023; and authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.
c. City Council and C orporation Board consider adopting Resolution No. 2022- and Resolution No. 2022 (PPSC-NPC), approving the Preston Park Sustainabl e Community Non-Profit Corporation Preston Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022- 23, and; authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries and approving the Preston Par k Sustaina ble Community N on-Profit Corporation Preston Park Housing Area Budget for FY 2022-23; and authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

Agenda for Special City Council Meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 2022 Page 5

12. COUNCIL & STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. Monterey County Mayor’s Association [Mayor Bruce Delgado] b. Council and staff opportunity to ask a questio n for clarification or make a b rief report on his or her own activities as permitted by Government Code Section 54954.2.

13. ADJOURNMENT:

CERTIFICATION

I, Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Marina, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall and Counc il Ch ambers Bulletin Board at 211 Hillcrest Avenue, Monterey County Library Marina Branch at 190 Seaside Circle, City Bulletin Board at the corne r of Reservation Road and Del Monte Boulevard on or before 6:30 p.m., Friday, July 29, 2022.

___________________________________

ANITA SHARP, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
City Council, Airport Commission and Redevelopment Agency meetings are recorded on tape and available for public review and listening at the Office of th e City Cl erk and kept for a period of 90 days after t he formal approval of MINUTES.

City C ouncil meetings may be vie wed live on the me eting nigh t and at 1 2:30 p.m. a nd 3:00 p.m. on C able Channel 25 on the Sunday following the Regular City Council meeting date. In addition, Council meetings can be viewed at 6:30 p.m. every Monday, Tuesday and W ednesday. For more inform ation ab out viewing the Council Meetings on Channel 25, you may contact Access Monterey Peninsula directly at 831-333-1267.

Agenda items an d staff re ports are public re cord and are available f or public review on the City's website (www.ciytofmarina.org), at the Monterey County Marina Library Branch at 190 Seaside Circle and at the Office of the City Clerk at 211 Hillcrest Avenue, Marina between the ho urs of 10:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m., on the Monday preceding the meeting.

Supplemental ma terials r eceived after the close of the f inal agenda and through noon on the day of t he scheduled meeting will be available for public review at the City Clerk’s Office during regular office hours and in a ‘Supplemental Binder’ at the meeting.

Members of the public may receive the City Council, Airport Commission and Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency Agenda at a cost of $55 per year or by providing a self-addressed, stamped envelope to the City Clerk. The Agenda is also available at no cos t via ema il b y n otifying t he C ity Clerk a t [email protected]
ALL MEETINGS A RE OP EN TO THE PUBLIC. THE CIT Y OF M ARINA DOES N OT D ISCRIMINATE AGAINST PERSONS WITH D ISABILITIES. Council Chambers are whee lchair accessible. meetings are broadcast on cable channel 25 and recordings of meetings can be provided upon request. to request assistive listening devices, sign language interpreters, readers, large print agendas or other accommodations, please call (831) 884-1278 or e-mail: [email protected]. requests must be made at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.

U p c o m i n g 20 2 2 M e e t i n g s o f t h e C i t y C o u n ci l , A i r p o r t C om mi s s i o n, M a r i n a A b r a m s B N o n - P r o f i t C or p o r a t i o n , P r e s t o n P ar k S u s t a i n ab le C o m m u n i t y N o n p r o f i t C o r p or a tio n , S u c ce s s o r A g e n c y o f th e F o r m e r R e d e v e lo p me n t A g e n c y a n d M a r i n a Gr ou ndw a t e r S u s t a i n a bi l i t y A g e n c y R e g u l a r M eet i n g s : 5: 0 0 p . m . C l o s e d S es s i o n; 6 : 30 p .m . R e g u la r O p e n S e s s i o n s
Agenda for Special City Council Meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 2022 Page 6

Tuesday, August 16, 2022

*Wednesday, September 7, 2022

Tuesday, July 19, 2022

Tuesday, November 1, 2022
Tuesday, November 15, 2022

Tuesday, September 20, 2022

**Thursday, October 6, 2022
Tuesday, October 18, 2022

Tuesday, December 6, 2022
Tuesday, December 20, 2022

* Regular Meeting rescheduled due to Monday Holiday
** Regular Meeting rescheduled due to Religious Holiday NOTE: Regular Meeting dates may be rescheduled by City Council only. _________________________________________

CI T Y H A L L 2022 H O L I D A Y S
(City Hall Closed)

Labor Day ------------------------------------------------------------- Monday, September 5, 2022 Veterans Day ---------------------------------------------------------- Friday, November 11, 2022 Thanksgiving Day ------------------------------------------------ Thursday, November 24, 2022 Thanksgiving Break -------------------------------------------------- Friday, November 25, 2022 Winter Break ------------------------ Friday, December 23, 2022-Friday, December 30, 2022 __ ___ __ _ _ _______ __ _ ___

Upc o m i n g 2022 Me et in g s of P l a nn i n g C o m m i s s i o n 2nd and 4th Thursday of every month. Meetings are held at the Council Chambers at 6:30 P.M.

August 8, 2022 September 8, 2022 October 13, 2022
August 22, 2022 September 22, 2022 October 27, 2022
November 10, 2022
December 18, 2022

Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Check 07/22/2022 100349 Accounts Payable Ace Hardware 157.82 Invoice Date Description Amount.
082513 07/14/2022 Fuel & Fastners 157.82
Check 07/22/2022 100350 Accounts Payable Ace Hardware 60.57 Invoice Date Description Amount.
082497 07/13/2022 Irrigation Controller 18.56
082490 07/12/2022 Irrigation V.D. Park 2.72
082491 07/12/2022 Airport Supplies 4.36
082517 07/14/2022 PD Plug 26.20
082500 07/13/2022 Light Pole 8.73
Check 07/22/2022 100351 Accounts Payable Doug Kuelpman 9,040.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
6722 07/09/2022 Professional Services - Airport Manager Brochure 9,040.00 Check 07/22/2022 100352 Accounts Payable American Supply Co. 723.96 Invoice Date Description Amount.
0168737 05/17/2022 Shop Supplies 580.56
0168877 05/23/2022 Shop Supplies 124.22
0169157 06/02/2022 Shop Supplies Branches 19.18
Check 07/22/2022 100353 Accounts Payable AT & T 910.01
Invoice Date Description Amount.
06-27-22 06/27/2022 Acct #149151548 160.57
06-14-22 06/14/2022 Acct # 831 384-7723 454 4 749.44
Check 07/22/2022 100354 Accounts Payable Avaya, Inc. 12.49 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2734584976 07/04/2022 Acct #0100828859 12.49
Check 07/22/2022 100355 Accounts Payable Branch's Janitorial 2,059.47 Invoice Date Description Amount.
228419 06/23/2022 Custodial Services for June 2022 2,059.47 Check 07/22/2022 100356 Accounts Payable Bureau Veritas North America, Inc. 844.28 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 1 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
Agenda Item: 8a
1 Invoice Date Description Amount.

RI 22043467 07/11/2022 New Paint Booth RI 22043467 844.28 Check 07/22/2022 100357 Accounts Payable Burton's Fire, Inc. 9,885.14 Invoice Date Description Amount.

W 80488 07/12/2022 Fire Repairs 9,885.14
Check 07/22/2022 100358 Accounts Payable California Department of Justice 320.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
589635 06/30/2022 June Fingerprint Apps 320.00
Check 07/22/2022 100359 Accounts Payable Carmel Fire Protection Associates 4,800.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
122274 07/11/2022 Document Review Only - The Dunes Phase 2 & 3 200.00 122283 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3017 Shasta Way 200.00 122284 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3009 Shasta Way 200.00 122285 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3018 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122286 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3016 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122287 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3014 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122288 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3012 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122289 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3010 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122290 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3006 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122291 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3004 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122292 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3000 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122293 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 2997 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122294 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3001 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122295 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 3003 Pinnacles Way 200.00 122296 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 491 Russell Way 200.00 122297 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 493 Russell Way 200.00 122298 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA5000 - 495 Russell Way 200.00 122299 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 497 Russell Way 200.00 122300 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 481 Russell Way 200.00 122301 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 483 Russell Way 200.00 122302 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 485 Russell Way 200.00 122303 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 487 Russell Way 200.00 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 2 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
2 122304 07/15/2022 Plan check and inspection, MA6000 - 489 Russell Way 200.00 122305 07/16/2022 Plan check and inspection for 299 Carmel Bldg O 200.00 Check 07/22/2022 100360 Accounts Payable Carrot-Top Industries 389.22 Invoice Date Description Amount.

INV106757 05/24/2022 POW-MIA Double Sided Flag 174.22
INV108502 07/11/2022 POW-MIA Double Sided Flag 215.00
Check 07/22/2022 100361 Accounts Payable Coffman Associates 1,482.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
19GS04-11 06/30/2022 Marina Pen and Ink Alp Update 1,482.00 Check 07/22/2022 100362 Accounts Payable Comcast 187.12 Invoice Date Description Amount.
06-14-22 06/14/2022 Teen Center Cable Fees 187.12
Check 07/22/2022 100363 Accounts Payable Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula

27.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-08-22 06/30/2022 Guarantor #12252 - June 2022 27.00
Check 07/22/2022 100364 Accounts Payable CSG Consultants 39,554.06 Invoice Date Description Amount.

B220975 06/01/2022 Building Plan Review Services 23,375.06 44109 06/10/2022 Marina Building Services FY 17-23 12,474.00 44992 07/15/2022 Fuel & Fastners 3,705.00
Check 07/22/2022 100365 Accounts Payable CSUMB 7,831.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
612693 07/12/2022 OtterNet - Annual Network Svc Fee - July 1, 2022-June 30, 2023 7,831.00 Check 07/22/2022 100366 Accounts Payable Dave's Repair Service 1,190.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
34019 07/06/2022 Mandatory Testing 1,100.00
33311DG 07/02/2022 Mandatory Inspection 90.00
Check 07/22/2022 100367 Accounts Payable Diablo Engineering Group 2,379.30 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 3 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
3 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2245 07/07/2022 Consulting 2,379.30
Check 07/22/2022 100368 Accounts Payable Emergency Vehicle Specialists 1,176.94 Invoice Date Description Amount.
14084 07/14/2022 Work done on Unit 5400 1,176.94
Check 07/22/2022 100369 Accounts Payable Enterprise Rent-A-Car - EAN Services, LLC 296.07 Invoice Date Description Amount.
30001755 05/31/2022 Ofc. Davila 296.07
Check 07/22/2022 100370 Accounts Payable Fastenal Company 660.48 Invoice Date Description Amount.

CASAL153752 06/30/2022 Shop Supplies 660.48
Check 07/22/2022 100371 Accounts Payable FedEx 16.30
Invoice Date Description Amount.
7-806-34633 07/01/2022 Acct #3995-9218-6 16.30
Check 07/22/2022 100372 Accounts Payable First Alarm 930.06 Invoice Date Description Amount.
695752 07/15/2022 Hangar Building 510 3240 Imjin Rd 460.77 690850 06/15/2022 Building 524 761 Neeson Road 113.67
690851 06/15/2022 Building 527, 741 Neeson Road 355.62
Check 07/22/2022 100373 Accounts Payable fiserv 350.75
Invoice Date Description Amount.

Jun 2022 06/30/2022 Jun 2022 Merchant Fee 350.75
Check 07/22/2022 100374 Accounts Payable Gavilan Pest Control 1,657.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
0147148 07/01/2022 211 Hillcrest Ave Rodents 82.00
0147149 07/11/2022 Pest Control at Station 2 90.00
0146906 07/08/2022 781 Neeson Bldg 520 Rodents 75.00
0146905 07/08/2022 781 Neeson Bldg 520 Squirrels 1,150.00 0147220 07/13/2022 Preston Park/Squirrels 180.00
Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 4 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
4 0147150 07/13/2022 Shoemaker Pond 80.00
Check 07/22/2022 100375 Accounts Payable Golden State Truck & Trailer Repair, Inc. 514.41 Invoice Date Description Amount.

W 35672 07/18/2022 Fire Department 514.41
Check 07/22/2022 100376 Accounts Payable Heather Hardee 300.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.

MPD22-01 05/14/2022 Marina PD - Ruelas 300.00
Check 07/22/2022 100377 Accounts Payable Home Depot Credit Service 33.41 Invoice Date Description Amount.
7-11-22 07/11/2022 Fence Repair PPW 33.41
Check 07/22/2022 100378 Accounts Payable Johnson Associates 407.34 Invoice Date Description Amount.
485483 06/30/2022 PD Truck 815 407.34
Check 07/22/2022 100379 Accounts Payable L.N. Curtis & Sons 2,067.64 Invoice Date Description Amount.

INV611312 07/06/2022 5 Gallon Pail Foam 2,067.64
Check 07/22/2022 100380 Accounts Payable Language Line, LLC 163.43 Invoice Date Description Amount.
10566965 06/30/2022 Acct #9020101064 163.43
Check 07/22/2022 100381 Accounts Payable Lexis Nexis Risk Solutions 150.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
1308841-20220630 06/30/2022 Marina PD 150.00
Check 07/22/2022 100382 Accounts Payable Marina Coast Water District 4,707.89 Invoice Date Description Amount.
000056036 063022 06/30/2022 2nd Ave/Divarty & Intergarrison 171.02 000056037 063022 06/30/2022 2nd Ave 171.02
000056095 063022 06/30/2022 2nd Ave 392.83
000056099 063022 06/30/2022 9th Street West of 2nd Ave 180.46 000056100 063022 06/30/2022 9th Street Irrigation Parcels L&M 585.82 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 5 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
5 000056043 063022 06/30/2022 761 Neeson Road/Airport 193.30 000056044 063022 06/30/2022 781 Neeson Road/Airport 155.54 000056051 063022 06/30/2022 721 Neeson Road/Airport 188.58 000056092 063022 06/30/2022 741 Neeson Road/Airport 1,285.36 000056096 063022 06/30/2022 3271 Imjin Road/Airport 112.60 000056097 063022 06/30/2022 3200 Imjin Road/Airport 504.01 000056049 063022 06/30/2022 Imjin Rd (Irrigation/Backflow Accts) 199.34 06-30-22 A 06/30/2022 Acct # 091 - 751 Neeson Rd Bldg #526 155.54 06-30-22 B 06/30/2022 Acct # 014874 000 - 289 12th St 130.85 000056041 06/30/ 07/20/2022 Water usage at Station 2 281.62 Check 07/22/2022 100383 Accounts Payable Marina Collision Repair Inc. 1,591.05 Invoice Date Description Amount.
11900 06/16/2022 CSO Truck 1,591.05
Check 07/22/2022 100384 Accounts Payable Martin's Irrigation Supply 538.47 Invoice Date Description Amount.
615206 07/13/2022 Irrigation V.D. Park 538.47
Check 07/22/2022 100385 Accounts Payable Maynard Group Inc. 657.35 Invoice Date Description Amount.

IN2028202 07/01/2022 Acct #AC3746 657.35
Check 07/22/2022 100386 Accounts Payable Microsoft 1,557.13 Invoice Date Description Amount.

E0700JK8JD 07/11/2022 Citywide MS Office 365 - July 2022 48.00 E0700JK8JE 07/11/2022 Citywide MS Office 365 - July 2022 261.87 E0700JK7C7 07/11/2022 Citywide MS Office 365 - July 2022 1,140.42 E0700JKF4E 07/11/2022 Citywide MS Office 365 - July 2022 33.29 E0700JKAML 07/11/2022 Citywide MS Office 365 - July 2022 73.55 Check 07/22/2022 100387 Accounts Payable Monterey Bay Office Products 2,866.34 Invoice Date Description Amount.
476409214 07/01/2022 City Hall Copier Lease - July 2022 380.20 475692687 06/24/2022 Acct #598296 2,486.14
Check 07/22/2022 100388 Accounts Payable Monterey County Peace Officers 1,120.00 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 6 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
6 Association
Invoice Date Description Amount.
2022043R 07/04/2022 Marina PD - June 2022 Range Use 1,120.00 Check 07/22/2022 100389 Accounts Payable Monterey Tire Service 1,347.11 Invoice Date Description Amount.
1-107057 07/01/2022 Tire Repair for 5404 27.46
1-107230 07/15/2022 Unit 551 849.10
1-107203 07/12/2022 unit 894 4 Tires Installed 470.55
Check 07/22/2022 100390 Accounts Payable National Recreation & Park Association 675.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
08-31-22 07/13/2022 membership fees 675.00
Check 07/22/2022 100391 Accounts Payable New Image Landscape Co. 2,140.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
138563 06/30/2022 Landscape Maintenance for June 2022 2,140.00 Check 07/22/2022 100392 Accounts Payable Newton Bros. Tire & Auto 120.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
433191 05/27/2022 Police Car 820 120.00
Check 07/22/2022 100393 Accounts Payable Nextel Communications - Sprint 65.70 Invoice Date Description Amount.
866147022-238 06/22/2022 Rec Dept Cell Phone Bills 65.70 Check 07/22/2022 100394 Accounts Payable Office Depot 347.46 Invoice Date Description Amount.
248797412001 07/11/2022 Office Supplies-Finance 55.39
252515472001 07/07/2022 Office Supplies-Finance 34.28
248775238001 07/11/2022 Office Supplies-Finance 257.79
Check 07/22/2022 100395 Accounts Payable Office Depot 290.49 Invoice Date Description Amount.
252662178001 07/01/2022 Office Supplies/Building 74.60
255521205001 07/13/2022 Office Supplies/Building 92.63
Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 7 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
7 252680781001 07/04/2022 Office Supplies/Building Stamp 29.49 251438443001 07/06/2022 Office Supplies/Building 93.77
Check 07/22/2022 100396 Accounts Payable Pacific Gas & Electric 2,203.29 Invoice Date Description Amount.
347-0.JUL22 07/11/2022 3263 Imjin Rd Bldg 519 469.38
608-2.JUN22 06/10/2022 Gas & Electric at Station 2 848.61 608-2.JUL22 07/12/2022 Plan check and inspection for 299 Carmel Bldg O 885.30 Check 07/22/2022 100397 Accounts Payable Quill Corporation 584.05 Invoice Date Description Amount.
25991193 06/24/2022 Acct # 7474999 315.33
25990654 06/24/2022 Acct # 7474999 268.72
Check 07/22/2022 100398 Accounts Payable Raul Aguilar 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-16-22 vd 07/16/2022 Vince DiMaggio Refund 250.00
Check 07/22/2022 100399 Accounts Payable Rizelle Custodio 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-09-22 vd 07/09/2022 Rental Refund - Vince DiMaggio 250.00 Check 07/22/2022 100400 Accounts Payable Safety-Kleen Corp. 259.72 Invoice Date Description Amount.
89326329 07/13/2022 Solvent Tank 259.72
Check 07/22/2022 100401 Accounts Payable Sentry Alarm Systems of America, Inc. 690.90 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2194933 07/15/2022 Cust # 1840 - 8/1/22 - 10/31/22 150.00 2194932 07/15/2022 Cust # 1840 - 8/1/22 - 10/31/22 540.90 Check 07/22/2022 100402 Accounts Payable South Coast Emergency Vehicle Service 7,388.25 Invoice Date Description Amount.
508679 06/29/2022 Marina Fire Department Annual Service 6,117.17 508788 07/07/2022 Flowmeter, Foam Pro Hypro 1,271.08
Check 07/22/2022 100403 Accounts Payable SpeakWrite 574.04 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 8 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
8 Invoice Date Description Amount.
fa4cbb2a 07/01/2022 Marina PD 574.04
Check 07/22/2022 100404 Accounts Payable Suburban Propane 497.16 Invoice Date Description Amount.
1602-116403 07/01/2022 Corp Yard 497.16
Check 07/22/2022 100405 Accounts Payable Tina Spruell 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
06-25-22 vd 06/25/2022 Rental Refund - Vince DiMaggio 250.00 Check 07/22/2022 100406 Accounts Payable Tri County Fire Protection 185.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.

HP58686 06/28/2022 Annual Extinguisher 208 Palm 185.00
Check 07/22/2022 100407 Accounts Payable Bill Uretsky 1,332.18 Invoice Date Description Amount.
9170 06/29/2022 Marina PD - Rocha Alvarez Background 1,332.18 Check 07/22/2022 100408 Accounts Payable Veritone, Inc. 5,000.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
30716 05/12/2022 Marina PD 5,000.00
Check 07/22/2022 100409 Accounts Payable Wellington & Rathie 5,200.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
26189 07/11/2022 Marina Municipal Airport Matters - May 2022 200.00 26194 07/11/2022 Public Records Act Request - May 2022 980.00 26190 07/11/2022 General Matters - May 2022 560.00
26193 07/11/2022 Misc Personnel Matters - May 2022 260.00 26192 07/11/2022 Land Use & Operations - May 2022 2,220.00 26191 07/11/2022 Joby Aero Inc - May 2022 360.00
26195 07/11/2022 Abrams Park-Marina Height-Sea Haven - May 2022 220.00 26196 07/11/2022 Wellington & Rathie May 2022 400.00
Check 07/22/2022 100410 Accounts Payable William A. Thayer Construction, Inc 28,398.88 Invoice Date Description Amount.

Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 9 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
9 2022-10-02 07/08/2022 Fire Station 3 Reroof 28,398.88 Check 07/22/2022 100411 Accounts Payable Zoom Imaging Solutions 520.53 Invoice Date Description Amount.

