Agenda — Marina City Council, January 21, 2026 (part 3 of 3)

kimley-horn.com 100 West San Fernando Street, Suite 250, San Jose, CA 95113 669 800 4130 October 1, 2025
Mr. Edrie Delos Santos P.E.

Senior Engineer
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California 93933
Re: Proposal – Change Order - City of Marina 2021 Development Impact Fee Update Dear Mr. Delos Santos:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is pleased to submit this request for additional funding for the DIF project. The additional fee request is based on the following additional services that were provided outside of the original scope:

1. Refinement of the fee calculations ($9,750)
This task includes the development of determination of eligible fee, fee income, and fee shortfall for four different scenarios of estimated fees per unit of development

2. Assessment of additional Dwelling Unit data for SF and MF units ($3,280) Based on City provided data, the apportionment of housing square feet will be assessed and recommendations made

3. Four additional meetings and preparation for meetings ($3,870)

4. Additional model runs for AB602 analysis for each alternative, determining the XX, II, IX and XI fee eligibility, LOS assessment ($11,980)
A change in the fee changes the overall calculation for the proportioning to roadways and intersection projects and equitable distribution of funding resources. Every alternative requires a recalculation of the allocation of fees between all the various categories.

5. Report updates. ($1,650)
Fee and Expenses
Kimley-Horn will perform the services in the Tasks above for a total Not to Exceed Time and Materials fee of $30,530. All permitting, application, and similar project fees will be paid directly by the Client.

Fees will be due within 30 days of your receipt of the invoice.

Additional Services
Any services not specifically provided for in the above scope will be billed as additional services and performed at our then current hourly rates.

Information Provided by Client
We shall be entitled to rely on the completeness and accuracy of all information provided by the Client or the Client’s consultants or representatives. The Client shall provide all information identified in this proposal and requested by Kimley-Horn during the project.

Schedule
Kimley-Horn is prepared to begin work immediately upon receipt of the notice to proceed (NTP), and we will endeavor to meet your scheduling needs, but no more than 4 months from the date of receiving an NTP.

EXHIBIT A TO STAFF REPORT
5

Page 2 ends

kimley-horn.com 10 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250, San Jose, CA 95113 669 800 4130 We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. Please contact me if you have any questions.

Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

By: Frederik Venter P.E.

Project Manager
P.E. No.: C64621
6 January 14, 2026 Item No. 10m(1)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of January 21, 2026

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 202 6-,

APPROVING THE APLLICATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE
BUILDING DIVISION BOARD OF APPEALS.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2026-, approving the applications for members of the Building Division Board of Appeals; and

2. Appointing the following persons to the Board: Peter Lipisto, Raju Ceerla, and Bob McCaffrey

BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting of June 24 th, 2025, resolution 2025 -64 was approved for creation of a Building Board of Appeal. Recruitment for applications was advertised on July 28 , 2025, with three (3) applications submitted and considered qualified to sit on this advisory panel:

Peter Lipisto
Raju Ceerla
Bob McCaffrey

QUALIFICATIONS
The board of appeals shall consist of members who are qualified by experience and training on matters related to implementation and provisions of the California Building Code (CBC).

ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW
Approval of the resolution is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to the commonsense exemption found in section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA guidelines.

FISCAL IMPACT
Creation of a new board will not have a negative fiscal impact on the City of Marina. Time spent providing administrative support to this board will be provided by city staff as part of the overall work program of the Marina Building Division.

CONCLUSION
City staff is recommending approval.

Respectfully submitted

_____________________
Dan Paolini
Interim Chief Building Official
City of Marina

REVIEWED BY:

______________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
1 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA CITY APPROVING

THE APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPEALS BOARD AND APPOINTING SAME.

WHEREAS, at the regular meeting on June 24 , 2025, by adoption of Resolution 2025 -10, the City Council approved the creation of the Building Division Appeals Board; and

WHEREAS, it shall be the function of the building appeals board to hear and decide appeals from orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official, or his or her designee, regarding the application and interpretation of housing laws set forth in California Health and Safety Code, the Marina Municipal Code Title 15 —except Chapters 15.36, 15.48, 15.54, and

15.56—and all decisions by the fire chief and/or fire marshal, or their designee, regarding the application and interpretation of the California Fire Code, Chapter 15.32; and

WHEREAS, three applications were submitted and deemed qualified to be members of the Marina Building Division Board of Appeal.

NOW THEREFORE BE IS RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Marina does hereby:

1. Approve the applications for three members of the Building Department Board of Appeals and appointing same to the Board: Peter Lipisto, Raju Ceerla, Bob McCaffrey

2. Determine that appointing members to an advisory body is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 21st day of January 2026, by following vote:

AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

___________________________
Bruce Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

_____________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

2 2
3 4
5 6
January 21, 2026 Item No. 13a

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
Of the Marina City Council of January 21, 2026

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA , CALIFORNIA CONSIDER

ADOPTING RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH THE CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 20 26-1 ( MARINA