IN2767352 06/26/2022 Acct #SOS-CIT1600-Z 520.53
Check 07/22/2022 100412 Accounts Payable Cheryl Kent 660.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2022-90 07/12/2022 Code Enforcement Investigations 660.00 EFT 07/22/2022 2435 Accounts Payable Richard B. Standridge 121042882 / 8312012522 4,203.75 Invoice Date Description Amount.
22-14 07/14/2022 Service 7/1-14/2022 4,203.75
905 Chase - Checking Totals: Transactions: 65 $167,049.01 Checks: 64 $162,845.26
EFTs: 1 $4,203.75
Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Register - 7.22.2022
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/22/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Rogah Satof Pages: 10 of 10 7/21/2022 1:13:13 PM
10 Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Check 07/29/2022 100413 Accounts Payable Ace Hardware 68.74 Invoice Date Description Amount.
082302 06/16/2022 Cust. # 116 6.54
082426 07/04/2022 Cust. #116 40.37
082483 07/12/2022 Cust. # 116 21.83
Check 07/29/2022 100414 Accounts Payable Ace Hardware 12.02 Invoice Date Description Amount.
082577 07/22/2022 Preston Park 12.02
Check 07/29/2022 100415 Accounts Payable Alliant Insurance Services 100.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2015595 07/06/2022 MARINA0-01 50.00
2015603 07/06/2022 MARINA0-01 50.00
Check 07/29/2022 100416 Accounts Payable Andersen's Lock & Safe, Inc. 348.45 Invoice Date Description Amount.
42649 07/25/2022 Fire King Medeco Lock 348.45
Check 07/29/2022 100417 Accounts Payable AT & T 758.03
Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-14-22 07/14/2022 Acct #831 384-7723 454 4 758.03
Check 07/29/2022 100418 Accounts Payable AT & T 213.14
Invoice Date Description Amount.
000018497727 07/15/2022 BAN #9391023478 46.06
000018485459 07/13/2022 BAN #9391023434 167.08
Check 07/29/2022 100419 Accounts Payable Ben's Motorcycle Works 1,927.56 Invoice Date Description Amount.
7579 05/21/2022 PD 803AA 1,927.56
Check 07/29/2022 100420 Accounts Payable Branch's Janitorial 4,945.82 Invoice Date Description Amount.
228446 07/25/2022 Custodial Service for July 2022 2,886.35 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 1 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 11 228445 07/25/2022 Custodial Services for July 2022 2,059.47 Check 07/29/2022 100421 Accounts Payable Cheryl Kent 1,200.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2022-95 07/21/2022 Code Enforcement Investigations 1,200.00 Check 07/29/2022 100422 Accounts Payable Comcast 187.21 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-14-22 07/14/2022 Teen Center Cable Fees 187.21
Check 07/29/2022 100423 Accounts Payable CSG Consultants 52,194.50 Invoice Date Description Amount.
45105 07/15/2022 Locke Paddon CFD 990.00
45106 07/15/2022 Phase 1C CFD 660.00
45108 07/15/2022 Imjin Widening (#401) 2,805.00
45109 07/15/2022 Salinas Ave Widening 165.00
45110 07/15/2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan 495.00
45111 07/15/2022 PFIF Update 165.00
45113 07/15/2022 Staff Augmentation 990.00
45114 07/15/2022 RWQCB 330.00
45115 07/15/2022 TAMC 330.00
45116 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Phase 3 Map/Plan Review 4,702.50 45117 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Phase 3A Inspection 2,451.00 45118 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Phase 5A Inspection 1,068.00 45119 07/15/2022 Marina Station 330.00
45120 07/15/2022 Dunes Phase 2 East 1,692.00
45121 07/15/2022 Dunes Phase 2 West 789.00
45122 07/15/2022 Dunes Op Site 1A 2,590.00
45123 07/15/2022 Dunes Phase 3 West 1,815.00
45124 07/15/2022 Hampton Inn (120 Reservation Road) 165.00 45125 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Inspection Phase 3B 1,032.00 45126 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Phase 4 Map/Plan Review 5,125.00 45127 07/15/2022 Seascrest Apartments 3108 Seacrest Ave 165.00 45128 07/15/2022 Dunes Phase 1B Promenade 3,825.00
45129 07/15/2022 Via Del Mar Subdivision (3320 Abdy Way) 1,419.00 45130 07/15/2022 Sea Haven Phase 4 Rough Grading 9,675.00 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 2 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 12 45131 07/15/2022 Home2 Suites By Hilton 1,935.00
45132 07/15/2022 Quick Quack Carwash 6,486.00
Check 07/29/2022 100424 Accounts Payable East Bay Tire Co. 174.78 Invoice Date Description Amount.
1853245 07/25/2022 Fire Engine 5412 174.78
Check 07/29/2022 100425 Accounts Payable Emergency Vehicle Specialists 3,000.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
13972 06/07/2022 New Patrol Vehicle Paint - Charger Vin#68879 3,000.00 Check 07/29/2022 100426 Accounts Payable Fairbank,Maslin,Maullin,Metz & Assoc. 29,750.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
240742 07/25/2022 City of Marina 2022 Issues Survey - Complete Billing 29,750.00 Check 07/29/2022 100427 Accounts Payable First Alarm 795.06 Invoice Date Description Amount.
690848 06/15/2022 Alarm Monitoring - 209 Cypress Ave - July-Sept 2022 197.01 690849 06/15/2022 Alarm Monitoring - Corp Yard - July-Sept 2022 333.87 693283 07/15/2022 Alarm Monitoring - City Hall - Aug-Oct 2022 118.02 694465 07/15/2022 Alarm Monitoring - 327 Reindollar Ave - Aug-Oct 2022 146.16 Check 07/29/2022 100428 Accounts Payable Formation Environmental, LLC 1,037.50 Invoice Date Description Amount.
7100 06/26/2022 180/400 Foot Aquifer GSP:Task 09 1,037.50 Check 07/29/2022 100429 Accounts Payable Goldfarb & Lipman 10,550.76 Invoice Date Description Amount.
146052 07/21/2022 General Files - June 2022 8,672.00
146053 07/21/2022 Marina Heights - June 2022 416.00
146054 07/21/2022 The Dunes - June 2022 1,462.76
Check 07/29/2022 100430 Accounts Payable HF&H Consultants 19,375.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
9719404 07/11/2022 Rate Analysis 19,375.00
Check 07/29/2022 100431 Accounts Payable Home Depot Credit Service 3,625.50 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 3 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 13 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-13-22 07/13/2022 Home Depot/Public Works/Corp Yard 3,625.50 Check 07/29/2022 100432 Accounts Payable J & M Aircraft Supply, Inc. 302.41 Invoice Date Description Amount.
42643 07/19/2022 Airport Lighting 302.41
Check 07/29/2022 100433 Accounts Payable Julia Sanchez 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-24-22 vd 07/24/2022 Rental Refund - Vince DiMaggio 250.00 Check 07/29/2022 100434 Accounts Payable Marina Coast Water District 4,871.30 Invoice Date Description Amount.
000056014 070722 07/07/2022 3200 Del Monte Blvd 1,830.52 000056086 070722 07/07/2022 Crescent Ave/Sirena Del Mar Irrigation 27.26 000056085 070722 07/07/2022 Crescent/Whitney Irrigation 27.26 000056015 070722 07/07/2022 Corner of Cardoza & Dolphin Circle 60.52 000056034 070722 07/07/2022 3240 De Forest Road 403.37
000056030 070722 07/07/2022 Crescent Ave/Reser Rd/Ramada Inn 36.77 000056087 070722 07/07/2022 Crescent Ave/Costa Del Mar Irrigation 27.26 000056008 070722 07/07/2022 Reservation & Del Monte 27.26 000056025 071522 07/15/2022 327 Reindollar Ave 69.16
000056027 071522 07/15/2022 Calif Ave at Reindollar 36.77 000056007 071522 07/15/2022 Calif Ave/North of 3rd 89.02 000056094 072122 07/21/2022 2660 5th Ave 426.66
000056021 071522 07/15/2022 Reservation Rd/By 290-308 Reservation 44.07 000056017 071522 07/15/2022 208-A Palm Ave 80.86
000056020 071522 07/15/2022 304 Hillcrest Ave 111.02
000056019 071522 07/15/2022 211 Hillcrest Ave 1,026.63
000056018 071522 07/15/2022 208 Palm Ave 281.48
000056001 071522 07/15/2022 209-13 Cypress Ave 102.85
000056024 071522 07/15/2022 Del Monte/Palm 89.02
000056022 071522 07/15/2022 Reservation/Marina Auto Stereo/Irrigation 36.77 000056016 071522 07/15/2022 Reserv Rd & Seacrest Ave-Next to Fire Hyd 36.77 Check 07/29/2022 100435 Accounts Payable Monterey County Animal Services 9,300.00 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 4 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 14 Invoice Date Description Amount.
7/20/2022 07/20/2022 4th Qtr FY 2021-22 9,300.00
Check 07/29/2022 100436 Accounts Payable Monterey Regional Waste Management District
110.25
Invoice Date Description Amount.
3643749 07/21/2022 Salinas Ave East 22.05
3643847 07/21/2022 Salinas Ave East 33.75
3643753 07/21/2022 Salinas Ave East 26.55
3643876 07/21/2022 Salinas Ave East 27.90
Check 07/29/2022 100437 Accounts Payable MuttMitt - ZW USA Inc. 1,196.14 Invoice Date Description Amount.
496952 07/25/2022 Mutt Mitt Replacement 1,196.14
Check 07/29/2022 100438 Accounts Payable MyFleetCenter - Wisconsin Quick Lube 113.46 Invoice Date Description Amount.
36764426 07/20/2022 1501215 Cheif's 113.46
Check 07/29/2022 100439 Accounts Payable Frank Reyes, Jr. 24,864.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
222175 07/20/2022 General Representation - June-July 2022 11,197.00 222177 07/20/2022 Personnel Matters - June 2022 592.50
222176 07/20/2022 City Council Meetings 4,305.50
222173 07/20/2022 Contract Matters - June-July 2022 7,821.00 222174 07/20/2022 PRA Matters - June-July 2022 948.00
Check 07/29/2022 100440 Accounts Payable Office Depot 388.76 Invoice Date Description Amount.
251995037-1 07/15/2022 Office Supplies - HR Office 190.82 251995035001 07/15/2022 Office Supplies - HR Office 197.94 Check 07/29/2022 100441 Accounts Payable Office Depot 31.13 Invoice Date Description Amount.
255532803001 07/14/2022 Office Supplies 31.13
Check 07/29/2022 100442 Accounts Payable Pacific Gas & Electric 23,354.72 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 5 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 15 Invoice Date Description Amount.
694-1.JUL22 07/12/2022 721 Neeson Rd Bldg 533 1,128.03
098-7.JUL22 07/12/2022 761 Neeson Rd Bldg 524 7,618.79
451-7.JUL22 07/11/2022 3271 Imjin Road Utilities B554 194.12 103-6.Jul22 07/13/2022 3200 Imjin Rd 14,314.70
533-8.JUL22 07/19/2022 PG&E - 2253666533-8 99.08
Check 07/29/2022 100443 Accounts Payable Quill Corporation 271.19 Invoice Date Description Amount.
26307941 07/12/2022 Records 271.19
Check 07/29/2022 100444 Accounts Payable Regional Government Services 153.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
13771 06/30/2022 Joby Aviation June 2022 153.00
Check 07/29/2022 100445 Accounts Payable Rincon Consultants, Inc. 16,408.25 Invoice Date Description Amount.
40738 07/14/2022 DVSP 16,408.25
Check 07/29/2022 100446 Accounts Payable Rosenbauer Minnesota, LLC 1,874.73 Invoice Date Description Amount.
68080 07/21/2022 Change orders for the 21-01 Rosenbauer Engine 1,874.73 Check 07/29/2022 100447 Accounts Payable Salinas Valley Ford 1,721.58 Invoice Date Description Amount.
92169 07/20/2022 15 Ford F250 587.37
92038 07/18/2022 Airport Ford F250 444.12
91897 07/14/2022 Ford F250 2003 Airport 690.09
Check 07/29/2022 100448 Accounts Payable Save The Whales 13,424.71 Invoice Date Description Amount.
5/Year 9 07/14/2022 Storm Water Program NPDES (6/1/22-6/30/22 13,424.71 Check 07/29/2022 100449 Accounts Payable Sierra Springs & Alhambra 107.35 Invoice Date Description Amount.
14225799 071322 07/13/2022 209 Cypress Ave 107.35
Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 6 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 16 Check 07/29/2022 100450 Accounts Payable Tartaglia Engineering 34,682.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
09CCP_2021 01/18/2022 Extend Taxiway B East to Threshold of Runway 29 34,682.00 Check 07/29/2022 100451 Accounts Payable Tevita Tulua 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-23-22 vd 07/23/2022 Rental Refund - Vince DiMaggio 250.00 Check 07/29/2022 100452 Accounts Payable Underground Service Alert - USA North 811 1,089.59 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2022120045 07/20/2022 811 Dig 1,089.59
Check 07/29/2022 100453 Accounts Payable Verizon Wireless 641.64 Invoice Date Description Amount.
9911477111 07/18/2022 PW Verizon Phone Bill 061922-071822 641.64 Check 07/29/2022 100454 Accounts Payable Wallace Group, Inc. 19,050.67 Invoice Date Description Amount.
55660 02/21/2022 Hayes Circle Two Lot Transfer 16,320.17 56211 05/28/2022 Hayes Circle Two Lot Transfer 1,087.50 55302 01/14/2022 MLK Sculpture 160.25
55150 12/20/2021 MLK Sculpture 1,482.75
Check 07/29/2022 100455 Accounts Payable William A. Thayer Construction, Inc 3,847.39 Invoice Date Description Amount.
2022-10-02 Bal 07/08/2022 Fire Station 3 Reroof Balance 3,847.39 Check 07/29/2022 100456 Accounts Payable Marina Employees Association 130.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-22-22 07/22/2022 24 - MEA Dues 130.00
Check 07/29/2022 100457 Accounts Payable Marina Professional Fire Fighters Association
300.00
Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-22-22 07/22/2022 35 - MPFFA Dues 300.00
Check 07/29/2022 100458 Accounts Payable Premier Access Insurance 1,030.00 Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 7 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 17 Invoice Date Description Amount.
08-01-22 08/01/2022 101 - Dental EE+1* 5,587.36
08-01-22. 08/01/2022 Dental Claim (08/2022) (4,557.36)
Check 07/29/2022 100459 Accounts Payable Vision Service Plan 1,938.85 Invoice Date Description Amount.
08-01-22 08/01/2022 103 - Vision EE* 1,825.60
08-01-22. 08/01/2022 VSP Adjustment (08/2022) 113.25
EFT 07/29/2022 2452 Accounts Payable Wex Bank 071000288 / 4539508 417.85 Invoice Date Description Amount.
81683633 06/23/2022 City of Marina - June 2022 107.32
82484577 07/23/2022 City of Marina - July 2022 310.53
EFT 07/29/2022 2453 Accounts Payable Marina Police Association-MPOA 322271627 / 901587928 250.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-22-22 07/22/2022 23 - MPOA Dues 250.00
EFT 07/29/2022 2454 Accounts Payable Police Officers Association - POA 322271627 / 901589106 1,350.00 Invoice Date Description Amount.
07-22-22 07/22/2022 25 - POA Dues 1,350.00
905 Chase - Checking Totals: Transactions: 50 $293,985.04 Checks: 47 $291,967.19
EFTs: 3 $2,017.85
Marina, CA LIVE
Payment Batch Register
Bank Account: 905 - Chase - Checking
Batch Date: 07/29/2022
Type Date Number Source Payee Name EFT Bank/Account
Transaction
Amount
User: Accounts Payable Pages: 8 of 8 7/28/2022 10:05:57 AM 18 Agenda Item: 8b(1)
City Council Meeting of
August 3, 2022

MINUTES
Tuesday, July 12, 2022, 6:00 P.M. Open Session

SPECIAL MEETING

CITY COUNCIL, AIRPORT COMMISSION,

MARINA ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, PRESTON PARK SUSTAINABLE

COMMUNITY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE FORMER

MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MARINA GROUNDWATER

SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY
Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California
Zoom Meeting URL: https://zoom.us/j/730251556
Zoom Meeting Telephone Only Participation: 1-669-900-9128 - Webinar ID: 730 251 556 In accordance with California Government Code §54953(e)(1)(A) and (C) and the Proclamation of a State of Emergency issued by Governor Newsom o n March 4, 2020, under the provisions of Government Code §8625 related t o the COVID -19 (coronavirus) pandemic, consistent with recommendations by State and local health officials regarding social distancing and in order to prevent an imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as determine d in Resolution 2022-48, public participation in City of Marina City Council public meetings shall be electronic only and without a physical location for public participation until the earlier of April 30, 2022, or such time as the City Council may ado pt a resolution in accordance wit h Government Code §54953(e)(3). This meeting is being broadcast “live” on Access Media Productions (AMP) Community Television Cable 25 and on the City of Marina Channel and on the internet at https://accessmediaproductions.org/

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL & ESTABLISHM ENT OF QUORUM: (City Council, Airport Commissioners, Marina Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation, Preston Park Sustainable Communities Nonpr ofit Corporation, Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency Members and Marina Groundwater Sustainability Agency) MEMBERS PRESENT: Cristina Medina Dirksen, David Burnett, Lisa Berkley, Mayor Pro-Tem/Vice Chair Kathy Biala, Mayor/Chair Bruce C. Delgado

3. MOMENT OF SILENCE & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Please stand)

4. OTHER ACTION:
a. City Council hold Discussion and Direction Regarding Con sideration of Potential General Obligation Bond Measure Options on the November 8, 2022 Ballot Council Questions: Of the 301 do you do any kind of analysis on the demograp hics, or the is it that cross-section like by race, age, socioeconomic status ? Is there any regard to property? ownership? home ownership? Who selected the 301 participants of the survey? How did you determine whether it 1 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 2

was a renter, or a homeowner? 301 doesn't sound like a lot when you're trying to represent various ethnicities so, and political parties and home ownersh ip, etc. So, you know, you might get 5 Filipino homeowners and 3 Filipino renters ? Is that enough to represent Filipinos to know what they're thinking, or republicans? Do you feel I mean, is it statistically significant that you got 95% confidence, etc.? How many of the 301 surveys were done by phone , approximately? What language where the phone and email surveys provided in? Do you find any we akness in these surveys when they’re English only? So, if we’re going to try to be successful with a bond , to build a fire station, or whatever facility I guess we would be reminding people that what we heard from them was that improving emergency services was critical, and that this is one way , this is one of the best ways we have to do that is, that is that tru e that we want to try to link those 2 ? if we go ahead with 75 words onto the ballot that we put the words in, that talk about outcome s? Did your company fashion these questions based on what was spoken a t our public meetings? So is there any case in which that the these concrete projects when you identify them like this they seem like they would always have more controversy because You're forcing the evaluator to say, Oh, do I really need you know what a senior center do I really need you know our city hall to be So I m ean it's going to just generate less of an impact I would think, than always saying, the broader categories of the obj ectives is, am I perceiving that correctly? On the Response Time, Medical and Quality of Life - after you've done your analysis did you go back or reflect on the language that's used to categorize you know con vincing very convincing? Opposition of Ballot s Measure – is this consistent with other jurisdictions, other cities, that kind of the same pattern that you would see in your surveys generally ? So, do we need the 50% plus one for this to pass? On the total no questions and strategy that you use in a bond measure li ke ours, what kind of opposition would typically raise like $200,000? who would these kinds of people or groups be? So, you gave us a ballpa rk figure of those who would be opposing , did you give us any figures of how much a city our size to get over that threshold of those numbers that were leaning no, or whatever? Do you have neat idea of what a city our size would have to spend, or and or an independent committee on our behalf, or unions, or anybody else? And some of those estimates would they include just overall in your experience and understanding how bond measure work or messaging messages work polling mid campaign? you gave us the sampling of the tax on the business license tax, which was successful, correct? Did you take a look at any of our unsuccessful campaigns , such as our Utility Users Tax or any that failed give similarities? do we have to just decide the level of bond that we are going to move forward on, or do we have to decide the facilities that go into that bond ? It was mentioned during the discussion that it's possible to create a 30 -year bond that has just this kind of thing embedded in it, where the collective community growth then pulls down the tax rate c orrect? When we talk about police, we’re thinking about it in as a complex with City Hall and a civic center kind of whatever that civic center is going to turn out to be , that is kind of what we're moving towards correct? If we were to not go for spending on a new facility, how much do we have to s ink into these just to make it safe and compliant with ADA? When you 5-7 million, towards which buildings would that money go? Is the planning and Annex an additional cost? So, with the planning/Annex, the City Council, City Hall police, is it roughly 9 to 10 million? We’re talking about the cost of the bond and generalities can you at least say what percentage is , cost of the bond ? Bond Structuring, so the way that it would translate to our residents is that they would have sort of a tiered or incremental increase as opposed to all at onc e? If the rates are dependent on the total amount of properties , and as Marina grows and more properties coming on board and therefor the rates can go down, correct? Should the city try for a smaller bond this yea r and then go for a larger one the following year? City liability on city response times, Is it safe to say that we have no liabilities if something should happen and we knew upfront that we don't have the facilities we don't have the ladder truck? How soon could we do a special election if that was the direction we wanted to go in ? So, if we were to, regardless of this coming November, or to do a special election, is it possible, Lane, for us to send out a couple of rounds of mailers in multiple lan guages explaining to the voters why we Would like to do this? On the different tiers of the annual or month ly, could they choose to decide if they wanted to pay it in one 2 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 3

lump sum annually or if they wanted to pay it out monthly ? Is there a way to include a hardship waiver if people cannot afford a bond measure ? would it be feasible to set up for the city to set up some kind of a loan or payment plan for people if they can't afford it?

Public Comments:
• Denise Turley – Hi! Thank you. So, first, just general comment. Fortunately, in t his scenario, you ain’t going to have the labor unions against you, because, hello, police and firefighters, they want a better place to work and live in, so that should definitely be on your sid e. A ny chance that you would give a very fast thumbnail sket ch of what you get at the lower a mount of money versus the higher amount of money, although the needs are there, and they are great ? A nd then just a bit of background. So, you are you are obviously more renters vote than…so that one question where you asked about protecting people and ho lding or increased values to Marina homeowners, I will tell you that if you ask most renters, they don't give a rat’s fat about homeowners, they're renters. so, I can see that that's a 2-edge sword, because you’re subliminally trying to say, “hey homeowners, this will help you vote for that ” anyway. So those are my those are my comments on that .

Anyway, gentlemen, thank you for being here tonight. It's important to have this discussion so that we can make a decision on this matter. Thank you.
• Liz Billingsley – Yeah, I have a question. If you lower the $60 from 100 to $60 wouldn’t that bring up our the length of the bond issue ? How does that work? You said 100 b ucks for a 100,000, pe r house. Okay. So if you lower down to $60 to 100,000, the taxes , then wouldn’t that throw off the bond issue, I mean the bond , the time to pay it back? And then another thing: How much is the bond gonna cost us? Do we pay a taxes on that? I mean, not taxes but fees on that money, or what? Well, that would be it. But I would I still would go with the 60, unless it's gonna cost us more for the bond, you know, to be paid back. But how many people can afford a $100 per 100,000? In my case it would be over $500 plus what I’m paying now, that would be a n addition. It would come over $1,000 a year. And we have too, many senior citizens and widows in this city that I don't think they could really afford that. I'm honest with you guys you know, but I would love to see all these things come to fruition, you know, and be built, and all of that. But that that telling you it's going to be a hard group to hold. Thank you, and you all have a nice evening, • Les Martin – Yeah. This this measure I totally supported. the point . The last lady made about the cost is a very important point. I mean the homes here at the dunes or over at sea Haven they're starting at a 1 million dollars now, so those people are going to multiply that $70 a month times 10, just to start. I already pay over $10,000 a year in property tax that'll make it closer to 11. I still would support it because I think the needs are so important. I don't understand totally the mechanics of how many years are we going to be paying for t his bond? The kind of question the last lady was just asking about, I think, and some of those similar kinds of questions . For what term are we go ing do that? And then also I assume that you had a specific list of project that total $50 million , like $10 million for a fire station , $5million for police station. Now, I’m just wondering or was your vision that you're g oing to have $50 million dollars for you guys to decide how to use down the road on these different visions , on these different problems ? A nother question I had on that is, how did you see this money getting spent? All at once for $50 million dollars? I kind of say to myself, why am I paying for every facility that needs to be replaced over the last 50 years when we didn't do anything for t he past 50 years and now we're going to come in with some major tax payment each month, because we have to do everything at once, or should we go for one of the lower rate bonds and then do so mething now and then plan to do something again later on? So, I don't know. I think you need definitely need to target something that's going to get a get approved. I would support it. I’d just like to know more details. Are these, you know the cost of these facilities are they really laid out? You got a really de tailed plan or no you haven't done even preliminary infinite planning yet? So again, good luck on it's very good discussion tonight. 3 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 4

Excellent brief. I would have thought you wanted to say, I want a fire station for this much but listen to your brief well, maybe that's not the best strategy. But I do think the undecided are going to make you win or lose, and that's going to require the good PR campaign that was discussed about earlier. So, thank you for this time to review your plan and give some input in. Thank you • Alex Stewart – I just wanted to say that. yea h, I ’m one of the people that thinks that the city is going in the right direction. It's interesting listening to this meeting tonight, because it seems like the poll firm and the and the methods that being used, you know, kind of like manipulation when you guys use language . I said, I, you know when people that likes the direction the city's going talking about the polling. It seems like the methods that the pollsters used, I don't like some of the languages that you guys use about trying to , it almost so unds like manipulation, you know, trying to sell this thing, you know, by turning up the heat through motion and raising the level of concern it sounds like scare tactics kind of, you know, to changing the language. But when it comes down to the bottom line, yeah, we need a lot of things, but it also comes down to money. Somebody like me who you know I work for 40 years in commercial printing class, but it was a trade job they didn't have any pension to retirement. I live off social security. All of our homes are closing in on being $1-million-dollar homes and a $1,000 a year for bond would be 5% of my income and that doesn't sound good . I see these new hotels goi ng up, and I ’m assuming they're getting a lot of taxes from them. So yeah, the money part wou ld be a hard sell for me. But it was a very good presentation, and thank you
• Jeff Markham – Thank you for the presentation. It's very clear. I think there's a lot of positives in it. for me that the perceived need i s very clear. I think the trust in city g overnance is clear, but it seems very premature to me. I think this initiative is destined to fail unless there's a lot of money put in to try getting it to pass. So, the better thing, in my opin ion, would be to do this to continue the conversation about w hat is needed and to fold it into the longer general plan update that's coming up very soon, and those are my comments. Thank you. • Mark Sweeney – Thank you, Mayor, Council, members, members of th e public. I'm the president of the Marina Professional Firefighters Association. I'll briefly speak on the needs of the city for a new fire station or new stations . First let me affirm much of what I will touch on is available on the city's website inclu ding in tonight's agenda in addition to the presentation made tonight. In it are small portions of the h ard data collected during an outside study which, without a motion or hyperbole addressed the city's needs . Ideally fire stations are in centralized locations within the city. If you picture the hub of a wagon wheel with overlapping extremities , current Marina fire stations are not ideally located. One is to the far west side of the city, and one is to the far East side. Station. 2 which the proposed bond measure would go towards replacing is an antiquated and is and located at the far east side of the city on a remote part of a former army Airfield and was never intended to serve the city at the time it was built. We've used it as a stop gap to be a ble to house a second staffed fire engine, provide better ser vice to the east side of town, and to i ncrease the number of personnel responding to fires and other emergencies, although it remains understaffed. Fire engine access to the roadway from Station 2 is currently delayed by F AA required fencing and gates, wh ich we have to wait to open. The station was originally built for army aviation, crash, rescue purposes, and absolutely no consideration was given, for obvious reasons, to the service to the city of Marina and its citizens. A fire service adage that secon d save minutes and minutes save lives is at play every time an emergency call is responded to from our current Station. 2. We are in a conundrum where a fully staffed second station is badly nee ded by the city, but the current Station, 2 location is comin g up desperately short. The department is used, what was available, and has been fiscally responsible beyond what should be expected by the city by the citizens of Marina. The time has come to gi ve our growing city the emergency services it deserves from its fire department. Our members are highly trained professionals, ready to answer the call, but we can only help after we arrive. Our response is hindered straight out of the gate 4 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 5

when we do it f rom a far from ideal location . For the city and its citizen s, we encourage you to support any movement towards improved fire department response through a desperately needed replacement fire station . While a bond measure may be worded in a particular way , as discussed during this meeting, to sell the bond to the v oters the statistics of the fire department response. times don't lie and aren't manipula ted. It is a plain and simple fact that our service needs improvement, and the citizens deserve it . While you may have never needed to call 911 for help, and we hope you never do the seconds and minutes saved by your fire department responding from a properly located and designed fire station may save the lives of you , your loved ones or at the least your va luables. Members of your fire department will be at the Natio nal Night Out event on August second, and the Fire Department Open House on October eleve nth, that was August, the second and October the eleventh, both of the Public Safety Building on Palm Aven ue, near D el Monte Boulevard. I encourage you to speak to us . Your firefighters are always happy to discuss ways we can better serve the needs of your city. Thank you for your time • Pat – Hi! my name is Pat. I think that the bucket is that we're being aske d to vote on is too big. I think that all the needs are real but I think that it's kind of daunting for people to be paying for it all at once at this time with the inflation going up , the bond rates going up . I think that we should break it down to 3 ne eds lists. I think it should go with the fire station the City Center and the Recreational part. I think that people would f ind that a lot easier to swallow. I also think we need to be real clear with how the assessment is going to be made. Is the assessment going to be made on your tax bill? Or do they rather rea ssess your house and that's to be really clear? Some of the seniors, as somebody pointed out our limit on a $1,000 a month in social security. And this is going to be a big hit if it comes, what ever it is. So, I think those points have to be addressed and be addressed clearly. Thank you
• Brian McCarthy – Hello! Can you hear me? I thank you, Mayor , Members of the Council. First congratulations on the survey the results, I think really appeared to r eflect pretty well on the job that you and Staff are doing, a nd you know, assuming that's truly representative, I think you and staff should really be proud of yourselves. It. It also seems to reflect that people understand the city kind of has great needs. And you know I guess I could break apart a lot of the comm ents that were made prior to most of which I actually very much agree with . You know, I do think there needs to be more. information that's disseminated. But I do want to talk a little bit about this idea of a $50 million versus a $30 million , and for me personally I would support the higher level and maybe not necessarily the lower level, because I don't wanna see the city go back to voters when more money is required. I join late so sorry if t his was already discussed but as I talked to people one of the questions, I heard is is it possible to word the measure or have 2 valid measures? You know one that says, should the 50-level fail would you, support a 30 -level so I guess that's a question for the Council and those are those are my comments. Like I said the needs are great and I think the $50 million is warranted and I hope that that's on the ballot for the voters to decide.

Thank you
• Tommy Bolea – The survey results, can they be reviewed? I guess that's the first question. Can this bond money, if it does pass will it take care of new development other than government buildings like hotels, litigation matters that kind of thing? I’m just gonna go right to the question. Fires not a want it's a need so, let's don't let's don't move around that bu sh. What I’ve seen just riding around on my bicycle I documented quite a few things. So, if this does pass. I see multi -city agents, fire agencies on one fire , will, if this passes, and we have all t he stuff in place what you guys want as far as our stations will the multi-agency go away? I guess that's an important question or would they still be there as a secondary source in case of a major fire or an earthquake? I notice we also in quality of li fe we brought up the cell service. I'm assuming is fire and p olice on cell service . I guess I need to know that you can either say yes, or no, or whatever on that, because that's based on that signal problem that we . Have one space, one point you're perfect another point you're totally 5 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 6

out of signal. And I guess there's more renters than owners, I guess landowners so, we documented that. So , were the landlord survey ed or renter surveyed in this survey ? I guess that's kind of, because I think in all what 's gonna happen, I think rents are gonna go up . If we pass i t to the landlord, because they're the landowner and then when of course they're gonna have to raise the rent so I think that's gonna be detrimental on fixed income. But I would think that this that this whole bond thing shou ld be on needs not wants. I know you want a new city building, but hey, you're growing exponentially and now you've created this balloon and I’m afraid what I see we have multi cities helping out with fires , again is that go nna go away or they're still the re as a secondary, but we're gonna have additional staff and fire building? Because what I've seen so far, I mean I think that's real important . As far as quality of l ife no, no real senior center, no riding a horse to the beach, I mean I know we're talkin g about it but I wanna see all this stuff in my lifetime. It sounds like you wanna do all this but it's gonna be in for something that's gonna be in 20 to 25 years from now. So, you wanna tax me for something that's gonna happen later. I know some of the stuff you want is gonna happen right away but no senior center? Better food stores my god, you go to Watson ville and they have Safeway, Nob-Hill staff alike. I mean you go to Prunedale t hey have a Safeway. You go to Moss L anding, and you can ride yo ur horse to the beach. I mean I see more things when I leave Marin a. I come back like a tsunami warning system , I don't see that. Bridges that are not earthquake reinforced , I see that. I mean I could go on but at this point we're just gonna have to close it. Good evening. • Liesbeth Visscher – Good evening, everybody. Instead of calling it scare techniques I would like to call it information. If residents are aware that response times for fire and for medical emergencies are longer than recommended, I think it would convince them to vot e yes. I’ve said it before , if you'd ever needed to wait for a fire engine or an ambulance to arrive you would wish that they were around the corner from you, that they were really close by. Please provide as much information as possible, like the durati on of the bonds, estimated cost to build an extra fire station, etc. And just like Brian, I've wondered whether the 2 different amounts could be put on the ballots, to see, you know if the higher one doesn't make it maybe the lower one would. And regardin g rentals, landlords can deduct the expenses. I don't think it will cause a very large rent increase, but it would offer better services to tenants and homeowners. Thank you all very much for working on this. Have a good evening.
• John Laro co – Great pres entation, great comments from the public. I live in Sea Haven, so I understand that the fees , the dues I think, in order to get something like this past it has to be 1) discussed and not thrown o ut there quickly. Lot of promotion on it, an understanding of timelines, where the money is going , how long it's, going to take for something to get built . Can there be a stepped approach where, say we it's a It's a 50 million or whatever. but you step u p the taxes as you're using the money ? Also, I think it's seriously hard to swallow for new residents specifically in the Dunes and Sea Haven area where you're talking about $10,000 to $14,000 a year that we're already paying . The question is, where is tha t additional funds from the new house s going to ? Right that but that can potentially offset this. Because we're coming in with $12,000 already a year and you're tacking on another $1,500 to 2 grand a year. What happened to the first 12 grand ? That's al l I mean, I support thi s I think we should go forward, but I think we need to do it strategically, so that it doesn't get a vote of a no. That's all. • Peter Le – Yes, good evening, yeah. and the member of City Council. I submit my comment in also in writing, and I send the m to your email address. Now let get back to the proposed generation obligation bond and tax measure. The Deployment Analysis of Marina Fire Department that the City Council accepted in June 2021 states that 2, not 1, new fire stations ar e needed for the city.

See Recommendation G as shown on Mari na City Manager report. One for the southern areas of Marina that is located in the vicinity of Imjin Parkway and California Avenue at an estimated cost of 17 million dollars. The second new fir e station for the northern areas of Marina that is located 6 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 7

on Del Monte Blvd in the vicinity of Vince DiMaggio Park at a n estimated cost of 16 million dollars. At a previous City Council meeting Marina City Manager discussed these 2 new fire stations when he discussed the project costs and options for funding the proposed projects. But now the city only considers one new fire station for the southern Marina areas and eliminates consideration for the second new fire station serving the northern Marina area s in the proposed General Obligation bond. The city has not provided any oral or written explanation, or justification on the deletion of the second new fire station near Vince DiMaggio Park. Marina City Manager only said City would build this second new f ire station when City has money in the future which could be 20 or 30 years from now. The mentioned Deployment Analysis of Marina Fire Department confirms that City of Marina has not provided equal fire protection service to the northern Marina areas for the last 47 years i.e. since 1975. Marina City Manager stat ed that the new fire station near Imjin Parkway will be the headquarter of the fire department. Since most fire personnel and equipment will move from the existing fire station on Palm Avenue to the new fire station near Imjin Parkway, the fire response t ime and the availability of a full fire crew from this new f ire station to the northern Marina areas will be longer than currently exists. Marina City Council now asks Marina voters living in the northern areas to pay for the new fire station located near Imjin Parkway in south Marina that not only these residents don't receive equal benefits from this new fire station but also their existing fire protection service will be reduced and suffer longe r response time. In approving only one new fire station near Imjin Parkway this City Council considers residents living in the southern areas as first-class citizens. And the rest of my comment is in my email, and I asked it. The man. The Council member read my comment. Thank you very much.
• Grace Silva-Santella – Thank you very much for the presentation tonight. I know that You've been spending a number of months discussing this, so I appreciate hearing the results of the survey . Of all my friends here, in Marina I know only of one pe rson who actually did receive the survey, they received it as an email. So, here's just a couple of comments I have in what I heard tonight. If 80% of the calls to the fire department is medical rel ated, could we not be looki ng at small substations that would address medical calls and not be looking at such a large brand-new fire station? Though I can certainly appreciate that a station position ed that the Marine Airport is not serving any of Marina's needs , certainly not the east side of Marina needs. I think that we need to do , if this Council hopes to pass this b ond by a two-thirds voter approval, you're going to need to do a much better job of defining the community center . And I, as a 64-year-old married to a 71-year-old I would stay away from calling a facility a senior center, and instead be looking at verbiage like an active adult center. 100% of the money that will be raised in the taxation on this bond measure will be going back to the city. I think it's really important that this is something that you emphasize as a council, as you go out to push this measure. Unlike much of what's on our property taxes not a lot of it goes back to the city of Marina. This will go back to the cit y of Marina, 100% of it. I think you need to anticipate a possible backlash from our newest ho meowners here in Marina, who will be paying substantially more for this bond than those of us who have lived in Marina for many , many years. Perhaps that won't ha ppen and perhaps the newer homeown ers will see the value of these improvements more than the older homeowners. Some months back it was my understanding that this bond measure was going to include funds to complete the sports complex and the aquatic center that are located on Second Avenue , is that no longer being considered ? And then finally, I would have to say, I’m terribly disappointed that the respondents of 301 did not put up at 80%. the need to address mold, and asbestos in our City Hall. And I will tell the staff that's listening in right now I certainly do believe you need much improved f acility, but I am very disappointed that we have postponed taking care of that problem for 40 plus years. Thank you very much.

7 MINUTES for Special City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 2022 Page 8

BERKLEY/BIALA: THAT WE APPROVE PUTTING A BALLOT ME ASURE FOR A $50 MILLION DOLLARS BOND ON THE NOVEMBER 2022 BALLOT ; AND THAT AS PART

OF THAT ESTABLISHING , SHOULD THE BALLOT MEASURE PASS, AN OVERSIGHT

COMMITTEE MADE UP OF AN EQUAL NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND

RENTERS TO OVERSEE THE ALLOCATION OF THE FUNDS AND THE PROCESS ,

ADDITIONALLY THE MONIES WOULD GO TOWAR DS FIRE STATION, CIVIC

CENTER, SUCH CITY HALL WI TH A NEW POLICE STATION, AND THAT WE ALSO

HEAR IN OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING A DISCUSSION, OR POSSIBLY WHAT THE

OPTIONS ARE FOR PROVIDING SOME KIND OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE O R RESIDENTIAL LOAN PROGRAM, SHOULD TH ERE BE A NEED. 5-0-0-0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote

5. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:48 P.M.

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

ATTEST:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
8 Agenda Item: 8b(2)
City Council Meeting of
August 3, 2022

MINUTES
Tuesday, July 19, 2022 5:00 P.M. Closed Session
6:30 P.M. Open Session

REGULAR MEETING

CITY COUNCIL, AIRPORT COMMISSION,

MARINA ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, PRESTON PARK SUSTAINABLE

COMMUNITY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE FORMER

MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MARINA GROUNDWATER

SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY
Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California
Zoom Meeting URL: https://zoom.us/j/730251556
Zoom Meeting Telephone Only Participation: 1-669-900-9128 - Webinar ID: 730 251 556 In accordance with California Government Code §54953(e)(1)(A) and (C) and the Proclamation of a State of Emergency issued by Governor Newsom o n March 4, 2020, under the provisions of Go vernment Code §8625 related to the COVID -19 (coronavirus) pandemic, consistent with recommendations by State and local health officials regarding social distancing and in order to prevent an imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as determine d in Resolution 2022-78, public participation in City of Marina City Council public meetings shall be electronic only and without a physical location for public participation until the earlier of May 31, 2022, or such time as the City Council may ado pt a resolution in accordance with Government Code §54953(e)(3). This meeting is being broadcast “live” on Access Media Productions (AMP) Community Television Cable 25 and on t he City of Marina Channel and on the i nternet a t https://accessmediaproductions.org/

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL & ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM: (City Council, Airport Commissioners, Marina Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation, Preston Park Sustainable Communities Nonpr ofit Corporation, Successor Ag ency of the Former Redevelopment Agency Members and Ma rina Groundwater Sustainability Agency)
MEMBERS PRES ENT: Cristina Medina Dirkse n, Mayor Pro -Tem/Vice Chair Kathy Biala, Mayor/Chair Bruce C. Delgado
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Burnett (Excused); Lisa Berkley (Excused)

a. Labor Negotiations
i. Marina Employee Association
ii. Marina Professional Fire Fighters Association
City Negotiators: Layne P. Long, City Manager and Employee Relations Officer b. Conference with Le gal Coun sel, Potential litigation, exposure to litiga tion per: “Conference with Legal Counsel – anticipated litigation, significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) (d) of CA Govt. Code s ec. 54956.9 – One potential case
c. Real Property Negotiation
i. Property: Commercial property at southeast corner of Del Monte Blvd. and Palm Avenue (APN 032-303-038) and residential property at Hayes Circle and 3rd Avenue (APN 032-303-039, a portion)
Negotiating Party: George Powell
Negotiator(s): City Manager
Terms: Price and Terms
7:30 PM - RECONVENE OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ON ANY ACTI ONS TAKEN I N

CLOSED SESSION
Heidi Quinn, City Attorney reported out Closed Session: Council met at 5:00 p.m. with the three items listed. In regard to all three items listed, Council received information, provided direction and no reportable action was taken.

4. MOMENT OF SILENCE & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Please stand)

5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
a National Night Out Proclamation
b Tahra Goraya, Monterey Bay Economic Partnership

6. SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE FLOOR: Any member of the Public or the City Council may make an announcement of special events or meetings of interest as information to Council a nd Public. Any member of the pub lic may comment on any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction which is not on the agenda. Please state your name for the record. Action will not be taken on an item that is not on the agenda. If it requires action, it will be r eferred to st aff and/o r pla ced on a futu re agenda. C ity Co uncil members or City staff may briefly respond to stat ements made or que stions posed as permitted by Government C ode Section 54954.2. In order that all interested parties have an opportunity to speak, please limit comments to a maximum of four (4) minutes. Any member of the public may comment on any matter listed on this agenda at the time the matter is being considered by the City Council. • Sean Reese , Field Rep for NorCal Carpenters Union – Spoke about ensuring the future of our construction, industry, and our community that begins with the pre -qualification language of our local developments, hiring locally and ensuring proper healthcare benefits. Local hiring policies are needed. Commented on their apprenticeship programs. Hoping to have a sit-down with city staff.
• Mike Owen – Commented on SB330 streamline process and anxious about turning his application for the Tree Committee in anticipation that something might happen at the end of August . Spoke about the process for becoming a Tree Committee mem ber and about development areas that will require trees to be removed.
2 MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 19, 2022 Page 3

• Tim Favalor , Field Rep for L ocal 605 – Wanted to discuss some building policies that would elevate labor construction standards and provide solid work operators for carpenters in our community and some of those policies include apprenticeships while also providing solid careers for workers in our community and help reduce greenhouse emissions. • Tommy Bolea – Commented on the City going to the voters for a $50 million bond to construct new buildings versus using current fund to fix the issues with the buildings we a lready have .

Noted the city should not leave the future generation in debt.

7. CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FO RMER MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Background information has been provided to the Successor Agency of the former Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent Agenda, and these it ems are considered to be routine. Al l items under the Consent Agenda ar e normally approved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may ask a quest ion or make a c omment a bout an agenda ite m and s taff w ill provide a response. If discussi on or a lengthy explanation is requ ired, that it em will b e removed from the Consent Agenda for Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency and placed at the end of Other Action Items Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency.

8. CONSENT AGENDA: Background information has be en provided to the City Council, Airport Commission, Marina Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation, and Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent A genda, and these items are considered to be routi ne. All items under the Consent Agenda are normally approved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may ask a question or make a comment about an agenda item and staff will provide a response. If di scussion or a lengthy ex planation is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed at the end of Other Action Items. a. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
(1) Accounts Payable EFT’s & Check Numbers 100268-100348, totaling $1,454,575.26 Accounts Payable for Successor Agency Check Number 90, totaling $2,380.00 b. MINUTES:
(1) June 21, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting
(2) July 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting
c. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: None
d. AWARD OF BID: None
e. CALL FOR BIDS: None
f. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS:
(1) City Council consider adoptin g Resolution No. 2022 -94, r egarding the Ralph M. B rown Act (California Go vernment Code §§54950 -54963, making c ertain findings; and authorizing th e city to continue to i mplement remote teleconferenced public meetings of the City Council and its constituent bodies for the period July 22, 2022, through August 20, 2022.
g. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS:
(1) City Council c onsider adopting Resolution No. 202 2-95, approving Public Improvement Agreements for the Terracina Project at the Dunes – Sites 1 & 2 between the City of Marina and USA Properties Fund, Inc., and; authorizing the City Manager to execute the Public Improvement Agreements on behalf of the City subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney. 3 MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 19, 2022 Page 4

(2) City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-96, approving a contract with Rincon Consulting and Veronica Tam to provide urban planning services to complete the Sixth Cycle Housing Eleme nt for an amount not to exceed $300,000; and authorize the Finance Director to make necessary accounting and budgetary ent ries, and authorize the City Mana ger to execute a contract amendment on behalf of City with Rincon Consulting subject to final review by the City Attorney.
(3) City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-97, approving the Animal Services Agreement bet ween the City of M arina and the County of Monterey; and authorize Animal Services Agreement with the County o f Monterey effective 07/01/2022 through 06/30/2024.
h. ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: None
i. MAPS:
j. REPORTS: (RECEIVE AND FILE): None
k. FUNDING & BUDGET MATTERS: None
l. APPROVE ORDINANCES (WAIVE SECOND READING):
(1) City Cou ncil consider a dopting Ordinance No. 2022-03, approving Amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code by adding Sections 17.45. (2) City Council consider adopting Ordinance No. 2022-04, approving Amending Chapter 17, Article 5, by adding a new section 17.49, “ Low-barrier Navigation Center”, to the Marina Municipal Code.
m. APPROVE APPOINTMENTS: None
Council Member Medina Dirkse n had a question for item 8a – Wanted to know what the payment to Save the Whales was for.

DELGADO/MEDINA DIRKSEN: TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA . 3 -0-0 (Burnett, Berkley)-0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote

9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. City Co uncil open a publ ic hearing and consider adopting Resol ution N o, 202 2-, approving the assignment of the Development Agreement related t o the Marina Station Project to 3rd Millennium Partners; and read by title only a nd approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-, approving the fir st ame ndment to the development agreement related to the Marina Station Project. Continued from June 21, 2022
Public Comments:
• Les Martin – Noted the plan for this project looks fantastic and was impressed and building of affordable houses is something that needs to be done. Supports moving forward • PK Diffenbaugh – Spoke as an individual as the MPUSD board hasn't taken any positi on on this project. This project will have a significant impact on the district in a variety of ways. Noted that currently about 20% of our student population qualifies as homeless under the McKinney Vento Act. A large percentage around 500 kids live in the city of Marina looking at the very low-income housing potentially I could see 80 plus students be able to have an affordable home and move out of homelessness would be probably the single greatest impact of the project . Need housing for 4 MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 19, 2022 Page 5

teachers as well under the moderate -income. Asked that you take that seriously into your consideration and hopeful that you'll move forward tonight. • Tommy Bolea – Asked how many renters versus homeowner were? Is there a ratio or these are going to be more homeowners or more renters? How long are the deed restriction in place for? Noted the current local schools look like an airport with all the cars. Wondered i f kids actually rode their bikes to school. Asked if Council kn ew how many student s come from out of the district? Wanted to know how much grass area is there in this project? • Jeff Markham – Asked if Third Millennium Partners selected a development partner at this time to do architecture and construction of the actual housing units and commercial units ? Also asked since it abuts up to farmland is there any additional environmental consideration that need to be taken into effect to approve a project such as such as this so close to farmland? Mayor Delgado closed the public comment period
Council Questions: Fire Station, can you tell us just a little bit, or review one of the amendments, not the amenities, what you will be doing to assist with the need for fire service in my part of town by Walmart? Would you mind quickly telling us what those fees and tail how many it mig ht be? Correct me Karen our city outside council and city manager , i t looks like about $800,000. is that correct? Dustin is you're asking us for what tonight can you just break that down really quickly, w e were talking 3, and now we're talking to him what is it that you need? The reason for such the delay, cause I had found some documents that said he needed from 2018. I think it needed. I think it was like no more than 15 years to build just what happened to delay it this long?

DELGADO/BIALA: that we accept the presentation information, and we direct Staff to come back as soon as comfortable for the developer and staff regarding these issues we brought up at our last meeting, and tonight

Council Member Medina Dirksen asked if the motion could be restated

Restated Motion
Delgado/Biala: to accept the presentation and direct staff to come back on August third with a summary and some clarification on the issues that we brought up at our last meeting Council Member Medina Dirksen asked for a friendly amendment, that this information that we've received in the reports and anything else that's releasing is made public on our website in a place that's easy to find.

Mayor Delgado incl uded in the fri endly amendment , would include, I think, the July eighth, 2022, Anthony Lombardo and associate's letter to the late to the city manager and any agreements settlement agreements if possible.

Final Motion
DELGADO/BIALA: TO ACCEPT THE PRESENTATION; AND DIRECT STAFF TO COME

BACK ON AUGUST THIRD WITH A SUMMARY AND SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE ISSUES THAT WE BROUGHT UP AT OUR LAST MEETING; AND THAT THIS

INFORMATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED IN THE REPO RTS AND ANYTHING ELSE

THAT'S RELEASING IS MADE PUBLIC ON OUR WEBSITE IN A PLACE THAT'S EASY TO FIND; AND WOULD INCLUDE, THE JULY EIGHTH, 2022, ANTHONY LOMBARDO

AND ASSOCIATE'S LETTER TO THE LATE TO THE CITY MANAGER AND ANY AGREEMENTS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS IF POSSIBLE . 3-0-0 (Burnett, Berkley) -0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote
5 MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Tuesday, July 19, 2022 Page 6

10. OTHER ACTIONS ITE MS OF THE SUCC ESSOR A GENCY TO THE FORMER MARINA R EDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Action l isted for each Agenda i tem is that which is requested by staff. The Successor Agency may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The pu blic is invited to approach th e pod ium to provide up to four (4) min utes of public comment.

11. OTHER ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is requested by staff.

The City Council may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to four (4) minutes of public comment.

Note: No additional major projects or p rograms should be undertaken without review of the im pacts on existing priorities (Resolution No. 2006-79 – April 4, 2006).

12. COUNCIL & STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. Monterey County Mayor’s Association [Mayor Bruce Delgado] b. Council and staff op portunity to ask a question for clarification or make a b rief report on his or her own activities as permitted by Government Code Section 54954.2.

13. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:05 P.M.

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

ATTEST:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
6 July 21, 2022 Item No. 8f(1)
Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
Of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022
CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 20 22-,
APPROVING THE UPDATED 202 1 MONTEREY COUNTY MULTI -

JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (MJHMP) , APPROVE

THE UPDATE TO ANNEX G AND APPROVE THE UPDATED PLAN AS
THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF MARINA.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is requested that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2022-, approving the update to the 2022 Monterey County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and;

2. Approve the update to Volume 2, Annex G, and;

3. Adopt the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, including Annex G as an official plan of the City of Marina.

BACKGROUND:

In an effort to reduce the nation's mounting natural disaster losses, the U.S. Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by invoking new and revitalized approaches to hazard mitigation planning. Section 322 of the Act emphasizes the need for state and local government entities to closely coordinate on hazard mitigation planning activities, and makes the development of a hazard mitigation plan a specific eligibility requirement for any local government applying for federal mitigation grant funds. Communities with an adopted and federally-approved hazard mitigation plan are eligible to receive certain types of mitigation funds before and after future disaster declarations, and, in some ways, are “pre-positioned” or “pre-qualified” for this funding.

To implement the new Stafford Act provisions, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published requirements and procedures for local hazard mitigation plans in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 44, Chapter 1, Part 201.6. These regulations specify minimum standards for developing, updating, and submitting local hazard mitigation plans for FEMA review and approval at least once every five years.

This Plan was prepared in coordination with FEMA and the California Office of Emergency Services (COES) to ensure that it meets all applicable federal and state requirements. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the California Governors’ Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) have completed a preliminary review of the 2022 Monterey County Multi - Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). FEMA and Cal OES have given tentative approval of the plan, pending local adoption.

Public Law 106 -390, known as the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, amended the Robert T.

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Service Act (ACT). This ACT requires local governments to have a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP).

At the regular meeting of the Marina City Council held on September 7, 2005 , the Marina City Council approved Resolution No. 2005-208, approving an agreement between the City of Marina and the Monterey County Office of Emergency Services for development and participation in a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
1 At the regular meeting of the Marina City Council held on August 1 6, 2016, the Marina City Council Approved Resolution No. 2016-127, approving the update to the Monterey County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and; adopt the Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan as an official plan of the City of Marina to be updated in 2021.

ANALYSIS:

The general purpose of this Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is:

• To protect life and property by reducing the potential for future damages and economic losses that result from known hazards;
• To qualify for additional grant funding, in both the pre -disaster and post -disaster environment;
• To speed recovery and redevelopment following future disaster events; • To sustain and enhance existing governmental coordination throughout Monter ey County and demonstrate a firm local commitment to hazard mitigation principles; and • To comply with federal and state requirements for local hazard mitigation plans.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the California Governors’ Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) have completed a preliminary review of the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) (“EXHIBIT A”). FEMA and Cal OES have given tentative approval of the plan, pending local adoption. The approval of the plan ensures the City of Marina’s eligibility and pre -qualification for potential federal pre -and post- disaster funding. The plan includes hazard identification, risk and vulnerability assessments, and mitigation strategies to reduce vulnerability and risk from hazards and reduce the severity of the effects of hazards on people, property, and the environment.

DISCUSSION:

Monterey County and the City of Marina is potentially vulnerable to a wide range of natural and man-made hazards. T hese hazards can threaten the life and safety of residents and visitors and have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property and disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. While the threats from hazard events may never b e fully eliminated, there is much that can be done to lessen their potential impact. The purpose of hazard mitigation is to implement and sustain actions that reduce vulnerability and risk from hazards or reduce the severity of the effects of hazards on people, property, and the environment.