STATION) AND AN IMPROVEMENT AREA THEREIN, TO DESIGNATE A

FUTURE ANNEXATION AREA, TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A

SPECIAL TAX TO PAY THE COST OF ACQUIRING OR CONSTRUCTING

CERTAIN PUBLIC FACILITIES, PROVIDING CERTAIN SERVICES AND

PAYING FOR CERTAIN INCIDENTAL EXPENSES AND TO PAY DEBT

SERVICE ON BONDED INDEBTEDNESS

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA, CALIFORNIA CONSIDER

ADOPTING RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

MARINA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO INCUR
BONDED INDEBTEDNESS WITHIN IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 OF
PROPOSED CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1 (MARINA STATION)

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council consider:

1. Adopting City Council Resolution No. 20 26-, of Intention to establish the City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)

2. Adopting City Council Resolution No . 2026-, declaring its intention to incur bonded indebtedness within proposed Improvement Area No.1 of proposed City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)

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"). The Development Agreement provided the Original Developer with 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 resi dential 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" or “Project”). The Development will include 53 acres of Parks and Open Space, and 83 acres of deed restricted open space with a habitat restoration plan. 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. As part of the approval of the Development Agreement, the City Council certified the EIR, approved the General Plan Amendments, the Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance Map Amendments, a Vesting Tentative Map (co llectively the "Project Approvals"), and Design Review.

The Original Developer, Creekbridge Homes of Salinas, California, 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 1 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. The property has subsequently been transferred to Marina Station Phase 1 and 2 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Owner”).

In 2022, the City Council approved a First Amendment to the Development Agreement that among other things recognized the new ownership and development entities, extended the term of the Development Agreement until March of 2036 , updated provisions regarding impact fees to require that impact fees in effect at the time of applications for building permits would be paid and to require that the Developer update the Fiscal Neutrality Study that is required pursuant to the City’s Gen eral Plan prior to issuance o f the Final Map for the Project. The City obtained an update of the Fiscal Neutrality Study in 2022 which found that the Development was fiscally neutral to the City assuming that community facilities districts were formed to fund costs of maintenance of all landscaping, lighting, parks and roadways that are the responsibility of the City to maintain and one half of the costs of operating a fire station serving the Development.

The City has received a petition , consent and waiver of certain CFD formation and election procedures and timeframes from the Owner requesting the City to create a new Community Facilities District to be designated City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 202 6-1 (Marina Station) to levy a special tax to pay for the cost of acquiring or constructing certain public facilities, providing certain services and paying for certain incidental expenses and to pay debt service on bonded indebtedness.

The Owner has requested that the City Council designate an improvement area with the boundaries shown in Exhibit A of the Resolution of Intention to be known as “Improvement Area No. 1 of City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)” (“Improvement Area No. 1”) and designate the property shown in Exhibit A to the Resolution of Intention as “Future Annexation Area” as territory proposed for future annexation to the Community Facilities District (the “Future Annexation Area”). Improvement Area No. 1 will contain 352 residential units and consists of Phase 1 and 2 of the Marina Station Project.

Property within such Future Annexation Area may be annexed as additional improvement areas (“Future Improvement Area(s)”) within the Community Facilities District and be subjected to the special tax of the Community Facilities District with the unanimous consent and approval of the owner or owners of the parcel or parcels at the time of annexation (the “Unanimous Consent and Approval”) and the approval of the City Council, acting as the legislative body of the Community Facilities District (the “Legislative Body”), or in compliance with other procedures established by the Act. It is important to emphasize that for the Development to be Fiscally Neutral a CFD is required to fund facilities and services for all 8 phases of the Development.

ANALYSIS:

The proposed annual amount of the maximum special taxes to be levied to fund facilities and services is estimated to range from $2,761 to $4,458 for a Single-Family Detached Property and between $44,580 to $70,841 per acre for Multi-Family Residential Property and for undeveloped property , depending on the tax zone in which such property is located. The Marina Station CFD will include 5 tax zones as shown in Table 1 of the rate and method of apportionment. The special tax amounts described above will be escalated each year according to the construction cost index to adjust for inflation.

The types of Facilities that are proposed to be financed with the proceeds of special taxes and bonds issued by the Community Facilities District consist of backbone infrastructure needed for new development, such as roadway, bridge, sewer, water, reclaimed water, storm drain, street and parkway landscaping, curb and gutter, medians, median landscaping, traffic signals, entry signage, parks, and 2 trails, and appurtenances and appurtenant work , and development impact fees that are used by the City to construct infrastructure, including any other facilities that are necessary for development of the property within the boundaries of the Community Facilities District.

The Engineering staff and City Manager have reviewed the estimate to fund services prepared by the Owner and their consultant . The Services to be funded are listed in Exhibit B of the Resolution of Intention and include the following:

(i) maintenance of parks, parkways, park lighting, sidewalks, signage, landscaping in public areas, easements or right of way and open space; (ii) maintenance of streets and roadways, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters; and (iii) public safety services including fire protection and fire suppression.

Legal Documents
At tonight’s City Council meeting there will be several legal documents prepared by Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth , the City’s Bond Counsel related to the formation of City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station) for your consideration and approval:

Petition – The Petition submitted by the Owner is signed by their authorized representatives and covers all the property in the Marina Station CFD. The petition includes a waiver of all applicable provisions under the Act for the election, all ballot analysis and arguments for the election, and all requirements as to the form of the ballot.