The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 (Public Law 106 -390) requires state and local government agencies to prepare comprehensive Hazard Mitigation Plans in order to be eligible to receive pre -and post -disaster mit igation funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The DMA also requires the Hazard Mitigation Plan to be monitored, evaluated, and updated within a five-year cycle to remain eligible for disaster related benefits under the DMA.

The 2022 Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) is a comprehensive update to the 2016 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and represents the third iteration of the Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which was initially adopted in 2007.The planning area for the MJHMP encompasses the entire geographic area of Monterey County and includes the following Participating Jurisdictions:

Monterey County, the cities of Carmel -by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Gonzales, Greenfield, King, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, Seaside, and Soledad, as well as the Monterey County Water Resources Agency, the Carmel Area Wastewater District, Monterey One Water, the Monterey Regional Waste Management District, and the Moss Landing Harbor District.

2 The 2022 update to the MJHMP was developed by the MJHMP Steering Committee, made up of participants from the County and the Participating Jurisdictions. The Steering Committee served as an advisory body on hazard and mitigation action priorities both for the County as a whole and each jurisdiction individually, with Monterey County Office of Emergency Services as the Planning Lead.

The Monterey County MJHMP:
• Provides an explanation of prevale nt hazards within the County and describes how hazards may affect the County and participating jurisdictions differently based upon various relationships to natural hazards.
• Includes a discussion of hazard location, size of a typical event, historical occurrences, and the probability of future occurrences for each identified hazard. • Identifies risks to vulnerable assets, both people and property. • Provides a mitigation strategy that responds to the identified vulnerabilities within each community and provides prescriptions or actions to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources.
• Pools resources from throughout the County and creates a uniform local hazard mitigation plan that can be consistently implemented.
• Ensures eligibility for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Cal OES grants

The City of Marina’s Annex “G” provides specific details on the City’s planning process, a City of Marina specific risk and vulnerability assessment, and a mitigation strategy that responds to the identified vulnerabilities within to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources.

The plan underwent review by the County and Participating Jurisdictions, the general public (Review period occurred from December 2021 to March 2022) and received Approval Pending Adoption from FEMA on June 14, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to approving this agreement. Implementation of the MJHMP will require funding and staff resources , however n ot approving this agreement may disqualify us from receiving certain federal pre and post disaster mitigation grants.

CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council consideration and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________
Doug McCoun
Fire Chief
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_____________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina

3 RESOLUTION NO. 2022

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2022-, A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE UPDATED 2021 MONTEREY COUNTY MULTI-

JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (MJHMP), APPROVE THE UPDATE

TO ANNEX G AND APPROVE THE UPDATED PLAN AS THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF MARINA.

WHEREAS, Public Law 106-390 known as the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Service Act (ACT), and; WHEREAS, the local governments without an approved Local Hazard Mitigation Plan will not be eligible to receive Hazard Mitigation Grant Program project grants, and; WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the Marina City Council held on September 7, 2005, the Marina City Council approved Resolution No. 2005 -208, approving an agreement between the City of Marina and the Monterey County Office of Emergency Services for the development and participation in a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and; WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the Marina City Council held on September 18, 2007, the Marina City Council approved Resolution No. 2007-219, adopting the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and;
WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the Marina City Council held on December 6, 2011, the Marina City Council approved Resolution No. 2011 -197, approving Letter of Commitment as a participating jurisdiction in Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) update, and;

WHEREAS, the City of Marina has historically experienced damage from natural and human - caused hazards such as drought, flooding, severe wind, transportation accidents, wildfire and winter storms. These hazards may continue to occur, possibly resulting in loss of property and life, economic hardship and threats to public health and safety; and

WHEREAS, the 20 21 Monterey County Multi -Hazard Mitigation Plan (the Plan) has been developed by the MJHMP Steering Committee, made up of participants from the City, County and Participating Jurisdictions.

WHEREAS, the updated work by the City of Marina in association and cooperation with the County of Monterey and State of California Office of Emergency Services in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 is reflected in Appendix G; and

WHEREAS, the Plan specifically addresses hazard vulnerabilities, mitigation strategies and plan maintenance procedures for the City of Marina;

WHEREAS, the City of Marina is a local unit of government that has afforded the citizens an opportunity to comment and provide input in the Plan and the actions in the Plan; and

WHEREAS, The City of Marina has reviewed the Plan and affirms that the Plan will be updated no less than every 5 years.

4 Resolution No. 2022-
Page Two

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Marina that:

1. Approve the update to the 202 1 Monterey County Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and;

2. Approve the update to Volume 2, Annex G, and;

3. Adopt the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, including Annex G as an official plan of the City of Marina.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

______________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

______________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

5 ANNEX G:

CITY OF MARINA
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan

EXHIBIT A
6 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-1 ANNEX G
G. CITY OF MARINA
G.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact
Chief Doug McCoun
Fire Chief, Marina Fire
211 Hilcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933
(831) 275-1700
[email protected]
G.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
G.2.1 LOCATION
7 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-2 ANNEX G
G.2.2 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
The City of Marina is a small coastal city located along the Monterey Bay. Marina occupies nearly 10 square miles in total area just north of Seaside and west of Salinas. Marina is on California State Route 1 between Monterey and Santa Cruz.

G.2.3 HISTORY
Dating back to (circa) 1868, about 9,000 acres of land stretching north along the Pacific Ocean, and east along the Salinas River, was owned by the late David Jacks and James Bardin. The land block breakup began in 1885, when the Bardin heirs sold 1,372 ½ acres to John Armstrong for farmland and grazing. About a year later, 1,450 acres was sold, then named the Sand Hill Ranch, and then 400 hundred acres near the ocean was sold to the San Francisco Sand Company, which subsequently constructed a sand plant in 1906.

In 1915, real estate salesman William Locke-Paddon from San Francisco was looking for land to sub- divide and found the breakup of the large Bardin and Jacks estate as an opportunity. On May 29, 1915, Locke-Paddon purchased 1500 acres south of Sand Hill Ranch designated as the “Pueblo Tract No. 1, City Lands of Monterey.” The Marina Post Office was established in 1919 and by 1926 the town had grown to their first 70 families. The City's history is intertwined with that of Fort Ord Military Base.

Major growth during the 1940s, made some impact on the community of Marina, as it became a “rest and relaxation” area for troops stationed at Fort Ord. Throughout the 50s,60s, and 70s, the City continued to grow with new residential, commercial, industrial, and visitor-serving development being built. Marina voters approved incorporation on November 5, 1975, making Marina the newest City along the Monterey Coast. Since incorporation, the City has continued to grow and flourish.

G.2.4 POPULATION
The City of Marina has a population of 22,359 people (2020 Census), an increase of 13.4% since 2010.

The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) estimates Marina’s current population to increase to approximately in 2025 (a % increase), and approximately in 2035 (a % increases). These increases are primarily associated with the planned development of housing on the former Fort Ord.

G.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The City of Marina’s form of government is a council-manager form of government with a Home-Rule City Charter. The Mayor is elected every years in a general election held in November Serving with the Mayor are four members of the City Council who have overlapping terms; every two years, two members of the City Council are also selected by the voters . The City Manager is appointed by the City Council to manage the daily operations and is responsible for making policy recommendations to the City Council and implementing City Council policy directives.

G.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
The economy of this community is based on tourism and local services. The city includes several miles of shoreline along Monterey Bay, though most of the beach is preserved as public park space and 8 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-3 ANNEX G
nearly all development is landward of the coastal dunes and US Highway 1. The city is contiguous with the former Fort Ord military installation, an area experiencing and targeted for future infill growth and redevelopment including more than 1,000 new homes, a number of large mixed-use projects, and a new business center at the former military airport which the City now owns. Through these and other recent commercial and industrial developments, Marina is undergoing transition from a small, primarily bedroom community to a more diversified, vibrant, and self-sufficient community.

G.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Marina followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process. The City of Marina held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on August 31, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:

Layne Long, City Manager
Doug McCoun, Fire Chief
Brian McMinn, Public Works Director
Fred Aegerter, Community Development Director
Matt Mogensen, Assistant City Manager
Marisol Gomez, Acting Finance Director
Tino Nieto, Police Chief
G.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
The City of Marina General Plan was adopted in 2000. The City has about three miles of shoreline fronted by restored coastal dune habitat. The coastal zone inland of Highway 1 is limited to roughly 60 acres that includes commercial development, visitor-serving overnight accommodations, coastal dunes, and three significant coastal wetlands. The City received a grant from the Coastal Commission in 2017 and is currently in the process of a comprehensive update to their Local Coastal Program to address sustainable development, increased opportunities for coastal access and recreation, and vulnerability to climate change and sea level rise. The City is also including provisions that embrace the concept of managed retreat.

The City gained land as part of the Fort Ord reuse, which includes several miles of shoreline along Monterey Bay, though most of the beach is preserved as public park space and nearly all development is landward of the coastal dunes and US Highway 1. The former Fort Ord land is an area experiencing and targeted for future infill growth and redevelopment including more than 1,000 new homes, a number of large mixed-use projects, and a new business center at the former military airport which the City now owns. Through these and other recent commercial and industrial developments, Marina is undergoing transition from a small, primarily bedroom community to a more diversified, vibrant, and self-sufficient community.

Marina’s Urban Growth Boundary protects the City of Marina from development in current open space areas north of the City limits and along its coast, and to encourage efficient development in central 9 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-4 ANNEX G
Marina and within Marina's portion of former Fort Ord, On June 16, 2020, the City Council of the City of Marina adopted Resolution 2020-75, submitting to the voters at the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election a Measure approving a General Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment extending the expiration date of the operative provisions of the 2000 Marina Urban Growth Boundary Initiative to December 31, 2040.

Safe Growth
The purpose of the Safe Growth Survey was to evaluate the extent to which each jurisdiction is positioned to grow safely relative to its natural hazards. The survey covered 9 distinct topic areas and was also completed as part of the previous plan update process. This allowed survey results to be compared to help measure progress over time and to continue identifying possible mitigation actions as it relates to future growth and community development practices.

This survey was a subjective exercise used to provide some quantitative measures of how adequately existing planning mechanisms were being used to address the notion of safe growth. Each topic area included a number of statements, which were answered on a scale from 1 to 5 based on the degree to which the respondent agreed or disagreed with the statement as it relates to the City’s current plans, policies, and programs for guiding future community growth and development. Scores for each topic area statement were averaged to provide a topic area result and the topic area totals were averaged to provide an overall survey score. More information on the survey is provided in Capability Assessment in Volume 1. The City of Marina Safe Growth Survey was completed by Christy Hopper, Planning Services Manager for the City of Marina Community Development Department. The results are summarized in Table G-1.

Table G-1
City of Marina Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 3.50 3.50
Transportation 4.33 3.00
Environmental Management 4.67 3.33
Public Safety 4.00 4.00
Zoning Ordinance 4.75 2.50
Subdivision Regulations 2.33 2.67
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 3.33 3.00 Building Code 5.00 4.00
Economic Development 5.00 3.00
Average Survey Ratings 4.10 3.22
G.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Marina’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Marina is included in this Annex. 10 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-5 ANNEX G
The City of Marina’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1. Table G-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Marina’s Planning Team.

Table G-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Marina Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact Total
Out of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 5.8 Slight
Coastal Erosion 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 10.5 Substantial
Coastal Flooding 2.0 1.8 1.8 2.2 7.8 Possible
Cyber-Attack 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.4 9.2 Moderate
Dam Failure - - - - - -
Drought & Water Shortage 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 10.5 Substantial Earthquake 3.0 2.8 2.8 3.0 11.7 Substantial
Epidemic 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 9.3 Moderate
Extreme Cold & Freeze 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 5.0 Slight
Extreme Heat 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.5 6.8 Possible
Flash Flood 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.3 5.3 Slight
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.2 Moderate Invasive Species 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.7 7.7 Possible
Levee Failure - - - - - -
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 7.5 Possible Mass Migration 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.0 7.7 Possible
Pandemic 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.5 10.3 Substantial
Riverine Flooding 1.7 1.3 1.7 1.3 6.0 Slight
Sea Level Rise 2.7 3.2 2.5 2.7 11.0 Substantial
Severe Winter Storms 2.0 1.7 2.0 2.2 7.8 Slight
Slope Failure 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 6.3 Possible
Targeted Violence 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Terrorism 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0 Possible
Tsunami 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.3 8.8 Moderate
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 2.7 2.5 2.2 2.2 9.5 Moderate Water Contamination 2.5 2.0 2.2 2.0 8.7 Moderate
Wildfire 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.7 10.5 Substantial
Windstorms 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.5 9.0 Moderate
11 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-6 ANNEX G
G.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
There is no agricultural land located within the City, so therefore an agricultural emergency does not pose a direct threat. Since agriculture is a major economic driver in the County, an agricultural emergency could have indirect economic impacts on the City.

G.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
Natural dune erosion from large storm waves is the primary hazard challenging the Marina shoreline.

To determine coastal erosion risk, USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMos) shoreline change, and cliff retreat projection data was used. For cliff retreat modeling an end of century (2100) forced sea level rise amount of 200 cm was used based on Ocean Protection Council (OPC) High Risk Aversion Guidance. For shoreline change, winter erosion uncertainty modeling was used to capture the degree of uncertainty associated with future shoreline erosion. Hold the Line scenario modeling was chosen for both types of erosion.

Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Table G-3 summarizes population and property exposure to coastal erosion risk.

Table G-3
Population and Property Exposed to Coastal Erosion Risk in Marina Sea Level Rise Scenario/
Erosion Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Cliff Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Shoreline Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 34 0 $0 20 $45,275,418
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 34 0 $0 20 $45,275,418
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 34 0 $0 20 $45,275,418
Coastal dune erosion hazards are the biggest threat to the City of Marina, with potentially up to five feet of sea level rise. The primary impact from this erosion will be to open space, recreation, and dune habitats along Marina State Beach. Infrastructure and facilities projected to be eroded and damaged include Marina Coast Water District facilities, some portions of the wastewater conveyance system including a sewer pump station and an (aging/ phasing out) water treatment facility, the Sanctuary Beach Resort, one groundwater supply well, and the coastal access and associated parking lot at Marina State Park.

Reduction of erosion rates from the recent cessation of sand mining is expected to reduce the risk of sea level rise and erosion impacts to the City.
12 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-7 ANNEX G
G.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
There is no population or property in the City located in the dam inundation zones of the Los Padres and Forest Lake dams.

Table G-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to spillway and dam failure of the Nacimiento and San Antonio dams.

Table G-4
Population and Property Exposed to Dam Failure Risk by Dam and Failure Type in Marina Dam Failure Scenario Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Nacimiento Spillway Failure 5 1 $199,341 2 $87,938
Nacimiento Dam Failure 39 1 $199,341 16 $45,275,418
San Antonio Spillway Failure 5 1 $199,341 1 $0
San Antonio Dam Failure 5 1 $199,341 2 $87,938
Levee Failure
Based on Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic impact.

G.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution.

A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most significant on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, cascading economic effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

G.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk.
13 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-8 ANNEX G
According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 4,991 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $2,745,331,711. Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Additionally, liquefaction risk was assessed. Table G-5 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table G-5
Population and Property Exposed to Liquefaction Risk in Marina Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 39 1 $199,341 21 $45,275,418 Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 516 16 $9,411,509 29 $57,441,079 G.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. Table G-6 summarizes population and property in the City in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain.

Table G-6
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Marina FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
100-Year Flood Zone 9,496 96 $55,762,807 98 $89,907,734 500-Year Flood Zone 436 0 $0 5 $0
G.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the “protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

To analyze the risk to a transportation-related hazardous materials release, a one-mile buffer was applied to highways in the US Dept of Transportation, National Transportation Atlas Database. The result is a two-mile buffer zone around each transportation corridor that is used for this analysis. Risk from a fixed facility hazardous materials release, was analyzed using a one-mile buffer was applied facilities identified in the Monterey County 2019 Hazardous Materials Plan. The result was a one-mile buffer zone around each facility.

Table G-7 summarizes population and property that could be exposed to both mobile and fixed hazardous materials incidents.
14 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-9 ANNEX G
Table G-7
Population and Property Exposed to Hazardous Materials Incident Risk in Marina Hazardous Materials
Incident Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Mobile Source 16,292 2,413 $1,483,891,351 1,018 $515,933,364 Fixed Source 443 0 $0 4 $28,649,394
G.5.8 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

G.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the COVID-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

G.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to happen anywhere in the City.

Vulnerable populations are the elderly, low income or linguistically isolated populations, people with life-threatening illnesses, and residents living in areas that are isolated from major roads. Properties in poor condition or in high-risk locations may be susceptible to the most damage.

All critical facilities in the City likely exposed to severe weather hazards. The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities and compromised access to roadways. Prolonged periods of extreme heat could result in power outages caused by increased demand for power for cooling.

The FEMA National Risk Index calculates annualized frequency, exposure and annual expected loss of building value and population to some severe weather hazards identified in this Plan. Based on zip code and census tract Countywide data was used to identify annualized frequency, exposure, and annual expected loss in the City from severe weather hazards. Though the entire City is considered vulnerable to these hazards, the FEMA data was used in this risk assessment to provide scale for the potential risk and impacts.

FEMA National Risk Index data from frequency and exposure to severe weather hazards is summarized in Table G-8.
15 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-10 ANNEX G
Table G-8
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Marina Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.34 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.09 Exposed Population 15,069 Exposed Population 15,069
Exposed Building Values $1,244,655,000 Exposed Building Values $1,244,655,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $219
Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 0.08 Frequency (Distinct Events) 1.31 Exposed Population 15,069 Exposed Population 10,187
Exposed Building Values $1,244,655,000 Exposed Building Values $749,974,394 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $1 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $19,235,838
Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.42 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 15,069 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $1,244,655,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $179 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0
Source: FEMA National Risk Index
G.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 1,634 people and $192,621,122in building value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. Additionally, the City is not susceptible earthquake induced to landslides.

G.5.12 TSUNAMI
Population and property in the City located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone is summarized in Table G-9.

Table G-9
Population and Property in Tsunami Inundation Zone in Marina Inundation Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Tsunami Inundation Zone 34 0 $0 20 $45,275,418
G.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption.
16 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-11 ANNEX G
G.5.14 WILDFIRE
For purposes of this analysis CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create 4 threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate.

Table G-10 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Table G-10
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Marina CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
High Fire Threat 3,256 6 $3,505,063 13 $37,060,120
Moderate Fire Threat 13,699 574 $458,626,555 492 $379,314,058 G.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures and rising sea-levels will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure. Drought, coastal and inland flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy. Changing weather patterns and more extreme conditions are likely to impact tourism and the rural economies, along with changes to agriculture and crops, which are a critical backbone of Monterey County’s economic success. There will also be negative impacts to ecosystems, both on land and in the ocean, leading to local extinctions, migrations, and management challenges.

Sea level rise risk exposure in the City was calculated based on the NOAA Office for Coastal Management sea level rise viewer projections. Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) were chosen to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Population and property exposed to sea level rise risk is summarized in Table G-11.

Table G-11
Population and Property Exposed to Sea Level Rise in Marina Sea Level Rise Amount Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
1 ft Sea Level Rise (2030) 34 0 0 20 $45,275,418
3 ft Sea Level Rise (2060) 34 0 0 20 $45,275,418
7 ft Sea Level Rise (2100) 34 1 $199,341 21 $45,275,418 17 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-12 ANNEX G
G.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Marina performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:

An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table G-12 An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table G-13 An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table G-14 An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table G-15 Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table G-16 A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section G.6.1 in Table G-17
An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section G.6.2 in Table G-18 Table G-12
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan • Community Development
Capital Improvement Plan • Public Works
Floodplain Management Plan • Public Works
Open Space Management Plan • Public Works
Under Development and will
be addressed with the General
Plan update.

Stormwater Management Plan • Public Works
Coastal or Shoreline Management
Plan • Community Development
Being updated to address Sea
Level rise and Coastal Hazards,
2019 Existing Conditions and
Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Report
Local Coastal Program • Community Development
Certified in 1982, Currently
being updated to address Sea
Level rise and Coastal Hazards
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan • Community Development Under development, working
with AMBAG for final adoption
with the General Plan update
Emergency Operations Plan • Fire Department Regional EOC Continuity of Operations Plan • Fire Department
Community Wildfire Protection Plan • Fire Department County Wide Plan Evacuation Plan • Fire Department County Wide, Local Tsunami Disaster Recovery Plan •
Economic Development Plan • City Administration In General Plan 18 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-13 ANNEX G
Table G-12
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Historic Preservation Plan • Community Development In General Plan Transportation Plan • Public Works Part of the General Plan and part of TAMC
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance • Public Works Ordinance 15.48 – Flood Damage Prevention
Zoning Ordinance • Community Development
Subdivision Ordinance • Community Development
Site Plan Review Requirements • Community Development
Unified Development Ordinance N/A
Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance N/A
Building Code • Community Development
Fire Prevention Code • Fire Department
Other Hazard-Specific Ordinances • Ordinance 8.46 – Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control
Table G-13
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
• Community Development
• Public Works
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
• Community Development
• Public Works
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or
natural hazards
• Community Development
• Public Works
Building Inspector • Community Development
Emergency Manager • City Manager
Floodplain Manager • Public Works Public Works Director Land Surveyors • Public Works Public Works Director
Resource development staff or
grant writers
Public Information Officer • Police Department Police Chief Scientist(s) familiar with the hazards
of the community
19 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-14 ANNEX G
Table G-13
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Staff with education or expertise to
assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
• All Departments
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS)
Maintenance programs to reduce
risk • Public Works
Warning systems/services • Monterey County
Mutual Aid Agreements • Fire Department
• Public Works
Table G-14
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds • Finance
Capital Improvements Project
Funding • Public Works
Special Purpose Taxes • Finance
Stormwater Utility Fees
Gas / Electric Utility Fees
Water / Sewer Fees
Development Impact Fees • Community Development
General Obligation Bonds • City Manager
• Finance
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds • City Manager
• Finance
Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG)
Table G-15
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, access and functional
needs populations, etc.
• Mayor’s Office
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
• Police Department
• Fire Department All Departments
20 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-15 ANNEX G
Table G-15
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
responsible water use, fire safety,
household preparedness,
environmental education)
• Public Works
• Community Development
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs • Parks and Recreation
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues
Table G-16
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) No - -
ISO Public Protection Classification Yes 3/3Y 1, 20
StormReady Certification Yes -
TsunamiReady Certification Yes -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
G.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table G-17
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Brian McMinn, Public Works Director NFIP Community Number: 060727
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 45
Insurance Coverage in Force: $13,664,400
Written Premium in Force: $61,833
Total Loss Claims: 0
Total Payments for Losses: 0
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Ordinance 15.48 – Flood Damage Prevention
• Ordinance 8.46 – Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

Research indicates the last contact with the CAC was in 2010. There is no evidence of compliance issues from that time.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:

N/A
Additional floodplain management provisions:

The soils in the City of Marina are mostly sand which lends itself towards flood prevention. On top of the naturally good infiltration rates, the City’s storm water standards exceed those of the State with a 21 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-16 ANNEX G
design retention for all new development and redevelopment with 100% retention of the 100-year storm event.

Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

The City follows the State requirements for on-site mitigation of storm events. City requirements exceed those of the State with a retention requirement of 100% of all on-site runoff for the 100-year storm event. The Design Engineer of every major project in the City must sign off on a self- certification that they meet the City’s requirements for on-site retention. The City’s website is updated on an annual basis for training opportunities in post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for stormwater collection and retention. The City also conducts an annual audit of its Municipal Code to confirm the information provided is up to the latest State mandates.

Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

None
Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:
• Maintain digital FEMA elevation certificates for all construction in the floodplain. • Encourage or require certain local staff positions to obtain and maintain Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM) certification.
• Hold informative work sessions for newly elected officials and new appointees to planning commissions and appeals/variance boards, to provide an overview of floodplain management, the importance of participating in the NFIP, and the implications of failing to enforce the requirements of the program or failing to properly handle variance requests. • Obtain FEMA’s Substantial Damage Estimator and attend training to be prepared to use it when damage occurs; develop mutual aid agreements with other jurisdictions to augment local inspection personnel after major disasters.
• Maintain supplies of FEMA/NFIP materials to help property owners evaluate measures to reduce potential hazard damage. Make available in public buildings, local library, website, etc. and inform people who they can call to learn more information.

G.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table G-18
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability Moderate
Fiscal Capability High
Education and Outreach Capability Moderate
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Moderate
G.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Staffing is the largest limitation to capability. Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
22 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-17 ANNEX G
Increase capacity through staffing
Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising Increased funding opportunities and capacity
Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

G.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the City made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives.

The following plans and programs currently integrate components of the hazard mitigation strategy:

Capital Improvement Plan: The capital improvement plan includes projects that can help mitigate potential hazards. The City will strive to ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plan. The hazard mitigation plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment.

Building Code: The City’s adoption of the 2016 California Building Code incorporated local modifications addressing seismic and fire hazards.

Regulatory Codes: A number of the City’s existing codes and ordinances include provisions to reduce hazard risk including the zoning code, storm water management code and flood damage prevention ordinance.
2019 Existing Conditions and Sea Level Rise Adaptation Report: Includes the principles of hazard mitigation to address sea level rise risk.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and 23 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-18 ANNEX G
expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:

General Plan, including the Safety Element
Emergency Operations Plans
Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
Debris management plans
Recovery plans
Capital improvement programs
Municipal codes
Community design guidelines
Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
Stormwater management programs
Water system vulnerability assessments
Community wildfire protection plans
Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
Resiliency plans
Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans Public information/education plans
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

G.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Marina Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Hazard Problem Statements helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the City of Marina are identified below:

The City continues to grow, with many new development projects underway or scheduled for the former site of Fort Ord but continues to be very concerned with maintaining a sustainable water supply – concerns that have only been exacerbated by the anticipated effects of climate change, including saltwater intrusion. It continues to coordinate and share these concerns the Monterey County Water Resources Agency and the Marina Coast Water District. 24 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-19 ANNEX G
The City experiences coastal storm events in March/April, with extreme winds that have caused significant tree damages and heavy rains that have caused isolated/localized nuisance flooding due to inadequate drainage systems.

The Sanctuary Beach Resort is one of the only developed parcels in the city located seaward of Highway 1. There is local concern that coastal erosion and sea level rise could have a detrimental impact on the continued use of the property.

Coastal erosion (potentially up to 5 to 7 feet a year) is a concern for areas such as Marina Coast Water District at 100 Reservation Road and potentially the former Cemex Sandplant site on Lapis Road toward the north of central Marina.

The City is concerned about the high threat of wildland fire due to existing fuels in combination with large areas of urban/wildland interface and intermix. Areas of concern include former Fort Ord lands, areas on the east end of the City around the airport and near Imjin Road, undeveloped land within the City, and areas near Reservation Road. The City is working to address some of these areas through fuel management practices.

The City is concerned with limited ingress/egress to the community following major disaster events. Current traffic levels, highway capacity, gridlock, and lack of mass transit options would make a large evacuation difficult and also limit emergency response capabilities.

G.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The City of Marina Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table G-20 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process.

Table G-19 includes the status of actions completed or removed from the previous plan. In order to improve the mitigation action plan for this Plan update and align with the countywide Mitigation Action Plan, the City added more specificity and detail to previous plan actions in addition to the new actions added to the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix. 25 CITY OF MARINA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | G-20 ANNEX G
Table G-19
City of Marina Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
1 Identify hazard-prone critical
facilities and infrastructure
and carry out acquisition,
relocation, and structural
and nonstructural
retrofitting measures as
necessary.

Completed
Completed and ongoing as needed. Annual
hazardous materials inspections are conducted
by Monterey County Environmental Health in
conjunction with the Public Works Supervisor at
the City Corporation Yard (5th Avenue), the Lake
Drive Corporation Yard (3040 Lake Court) and
the fuel farm at the Marina Municipal Airport.
26 27
28 July 26, 2022 Item No. 8g(1)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council
Meeting of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022

CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE ON -CALL LANDSCAPE

ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF MARINA AND VERDE DESIGN, INC. INCREASING THE ANNUAL CONTRACT LIMIT TO $650,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023, AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE

AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY SUBJECT TO FINAL
REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2022-, approving Amendment No. 1 to the On- Call Landscape Architectural Services agreement between the City of Marina and Verde Design, Inc. (Verde) increasing the annual contract limit to $650,000 for fiscal year 2022-2023 (“EXHIBIT A”).

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney.

BACKGROUND:

On November 16, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-119, approving the final 2021-22 & 2022-23 Budget. Included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) portion of the budget was an allocation of $1,700,000 in one-time land sales and impact fee funding to provide new improvements to Glorya Jean-Tate Park.

On July 7, 2021, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2020-79, approving a professional services agreement between the City of Marina and Verde Design, Inc. for Landscape Architectural Services for projects in the CIP.

On December 1, 2021, the City entered into an agreement with the Verde Design, Inc. to provide on-call landscape architecture services associated with various City projects.

On April 9, 2019 and March 8, 2021, the concept plans were presented to the City Council. City Council receive d the presentations on the park concept plans and provi ded comments for changes which have been incorporated into the plans.

The City received a cost proposal from Verde for the design and bidding document preparation for the Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvements Project in the amount of $ 415,494 (“EXHIBIT B”).

ANALYSIS:

The annual contract limit for the On-Call Landscape Architectural Services between the City of Marina and Verde is $300,000 and is not sufficient to issue Service Orders for the full scope of the proposed professional services for the preparation of contract documents for the Dunes Park Improvements and Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvements Projects. 1 The majority of the Verde work will occur during Fiscal Year 2022-2023. Increasing the annual compensation limit for the on -call Landscape Architectural services agreement with Verde to $650,000 for the next fiscal year will allow for completion of construction documents for the Dunes Park Improvements and Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvements Projects.

Verde has the experience to provide Landscape Architectural services including bid document preparation and Landscape Architectural services during construction. They are familiar with the project and have provided design concepts and construction documents for the Glorya Jean Tate Park Bicycle Pump Track and Improvements. Approval of the increase in the contract limit to $650,000 for the next fiscal year is an expeditious and cost -effective way for the City to manage the design of the Dunes Park Improvements and Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvements Projects.

Approval of this request allows issuance of service orders to Verde for the full scope of Landscape Architectural design, bidding document preparation, and Landscape Architectural support during construction for the Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvement Project as well as the grading plan and site survey for the Dunes Park Improvement Project.

Staff and Verde will return to the City Council with presentation of the schematic design and design development of the Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements for input during the overall construction document preparation.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Sufficient funding is allocated within the approved CIP budget under Project Number QLP2119 and QLP2017 to cover the full scope of the proposed Landscape Architectural services for Glorya Jean-Tate Park Improvement Project and the Dunes Park Improvement Project.

CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council discussion and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

Rick Riedl, P.E.

Project Management Services
Wallace Group

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

Brian McMinn, P.E., P.L.S.

Public Works Director/City
Engineer City of Marina

Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina
2 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE ON-CALL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARINA AND VERDE DESIGN, INC. INCREASING THE ANNUAL CONTRACT LIMIT TO $650,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE

AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY SUBJECT TO FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

WHEREAS, on November 16, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021 -119, approving the final 2021-22 & 2022-23 Budget. Included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) portion of the budget was an allocation of $1,700,000 in one -time land sales and impact fees funding to provide new improvements to Glorya Jean-Tate Park; and

WHEREAS, on July 7, 2021, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2020 -79, approving a professional services agreement between the City of Marina and Verde Design, Inc. for Landscape Architectural Services for projects in the CIP; and

WHEREAS, on December 1, 2021, the City entered into an agreement with the Verde Design, Inc. to provide on-call architecture services associated with various City projects.

WHEREAS, the concept plans were presented to the City Council on April 9, 2019 and March 8, 1021. City Council received presentations on the park concept plans and provided comments for changes which have been incorporated into the plans: and

WHEREAS, th e City received a cost proposal for the Landscape Architectural design and bidding document preparation for the Glorya Jean -Tate Park Improvements Project in the amount of $415,494 (“Exhibit B”); and

WHEREAS, the annual contract limit for the On-Call Landscape Architectural Services between the City of Marina and Verde is $300,000 and is not sufficient to issue Service Orders for full scope of the proposed Landscape Architectural services for the Glorya Jean -Tate Park Improvement Project and the Dunes Park Improvement Project; and

WHEREAS, increasing the annual compensation limit for the on -call Landscape Architectural services agreement with Verde to $650,000 for the next fiscal year will allow for completion of construction documents for the Dunes Park Improvement and Glorya Jean -Tate Park Improvement Projects; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Marina does hereby adopt Resolution No. 2022- for the following actions:

1. Approving Amendment No. 1 to the On-Call Landscape Architectural Services agreement between the City of Marina and Verde Design, Inc. (Verde) increasing the annual contract limit to $ 650,000 for fiscal year 2022 -2023 (“Exhibit A”); and

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney.

3 Resolution No. 2022-
Page Two

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

4 EXHIBIT A

AMENDMENT No. 1 TO AGREEMENT

BETWEEN CITY OF MARINA
AND VERDE DESIGN, INC. FOR ON-

CALL ARCHITECTURE SERVICES

THIS AMENDMENT No. 1 (“Amendment No. 1”) to the Agreement for On -Call Architecture Services pertaining to various City projects and to provide on -call support services for the City on an as-needed basis as determined by the City Engineer is made this 2022, by and between th e City of Marina, a California charter city (“CITY”) and Verde Design, Inc. , a California Corporation (“CONTRACTOR”). CITY and CONTRACTOR are sometimes referred to herein collectively as the “Parties.”

Recitals

A. On December 1, 2021, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into the Agreement for On- Call Architecture Services (the “Agreement”) for services to provide Landscape Architectural services pertaining to various City projects and to provide on -call support services for the City on an as-needed basis as determined by the City Engineer. The term of the Agreement ends on June 30, 2024 and compensation to the Contractor under the Agreement was limited to $300,000 per fiscal year.

B. The Agreement provides it may only be amended or modified by written agreement of the Parties. Both Parties now desire to amend the Agreement to increase the total annual compensation limit under the Agreement to $650,000 for fiscal year 2022/2023.

C. Only the numbered Articles of the Agreement which are being a mended are set forth in this First Amendment.

Terms & Conditions Amended

Now, therefore, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

Article 3 “Compensation” Section (a) is deleted and replaced to read in its entirety:

“City liability for compensation to Contractor under this Agreement, as amended, shall only be to the extent of the present appropriation to fund this Agreement. For services to be provided under this Agreement City shall compensate Contractor in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the hourly rate(s) and reimbursable schedule(s) attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. The total annual compensation under this Agreement as amended shall be limited to: (1) Three Hundred Thousand ($300,000) for the period December 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022; (2) Six Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($650,000) for the period July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023; (3) On July 1, 2023 and continuing for the remaining term of this Agreement the total amount of compensation under this Agreement as amended shall be limited to Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) per fiscal year. All fiscal years commence on July 1 and end on June 30 and compensation during any portion of a fiscal year shall be pro -rated. For purposes of calculating and pro-rating compensation due each fiscal year shall be considered to have 365 days.” 5 All other terms and conditions of the Agreement as amended shall remain in full force and effect.

This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in two (2) counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but both of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Counterpart may be delivered by facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf. or any electronic signature complying with the U.S.ESIGN Act of 2000, California’s Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code 1633.1 et seq.) or other applicable law) or other transmission method and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes. This Amendment No. 1 consists of two (2) pages.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for CONTRACTOR to provide on-call architecture services pertaining to various City projects and development and to provide support services for the CITY on an as -needed basis as determined by the City Engineer on the date(s) and year written below.

CITY OF MARINA Verde Design, Inc., a California
Corporation

By: By:

Layne Long Name:

City Manager Its:

Date: 2022 Date:
2022 (Attestation & Approval
follow)
ATTEST: (Reso. 2022-_ )

By: Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: For the City Attorney

6 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN July 26, 2022
Mr. Brian McMinn, Public Works Director
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933
Subject: Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements
Verde Design Project No.: 2207300M
In response to your request, Verde Design, Inc. is pleased to submit the following proposal to provide the identified design services on the above mentioned project. This proposal shall remain valid for a period of sixty (60) days.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING/HISTORY:

The City of Marina (City) is requesting a proposal for design services for improvements to the park that include the full renovation of the park per the previously completed conceptual design. We have been working on phase one with the City that will develop the bike pump track. Remaining elements in the conceptual plan include:
• Entry plaza along Reservation Road
• Playground
• Half Court Basketball
• Pickle Ball
• Cornhole/Horseshoe Court
• BBQ & Picnic Area
• Dog Park
• Natural or Synthetic Turf
• Parking Lot Renovation
• Building Entry Access Upgrade
• Jogging Loop and Pathways
• Bike Entry & Seating
• Park Landscaping
• Park Furnishings: Benches, Drinking Fountains, Exercise Stations, Security Lighting, Bike Racks, Trash & Recycle Receptacles
Verde Design proposes a design process to include start-up and 30% schematic design, 50% design development submittal, 95% submittal and 100% construction documents. Plans will be developed as one increment and a single bid package.

Starting with a review of the conceptual plan Verde Design developed, we will review the proposed improvements and programs with staff for alignment with any standards and equipment selection. A site walk and meeting with

EXHIBIT B
7 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 2 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN the City staff will occur to review input and program needs. We can review conditions and proposed needs for the paving/circulation, ADA improvements, lighting, utility and other upgrades.

We will prepare site survey for areas not previously surveyed and can utilize any as-built plans the City has for the base information. A base plan will be setup per the proposed improvements. Geotechnical report will be prepared.

After the start-up phase, we will develop the schematic design package. We plan to meet with staff halfway through this process to review the progress and verify questions on the design and engineering. We will setup a systems design for the grading, drainage, material and electrical for the proposed improvements and site work for discussion and review at the meeting. We plan to present options or insights so that direction can be provided to complete the design and final 30% submittal. We will also present to the City Council to gather their input on the final design.

We have included an ADA consultant to review existing conditions and our plans for compliance. Specifically the building access and ADA parking will be reviewed. Current building entry from the front and parking lot side is not compliant and should be upgraded.

Following the approval of the design development package, we will move forward with 95% construction documents. We will review the package with staff and coordinate comments. The next submittal will be the final bid submittal for a final review and design coordination. City specifications, bidding documents and standards will be incorporated. A bid set of plans will be prepared for bidding.

Included are services for storm water treatment alignment for the impervious surfacing being added. We may need to add or modify the drainage system for the proposed improvements and storm water requirements. Storm water calculations and coordination with the City engineers will occur to align the plans with the City’s stormwater requirements.

An erosion control plan and SWPP will be provided. Inspection services or QSP services will be provided by the contractor.

Included are several meetings with the City staff during the design process and construction documents phases.

Our timeline is proposed below. Our master plan cost estimate was at $7.3 million and the phase one costs were around $1M. Therefore, we are looking at around $6 million for the construction value of this phase.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Verde Design proposes to provide the following services based on the above stated project understanding.

I. Start-Up Phase
A. Establish files and in-house documentation.

B. Receive all available data, maps, reports, etc.

C. Obtain City documents relating to the site and other requirements, standards and regulations for development of the facilities.

D. Coordinate the as-builts, site maps and Reservation Road improvements available with the City.

E. Provide a draft milestone schedule.

F. Provide a site survey and update the previously prepared topographical survey for the areas not previously included, including the stairs at Cardoza Avenue.

G. Provide geotech report s for the project site for paving and subgrade construction recommendations. Percolation tests are also included for storm water treatment planning.

H. Visit the project site to complete a visual inventory of the existing conditions and review pedestrian circulation, paving conditions, and proposed park elements with City staff.

EXHIBIT B
8 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 3 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN I. Kick-Off Meeting

1. Staff meeting to review schedule, deliverables, budget, and project process.

2. Review any relevant City Standards and any other related projects or future work anticipated in the park.

3. Review previous master plan and phase one improvements for direction related to this project scope.

4. Review project schedule.

II. Schematic Design Phase - The following outlines the work to be completed to prepare plans and specifications for construction.

A. 30% Submittal Package

1. The submittal includes plans that will be developed to a preliminary level for discussion .

We plan to make an approach to the design and engineering of the plans/systems and review our progress with City and then complete the design based on input. The plans show overall site design including:
a. Cover Sheet
b. Existing Conditions Plan
c. Grading Plan
d. Drainage Plan
e. Stormwater Treatment Plan
f. Layout Plan
g. Material and Detail Reference Plan
h. Conceptual Planting Plan & Palette
i. Construction Details
j. Electrical Plans
k. ADA Assessment

2. Provide representative technical specifications for the project with a table of contents listing.. Specifications will be provided in six-digit CSI format.

3. The submittal book supplements the plans and specifications showing:
a. Progress Report
b. Statement of Probable Construction Costs
c. Material cut sheets

4. Redline and review, Internal Quality Control (QC).

5. Submittal Preparation and coordination of plans and specifications will be provided for review.

B. Two review meetings with City staff to review plans and receive comments.

C. One presentation to City Council to review plans and receive comments.

EXHIBIT B
9 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 4 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN II. Design Development Phase - The following outlines the work to be completed to prepare plans and specifications for construction.

A. 60% Submittal Package

1. The submittal includes plans and draft technical specifications. The plans show overall site design including:
a. Cover Sheet
b. Access Plan
c. Existing Conditions Plan
d. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
e. Demolition Plan
f. Grading Plan
g. Drainage Plan
h. Stormwater Treatment Plan
i. Layout Plan
j. Material and Detail Reference Plan
k. Irrigation Plan
l. Planting Plan
m. Construction Details
n. Electrical Plans
o. Structural Plans

2. Setup technical specifications for the project. Specifications will be provided in six-digit CSI format. Setup City front end documents and overall table of contents.

3. The submittal book supplements the plans and specifications showing:
a. Progress Report
b. Statement of Probable Construction Costs
c. Material cut sheets

4. Redline and review, Internal Quality Control (QC).

5. Submittal Preparation and coordination of plans and specifications will be provided for review.

B. Two review meetings with City staff to review plans and receive comments.

III. Construction Document Phase - The following outlines the work to be completed to prepare plans and specifications for construction.

A. 95% Submittal Package

1. The submittal includes plans and draft technical specifications. The plans show overall site design including:
a. Cover Sheet
b. Access Plan

EXHIBIT B
10 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 5 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN c. Existing Conditions Plan
d. Demolition Plan
e. Grading Plan
f. Drainage Plan
g. Storm Water Plan
h. Layout Plan
i. Material and Detail Reference Plan
j. Irrigation Plan
k. Planting Plan
l. Construction Details
m. Electrical Plans
n. Structural Plans

2. The technical specifications show representative specifications for the project.

Specifications will be provided in six-digit CSI format. City front end specification updates.

3. The submittal book supplements the plans and specifications showing:
a. Progress Report
b. Statement of Probable Construction Costs

4. Redline and review, Internal Quality Control (QC).

5. Submittal Preparation and coordination of plans and specifications will be provided for review.

B. Edit technical specifications, City standard specifications and front-end documents.

C. City building department review and coordinate comments.

D. 100%/Bid Submittal – Coordinate, update and provide final bid package.

E. One review meeting with City staff to review plans and receive comments.

F. Play equipment inspection during plan development.

EXHIBIT B
11 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 6 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN IV. Optional Services
A. Security cameras and WAP.

B. Pump track lighting.

C. Power service upgrade.

PRODUCTS
Verde Design will provide the following products as outlined in the above Scope of Services:

1. 30% submittal – one electronic and two hardcopy sets of plans, costs and specifications

2. 50% submittal – one electronic and two hardcopy sets of plans, costs and specifications

3. 95% submittal – one electronic and two hardcopy sets of plans, costs and specifications

PROJECT TIMELINE
Verde Design proposes the following general timeline:
30% Submittal: 10 Weeks
60% Submittal: 6 Weeks
95% Submittal: 5 Weeks
Bid Submittal: 4 Weeks
Note: the above timelines does not include any required review time by City staff.

CLIENT’S RESPONSIBILITIES
In order to complete the items described in Scope of Services above, we respectfully request that the City provide the following information:

1. Any available construction, utility or record drawings of the project area.

2. Reservation Road improvement plans.

3. Geotechnical testing during construction.

4. Bid set copies.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS
A. Without attempting to be all-inclusive and for purposes of clarity, the following items are specifically not included in the Scope of Services:

1. Meetings other than those listed

2. Renderings and presentations to public bodies other than those listed

3. SWPPP services for design (QSP) inspection during construction. Services to be provided by contractor for inspection.

4. Testing during construction

5. Underground utility surveys

6. Utility runs off-site

7. Survey property lines or easement locations

EXHIBIT B
12 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 7 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN

8. Permit fees associated with the project

9. Access plans – ADA site plan and evaluation of existing conditions

10. Pump or lift station design

11. 3D graphics

12. Arborist report

13. CEQA process

14. Architecture and mechanical engineering services.

B. This fee will be valid for 60 days, should the City choose to extend or add to the contract, the unbilled portion of this agreement will be subject to an increase in January of 2021 to cover annual wage adjustments for office personnel.

C. Services will be diligently pursued, and every reasonable effort will be made to meet the mutually agreed upon schedule. If the completion of the services is delayed at any time in the progress of the work undertaken in this Agreement by conditions beyond the control of the Consultant; including but not limited to: strikes, lockouts, labor disputes, or the inability of City, their consultants, utility companies, or jurisdictional agencies to provide required information, processing or direction; the time of completion shall be extended during such period and Consultant shall be held harmless from any and all claims arising out of such delay.

PROFESSIONAL COMPENSATION
For the scope of services and products identified in this proposal, Verde Design respectfully requests the following time and materials not to exceed fee including all reasonable reimbursable expenses that are outlined to be included in the project.
▪ Phase 1: 30% Submittal $142,433
▪ Phase 2: 60% Submittal $116,293
▪ Phase 3: 95% & Bid Submittal $156,768
Total $415,494

Optional Services
• Data/WAP and Security Cameras $11,370
• Pump Track Lighting Design $8,070
• Power Service Upgrade $13,570

Additional services will be charged on a time and material basis. Charges for additional services will be billed separately.

CHANGE IN SERVICES
Client may order changes in scope or character of service, either decreasing or increasing the amount of Consultant's services, and if necessary, changing the character of services. In the event that such changes are ordered, Consultant is entitled to full compensation for all services performed and expenses incurred prior to receipt of notice of change.

EXHIBIT B
13 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 8 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN

TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
In the event the project is terminated or indefinitely suspended in the manner herein provided, Verde Design shall turn over copies of any and all documents completed to that date. Verde Design shall be entitled to compensation up to and including said termination date. Original work shall remain the property of Verde Design.

Brian, if this proposal meets with the approval of the City of Marina, please sign the proposal below. Thank you again for the opportunity to work with your City and Community on the Glorya Jean Tate Park improvements.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved:

Verde Design, Inc.

Derek McKee, RLA
Principal Name:

Date:

Enclosure: 2022 Charge Rate Schedule
cc: Nance Cronin, Verde Design

EXHIBIT B
14 Glorya Jean Tate Park Improvements – Full Development July 26, 2022

Page 9 ends

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • CIVIL ENGINEERING • SPORT PLANNING & DESIGN Verde Design, Inc.

Charge Rate Schedule
Effective until December 31, 2022

The following chart outlines the current charge rate for professional and office costs. Reimbursable rates and expenses are shown at the bottom.

Project Rates
Principal $255.00 per hour
Project Manager/Construction Manager
Level Four $240.00 per hour
Level Three $220.00 per hour
Level Two $180.00 per hour
Level One $165.00 per hour
Project Engineer
Level II $180.00 per hour
Level I $165.00 per hour
IT Manager $180.00 per hour
CAD Manager $175.00 per hour
Project Designer $160.00 per hour
Job Captain/Staff Engineer/Construction Administrator $150.00 per hour Draftsperson Level II $145.00 per hour
Draftsperson Level I $140.00 per hour
Project Administrator $85.00 per hour
Intern $75.00 per hour
Reimbursable Rates
Blueprints, Printing and Reproductions Cost plus 10%
Sub Consultant Services Cost plus 10%
Reimbursable Expenses
Blueprints and Reproductions Travel Expenses
Photography Parking and Toll Expenses
Models and Renderings Permit Fees
Postage/Overnight Mail Service Courier Delivery Service

EXHIBIT B
15 July 28, 2022 Item No. 8h(1)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022

RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO.
2022-, ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF P UBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED SEA HAVEN PHASE 5A

IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND FINAL MAP , AND AUTHORIZING THE

CITY CLERK TO RELEASE BOND SECURITIES , ACCEPT A

WARRANTY BOND, AND RECORD ACCEPTANCE WITH THE
MONTEREY COUNTY RECORDER’S OFFICE

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Consider adopting Resolution No. 20 22-, accepting the dedication of Public Improvements as shown on the approved Sea Haven Phase 5 A Improvement Plans and Final Map, and;

2. Authorize the City Clerk to release bond securities, accept a warranty bond, and record acceptance with Monterey County Recorder’s Office.

BACKGROUND:

At the regular meeting of August 7, 2019 , the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-78, approving a Public Improvement Agreem ent for Sea Haven Phase 5 A between the City of Marina and the Contracting Parties associated with the S ea Haven Residential Development (Developer).

At the same meeting , City C ouncil adopted Resolu tion No. 2019-81, approving the Phase 5A Final Map for the Sea Haven Development Project Subdivision (formerly Marina Heights).

The Final Map of Tract No. 1540, recorded in the Monterey County Recorders Office in Volume 24 of Cities and Towns, at page 62 specifies the dedications for public use as part of the Owner’s Statement (“ EXHIBIT A ”). Streets dedicated to the Ci ty on this map include Hayden Way, Denali Drive, Rainer Way, Hood Way and McKinley Drive.

The Developer has filed with the City Clerk a Faithful Performance bond and a Labor and Materials bond each in the amount of $2,218,000.

ANALYSIS:

The Improvements required by the improvement plans entitled “Improvement Plans for Preserve & Residences Sea Haven Phase 5A” (“ Improvement Plans ”), and approved by the City Engineer on April 23, 2019 , were completed by the Developer in substantial conformance with the approved Improvement Plans for the project.

The Public Improvement Agreement states that a Guarantee and Warranty period will remain for one year after acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council.

1 Therefore, a request is being made by the Developer to release all of the Faithful Performance Bond & Lab or and Materials bond. A new bo nd of 10% of the original Performance bond ($221,800) for public improvements will remain with the City Clerk as the Guarantee and Warranty Security for one (1) year after a cceptance. Any repairs required during the Guarantee and Warranty period will be made by the Developer, or the costs w ill be recovered from said bond. After the Warranty period, mainte nance responsibilities for pavement improvements will be covered by the City and financed through the City’s Pavement Management Program.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impacts for maintenance of these improvements after the warranty period shall be incorporated into the City’s existing street maintenance budget.

CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council consideration and possible action.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________
Edrie Delos Santos, P.E.

Senior Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

____________________________
Brian McMinn, P.E., P.L.S.

Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Marina

_____________________________
Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

2 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA

ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED SEA HAVEN PHASE 5A IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND

FINAL MAP, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO RELEASE BOND

SECURITIES, ACCEPT A WARRANTY BOND, AND RECORD
ACCEPTANCE WITH THE MONTEREY COUNTY RECORDER’S OFFICE

WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of August 7, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-78, approving a Public Improvement Agreement for Sea Haven Phase 5A between the City of Marina and the Contracting Parties associated with the S ea Haven Residential Development (Developer), and;

WHEREAS, at the same meeting, City C ouncil adopted Resolution No. 2019-81, approving the Phase 5A Final Map for the Sea Have n Development Project Subdivision (formerly Marina Heights), and;

WHEREAS, the Final Map of Tract No. 1 540, recorded in the Monterey Count y Recorders Office in Volume 24 of Cities and Towns, at page 62 specifies the dedications for public use as part of the Owner’s Statement (“EXHIBIT A”). Streets dedicated to the City on this map include Hayden Way, Denali Drive, Rainer Way, Hood Way and McKinley Drive, and;

WHEREAS, the Developer has filed with the City Clerk a Faithful Performance bond and a Labor and Materials bond each in the amount of $2,218,000, and;

WHEREAS, the Improvements required by the improvement plans entitled “Improvement Plans for Preserve & Residences Sea Haven Phase 5A” (“Improvement Plans”), and approved by the City Engineer on April 23, 2019 , were completed by the Developer in substantial conformance with the approved Improvement Plans for the project, and;

WHEREAS, the Public Improvement Agreement states that a Guarantee and Warranty period will remain for one year after acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council, and;

WHEREAS, therefore, a requ est is being made by the Developer to release all of the Faithful Performance bond. A new bond of 10% of the original Performance bond ($221,800) for public improvements will remain with the City Clerk as the Guarantee and Warr anty Security for one (1) year after acceptance. Any repairs required during the Guarantee and Warranty period will be made by the Developer , or the costs w ill be recovered from said bond . After the Warranty period, maintenance responsibilities for sidewalks and pavement improvements will be cover ed by the City and financed through the City’s Pavement Management Program, and;

WHEREAS, the fiscal impacts for maintenance of these improvements after the warranty period shall be incorporated into the City’s existing street maintenance budget.

3 Resolution No. 2022-
Page Two

NOW, TH EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Marina does hereby:

1. Accept the dedication of Public Improvements as shown on the approved Sea Haven Phase 5A Improvement Plans and Final Map

2. Authorize the City Clerk to rele ase Performance, an d Labo r and Materials bond securities;

3. Authorize the City Clerk to accept a warranty bond, and;

4. Authorize the City Clerk to record acceptance with Monterey County Recorder’s Office.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regula r meeting duly held on the 3rd day of August 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

_____________________________
Bruce Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

__________________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

4 EXHIBIT A
to Staff Report
5 15
22 31
6 7
8 9

EXHIBIT B
to Staff Report
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
Continued from July 19, 2022
July 21, 2022 Item No. 9a
Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
Of the Marina City Council of August 3, 2022

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVE
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -, APPROVING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE MARINA STATION
PROJECT TO 3RD MILLENNIUM PARTNERS

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA READ BY TITLE
ONLY AND APPROVE THE FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 2022 -,

APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT

AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE MARINA STATION PROJECT

REQUEST
It is requested that the Marina City Council:

1. Approve Resolution 2022-, approving the assignment of the Development Agreement related to the Marina Station Project to 3rd Millennium Partners.

2. Read by title only and waive further reading and approve the first reading of Ordinance 2022-, approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement related to the Marina Station Project.

SUMMARY OF MAIN QUESTIONS RAISED AT THE JUNE 21st and JULY 19th

COUNCIL MEETINGS
A comprehensive list of questions asked by the Council is included as EXHIBIT “E” and is summarized here:

1. Affordable Housing. The mix of rental and for sale affordable units will be part of the Affordable Housing Plan that will have to be approved by Council at a later date.

The rent control language has been removed from the DA.

2. Settlement Agreements and Compliance. A summary is provided as EXHIBIT “G”.

3. Park Layout and In-Lie Fee Comparisons. Please see EXHIBIT “F”.

4. Vernal Ponds. The amended agreement allows City access when access is provided to others, copies of any reports or studies will be provided to the city. If the developer is amenable to allowing additional access, that can be negotiated.

5. Water. The certified EIR considered future + project water use and determined that water is available for the full build-out of this project.

6. Access to the Sand Mine Property via Lapis Rd or Other. Assuming that Lapis Rd. is a public road, the residents of Marina Station and others will be able to utilize this road to access the beach via the sand mine property once the sand mine property is in public ownership/control. Lapis Rd. is outside the City’s jurisdiction so in -lieu fees cannot be directly utilized for improvements. The sand mine property is not included in the City’s Park Master Plan; impact fees cannot be used there for access and park improvements.
1 7. Fiscal Impact Study and Fire Station Development. The updated Fiscal Impact Study (EXHIBIT “D”) estimates that Marina Station will generate a net surplus to the City’s General and Gas Tax Funds approximating $1.7 million per y ear upon buildout. The projection indicates that Marina Station will meet and exceed the fiscal neutrality target for the Project . (Keyser Marston Assoc., June 2022) Under the terms of the DA, the Marina Station revenue will pay for 50% of the ongoing operations and maintenance of a new fire station. It is not intended to pay for the construction of a new fire station. Impact fees from the residential development will be dedicated as follows:

Public Buildings - $6.2 million
Public Safety - $1.4 million
Streets - $13.2 million
Parks - $6.8 million

BACKGROUND
The City of Marina and Creekbridge Homes, LLC (“Original Developer”) originally entered into a Development Agreement dated March 4, 2008, related to the Marina Station project (the "Development Agreement ") (“EXHIBIT B”) . The Development Agreement provided the Original Developer the opportunity to develop a 320 -acre site into a mixed -use project on either side of Del Monte Avenue at the northern boundary of the City of Marina. The Development Agreement stipulated the terms and conditions for development of 1,360 residential units (887 single family units and 473 multifamily units), approximately 60,000 square feet of retail space, approximately 144,000 square feet of office space, approximately 652,000 square feet of business park/industrial, parks and open space (the "Development"). The project approvals include requirements for the development of affordable housing and the reservation of a parcel if needed for the development of a fire station.

The Development Agreement was entered into by the City of Marina and the Original Developer pursuant to Government Code Section 65864 and the Marina Municipal Code Chapter 4.04. The Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on March 4, 2008. At that regular meeting of March 4, 2008, the City Council certified the EIR, approved the General Plan Amendments, the Specific Plan (“EXHIBIT C” Links to approved Specific Plan and Settlement Agreements) , Zoning Ordinance Map Amendments, a Vesting Tentat ive Map (collectively the "Project Approvals"), Design Review and the Development Agreement for the Marina Station Project.

Development of the Project has been delayed because of a variety of factors, including the recession, litigation, and transfer of the property to a new ownership group. The Project Approvals were challenged in court resulting in delays in implementation of the Development. The court challenge coincided with the Great Recession that weakened the housing market. As a result of these events as well as the fact that the Original Developer dropped out of the Development and the Property was sold to a new ownership group, the Development has been delayed. The litigation and related settlement agreement between the Sierra Club and Creekbridge Homes, LLC resulted in some changes in the Development to better accommodate conservation and habitat resource protection (in the northwest portion of the property). As a result of the expanded conservation and habitat resource protection activities, some of the approved housing units in that phase of the project needed to be relocated. This relocation occurred to the east of Del Monte Boulevard. The conservation and habitat protection area required by the settlement agreement also necessitated the relocation of certain park improvements and resulted in the reduction of park acreage.

2 Creekbridge Homes of Salinas, California was the original developer of the project. Creekbridge Homes dropped out of the project in 2010. Subsequently, the owners of the property began seeking a new developer to move the project forward. The property was sold in 2017 to new property owners. The new ownership group brought in 3rd Millennium Partners, Inc. of San Jose ("3MP") to act as the developer of the Development in 2019. 3MP, acting as the Developer, has been working with the City since that time to move the Development forward.

Given the prior delays in the Development, it is impossible for the Development to be completed by the original expiration date of the Development Agreement – March 2026. 3MP and property owners have requested a 10 -year extension of the Development Agreement (to 2036). Although the full 10 additional years most likely will not be needed, the additional time will cover unforeseen events that may occur as development proceeds, including economic cycles.

The Developer is required prior to recording the first final map to obtain City Council approval of a below market rate housing agreement consistent with the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan in effect in 2008. The Development Agreement requires that 20% of the homes be affordable to very low, low and moderate income households with the following breakdown of the affordable units:
• 95 units for moderate income households (120 percent of County median income) • 95 units for low-income households (80 percent of County median income) • 82 units for very low-income households (50 percent of County median income) The below market rate homes will be dispersed throughout the project and likely be a mix of rental and for-sale units. The below market rate housing agreement will include details such as the mix of units between rental and ownership, the timing for development of the units in relation to market rate units, the size of the units and the dispersal of the units through the Development.

Assignment Agreement
The City originally entered into the Development Agreement with Creekbridge Homes, LLC.

Creekbridge was party to a purchase and sale agreement with the then existing property owner. In 2010 Creekbridge dropped out of Development. The Armstrong Family, the then existing owner of the property, assumed the rights and obligations under the Development Agreement. In 2017 the Armstrong Family sold the property to the current property owners. The rights and obligations under the Development Agreement run with the land and the new owners assumed those rights and obligations when they acquired the Property. The current owners have entered into an agreement with 3MP to act as developer under the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement.

Under the terms of the Development Agreement, the Developer cannot assign the Development Agreement without the consent of the City, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. The City can refuse to approve an assignment only if the City, in its reasonable opinion, determines that the assignee would not be able to perform the obligations to be assumed. A review of the qualifications of 3MP has determined that 3MP will be able to perform the obligations under the Development Agreement.

Development Agreement
The Development Agreement is a valid and enforceable contract which creates rights and responsibilities for both the City and the Dev eloper. The Development Agreement grants the Developer vested rights in the Project Approvals for the term of the Development Agreement and prevents the City from applying new city laws to the Development that conflict with the Project Approvals during the term of the Development Agreement except to the extent that such conditions or requirements are mandated by State or Federal law or required for reasons of public health and safety, such as Building and Fire Code changes. Development Agreements are authorized by 3 Government Code Section 65864 et seq and are designed to provide developers with certainty about development rights, particularly for large scale projects that may be constructed over multiple years. The City of Marina adopted a development agreement ordinance (Chapter 4.04 of the Municipal Code). The City's procedures for the approval of development agreements and amendments to development agreements requires that both the Planning Commission and the City Council hold public hearings.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 8, 2021, on the Development Agreement Amendment as well as the Developer's compliance with the terms of the Development Agreement to date. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the amendment to the Development Agreement and found that the Developer is in compliance with the terms of the Development Agreement.

Development Agreement Amendments (“EXHIBIT B”)
The property owner and 3MP have requested a 10-year extension of the term of the Development Agreement. The extension request is based in part on delays that were caused by the great recession, the litigation and most recently the global pandemic, all events outside the control of the Developer. The Development Agreement provides for an automatic extension of the term if the Development is delayed because of certain force majeure events. Some portion of the requested 10-year extension is required as of right under the existing Development Agreement but currently the full 10 years cannot be justified by force majeure events. Since the requested extension requires an amendment to the Development Agreement, the City and the Developer have also reviewed the Development Agreement to determine other amendments that are necessary to address changes that may have occurred since the Development Agreement was originally entered into. The amendment to the Development Agreement proposes the following changes:
• Extends the Term of the Development Agreement for 10 years with a new expiration date of March 4, 2036.
• Clarifies Section 2.3 of the Development Agreement to require that the Development be built to building codes in effect at the time of approval of the building permits as well as clari fies that the City's then current codes with respect to trees and fencing will be applicable to the Development.
• Removes language regarding escrowing TAMC fees since TAMC has now adopted its regional fee which will be applicable to the Development. • Requires that an update of the 2008 Fiscal Impact study be prepared. The updated fiscal impact study will include as part of the assumptions the formation of community facilities and community service districts to cover some costs of infrastructure as well as all of the City's ongoing maintenance costs of the infrastructure, including one half of the costs of operation of the fire station serving the area. If the updated fiscal impact study does not show that the Development is at least fiscally neutral to the City, the City does not have to approve the Final Map until the City and the Developer have reached agreement on additional impact fees or a reallocation of maintenance responsibilities to reach fiscal neutrality. • Adds language to clarify that City processing fees in effect at the time a permit application is filed will be applicable to the Development.
• Updates language regarding park improvements to reflect the current configuration of the parks as well as the improvements to be constructed on the parks and to allow the City and the Developer to agree on the standards for the park improvements. The requirements in the existing Development Agreement included specific park improvements that are outdated. • Revises the City's maintenance obligations related to parks to address that change in the Park in Phase 8 that is now, as a result of the Settlement Agreement, conservation and habitat protection area. The Developer will remain responsible for the maintenance of that area in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
4 • Imposes a park impact fee on the development to address the reduction in parks and recreational areas that result from changes to the total acreage of parks and park improvement.

The Developer will now be responsible for paying 51.9% of the City's park impact fee on each residential unit.
• Grants the City access to the Property owners' vernal ponds for monitoring and testing should the owners grant such access to any other party.

The City Council, in considering the approval of the amendments to the Development Agreement is required to make certain findings in accordance with the Municipal Code Chapter 4.04 as follows:
• That the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan and the Specific Plan; • That the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the Property is located • That the Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice;
• Whether the Development Agreement will be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare;
• Whether Development Agreement will adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values;
• That the Development Agreement is consistent with the provisions of the Government Code related to development agreements.

The City Council made these finding for this Development when the original Development Agreement was approved. The Development has not substantially changed since its original approval and remains subject to the same General Plan and Speci fic Plan provisions that were applicable in 2008. The Amendment to the Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of the property or the preservation of property values and in fact will contribute to the orderly development of the property by completing the Development that was approved in 2008. The Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the provisions of the Government Code related to development agreements. The ordinance prepared for the approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement makes the required findings based on the above information and the information contained elsewhere in this staff report.

Environmental Determination
On March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Marina certified the final environmental impact report for the Marina Station Project (State Clearing House Number 2005061056) ("EIR"). The EIR served as the environmental review for the Development and the Project Approvals and entitlements as well as for the approval of the Development Agreement. Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines states that if an EIR or negative declaration has been adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR is to be prepared unless there have been substantial changes to the project, substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken or new information of substantial importance shows that the project would have significant effects not discussed in the EIR. Since certification of the EIR there have been (i) no substantial changes to the project which would require revisions to the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Although there have been changes to the Project since the certification of the EIR as a result of the Settlement Agreement, tho se changes do not significantly alter the Development or change the density or intensity of the uses approved for the Development such that there are new significant environmental effects; 5 (ii) no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which require revisions to the EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified effect. The City's urban growth boundary, which was in effect when the Development was approved was recently extended for an additional 20 years so will remain in effect for the duration of the development period. There have been no significant changes in the areas surrounding the Development since the EIR was app roved that involve new significant impacts; and
(iii) no new information shows that the Development will a. have any significant effects that were not discussed in the EIR, b. that significant effects that were previously examined will be more severe c. mitigations measures or alternatives that were found infeasible would in fact be feasible and reduce one or more significant effects; or d. new mitigation measures or alternatives that were not considered in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Development on the environment.

Based on the above, no additional environmental analysis is required for the approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement.

TONIGHT’S ACTION Staff is recommending the following actions: That the Marina City Council:

1. Approve Resolution 2022-, approving the assignment of the Development Agreement related to the Marina Station Project to 3MP.

2. Read by title only and waive further reading and approve the first reading of Ordinance 2022-, approving the Amendment to the Development Agreement related to the Marina Station Project.

FISCAL IMPACT
The approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement will result in the following beneficial fiscal impacts to the City:

1. The project will be fiscally neutral or beneficial to the City based on an updated fiscal impact study (EXHIBIT “D”) that must be completed before the City approves the Final Map for the first phase. If the fiscal impact study does not demonstrate that the project is fiscally neutral, the Developer will be obligated to either assume more in the way of maintenance obligations or pay additional impact fees.

2. Development of the project as contemplated will result in increased property taxes benefiting the City as well as the other taxing entities.

CONCLUSION
This request is submitted for City Council approval.

Respectfully submitted,

Alyson Hunter, AICP
Senior Planner, Community Development
Department City of Marina
6 REVIEWED/CONCUR:

Guido F. Persicone, AICP
Director, Community Development
Department City of Marina

Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

7 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE MARINA STATION PROJECT TO 3RD

MILLENNIUM PARTNERS

WHEREAS, Creekbridge Homes, LLC and the City previously entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of March 4, 2008 (the "Development A greement"), pursuant to which the City and Creekbridge Homes, LLC agreed to certain matters with respect to the development of a mixed use community with residential, commercial, office, industrial, public, cultural, recreation, and park land uses (the "Pr oject") as more specifically provided for in the Marina Station Specific Plan adopted by the City of Marina; and

WHEREAS, Creekbridge Homes, LLC elected not to proceed with the development of the Project in accordance with the Development Agreement and Creekbridge Homes, LLC's rights and obligations under the Development Agreement were assumed by the owner of the Property at the time, the Armstrong Family, and the City recognized the Armstrong Family as the successor in interest to Creekbridge Homes, LLC under the Development Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Armstrong Family subsequently sold the Property to Valle del Sol Properties, LLC, the 2004 Ramirez Family Revocable Trust (Restated 2013) and the Villam Legacy Irrevocable Trust (2017) (the "Subsequent Ow ner") and the Subsequent Owner succeeded to the Armstrong Family's rights under the Development Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Subsequent Owner has entered into an agreement with 3rd Millennium Partners, a California Corporation ("3MP") for 3MP to act as the developer of the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires that the City consent to the assignment of the Development Agreement;

WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the qualifications of 3MP and has determined that 3MP has the necessary qualification to complete the project;

WHEREAS, based on the information provided in the staff report no new environmental review for the project is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and the final environmental impact report for the Marina Station Project (State Clearing House Number 2005061056) shall serve as the environmental review for the approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Marina hereby approves the assignment of the Development Agreement to 3MP in accordance with that certain assignment and assumption agreement on file with the City Clerk.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 3RD day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

_____________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

8 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE MARINA STATION PROJECT TO 3RD

MILLENNIUM PARTNERS

WHEREAS, Creekbridge Homes, LLC and the City previously entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of Marc h 4, 2008 (the "Development Agreement"), pursuant to which the City and Creekbridge Homes, LLC agreed to certain matters with respect to the development of a mixed use community with residential, commercial, office, industrial, public, cultural, recreation , and park land uses (the "Project") as more specifically provided for in the Marina Station Specific Plan adopted by the City of Marina; and

WHEREAS, Creekbridge Homes, LLC elected not to proceed with the development of the Project in accordance with the Development Agreement and Creekbridge Homes, LLC's rights and obligations under the Development Agreement were assumed by the owner of the Property at the time, the Armstrong Family, and the City recognized the Armstrong Family as the successor in inter est to Creekbridge Homes, LLC under the Development Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Armstrong Family subsequently sold the Property to Valle del Sol Properties, LLC, the 2004 Ramirez Family Revocable Trust (Restated 2013) and the Villam Legacy Irrevocable Tru st (2017) (the "Subsequent Owner") and the Subsequent Owner succeeded to the Armstrong Family's rights under the Development Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Subsequent Owner has entered into an agreement with 3rd Millennium Partners, a California Corporation ("3MP") for 3MP to act as the developer of the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Development Agreement requires that the City consent to the assignment of the Development Agreement;

WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the qualifications of 3MP and has determined tha t 3MP has the necessary qualification to complete the project;

WHEREAS, based on the information provided in the staff report no new environmental review for the project is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and the final environmental imp act report for the Marina Station Project (State Clearing House Number 2005061056) shall serve as the environmental review for the approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 3RD day of August 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

_____________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

8 ORDINANCE NO. 2022-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING AN

AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE

MARINA STATION PROJECT
WHEREAS, to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. (the "Development Agreement Statute") which authorizes cities to enter into agreements for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such property; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, the City of Marina (the "City") has enacted Chapter 4.04 of the Marina Municipal Code (the "Development Agreement Regulations") to implement procedures for the processing and approval of development agreements in accordance with the Development Agreement Statute; and WHEREAS, the City and Creekbridge Homes, LLC previously entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of March 4, 2008 (the “Development Agreement”), pursuant to which the City and Developer agreed to certain matters with respect to the development of a mixed use project including 1320 residential units, approximately 60,000 square feet of retail space, approximately 144,00 square feet of office, approximately 652,000 square feet of industrial space as well as approximately 52 acres of open space and parks along with roadways and other infrastructure serving the development (the “Project”) on certain real property consisting of approximately three hundred twenty (320) acres , located in the northern section of the City of Marina (the “Project Site”), which is more particularly described in the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Creekbridge Homes, LLC elected not to proceed with the development of the Project in accordance with the Development Agreement and Creekbridge Homes, LLC's rights and obligations under the Development Agreement were assumed by the owner of the Property at the time, the Armstrong Family.

WHEREAS, The Armstrong Family subsequently sold the Property to Valle del Sol Properties, LLC a California limited liability company, the 2004 Ramirez Family Revocable Trust dated January 16, 2004 and Restated on June 14, 2013 and the Villam Legacy Irrevocable Trust dated October 16, 2017 (collectively the "Subsequent Owner"); WHEREAS, Subsequent Owner has entered into an agree ment with 3rd Millennium Partners, a California corporation ("3MP") to act as developer of the Property and the City has approved the assignment of the rights and obligations under the Development Agreement to 3MP pursuant to the terms of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement meeting the requirements of Article 5 of the Development Agreement;
WHEREAS, prior to its adoption of the Development Agreement, the City has approved a Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan) for the Project Site, General Plan Amendments (the "General Plan Amendments"), a Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance and Map Amendments, a Vesting Tentative Map and certified an EIR (collectively the "Project Approvals"); and

EXHIBIT A
9 Ordinance No. 2022-
Page Two
WHEREAS, the development of the Project has been delayed and the Developer has requested that the City approve an extension of the Development Agreement to account for those delays; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer have negotiated the terms of the Amendment to the Development Agreement (the "Amendment") amending the terms of the Development Agreement; and

WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project (State Clearing House Number 2005061056) (the "Final EIR"); and WHEREAS, the complexity, magnitude and long term buildout of the Project would be difficult for Developer to undertake if the City had not determined, through the Development Agreement, to inject a sufficient degree of certainty in the land use regulatory process to justify the substantial financial investment associated with development of the Project; and WHEREAS, the Amendment to the Development Agreement will assure both the City and Developer that the Project can proceed without disruption caused by a change in City planning and development policies and requirements, which assurance will thereby reduce the actual or perceived risk of planning, financing and proceeding with construction of the Project and promote the achievement of the private and public objectives of the Project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65867 of the Government Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on July 8, 2021, on amending the Development Agreement consistent with the terms of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement during which public hearing the Planning Commission received comments from the Developer, City staff, and members of the general public; and
WHEREAS, following said public hearing, the Planning Commission recomm ended approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65867 of the Government Code, the City Council, on June 21, 2022, held a duly noticed public hearing on the Amendment to the Development Agreement during which p ublic hearings, the City Council received comments from the Developer, project consultants, City staff, and members of the general public; and

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. This Ordinance incorporates, and by this reference makes a part hereof, the Development Agreement and the Amendment to the Development Agreement substantially in the form on file with the City Clerk as of the date of passage of this Ordinance, subject to the provisions of Section 5 hereof.

SECTION 2. This Ordinance is adopted under the authority of Government Code Section 65864 et seq., and pursuant to Chapter 4.04 of the Municipal Code of the City of Marina, which was added by City Ordinance No. 2003-04, establishing procedures and requirements for consideration of development agreements pursuant to Government Code Section 65864 et seq. (the “Development Agreement Regulations”).

10 Ordinance No. 2022-
Page Three

SECTION 3. In accordance with Section 4.04.090 of the Development Agreement Regulations, the City Council hereby finds and determines, as follows:

(a) The Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Specific Plan and the General Plan, as amended;
(b) The Amendment to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the Property which is subject to the Development Agreement is located; (c) The Amendment to the Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice; (d) The Amendment to the Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare;
(e) The Amendment to the Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values; and (f) The Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5.
(g) Based on the information provided that no new environmental review for the project is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and that the Final EIR shall serve as the environmental review for the approval of the Amendment to the Development Agreement.

SECTION 4. The foregoing findings and determinations are based upon the following:

(a) The Recitals set forth in this Ordinance, which are deemed true and correct; (b) The Final EIR;
(c) The City’s General Plan;
(d) The Marina Zoning Map;
(e) All City staff reports (and all other public reports and documents) prepared for the Planning Commission, City Council, or others relating to the Final EIR, the Specific Plan, the General Plan Amendments, the Development Agreement, the Amendment and other actions relating to the Property;
(f) All documentary and oral evidence received at public hearing or submitted to the Planning Commission or City during the comment period relating to the Amendment; and
(g) All other matters of common knowledge to the City Council, inclu ding, but not limited to the City’s fiscal and financial status; City policies and regulations; reports, projections and correspondence related to development within and surrounding the City; State laws and regulations and publications.