Resolution of Intention – The Resolution of Intention does the following: a) accepts the petition filed by the Owner with respect to the CFD; b) declares the intention of the City to form the Marina Station CFD; (c) describes the territories within the boundaries of CFD and within the Future Annexation Areas; d) describes the types of services that will be funded by special taxes; e) describes the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes to be levied in the Marina Station CFD; f) calls a public hearing to be held on March 3, 2026: and g) describes the proposed voting procedures for the Marina Station CFD.

Resolution Declaring its Intention to Incur Bonded Indebtedness – The Resolution Declaring its Intention to Incur Bonded Indebtedness states it is necessary to issue bonded indebtedness within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 in one or more series in an aggregate amount not to exceed $7,600,000, to finance certain of the costs of the Facilities and Incidental Expenses, as permitted by the Act. Upon the annexation of one or more Future Improvement Areas into the Community Facilities District, the not-to-exceed amount of bonded indebtedness necessary to be incurred by the Community Facilities District on behalf of such Future Improvement Areas will be set forth in each Unanimous Consent and Approval of the owner of the property in the Future Improvement Area and will be approved by the City Council, acting as the legislative body of the Community Facilities District at the time of such annexation.

Conclusion and Next Steps – Adoptions of tonight’s Resolutions is the first step to establish Marina Station CFD. The formation of Marina Station CFD will occur after the public hearing, scheduled for March 3, 2026. At that hearing, the City Council will be presented with information regarding the Marina Station CFD, the special taxes, and facilities and public services. The public will be able to comment on the Marina Station CFD. After the conclusion of the March 3 public hearing the City Council may take the following actions:

1. Adopt a resolution establishing the CFD

2. Call a special election and conduct Landowner Election

3. Adopt a Resolution declaring the results of the election 3 4. Introduce for first reading an ordinance authorizing the levy of special taxes

5. Approve an Acquisition and Funding Agreement

6. Approve a Services Funding Agreement

The adoption of the Resolution of Intention under consideration this evening will not commit the City Council to establish the Marina Station CFD nor authorize the levy of special taxes. The City Council may establish the Marina Station CFD only after conducting the March 3 public hearing and may levy the special taxes only if the result of the special election shows 2/3rds landowner approval. Following the March 3 public hearing, the proposed schedule to complete the formation of the CFD is as follows:

1. Introduce for 2nd reading an ordinance authorizing the levy of special taxes at the March 17th City Council meeting

2. 30 days later: Special Tax Ordinance becomes effective

The resolutions and related documents have been prepared and reviewed by the City’s consultant team, which includes bond/special counsels (Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP), city attorney (Shute , Mihaly & Weinberger LLP ), municipal advisor (Fieldman, Rolapp and Associates) and special tax consultant (Goodwin Consulting).

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Keyser Marston Fiscal Impact study estimates Marina Station will generate a net surplus to the City’s General Fund and Gas Tax Funds approximating $1.7 million per year upon buildout. The construction of Marina Station will also generate one-time revenues to both the City’s General Fund and Impact Fee Fund. Formation of the Marina Station CFD is necessary to achieve fiscal neutrality for the project.

CONCLUSION:

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

_______________________
Tori Hannah
Finance Director
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_____________________
Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

Exhibits:

1. Petition

2. City Council Resolution of Intention including CFD Boundary Map, and Rate and Method of Apportionment

3. City Council Resolution declaring its intention to incur bonded indebtedness 4 EXHIBIT 1
5 EXHIBIT 1
6 EXHIBIT 1
7 EXHIBIT 1
8 EXHIBIT 1
9 EXHIBIT 1
10 EXHIBIT 1
11 EXHIBIT 1
12 EXHIBIT 1
13 EXHIBIT 1
14 EXHIBIT 1
15 EXHIBIT 1
16 EXHIBIT 1
17 EXHIBIT 1
18 EXHIBIT 1
19 EXHIBIT 1
20 EXHIBIT 1
21 EXHIBIT 1
22 EXHIBIT 1
23 EXHIBIT 1
24 EXHIBIT 1
25 EXHIBIT 1
26 EXHIBIT 1
27 EXHIBIT 1
28 RESOLUTION NO. 2026

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA, CALIFORNIA,

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ESTABLISH CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1 (MARINA STATION) AND AN IMPROVEMENT

AREA THEREIN , TO DESIGNATE A FUTURE ANNEXATION AREA, TO

AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX TO PAY THE COST OF ACQUIRING