11 Ordinance No. 2022
Page Four

SECTION 5. The City Council hereby approves the Amendment to the Development Agreement, substantially in the form on file with the City Clerk subject further to such minor, conforming and clarifying changes consistent with the terms thereof as may be approved by the City Manager prior to execution thereof, including but not limited to completion of references and status of planning approvals, and completion and conformity of all exhibits thereto, as amended and as approved by the City Council.

SECTION 6. Upon the effective date of this Ordinance as provided in Section 9 hereof, the City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Amendment to the Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Marina.

SECTION 7. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to perform all acts authorized to be performed by the City Manager in the administration of the Amendment to the Development Agreement and the Development Agreement pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement as amended by the Amendment, including but not limited to provisions for certain administrative amendments and transfers and assignments as authorized therein.

SECTION 8 . If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.

SECTION 9. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption; as certified by the City Clerk.

THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was first read at a regular meeting of the Marina City Council on the 21 st day of June 2022 , continued to July 19, 2022, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Marina City Council on the 3rd day of August, 2022.

AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk
12 This First Amendment to Development Agreement (the “First Amendment”) is made as of this day of _________, 2022 by and between the CITY OF MARINA, a California municipal corporation (the “City”) and VALLE DEL SOL PROPERTIES, LLC (“Valle”), THE 2004 RAMERIZ FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST (RESTATED 2013) (“Ramirez Trust”), THE VILLAM LEGACY IRREVOCABLE TRUST (2017) (“Villam Trust”) (collectively, Valle, Ramirez Trust and Villam Trust are referred to as the “Subsequent Owner”), and 3RD MILLENNIUM PARTNERS, a California corporation “(the “Developer”) with reference to the following facts and circumstances.

RECITALS

A. Creekbridge Homes, LLC and the City previously entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of March 4, 2008 and approved by the City on May 20, 2008 (the “Development Agreement”). A copy of the Development Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A, pursuant to which the City and Creekbridge Homes, LLC agreed to certain matters with respect to the development of a mixed use community with residential, commercial, office, industrial, public, cultural, recreation, and park land uses (the “Project”) as more specifically provided for in the Marina Station Specific Plan adopted by the City of Marina on May 20, 2008, located on approximately 320 acres of real property in the City more particularly described in Exhibit B (the “Property”).

B. Creekbridge Homes, LLC elected not to proceed with the development of the Project in accordance with the Development Agreement and Creekbridge Homes, LLC ’s rights and obligations under the Development Agreement were assumed by the owner of the Property at

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:

City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933
Attn: City Manager

NO FEE FOR RECORDING PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383

SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE

FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

THE CITY OF MARINA
AND
VALLE DEL SOL PROPERTIES, LLC, THE 2004 RAMERIZ FAMILY
REVOCABLE TRUST (RESTATED 2013), THE VILLAM LEGACY
IRREVOCABLE TRUST (2017) AND 3RD MILLENNIUM PARTNERS

FOR THE MARINA STATION PROJECT

EXHIBIT B
13 the time, the Armstrong Family, and the City recognized the Armstrong Family as the successor in interest to Creekbridge Homes, LLC under the Development Agreement.

C. The Armstrong Family subsequently sold the Property to the Subsequent Owner.

D. The Subsequent Owner has entered into an agreement with the Developer to act as developer of the Property, and the City, by Resolution 2022-___ has approved the assignment of the rights and obligations under the Development Agreement to the Developer pursuant to the terms of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement between the Subsequent Owner and the Developer meeting the requirements of Article 5 of the Development Agreement. The Assignment and Assumption Agreement between the Subsequent Owner and the Developer has been approved by the City, and it is being recorded concurrently with this First Amendment.

E. The development of the Project has been delayed and the Developer has requested that the City approve an extension of the Development Agreement in part to account for those delays and also to provide time for the Developer to complete the Project.

F. Each of the City and the Developer are requesting modification to the Development Agreement to facilitate the development of the Project, which in turn will bring financial and other benefits to the City.

G. The City and the Developer now desire to amend the Development Agreement pursuant to the terms of this First Amendment.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

1. Defined Terms . All terms defined in the Development Agreement when used herein shall have their respective meanings as set forth in the Development Agreement unless expressly superseded by the terms of this First Amendment. All references in this First Amendment to an “Article” or a “Section” shall refer to the applicable Article or Section of the Development Agreement, unless otherwise specifically provided.

2. Term. The first sentence of Se ction 1.2.2 of the Development Agreement is amended to read as follows:

The Term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue until March 4 , 2036 (as may be extended, the “Term”) unless this Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended in accordance with the provision of this Agreement.

3. Construction Codes. Section 1.1.8 of the Development Agreement is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

EXHIBIT B
14 The California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), as it may be updated by the California Building Standards Commission from time to time (although generally on a triennial basis), and which currently consists of the California Building Code, the California Residential Code, the California El ectrical Code, the California Mechanical Code, the California Plumbing Code, the California Energy Code, the California Fire Code, the California Existing Building Code, the California Green Building Standards Code (also referred to as CALGreen), Building Conservation Code and the Uniform Building Security Code. Uniform Building Codes shall include local amendments to the Uniform Building Codes only if such local amendments have been filed with, and approved, by (i) the California Building Standards Commis sion pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Sections 18941.5, and (ii) for local amendments relating to Part 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (the California Energy Code), Part 11 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (t he California Green Building Standards Code) and any successor regulations, the California Energy Commission pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)(2).

4. Applicability of New City Laws. Notwithstanding anything set forth in Sect ion

2.4, the City shall be entitled to apply the provisions related to trees and fencing in Marina Municipal Code Chapter 17.62 and Title 17. 42 in effect at the time the Developer submits applications related to trees and fencing.

5. Rent or Price Control . Section 2.4.7 of the Development Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety.

65. Impact Fees, Dedication and Processing Fees.

(a) The final sentence of the first paragraph of Section 2.7 of the Development Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Notwithstanding the previous sentence, the Developer acknowledges that the Project and Property shall be subject to the Regional Development Impact Fee proposed by the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC).

The second paragraph of Section 2. 7, and Subsections 2.7.1.1, 2.7.1.2, 2.7.1.3 and

2.7.1.4 are deleted in their entirety.

(b) Section 2.7.3 of the Development Agreement is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

Developer shall be obligated to pay those processing fees, including application, plan check, map review, inspection and monitoring fees and fees of outside consultants, for land use approvals, grading and building permits and other permits and entitlements ( “Processing Fees ”) in connection with the Project that are in effect at the time the application is submitted to the City, provided, however, the

EXHIBIT B
15 Developer retains the right to challenge such fees as excessive under state law, provided, however, if the Developer requests expedited processing for any approval, plan check, map review, or inspection or other services, the Developer shall pay an increases costs incurred by the City to accommodate the request for expediting.

75. Municipal Services Financing, Plan/Fiscal Neutrality . The opening paragraph of Section 2.16 of the Development Agreement is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

Pursuant to the requirements of the General Plan, a City staff directed fiscal analysis was prepared at the time the Development Agreement was approved in 2008 (“2008 Fiscal Impact Study”) that summarized costs associated with providing required public services to, and the revenues generated by the Project. Based upon the findings of the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study, the City determined that the economic impact of the Project on the City was fiscally neutral, provided that the ownership of infrastructure and maintenance responsibilities are shared between the City of Marina’s General Fund and the Marina Station Home Owners Association (HOA) as set forth in subsection 2.16.1 through 2.1 6.4. The City will not issue the Final Map for the first phase of the Development until the City has completed an update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study and that update demonstrates that the Project is fiscally neutral to the City. For purposes of comple ting the update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study, the City will assume that community facilities districts and community service districts will be formed at the Developer ’s expense that will cover the maintenance costs for all landscaping, lighting, parks, and roadways that are the responsibility of the City and that will also cover one-half of the City’s costs of operating its fire station serving the Project. If the update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study fails to demonstrate fiscal neutrality, the Developer and the City shall make adjustments to the ownership and maintenance responsibilities for infrastructure or the Developer shall agree to additional impact fees or other exactions as necessary to achieve fiscal neutrality. Any community facilities districts and community service districts contemplated in the update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study must be formed prior to the approval of the Final Map for the first phase of the Development.

86. City-Maintained Parks. Section 2.16.3 of the Development Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

The City shall maintain all of the improvements within Tentative Map Parcels 3, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 29, including the trees and landscaping between the property line of the parcels and the back of the curb.

97. Construction and Dedication of Parks and Streets . The first two sentences of Section 2.16.4 of the Development Agreem ent are hereby amended in their entirety to read as follows:

EXHIBIT B
16 The Developer shall construct or install all improvements within both the City - maintained areas and the HOA maintained areas described in Section 2.16.1, 2.16.2, and 2.16.3 above. The parks shall incorporate those facilities set forth in Exhibit C to this Amendment. Exhibit C replaces Appendix E of the Marina Station Specific Plan. The facilities shall be generally consistent with those facilities listed in Exhibit C as such facilities may be revised or modified by mutual agreement of the Parties.

Section 3 of Exhibit C of the Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:

The Developer shall, in connection with the Project, dedicate to the City, the parks and recreational areas set forth in Section 2.16.3 of this Amendment for park and recreational purposes, which shall be maintained in accordance with Section 2.16 of the Agreement. The Developer and the City dispute whether the park and recreation spaces to be ded icated to the City based on the current submissions to the City are less than contemplated originally in the Development Agreement, and the Developer and the City have agreed to resolve this dispute by the Developer agreeing to pay a portion of the City’s Park Fees as set forth in the Marina Muncipal Code Section 3.26.05 equal to 51.9% of the City's Park Fee per residential unit as such Park Fee increases annually, such fee to be paid upon issuance of the building permits for each residential unit. The Developer shall irrevocably dedicate to the City the parkland within each phase of the Project in an unimproved condition at the time of the City Approval of a Final Map that includes said parkland .

Additionally, the Developer shall irrevocably dedica te to the City the parkland shown within Parcel 3 of the Vesting Tentative map prior to City approval of the Final Map for the second phase of the Project. Each park shall be improved by Developer when more than 50% of the residences on the streets surrounding that park (as shown on the final map that includes that park) are installed, and Developer shall bond for each park when it submits the improvement plans and draft final map for that phase which includes that park. The City agrees not to delay occupancy of residential units based upon the status of park improvements.

108. Exhibits. Exhibit D of the Development Agreement is deleted in its entirety.

119. City Access to Wetlands.

9.1 Purposes. In consideration for the City ’s extension of the Development Agreement, the Subsequent Owner on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, agrees to provide the City with reasonable access to wetlands and vernal pools located on Subsequent Owner’s property in the area shown as “Wetlands Area” on Exhibit D to this First Amendment for purposes of testing and monitoring the wetlands' and vernal pools' hydrologic condition if at any time during the Term of this Agreement, the Subsequent Owner provides access to the Wetlands Area to any other person or entity for purposes of testing and monitoring the wetlands' and vernal pools' hydrologic condition. Subsequent Owner shall provide the City with notice if it provides access to the Wetlands Area to any other person or entity for the purposes of testing and monitoring

EXHIBIT B
17 the wetlan ds' and vernal pools' hydrologic condition. If the Subsequent Owner provides such access to the Wetlands Area to any other person or entity, then the City shall be allowed such access, and the City's access shall be on the same terms as provided to such other person or entity.

Subsequent Owner also agrees to provide to the City copies of any reports, studies or data obtained by the Subsequent Owner related to the wetlands' and vernal pools' hydrologic condition as a result of the Subsequent Owner providing access to the Wetlands Area to any other person or entity for purposes of testing and monitoring the wetlands' and vernal pools' hydrologic condition.

120. MCWD Cooperation. If infrastructure required by the Marina Coast Water District ("MCWD") is to be funded in whole or in part by a community facilities district established by the City, the City agrees to cooperate with the Developer in negotiating and entering into an infrastructure agreement with MCWD mutually acceptable to the City and the Deeloper provided such agreement does not require the City to commit any funds toward the development of water infrastructure other than funds from a community facilities district and does not require the City to incur any liability with regard to the infrastructure to be constructed. Nothing herein shall eliminate or retrain the City Counil discretaion in approving any such agreement with MCWD and the parties understand and agreed that any such agreement is subject to City Council approva.

130. Conflict and Effectiveness. In the event of a conflict between terms and condition of this First Amendment and the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement, the terms and conditions of this First Amendment shall control. This First Amendment shall be effective as of the date that the Ordinance adopting this First Amendment is effective.

141. No Further Modification. Except as set forth in this First Amendment, all other terms and provisions of the Development Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed and shall be and remain unmodified and in full force.

152. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which counterparts shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which counterparts, when taken together, shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this First Amendment as of the day and year first above written.

“DEVELOPER”: 3RD MILLENNIUM PARTNERS,

By: ______________________________
Its: ____________________

“SUBSEQUENT OWNER”: VALLE DEL SOL PROPERTIES, LLC

By:_______

EXHIBIT B
18 Its:________________________

THE 2004 RAMERIZ FAMILY
REVOCABLE TRUST (RESTATED 2013)

By:___________________________
Its:____________________________

THE VILLAM LEGACY IRREVOCABLE
TRUST (2017)

By:____________________________
Its:_____________________________

“CITY”: CITY OF MARINA

By: __________________________________
Name:
________________________________
Title:
_________________________________

List of Exhibits

Exhibit A – Development Agreement approved by the City in May 2008 Exhibit B – Map of Property subject to Development Agreement Exhibit C – Park Facilities to be included in Project
Exhibit D – Map of Locations of Wetlands Areas

EXHIBIT B
19 EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT B
20 EXHIBIT B

MAP OF PROPERTY

EXHIBIT B
21 EXHIBIT C

PARK FACILITIES TO BE PROVIDED
(Replaces Exhibit E to the Marina Station Specific Plan)

The parks and facilities outlined in red and lined out will not be built by the Developer.

EXHIBIT B
22 EXHIBIT D

MAP OF LOCATIONS OF WETLANDS AREAS

EXHIBIT B
23 EXHIBIT B
24 EXHIBIT B
25 EXHIBIT B
26 EXHIBIT B
27 EXHIBIT B
28 EXHIBIT B
29 EXHIBIT B
30 EXHIBIT B
31 EXHIBIT B
32 EXHIBIT B
33 EXHIBIT B
34 EXHIBIT B
35 EXHIBIT B
36 EXHIBIT B
37 EXHIBIT B
38 EXHIBIT B
39 EXHIBIT B
40 EXHIBIT B
41 EXHIBIT B
42 EXHIBIT B
43 EXHIBIT B
44 EXHIBIT B
45 EXHIBIT B
46 EXHIBIT B
47 EXHIBIT B
48 EXHIBIT B
49 EXHIBIT B
50 EXHIBIT B
51 EXHIBIT B
52 EXHIBIT B
53 EXHIBIT B
54 EXHIBIT B
55 EXHIBIT B
56 EXHIBIT B
57 EXHIBIT B
58 EXHIBIT B
59 EXHIBIT B
60 EXHIBIT B
61 EXHIBIT B
62 EXHIBIT B
63 EXHIBIT B
64 EXHIBIT B
65 EXHIBIT B
66 EXHIBIT B
67 EXHIBIT B
68 EXHIBIT B
69 EXHIBIT B
70 EXHIBIT B
71 EXHIBIT B
72 EXHIBIT B
73 EXHIBIT B
74 EXHIBIT B
75 EXHIBIT C

SPECIFIC PLAN
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 4, 2008
This Exhibit is 204 pages with color
https://www.cityofmarina.org/DocumentCenter/View/10756/MS-Specific-Plan-Feb-2008?bidId= ____________________________________________________________________ 76 Dra
ft Assessment of Fiscal Impacts of
Marina Station Development Project to the
City of Marina
Prepared for:

City of Marina
Prepared by:

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

June 2022

EXHIBIT D
77 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

Exhibits
Exhibit A. Development Program 2
Exhibit B. General Fund, Gas Tax, and Measure X Fund Impacts at Stabilization, with Financing Plan 3 Exhibit C. One-time General Fund Use Tax and Property Transfer Tax Revenues from Construction 4 Exhibit D. Recurring Annual General Fund, Gas Tax, and Measure X Fund Revenues at Stabilization 6 Exhibit E. Recurring Annual General Fund and Gas Tax Fund Expenses at Stabilization 9

Tables
Table 1 Annual General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Summary Table 2 Development Program
Table 2a Absorption
Table 3 Project Demographics
Table 4 Estimated Assessed Value
Table 5 Existing City Demographic Data
Table 6 Revenue Source Assumptions
Table 7 Estimated Annual Recurring General Fund Revenue, By Absorption Period Table 8 General Fund Operating Expense Assumptions
Table 9 Estimated Annual General Fund Expenditures
Table 10 One-Time Public Facilities Impact Fees
Table 11 One-Time Transfer Tax Revenues on New Home Sales Table 12 Average SFR and Condo Sale Prices, Marina and Seaside Table 13 Industrial Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Table 14 Office Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Table 15 Retail Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Salinas, Gilroy Table 16 Sales of Apartment buildings over past 5 years

I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Marina Station Development Program 1
B. Summary of Contents of Report 2
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 3
A. Annual General Fund and Gas Tax Fund Impacts with Negotiated Municipal Services Financing Plan 3
B. One-time Construction Related General Fund and Impact Fee Revenues to the City of Marina 4
C. Recurring annual General Fund, Gas Tax and Measure X Fund Revenues 6 D. Recurring City Service Expenses 9
III. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS 11
A. Approach 11
B. Key Assumptions and Analysis 12
IV. LIMITING CONDITIONS 16

EXHIBIT D
78 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
I. INTRODUCTION

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) has updated the analysis of recurring revenue and service cost impacts on the City of Marina’s General Fund and Gas Tax Fund to be generated by the development of Marina Station. This update reflects the Marina Station Specific Plan, the Development Agreement between the City and Creekbridge Homes, LLC dated March 4, 2008, and the terms of the first Amendment to the Development Agreement (Amended DA) that have been negotiated with an ownership group (“Developer”) that has assumed the responsibilities of Creekbridge, who elected to not proceed with the Marina Station project (Project).

The purpose of the proposed amendments to the Development Agreement is to facilitate the development of the Project, which in turn will bring financial and other benefits to the City of Marina. Key elements of the Amended DA that relate to the Project’s fiscal impacts to the City include the following:
 The City will not issue the Final Map for the first phase of the development until the City has complete an update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study and that update demonstrates that the Project is fiscally neutral to the City.
 The fiscal analysis shall assume that community facility districts and community service districts will be formed at the Developer’s expense that will cover the maintenance costs for all landscaping, lighting, parks, and roadways that are the responsibility of the City and will cover one-half of the City’s costs of operating a fire station to serve the Project.  If the update to the 2008 Fiscal Impact Study fails to demonstrate fiscal neutrality, the Developer and the City shall adjust the ownership of and maintenance responsibilities for new infrastructure improvements built to serve the Project or the Developer shall agree to additional impact fees or other exactions as necessary to achieve fiscal neutrality.

A. Marina Station Development Program

The Marina Station project consists of 1,117 ownership residential units, 243 rental apartments, and approximately 855,000 commercial square feet, including retail, office, and industrial space, as summarized below. Of the 1,360 total residential units, 272 will have long-term affordability covenants restricting occupancy to Very Low Income to Moderate Income households.

Supporting Tables 2 and 2a provide a detailed breakdown of the unit mix and the projected annual absorption schedule.

EXHIBIT D
79 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
Exhibit A. Development Program
Total at
Buildout
Year of Full
Absorption 1
Residential
For Sale Units 1,117 units 2031
Rental Apartments 243 units 2030
1,360 units
Affordable units 272 units 2030
20%
Commercial
Retail 60,000 SF 2035
Office 144,000 SF 2036
Industrial 651,000 SF 2036
855,000 SF

B. Summary of Contents of Report

The analysis considers impacts to the General Fund and Gas Tax Fund because these are the major sources of discretionary spending for key city services including Public Safety and Public Works. Other special revenue funds are tied to specific purposes and have not been included.

This report includes a summary of:
 The development program proposed for Marina Station;
 Projected General Fund and Gas Tax Fund impacts to be generated by the project under the City’s proposed Municipal Services Financing Plan;  Details of projected General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenues and expenditures to be generated by the project;
 The methodology that has been used to estimate the project’s fiscal impacts;  The key assumptions of the analysis; and
 Limiting conditions.

The details of the analysis are presented in the attached supporting tables and appendix tables.

EXHIBIT D
80 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 3
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

A. Annual General Fund and Gas Tax Fund Impacts with Negotiated Municipal Services Financing Plan

As shown below, it is estimated that Marina Station will generate a net surplus to the City’s General and Gas Tax Funds approximating $1.7 million per year upon buildout. The projection indicates that Marina Station will meet and exceed the fiscal neutrality target for the Project.

Exhibit B. General Fund, Gas Tax, and Measure X Fund Impacts at Stabilization, with Financing Plan
(Revenues and Expenses are expressed in 2022 dollars)
Annual Impact at Stabilization
Recurring Revenues $4.96 million
Recurring Expenses $3.23 million
Net Revenue $1.73 million

Prior to stabilization, the project is expected to generate positive annual net impacts in each year as the project absorbs. As shown in Table 1, the 512 residential units that are anticipated to be built through 2026 are anticipated to generate an annual net surplus of $600,000 per year.

It is anticipated that the Project’s service population will trigger the need for the new fire station by 2028, which will significantly increase city service costs. By 2029, it is estimated that 1,166 of the Project’s units will be built and occupied along with 43,200 square feet of office space and 15,000 square feet of retail space. The annual surplus at that time is estimated to total $651,000 per year. The development of additional non-residential and development units is anticipated to increase the size of the Project’s annual fiscal surplus, with the annual surplus reaching $1.27 million by 2032 and $1.73 million by stabilization in 2036. $4.96
-$3.23
$1.73
-$4
-$3
-$2
-$1
$0
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
$6
Recurring Revenues Recurring Expenses Net Revenue
General Fund, Gas Tax, and Measure X Fund Impacts at
Stabilization, with Financing Plan ($millions)

EXHIBIT D
81 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx

B. One-time Construction Related General Fund and Impact Fee Revenues to the City of Marina

The construction of Marina Station will generate one-time revenues to both the City’s General Fund and to Impact Fee Fund. Unrestricted General Fund revenues will be generated through “use tax” revenue associated with the purchase of construction materials and transfer fees associated with the initial sale of the 1,117 homes at Marina Station.

One-time General Fund Construction Revenues

For the purposes of this analysis, it has been assumed that the City of Marina is designated as the point of sale by the Project’s General and Sub-contractors for 50% of the materials purchased for construction. Based on the experiences of other projects, it is further estimated that the project’s hard construction costs will approximate $440 million and that the cost of construction materials will approximate 50% of hard costs. City use tax revenues from the purchase of construction materials are estimated to total $2.75 million. City transfer tax revenues from the initial sale of the homes will approximate $486,000. The combined total of these two sources of one-time General Fund revenues is $3.2 million.

Exhibit C. One-time General Fund Use Tax and Property Transfer Tax Revenues from Construction
Transfer tax revenues (Table 11) $486,000
Estimate of Hard Costs $443,000,000
Estimate of Material s cost as a percent of hard costs 50% Estimated Share with Dublin as a point of sale 50%
Local Sales and Use Tax Rate 2.5%
Estimated One-time City Use Tax Revenue from Construction $2,750,000 Total One-time General Fund Revenues from Construction $3,236,000

One-time Impact Fee Revenues

The City levies a series of impact fees on both residential and non-residential development. As shown on Table 10, it is estimated that the development of Marina Station will yield approximately $38.8 million of impact fee revenues. The use of these revenues is restricted to fund public facilities that are needed to serve the Project.

EXHIBIT D
82 Table 1
Annual General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
General Fund Revenues
City Share of Property Taxes $589,000 42.7% $756,000 39.7% $292,000 31.7% $139,000 24.6% $1,776,000 37.2% Sales Tax $112,000 8.1% $262,000 13.8% $228,000 24.7% $190,000 33.6% $792,000 16.6% Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF $577,000 41.8% $740,000 38.8% $286,000 31.0% $137,000 24.2% $1,740,000 36.5% Franchise Fees $60,000 4.4% $78,000 4.1% $30,000 3.3% $10,000 1.8% $178,000 3.7% Licenses, Permits, and Fees $15,000 1.1% $20,000 1.0% $8,000 0.9% $3,000 0.5% $46,000 1.0% Fines / Forfeitures / Penalties $7,000 0.5% $9,000 0.5% $4,000 0.4% $1,000 0.2% $21,000 0.4% Property Transfer Tax $19,000 1.4% $23,000 1.2% $6,000 0.7% $0 0.0% $48,000 1.0% Business License Tax $0 0.0% $17,000 0.9% $68,000 7.4% $85,000 15.0% $172,000 3.6% $1,379,000 100.0% $1,905,000 100.0% $922,000 100.0% $565,000 100.0% $4,771,000 100.0% General Fund Expenditures
Police ($310,000) 39.8% ($403,000) 21.6% ($157,000) 50.3% ($52,000) 53.6% ($922,000) 30.2% Fire, Before New Station ($153,000) 19.6% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% ($153,000) 5.0% Additional Fire for New Station $0 0.0% ($1,059,000) 56.6% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% ($1,059,000) 34.6% Recreation and Culture ($41,000) 5.3% ($52,000) 2.8% ($15,000) 4.8% $0 0.0% ($108,000) 3.5% Public Works ($59,000) 7.6% ($76,000) 4.1% ($30,000) 9.6% ($10,000) 10.3% ($175,000) 5.7% General Government ($96,000) 12.3% ($125,000) 6.7% ($49,000) 15.7% ($16,000) 16.5% ($286,000) 9.4% Plng., Bldg., Eng. ($31,000) 4.0% ($40,000) 2.1% ($16,000) 5.1% ($5,000) 5.2% ($92,000) 3.0% Non-Departmental ($81,000) 10.4% ($105,000) 5.6% ($41,000) 13.1% ($13,000) 13.4% ($240,000) 7.8% Economic Development ($8,000) 1.0% ($10,000) 0.5% ($4,000) 1.3% ($1,000) 1.0% ($23,000) 0.8% ($779,000) 100.0% ($1,870,000) 100.0% ($312,000) 100.0% ($97,000) 100.0% ($3,058,000) 100.0% $600,000 $35,000 $610,000 $468,000 $1,713,000
$7,000 $9,000 $4,000 $1,000 $21,000
$607,000 $44,000 $614,000 $469,000 $1,734,000
$607,000 $651,000 $1,265,000 $1,734,000
Net Gas Tax + Meas. X
Combined
Cumulative
Revenue or Expenditure
Category
Net Annual Recurring
General Fund Impacts
Absorption Period
2030-2032 2033-36 Total2024-2026 2027-2029
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 1 summ; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
83 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 6
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
C. Recurring annual General Fund, Gas Tax and Measure X Fund Revenues

The table below summarizes recurring revenues expected upon stabilization. As shown, Marina Station is estimated to generate approximately $4.96 million annually of General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenues.