OR CONSTRUCTING CERTAIN PUBLIC FACILITIES , PROVIDING CERTAIN

SERVICES AND PAYING FOR CERTAIN INCIDENTAL EXPENSES AND TO PAY

DEBT SERVICE ON BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 53318 and 53319 of the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, comprising Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California , as incorporated and adopted into the City of Marina Municipal Code, with certain amendments, by Chapter 3.35 of the City of Marina Municipal Code (as so incorporated, adopted and amended, the “Act”), the City of Marina (the “City”) has received a petition from Marina Station Phases 1 and 2, LLC , a Delaware limited liability company (the “Owner”), the owner of all of the territory described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”), requesting the City establish City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station) (the “Community Facilities District”) to finance (1) the purchase, construction, expansion, improvement or rehabilitation of the public facilities described in Exhibit B hereto (which att achment is incorporated herein by this reference), including all furnishings, equipment and supplies related thereto (collectively, the “Facilities”), which Facilities have a useful life of five years or longer , (2) the services described in Exhibit B hereto (the “Services”), and (3) the incidental expenses to be incurred in connection with financing the Facilities and Services , and forming and administering the Community Facilities District (the “Incidental Expenses”); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the request of the Owner, the City Council has been asked to consider the designation of an improvement area within the proposed Community Facilities District with the boundaries shown in Exhibit A to be known as “Improvement Area No. 1 of City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)” (“Improvement Area No. 1”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 53329.6, 53339 et seq., and 53350 of the Act, the City Council proposes to designate the property shown in Exhibit A hereto and designated thereon as “Future Annexation Area” and incorporated herein by this reference as territory proposed for annexation to the Community Facilities District in the future (the “Future Annexation Area”); and WHEREAS, from time to time, a parcel or parcels within such Future Annexation Area may be annexed into a then -existing improvement area or as additional improvement areas (“Future Improvement Area(s)”) within the Community Facilities District and subjected to the s pecial tax of the Community Facilities District with the unanimous consent and approval of the owner or owners of the parcel or parcels at the time of annexation (the “Unanimous Consent and Approval”), and shall be approved by the City Council, ac ting as the legislative body of the Community Facilities District (the “Legislative Body”), or in compliance with other procedures established by the Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City (the “City Council”), acting as the legislative body of the Community Facilities District, further intends to approve an estimate of the costs of the Facilities, Services and the Incidental Expenses for the Community Facilities District; and EXHIBIT 2
29 WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to consider financing the Facilities, Services, and the Incidental Expenses through the formation of the Community Facilities District, and the sale of bonds in an amount not to exceed $ 7,600,000 for Improvement Area No. 1 (the “Obligations”) and the levy of a special tax in Improvement Area No. 1 to pay for the Facilities and Incidental Expenses and to pay debt service on the Obligations, provided that the authorization to incur bonded indebtedne ss and to le vy a special tax levy are approved at elections to be held within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1; and

WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to consider financing the Facilities, the Services, and the Incidental Expenses through the annexation of the Future Annexation Area to a then - existing improvement area or to one or more Future Improvement Areas of the Community Facilities District and the issuance of bonded indebtedness within each Future Improvement Area not to exceed the amount approved by the owner or owners of the parcel or parcels to be annexed in the rel ated Unanimous Consent and Approval, as a pproved by the Legislative Body, and the levy of a special tax within each Future Improvement Area so annexed to pay for the Facilities, the Services, and the Incidental Expenses and to pay debt service on the bonded indebtedness to be incurred for such Fu ture Improvement Area at such rates and method of apportionment approved by the owner or owners of the parcel or parcels to be annexed in the Unanimous Consent and Approval, as approved by the Legislative Body at the time of annexation, in accordance with Sections 53329.6, 53339 et seq., and 53350 of the Act; and

WHEREAS, as required by Section 53312.7 of the Act, the City Council has previously adopted on April 7, 2015, local community facilities district goals and policies.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Intention. The City Council declares its intention to conduct proceedings pursuant to the Act for the establishment of the Community Facilities District and to designate Improvement Area No. 1 with boundaries coterminous with the Property. It is further proposed that the boundaries of the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1 shall be the legal boundaries as described in Exhibit A hereto which boundaries shall, upon recordation of the boundary map for the Community Facilities District, include the entirety of any parcel subject to taxation by the Community Facilities District, except where indicated on the boundary map, and as depicted on the boundary map of the Community Facilities District which is on file with the City Clerk. The City Council further proposes to designate the Future Annexation Area shown in Exhibit A hereto as property proposed for annexation into the Community Facilities District in the future, by submittal of a Unanimous Consent and Approval of the owner or owners of such parcel or parcels, as approved by the Legislative Body at the time that such parcel or parcels are annexed to the Community Facilities District.

The proposed boundaries of the Community Facilities District, Improvement Area No. 1 and the Future Annexation Area are depicted on the map of proposed Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 which is attached as Exhibit A hereto. The Clerk of the City Council is hereby directed to sign the original map of the proposed boundaries and record it with all proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder of Monterey County within 15 days after the adoption of this resolution, all as required by Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.

Section 2. Name of the Community Facilities District . The name of the proposed Community Facilities District shall be “City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)” and the proposed Improvement Area No. 1 shall be designated as “Improvement Area No. 1 of City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station).” EXHIBIT 2
30 Section 3. Types of Facilities and Services to be Financed by the Community Facilities District. The Facilities proposed to be provided within the Community Facilities District are public facilities as defined in the Act. The Services proposed to be provided for the benefit of the Community Facilities District are public services as defined in the Act. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the description of the Facilities, Services and Incidental Expenses herein is sufficiently informative to allow taxp ayers within the Community Facilities District to understand what the funds of the Community Facilities District may be used to finance, the Facilities, Services and Incidental Expenses expected to be incurred, including the cost of planning and designing the Facilities and Services, the costs of forming the Community Facilities District, issuing bonds, levying and collecting a special tax and the annual administration costs of the Community Facilities District . The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Facilities and Services are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of development occurring in the Community Facilities District. The Facilities may be acquired from one or more of the property owners as completed public facilities and/or as discrete portions or phases pursuant to Section 53313.51 of the Act or may be constructed by or on behalf of the City and paid for with bond proceeds and special taxes. Any portion of the Facilities may be financed through a lease or lease-purchase arrangement if the City hereafter determines that such arrangement is of benefit to the City. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the Services to be financed are in addition to those provided in the territory of the Community Facilities District at the present time.

Bond proceeds shall not be used to finance Services.

Section 4. Special Taxes. Except where funds are otherwise available, it is the intention of the City Council to levy annually in accordance with the procedures contained in the Act a special tax, secured by a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property within Improvement Area No. 1, sufficient to pay for the Facilities, Services and Incidental Expenses and the principal and interest and other periodic costs on bonds or other indebtedness issued to finance the Facilities and Incidental Expenses, including th e establishment and replenishment of any reserve funds deemed necessary by the City, and any remarketing, credit enhancement and liquidity facility fees (including such fees for instruments which serve as the basis of a reserve fund in lieu of cash) attributable to the Community Facilities District . The rate and method of apportionment and manner of collection of the special tax in Improvement Area No. 1 is described in detail in Exhibit C attached hereto (which attachment is incorporated herein by this re ference). Exhibit C allows each landowner within the Community Facilities District to estimate the maximum amount of special taxes that may be levied against each parcel. In the first year in which such special tax is levied in Improvement Area No. 1 , the levy shall include an amount sufficient to repay to the Community Facilities District all amounts, if any, transferred to the Community Facilities District pursuant to Section 53314 of the Act and interest thereon.

If special taxes of Improvement Area No. 1 are levied against any parcel used for private residential purposes, (i) the maximum special tax rate shall not be increased except to the extent permitted in the rate and method, (ii) the special tax to finance Facilities shall not be levied later than the 2066-67 Fiscal Year and the special tax to finance Services shall be levied for as long as necessary to meet the special tax requirement for Services as determined in the sole discretion of the City Council, act ing as the Legislative Body of the Community Facilities District , and (iii) under no circumstances shall such special tax in Improvement Area No. 1 be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within Improvement Area No. 1 by more than ten percent (10%) above the amount that would have been levied in that fiscal year had there never been any such delinquencies or defaults. Special taxes for Services shall be levied as long as it is needed, as determined at the sole discretion of the City Council. The special taxes for Services may be increased annually by the lesser of (i) the percentage increase, if any, in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco region in the twelve (12)-month period ending June 1 of the prior Fiscal Year, as published in the Engineering EXHIBIT 2
31 News Record (or other comparable source if the Engineering News Record is discontinued or otherwise not available), or (ii) four percent (4.0%) to the extent permitted in the rate and method of apportionment of special tax as described in Exhibit C hereto.

The special tax is based on the expected demand that each parcel of real property within Improvement Area No. 1 will place on the Facilities and Services . The City Council hereby determines that the proposed Facilities and Services are necessary to meet the increased demand placed upon the City and other local government agencies in the City as a result of the development of the land proposed for inclusion in the Community Facilities District. The City Council hereby determines the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax set forth in Exhibit C to be reasonable. The special tax is apportioned to each parcel on the foregoing basis pursuant to Section 53325.3 of the Act; and such special tax is not on or based upon the value or ownership of real property. In the event that a portion of the property within the Community Facilities District shall become for any reason exempt, wholly or partially, from the levy of the special tax specified in Exhibit C, the City Council shall, on behalf of the Community Facilities District, cause the levy to be increased, subject to the limitation of the maxim um special tax for a parcel as set forth in Exhibit C, to th e extent necessary upon the remaining property within Improvement Area No. 1 which is not exempt in order to yield the special tax revenues required for the purposes described in this Section. The obligation to pay special taxes may be prepaid as provided in the rate and method of apportionment set forth in Exhibit C, as such rate and method may be amended hereafter.

Section 5. Public Hearing . A combined public hearing (the “Hearing”) on the establishment of the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1, the designation of the Future Annexation Area, the proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax and the proposed authorization to issue bond indebtedness to finance the Facilities and the Incidental Expenses shall be held at 6:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, on March 3, 2026, at the City Council’s Chambers, 211 Hillcrest Avenue, Marina, California. If the City Council determines to form the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1 , a special election will be held to authorize the issuance of the bonds and the levy of the special tax in accordance with the procedures contained in Government Code Section 53326. If such election is held, the proposed voting procedure at the election will be a landowner vote with each landowner who is the owner of record of land within Improvement Area No. 1 at the close of the Hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, having one vote for each acre or portion thereof owned within the proposed Improvement Area No. 1. Ballots for the special election may be distributed by mail or by personal service.

At the time and place set forth above for the Hearing, the City Council will receive testimony as to whether the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1 shall be established, as to whether special taxes shall be levied in accordance with the proposed method of apportionment of the special tax, as to whether Future Annexation Area shall be established, and as to whether Obligations shall be issued to finance Facilities and Incidental Expenses of the Community Facilities District.

At the time and place set forth above for the Hearing, any interested person, including all persons owning lands or registered to vote within the Community Facilities District, may appear and be heard.

Section 6. Notice. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice (the “Notice”) of the Hearing pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation published in the area of the Community Facilities District. The City Clerk is further authorized and directed to mail a copy of the Notice to each of the landowners within the boundaries of the Community Facilities District at least 15 days prior to the Hearing. The Notice EXHIBIT 2
32 shall contain the text or a summary of this Resolution, the time and place of the Hearing, a statement that the testimony of all interested persons or taxpayers will be heard, a description of the protest rights of the registered voters and landowners in the Community Facilities District and a description of the proposed voting procedure for the election required by the Act. Such publication shall be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date of the Hearing.