Exhibit D. Recurring Annual General Fund, Gas Tax, and Measure X Fund Revenues at Stabilization

Recurring Fund
Revenue
% of Total Marina
Station Revenue
Property Tax $1,776,000 36%
Ppty Tax In-lieu of MVLF $1,740,000 35%
Sales Tax $792,000 16%
Gas Tax and Meas. X $187,000 4%
Franchise Fees $178,000 4%
Business License Tax $172,000 3%
Licenses, Fees and Fines $67,000 1%
Property Transfer Tax $49,000 1%
Annual City Revenues at Buildout $4,958,000 100%

Property tax revenues are anticipated to represent the largest source of Fund revenues to be generated by the project, which is typical for a mixed-use project with a large residential Property Tax,
$1,776,000
Ppty Tax In-lieu of
MVLF, $1,740,000
Sales Tax,
$792,000
Gas Tax and
Meas. X,
$187,000
Franchise Fees,
$178,000
Business License
Tax, $172,000
Licenses,
Fees and
Fines,
$67,000 Property Transfer
Tax, $49,000

EXHIBIT D
84 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 7
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
component. Property taxes represent 36% of annual revenues to the General fund and Gas Tax fund. Property tax revenues in-lieu of motor vehicle license fees are the second leading source of revenue, representing 35% of total annual revenue.

Sales tax revenues are anticipated to represent the third largest component of General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenues. Marina Station’s 60,000 square feet of new retail space and 3,562 new residents are expected to generate approximately $792,000 of new sales tax revenues to the City at buildout. This represents 16% of the revenues to be generated by the Marina Station project. The city receives 2.5% of annual taxable retail sales due to the special sales tax measures that were passed by Marina voters.

The other sources of revenue, including gas tax, Measure X funds, utility franchise fees, business license taxes, fines and forfeitures, fees and permits, and property transfer taxes.

These revenues are anticipated to account for $653,000 in annual revenues at buildout, or approximately 13% of total annual Marina Station General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenues.

Exhibit B provides a graphic percentage breakdown of revenues to be generated by Marina Station at build-out, which are presented in Table 7.

EXHIBIT D
85 Table 2
Development Program
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Development Program
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Villas (3,100 SF) 22 28 0 0 50
Large SF (2,700 SF) 74 75 14 0 163
Small SF (2,300 SF) 96 108 33 0 237
Cottages (1,800 SF) 96 108 53 0 257
Townhomes (1,450 74 75 31 0 180
Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) 30 105 0 0 135
Condominiums, Mod. 30 65 0 0 95
Apartments, Market Rate 30 30 6 0 66
Apartments, Low and VL 60 60 57 0 177
Total Residential 512 654 194 0 1,360
cumulative 512 1,166 1,360 1,360 1,360
Office 0 43,200 43,200 57,600 144,000
Retail 0 15,000 22,500 22,500 60,000
Industrial 0 0 279,000 372,000 651,000
Total Office, Retail and Industrial 0 58,200 344,700 452,100 855,000 Absorption Period
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 2 program; 6/21/2022

EXHIBIT D
86 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 9
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
D. R ecurring City Service Expenses

The total annual cost to the General and Gas Tax Funds to provide services to Marina Station are estimated to approximate $3.23 million upon buildout.

Exhibit E. Recurring Annual General Fund and Gas Tax Fund Expenses at Stabilization
Recurring Fund
Revenue
% Total Marina
Station Expenses
Fire Protection Services $1,212,000 38%
Police Protection Services $922,000 29%
General Government $286,000 9%
Non-Departmental $240,000 7%
Citywide Public Works $175,000 5%
Gas Tax Fund $167,000 5%
Other Expenses1 $223,000 7%
Total Annual Expenses $3,225,000 100%

Fire protection costs represent the single largest annual expense (38% of total annual costs), which is largely due to the cost of operating a new fire station that will be built to serve the Project and the general community. Under the terms of the Development Agreement, Marina

1 Includes annual service costs for the following departments: economic development, planning, engineering and building, and recreation and culture.

Fire Protection
Services,
$1,212,000
Police Protection
Services,
$922,000
General
Government,
$286,000
Non-
Departmental,
$240,000
Citywide Public
Works, $175,000
Gas Tax Fund,
$167,000
Other Expenses,
$223,000

EXHIBIT D
87 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 10
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
Station property owners will fund 50% of the annual cost to operate and maintain the new fire station and the General Fund will fund the remaining 50% of ongoing costs. Based on a staffing plan established in 2008 and inflation since 2008, it is estimated that it will cost approximately $2.4 million per year to operate and maintain the new station, with the cost to the General Fund approximating $1.2 million per year. The fire station will be built once the Project’s service population reaches 2,800, which is anticipated to occur by 2029. Prior to the completion of the new fire station, the Project will be served by Marina’s existing fire stations.

The second largest service cost is police protection costs. Service costs are based on citywide budgeted per capita costs and are estimated to total $922,00 per year upon buildout, or 29% of total annual costs.
2 Under the Municipal Services Financing Plan (Section 2.16 of the Development Agreement), the maintenance of all parks, interior streets, and street landscaping will be privately funded by Marina Station property owners through the homeowners’ association or the formation of a community facilities district (CFD) or community service district (CSD). In addition, 50% of the annual cost to operate the new fire station will be funded through the CFD or CSD.

General Fund expenditures for General Government, Non-Departmental, Recreation and Culture, Economic Development, Planning, Engineering, and Building, and Public Works departments are based on projections from current service levels and are estimated to total $1,091,000 per year upon build-out, or approximately 33% of the total.

Table 9 and Exhibit E show a detailed breakdown of anticipated Marina Station expenses.

2 For purposes of this analysis, the City’s last pre-pandemic budget of FY 2019/20 was assumed to be representative of a stabilized level of service. Per capita service cost factors were developed based on the 2019/20 budget to estimate impacts on several City departments, including general government, police services, non-department services, economic development, planning and building, recreation and culture and public works.

EXHIBIT D
88 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 11
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
III. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS

A. Approach

KMA’s analysis focuses exclusively on the assessment of recurring General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenues and expenses to be generated by the development of Marina Station. KMA has prepared a model of the development scenario to evaluate upon buildout and ad three interim points during the Project’s 13-year absorption schedule. All revenues and expenses are expressed in uninflated 2022 dollars.

The analysis evaluates the major revenue and cost elements, including property tax revenues, property tax in-lieu of motor vehicle license fee revenues, sales tax revenues to be generated from the project’s residential and commercial development, and the cost to provide on-going municipal services. To estimate these impacts, KMA has:
 Reviewed the City’s budget and the existing revenue and cost relationships in Marina;  Reviewed the base assumptions used in the original fiscal impact analysis of the Marina Station Project that was prepared in 2008;
 Estimated the assessed value of the development program based on current market conditions and the portion of annual property taxes to be captured by the City of Marina;  Estimated the magnitude of taxable sales to be generated by new residents and retail square footage based on current market conditions;
 Modeled the negotiated terms of the Development Agreement as they relate to the provision of municipal services, which require the Marina Station property owners to fund the on going maintenance costs of all new infrastructure built to serve the project, including but not limited to parks, streets, and landscaping, and 50% of the cost to operate and maintain a new fire station;
 Estimated the cost of providing on-going services based on existing service levels as represented by the City’s budget for FY 2019/20 as this represented the last stabilized budget prior to the pandemic;

Except for the inclusion of sales tax revenues to be generated by Marina Station residents from purchases at Marina retail establishments not located at Marina Station, the analysis focuses on the “direct, on-site” revenues to be generated by the Project. Indirect and induced impacts, such as hotel room nights generated by business travelers have not been included.

One-time revenues associated with the construction of the Project have been estimated, including transfer tax revenues from the initial sale of the ownership units and impact fee revenues. Impact fee revenues are restricted to be used to fund improvements to mitigate the impacts that the development of Marina Station will have on public facilities.

EXHIBIT D
89 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 12
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
B. Key Assumptions and Analysis

Since a fiscal impact analysis is based upon an assessment of future circumstances, the assumptions that are used to make estimates of future conditions are fundamental to the conclusions. The key assumptions of this fiscal analysis are as follows:

 Marina Station Development Program – The development program that has been evaluated in this fiscal analysis reflects the program provided by the Developer in 2022 (Table2 and Table 2a).
˗ Residential - 1,360 residential units including 1,117 ownership, and 243 rental units.
˗ Retail - 60,000 square foot retail component.
˗ Office - 144,000 square foot office component.
˗ Industrial - 651,000 square foot industrial component.

There are components of the development program that have changed since the Specific Plan was adopted. KMA is not aware if the changes required any formal amendment process. While the total number of units and the total number of affordable units have not changed, the mix of units has changed. The key differences are as follows:

Current Plan Specific Plan Difference
Number of Affordable
Ownership Units 95 35 +60
Number of Affordable
Rental Units 177 237 -60 (reduction in
Moderate rentals)
Number of Market
Rate Ownership Units 1022 1088 -66 (reduction in
market rate condos)
Number of Market
Rate Rental Units 66 0 +66

 Construction Schedule – The absorption schedule is based on information from the Developer, as summarized below (supporting Table 2a):
˗ Residential – The first residential units are to be sold in 2024, with the residential portion of the project sold out and fully occupied by 2031. ˗ Retail – Retail space will begin to come on line in 2028, and will be completed and occupied by 2035.
˗ Office – The office space will be built and fully occupied by 2036. ˗ Industrial – Industrial space will be built and fully occupied by 2036.

 Population – Marina’s population reflects estimates by the State Department of Finance for the years 2019/2020 for consistency with the use of the City’s 2019/2020 budget in developing the per capita revenue and service cost factors. Marina Station project is

EXHIBIT D
90 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 13
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
projected to have a population of 3,562 upon buildout, which reflects an average household size of 2.7 people for ownership units and 2.5 people for apartments , which were the factors used in the original 2008 fiscal analysis. The population estimates reflect an assumed 5% vacancy factor for the market rate apartments. (Supporting Tables 3 and 5).

 Employment – The demographics research firm ESRI estimates Marina’s 2019/2020 employment base at 5,768 jobs. Marina Station is projected to add approximately 1,714 jobs, or 2.5 jobs per 1,000 square of retail and office space, and 2.0 jobs per 1,000 square feet of industrial space. The employment projections reflect a 5% vacancy rate for office and industrial space and a 10% vacancy rate for retail space. (Supporting Tables 3 and 5).

 Resident Equivalents – The estimate of certain revenues and service costs is based on a modified per capita measure known as “resident equivalents.” This approach combines residents and employees to form a single service population to drive the revenue or cost projection. The resident equivalents approach weights an employee as .25 of a resident, such that approximately 4 employees are viewed as having the same impact as one resident. This is the same approach that was used in the 2008 fiscal impact analysis of Marina Station. (Table 3).

 Assessed Values – The assessed values of market rate for-sale homes are based on the prices of homes sold in Marina over the past year (Table 12). The assessed values of market rate apartments, retail, office, and industrial space have been estimated based on recent sales in the Marina market area (Tables 13,14, and 15). The price of Moderate-income condos is based on the City’s adopted formula for affordable ownership units. It is assumed that the Very Low and Low-income rental units will be exempt from property taxes. The assumed values are as follows:

Project Component Assessed Value
Residential
Market Rate Units $835,000 average value per unit
Affordable Ownership Units $320,000 average value per unit Affordable Rental Units – VL, L $0 / exempt from property taxes Retail $360 per square foot
Office $355 per square foot
Industrial $150 per square foot

 Motor Vehicle License Fees – Motor Vehicle License Fees are estimated in accordance with SB 1096, based on data from the California State Controller’s Office. (Table 8).

EXHIBIT D
91 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 14
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
 Property Tax Ratios – Property taxes in California are based on 1% of assessed values, and distributed by the State among a series of agencies including the County and the City. The ratio of property taxes distributed to the City varies by tax rate area.

The property tax rate used in this analysis is based on information provided by the County in 2008. KMA is awaiting confirmation from the County that this figure remains applicable (Table 6).

 Sales Tax – Sales tax revenues are generated by new residents and new retail space.

Taxable sales have been allocated first to residents based on the capture of expenditure potential, and second to retail based on a square footage allocation of the remaining taxable sales after deduction of sales allocated to residents. The City’s share of sales taxes is 2.5%. (Tables 6 and 7).

˗ Resident Expenditures at off-site Marina stores – Retail expenditure potential based on average household income, the proportion of spending on retail per the State Board of Equalization, and estimated capture rates in Marina is calculated and applied to the anticipated new residential population at Marina Station. This results in estimated taxable sales of $8,380 per unit, or $11.4 million at buildout.

˗ Retail – Taxable sales from new retail anticipated in Marina are estimated using sales per square foot and percent taxable assumptions. Sales allocated to residents are deducted and net retail sales are allocated to each project area based on retail square feet. Marina Station’s 60,000 square feet of retail space is expected to generate $20.3 million of taxable sales at buildout.

 Gas Tax and Measure X Revenues – Together with the General Fund, the Gas Tax Fund is one of the major sources of discretionary spending for key city services. Gas Tax Fund revenues are used to pay for public works maintenance costs such as arterial and landscape maintenance. Allocation of Gas Tax revenues from the State is based on a series of formulas pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Sections 2105, 2106, 2107, and 2107.5. The majority of tax revenue is apportioned to California cities based on population. As a result, gas tax revenue is projected based on a per capita factor derived from the 2019/20 allocation of $1,118,000. (Supporting Table 6).

 Public Safety / Police Service Costs – Projections are based on the City’s service levels and department budget in FY 2019/20. Based on this level of service, it is estimated that the annual cost to serve the project will approximate $922,000 per year upon buildout. (Tables 8 and 9).

 Public Safety / Fire Service Costs – In accordance with the Fire Department's "Standard of Cover Deployment Analysis", the City intends to build a new fire station to provide adequate service to the Project over time and to the broader Marina community.

EXHIBIT D
92 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 15
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
The fire station will be built once the Project’s service population reaches 2,800, which is expected to occur by 2028. Per the negotiated terms of the Development Agreement, Marina Station property owners will be responsible for funding 50% of the station’s ongoing operating costs and the General Fund will fund the remaining 50%. Based on cost estimates prepared in 2008 adjusted for inflation, operating costs are estimated to total $2.4 million per year. The General Fund’s responsibility will approximate $1.2 million per year. Until the new station is built (estimated in 2028), it is assumed that the cost to provide fire protection services to Marina Station will reflect the current per capita cost throughout the City of $114 per resident equivalent. (Tables 8 and 9).

 Public Works Maintenance Costs – Estimates of public works maintenance costs reflect the terms of the Amended Development Agreement. In accordance with that Agreement, the Marina Station property owners will be responsible for funding 100% of ongoing maintenance costs for landscaping, lighting, parks, and roadways through either an HOA or the formation of a community facilities district or services district. In accordance with these provisions, none of these costs will be funded by the General Fund and are therefore not reflected in this fiscal analysis. The cost to mitigate the wear and tear on existing infrastructure by Project residents and businesses has been included in this fiscal analysis. Costs reflect current citywide per capita costs (Table 8 and 9).

 Variable versus Fixed Costs – For General Government, Non-department expenses, Economic Development, Planning and Building, and Public works departments, 50% of the existing expenditures and budget are assumed to be the result of variable costs that increase with additional population or employment. The other 50% of expenditures are assumed to be fixed costs of operation that will not increase as a result of the Project.

Approximately 75% of Fire Department, Police Department and Recreation and Culture Department expenses are estimated to be impacted by new population. (Table 8 and 9).

 Constant 2022 Dollars – The analysis is in constant 2022 dollars. No inflation has been applied to revenues, costs, or property values.

 Continuity of Legal and Institutional Constraints – The cost and revenue experience of the City of Marina is based on the City’s 2019-2020 Budget. The projections assume that revenue sources will remain constant through buildout of the project.

EXHIBIT D
93 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 16
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\001-002.docx
IV. LIMITING CONDITIONS

1. The analysis contained in this report is based in part on data from published sources, such as the City of Marina Budget, the California Department of Finance, and the demographics research firm ESRI. While we believe that the assumptions are reasonable and these sources are accurate, we cannot guarantee their accuracy.

2. The findings are based on the development concept specified in the report. If the development program varies from the assumed concept, the findings of this analysis may not be valid.

3. The conclusions reflect the assumption that the development concept will be completed at buildout. It is assumed that there is sufficient market support for the concept and that the commercial components achieve industry standard productivity levels. If the project’s program changes or sales volumes are less than industry standards, the findings of this analysis may not be valid.

4. Revenue or cost projections contained in this report are based on the best project-specific and fiscal data available at this time as well as experience of our firm with comparable projects. These projections are reasonable and appropriate for planning purposes. However, actual revenues and expenses may vary considerably from the projections due to several factors including changes to the following: the development program, operating costs, the tax structure, legislation, market conditions, assessment appeals, County assessor practices, etc. No warranty or representation is made that any of these estimates or projections will be realized.

5. KMA’s analysis is based in part on input from the City of Marina and the Developer obtained through documents and discussions.

6. We assume that all applicable laws and governmental regulations in place as of March 1, 2022 will remain unchanged at buildout. If this assumption does not hold true in the future, i.e., if the rates of property tax, motor vehicle license fees, etc., are changed, the analysis will need to be revised.

7. The findings reflect the assumption that the Marina Station property owners will be responsible for funding 100% of the maintenance costs for landscaping, lighting, parks, and street improvements within Marina Station through the combination of an HOA/CFD/CSD.

In addition, property owners will be responsible for funding 50% of the ongoing operating costs of a new fire station to be built in Marina.

EXHIBIT D
94 Tables
Table 1 Annual General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Summary Table 2 Development Program
Table 2a Absorption
Table 3 Project Demographics
Table 4 Estimated Assessed Value
Table 5 Existing City Demographic Data
Table 6 Revenue Source Assumptions
Table 7 Estimated Annual Recurring General Fund Revenue, By Absoprtion Period Table 8 General Fund Operating Expense Assumptions
Table 9 Estimated Annual General Fund Expenditures
Table 10 One-Time Public Facilities Impact Fees
Table 11 One-Time Transfer Tax Revenues on New Home Sales Table 12 Average SFR and Condo Sale Prices, Marina and Seaside Table 13 Industrial Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Table 14 Office Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Salinas, Gilroy Table 15 Retail Sales Past Year - Marina, Seaside, Salinas, Gilroy Table 16Sales of Apartment buildings over past 5 years
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 6/21/2022

Page 17 ends

EXHIBIT D
95 Table 1
Annual General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
General Fund Revenues
City Share of Property Taxes $589,000 42.7% $756,000 39.7% $292,000 31.7% $139,000 24.6% $1,776,000 37.2% Sales Tax $112,000 8.1% $262,000 13.8% $228,000 24.7% $190,000 33.6% $792,000 16.6% Property Tax In-Lieu of MVLF $577,000 41.8% $740,000 38.8% $286,000 31.0% $137,000 24.2% $1,740,000 36.5% Franchise Fees $60,000 4.4% $78,000 4.1% $30,000 3.3% $10,000 1.8% $178,000 3.7% Licenses, Permits, and Fees $15,000 1.1% $20,000 1.0% $8,000 0.9% $3,000 0.5% $46,000 1.0% Fines / Forfeitures / Penalties $7,000 0.5% $9,000 0.5% $4,000 0.4% $1,000 0.2% $21,000 0.4% Property Transfer Tax $19,000 1.4% $23,000 1.2% $6,000 0.7% $0 0.0% $48,000 1.0% Business License Tax $0 0.0% $17,000 0.9% $68,000 7.4% $85,000 15.0% $172,000 3.6% $1,379,000 100.0% $1,905,000 100.0% $922,000 100.0% $565,000 100.0% $4,771,000 100.0% General Fund Expenditures
Police ($310,000) 39.8% ($403,000) 21.6% ($157,000) 50.3% ($52,000) 53.6% ($922,000) 30.2% Fire, Before New Station ($153,000) 19.6% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% ($153,000) 5.0% Additional Fire for New Station $0 0.0% ($1,059,000) 56.6% $0 0.0% $0 0.0% ($1,059,000) 34.6% Recreation and Culture ($41,000) 5.3% ($52,000) 2.8% ($15,000) 4.8% $0 0.0% ($108,000) 3.5% Public Works ($59,000) 7.6% ($76,000) 4.1% ($30,000) 9.6% ($10,000) 10.3% ($175,000) 5.7% General Government ($96,000) 12.3% ($125,000) 6.7% ($49,000) 15.7% ($16,000) 16.5% ($286,000) 9.4% Plng., Bldg., Eng. ($31,000) 4.0% ($40,000) 2.1% ($16,000) 5.1% ($5,000) 5.2% ($92,000) 3.0% Non-Departmental ($81,000) 10.4% ($105,000) 5.6% ($41,000) 13.1% ($13,000) 13.4% ($240,000) 7.8% Economic Development ($8,000) 1.0% ($10,000) 0.5% ($4,000) 1.3% ($1,000) 1.0% ($23,000) 0.8% ($779,000) 100.0% ($1,870,000) 100.0% ($312,000) 100.0% ($97,000) 100.0% ($3,058,000) 100.0% $600,000 $35,000 $610,000 $468,000 $1,713,000
$7,000 $9,000 $4,000 $1,000 $21,000
$607,000 $44,000 $614,000 $469,000 $1,734,000
$607,000 $651,000 $1,265,000 $1,734,000
Net Gas Tax + Meas. X
Combined
Cumulative
Revenue or Expenditure
Category
Net Annual Recurring
General Fund Impacts
Absorption Period
2030-2032 2033-36 Total2024-2026 2027-2029
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 1 summ; 6/21/2022

Page 18 ends

EXHIBIT D
96 Table 2
Development Program
Marina Station
Marina, Ca 6/15/22
Development Program
2024-
2026
2027-
2029
2030-
2032
2033-
2036 Total
Villas (3,100 SF) 22 28 0 0 50
Large SF (2,700 SF) 74 75 14 0 163
Small SF (2,300 SF) 96 108 33 0 237
Cottages (1,800 SF) 96 108 53 0 257
Townhomes (1,450 74 75 31 0 180
Condominiums, Market (1,075 SF) 30 105 0 0 135
Condominiums, Mod. 30 65 0 0 95
Apartments, Market Rate 30 30 6 0 66
Apartments, Low and VL 60 60 57 0 177
Total Residential 512 654 194 0 1,360
cumulative 512 1,166 1,360 1,360 1,360
Office 0 43,200 43,200 57,600 144,000
Retail 0 15,000 22,500 22,500 60,000
Industrial 0 0 279,000 372,000 651,000
Total Office, Retail and Industrial 0 58,200 344,700 452,100 855,000 Absorption Period
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 2 program; 6/21/2022

Page 19 ends

EXHIBIT D
97 Table 2a
Absorption
Marina Station
Marina, Ca
Land Use 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 Single Family - Villas 4 12 22 34 46 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Single Family - Large 24 49 74 99 124 149 163 163 163 163 163 163 163 Single Family - Small 24 60 96 132 168 204 237 237 237 237 237 237 237 Single Family - Cottages 24 60 96 132 168 204 240 257 257 257 257 257 257 Single Family - Towns/Rows 24 49 74 99 124 149 174 180 180 180 180 180 180 Condos - 30 30 70 70 135 135 135 135 135 135 135 135 Apartments - - 30 30 60 60 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 Condos (Moderate) - 30 30 70 70 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Apartments (Low) - - 30 30 60 60 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Apartments (Very Low) - - 30 30 60 60 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 TOTAL (Cumulative) 100 290 512 726 950 1,166 1,337 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,360 Office - - - 14,400 28,800 43,200 57,600 72,000 86,400 100,800 115, 200 129,600 144,000 Retail - - - - 7,500 15,000 22,500 30,000 37,500 45,000 52,500 60,000 60,000 Industrial - - - - - - 93,000 186,000 279, 000 372,000 465,000 558,000 651,000 Total Non Residential SF - - - 14,400 36,300 58,200 173,100 288, 000 402,900 517,800 632,700 747,600 855,000 Residential Units
Non Residential Building (Sq Ft.)
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\SF-FS2\wp\15\15927\048\Marina Station Fiscal 06 21 22.xlsx; 6/21/2022

Page 20 ends

Marina City CouncilAugust 3, 2022

Marina City Council
August 3, 2022