Section 7. Reports re Facilities and Services . Each City officer who is or will be responsible for providing the Facilities and Services within the Community Facilities District, if it is established, is hereby directed to study the Community Facilities District and, at or before the time of the Hearing, file a report with the City Council containing a brief description of the public facilities and services by type which will in his or her opinion be required to meet adequately the needs of the Community Facilities District and an estimate of the cost of providing those public facilities and services including an estimate of the fair and reasonable cost of the Incidental Expenses to be incurred.

Section 8. Advance of Funds. The City may accept advances of funds or work -in-kind from any source, including, but not limited to, private persons or private entities, for any authorized purpose, including, but not limited to, paying any cost incurred by the City in creating the Community Facilities District . The City may enter into an agreement with the person or entity advancing the funds or work -in-kind, to repay all or a portion of the funds advanced, or to reimburse the person or entity for the value, or cost, whichever is less, of the work -in-kind, as determined by the City Council, with or without interest.

Section 9. Maximum Bonded Indebtedness. The maximum aggregate principal amount of the Obligations to be incurred in one or more series within Improvement Area No. 1 is Seven Million Six Hundred Thousand Dollars ($7,600,000).

Section 10. Reservation of Rights. Except to the extent limited in any bond resolution or trust indenture related to the issuance of bonds, the City Council hereby reserves to itself all rights and powers set forth in Section 53344.1 of the Act (relating to tenders in full or partial payment).

Section 11. This Resolution shall be effective upon its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of January 2026.

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

Attachments: Exhibits A, B and C
EXHIBIT 2
33 A-1

EXHIBIT A

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1, AND FUTURE

ANNEXATION AREA

EXHIBIT 2
34 B-1

EXHIBIT B

DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES

TYPES OF PUBLIC FACILITIES
The types of Facilities that are proposed to be financed by City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026 -1 (Marina Station) (the “Community Facilities District”) with the proceeds of special taxes and bonds issued by the Community Facilities District consist of facilities authorized to be financed by the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (as incorporated and adopted into the City of Marina Municipal Code, with certain amendments, by Chapter 3.35 of the City of Marina Municipal Code) (the “Act”) (including, but not limited to, backbone infrastructure needed for new development, such as roadway, bridge, sewer, water, reclaimed water, storm drain, street and parkway landscaping, curb and gutter, medians, median landscaping, traffic signals, entry si gnage, parks, and trails, and appurtenances and appurtenant work, and development impact fees that are used by the City to construct infrastructure) that are necessary or desirable for development of the property within the boundaries of the Communi ty Facilities District.

The description of Facilities described above is general in nature. The final nature and location of the Facilities will be determined upon preparation of final plans and specifications.

TYPES OF SERVICES
The services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax of the Community Facilities District, consist of the services authorized to be funded by Section 53313 of the Act, including but not limited to the following (collectively, the “Services”):
(i) maintenance of parks, parkways, park lighting, sidewalks, signage, landscaping in public areas, easements or right of way and open space; (ii) maintenance of streets and roadways, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters; and (iii) public safety services including fire protection and fire suppression.

In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be expended to pay “Incidental Expenses” as said term is defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment and to establish an operating reserve for the costs of services as determined by the Community Facilities District Administrator. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax es for the Community Facilities District.

EXHIBIT 2
35 C-1

EXHIBIT C

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1
CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1

EXHIBIT 2
36 C-2

EXHIBIT 2
37 C-3

EXHIBIT 2
38 C-4

EXHIBIT 2
39 C-5

EXHIBIT 2
40 C-6

EXHIBIT 2
41 C-7

EXHIBIT 2
42 C-8

EXHIBIT 2
43 C-9

EXHIBIT 2
44 C-10

EXHIBIT 2
45 C-11

EXHIBIT 2
46 C-12

EXHIBIT 2
47 C-13

EXHIBIT 2
48 C-14

EXHIBIT 2
49 C-15

EXHIBIT 2
50 C-16

EXHIBIT 2
51 C-17

EXHIBIT 2
52 C-18

EXHIBIT 2
53 C-19

EXHIBIT 2
54 C-20

EXHIBIT 2
55 C-21

EXHIBIT 2
56 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA ,

CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO INCUR BONDED
INDEBTEDNESS WITHIN PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 OF
PROPOSED CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1 (MARINA STATION)
WHEREAS, upon receipt of a petition as provided in Section 53318 of the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, comprising Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, as incorporated and adopted into the City of Marina Municipal Code, with certain amendments, by Chapter 3.35 of the City of Marina Municipal Code (as so incorporated, adopted and amended, the “Act”) , the City Council of the City of Marina (the “City Council”) instituted proceedings to (i) establish City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station) (the “Community Facilities District”), (ii) designate an improvement area therein to be known as “Improvement Area No. 1 of City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station)” (“Improvement Area No. 1”) with boundaries coterminous with the property described as Improvement Area No. 1 in Exhibit A to the Resolution of Intention to Establish the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area therein (the “Resolution of Intention”) adopted on January 21, 2026 (the “Property”) and (iii) designate an area for future annexation (“Future Annexation Area”) to the Community Facilities District to a then-existing improvement area or to one or more future improvement areas (“Future Improvement Areas”), all pursu ant to the Resolution of Intention. The Resolution of Intention stated the City Council’s intention to establish the Community Facilities District, Improvement Area No. 1, and the Future Annexation Area and to finance (1) the purchase, construction, expansion, improvement or rehabilitation of the public facilities described in Exhibit B to the Resolution of Intention, including all furnishings, equipment and supplies related thereto (collec tively, the “Facilities”), and (2) the incidental expenses to be incurred in connection with financing the Facilities, and forming and administering the Community Facilities District (the “Incidental Expenses”); and
WHEREAS, the City Council estimates that the aggregate amount required to finance the Facilities and Incidental Expenses in Improvement Area No. 1 is approximately $7,600,000; and WHEREAS, in order to finance the Facilities and Incidental Expenses in Improvement Area No. 1, the City Council intends to authorize the issuance of bonds in a maximum aggregate principal amount of $7,600,000 for Improvement Area No. 1, the repayment of which is to be secured by special taxes levied in accordance with Section 53328 of the Act on all property in the proposed Improvement Area No. 1, other than those properties exempted from taxation in the rate and method of apportionment set forth in Exhibit C to the Resolution of Intention;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2. It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness within the boundaries of Improvement Area No. 1 in one or more series in a maximum aggregate principal amount of $7,600,000, in order to finance certain of the costs of the Facilities and Incidental Expenses, as permitted by the Act. Upon the annexation to the Community Facilities District of parcels of Future Annexation Area to an existing improvement area or to one or more Future Improvement Areas as set forth in the Resolution of Intention, the not -to-exceed amount of bonded indebtedness necessary EXHIBIT 3
57 to be incurred by the Community Facilities District on behalf of such Future Improvement Areas shall be set forth in each unanimous consent and approval of the owner or owners of the parcel or parcels (the “Unanimous Consent and Approval”) submitted for an nexation of the Future Annexation Area and shall be approved by City Council, acting as the legislative body of the Community Facilities District at the time of such annexation.

SECTION 3. The bonded indebtedness of proposed Improvement Area No. 1 and of any Future Annexation Area annexed to the Community Facilities District will be incurred for the purpose of financing the costs of the Facilities and the Incidental Expenses, including, but not limited to, the funding of reserve funds for the bonds, the financing of costs associated with the issuance of the bonds and all other costs and expenses necessary to finance the Facilities which are permitted to be financed pursuant to the Act.

SECTION 4. It is the intent of the City Council to authorize the sale of bonds in one or more series, which bonds may be issued to fund Facilities costs and Incidental Expenses for the Community Facilities District, and which bonds may bear interest at a rate not in excess of the maximum rate permitted by law at the time that the bonds are issued. The term of the bonds of each series shall be determined pursuant to a resolution of this City Council authorizing the issuance of the bonds of such series, but such term shall in no event exceed 40 years from the date of issuance of the bonds of such series, or such longer term as is then permitted by law. Bonds issued for Improvement Area No. 1 shall be in one or more series in the maximum aggregate principal amount set forth in Section 2.

SECTION 5. A combined public hearing (the “Hearing”) on the authorization to incur bonded indebtedness and to authorize the levy of special taxes shall be held at 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as practicable, on March 3, 2026, at the City Council’s Chambers, 211 Hill crest Avenue, Marina, California.

SECTION 6. At the time and place set forth in this Resolution for the Hearing, any interested persons, including all persons owning land or registered to vote within the proposed Community Facilities District, may appear and be heard.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a notice of the Hearing (the “Notice”) pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation published in the area of the proposed Community Facilities District . Such publication shall be completed at least seven days prior to the date of the Hearing. The City Clerk is further directed to mail a copy of the Notice to each of the landowners within the boundaries of the proposed Community Facilities District at least 15 days prior to the Hearing.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of January 2026.

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk
EXHIBIT 3
58 January 16, 2026 Agenda Item: 13(b)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
Of the Marina City Council of January 21, 2026

CITY COUNCIL TO RECEIVE CITY FACILITIES CITIZENS

ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON

STRATEGIES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND FUNDING OPTIONS FOR
CITY FACILITIES INCLUDING: POLICE AND FIRE STATIONS;

CITY HALL AND COUNCIL CHAMBERS, AND COMMUNITY
CENTER.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Receive report from the City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee; and

2. Provide direction to the City Manager on strategies for the construction and funding options for city facilities including police and fire stations; city hall and council chambers; and community center.

BACKGROUND
On September 23, 2025, the City Council held a special Study Session to discuss a pathway forward on meeting the needs for new City facilities, including a police station, fire station, emergency operations center, community center facilities, and new city hall and council chamber and potential funding strategies for constructing these new facilities. (EXHIBIT A – September 23, 2025, Staff Report and Power Point Presentation)

Following this discussion, Council directed staff to establish a City Facility Citizens Advisory Committee (CFCAC) within the coming months to work with Tripepi Smith, staff, and other consultants as appropriate; initiate community outreach efforts, including tours, public meetings, and engagement opportunities to involve residents early in the process; conduct further research into funding mechanisms such as bonds and utility users tax options, potential exemptions, and case studies from other cities; and provide Council with preliminary analysis of voter demographics, past election results, and a summary of the City’s available facility sites and also provide staff review and comments to a 10 -page document provided by citizens regarding questions about the Measure U bond.

On October 7, 2025 the City Council approved additional funding for Tripepi Smith and Associates to : provide additional professional services for community outreach, engagement, and education for construction of new city facilities and potential funding strategies; coordinate with FM3 conducting an opinion survey to assess citizen support fo r constructing new city facilities and viability of new revenue sources for a potential November 2026 ballot measure; and, facilitate the Citizens Advisory Committee meetings and develop a final report.

ANALYSIS
On October 24, 2025, the City of Marina issued the City Facilities Citizens Advisory application. Thirteen applicants responded and all were invited to serve on the Committee.

Four meetings of the CFCAC were held:

• November 17 – Tour of City Facilities (Council Chamber, Police/Fire Stations, Community Center, and City Hall) , then reconvening at Marina Library for discussion on key issues regarding facility needs, financial constraints, and perceptions on the failed 2024 Measure U ballot initiative.

• December 1 (Marina Library) – Discussion of the CFCAC with RNT Architecture staff, who had previously presented materials to City Council, with focus being on the evaluation of structural integrity of existing City buildings and evaluations of potential site locations.

• December 15 (Marina Library) – Discussion of eliminating sites for consideration, and possible options for potential site combinations, as well as estimated facility costs and current funding gaps to build new facilities. Discussion also included different funding approaches and a presentation on the basics of ballot measures as well as key timelines and other options, such as a citizen initiative.

• December 22 (Zoom) – The final meeting of the CFCAC included a review of the draft Final Report, discussion of a potential User Utility Tax, and narrowing down options for site locations of new City Facilities.

The attached City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee Report and Recommendations (EXHIBIT B) represent the Committee’s thoughts and support of the following recommendations to the City Council:

• Prioritize funding and construction of three new facilities only: a police station, fire station (with EOC), and city hall/council chambers.

• The preferred site to construct a police station, fire station, and emergency operations center is on city -owned property off California Ave in the area known as Cypress Knolls.

• City Hall preferred site is on Reservation Road next to the Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) center on property owned by MST . Second preferred site to locate a new city hall would be Vince DiMaggio Park . The Committee generally opposed building a city hall on the current Hillcrest Avenue campus.

• Priorities for facilities should remain focused on police station, fire station, city hall, and council chamber.

• Fund construction of the facilities by pursuing a Utility User Tax (UUT) at 7% to ensure sufficient funds to cover all anticipated construction costs.

• Place the UUT measure on the November 2026 ballot as a general tax along with a non-binding advisory measure.

Key City Council Points for Discussion

• Review of Citizens Advisory Committee Report and Recommendations • City facilities to construct
• Site locations for city facilities
• Mechanism to raise funds including UUT or other tax measures • How much to fund
• Ballot measure timeline

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact currently. Total cost to build proposed police station, fire station, city hall, and council chamber is estimated at $55 million.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the following: CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 – The project involves the approval of a sublease for the continued use of an existing facility with no expansion of use beyond that previously authorized. The sublease does not involve any new construction, modification, or physical alteration of the property and constitutes a negligible or no expansion of the existing use; CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) – Common Sense Exemption: Additionally, the activity is exempt under the common sense exemption, as it can be understood with certainty that there is no possibility the proposed sublease will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed sublease involves no physical changes to the property and no change in the type or intensity of use.

Therefore, no further environmental review is required.

CONCLUSION
This request is submitted for City Council consideration.

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF MARINA
City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee
Report and Recommendations
Date December 2025
Authored by Ryder Todd Smith
Reviewed and Content Affirmed by
City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee

EXHIBIT B
2 Table of Contents
Introduction ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3 Committee Formation

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4
Sites Considered by Committee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5
Meeting Summaries

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 6
Findings of Fact

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7
Key Recommendations of the Committee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 9
Additional Thoughts and Observations from the Committee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 10
Exhibit A - PowerPoint Decks from All Meetings

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 11
Exhibit B - Agendas for All Four Meetings

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 41
Exhibit C - Other Materials Shared with Committee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 44
Exhibit D - Email Comments from Committee Members

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 72

EXHIBIT B
3 Introduction
The following report was developed to summarize the information shared with the City Facilities Citizen Advisory Committee (CFCAC), the activities and work of the Committee and the ultimate recommendations of the Committee. This report was unanimously consented to by the Committee and represents effective community engagement that allows for viewpoint diversity and differing priorities while sharing the same goal of improving the community.

EXHIBIT B
4 Committee Formation
On September 23, 2025, the Marina City Council
participated in a Study Session to consider a pathway
forward on meeting the needs for new City facilities,
including a police station, fire station, emergency
operations center, community center facilities,
council chamber and new city hall building.

In the course of that meeting, the City Council
identified concerns with the public engagement
process during the last ballot measure effort and
authorized the creation of a City Facilities Community
Advisory Committee to tackle the following areas:
•
Review and d
iscuss the state of the
current City facilities
•
Pr
ovide recommendations to the City Council
surrounding site locations for any new City facilities
•
Discuss t
he Measure U outreach efforts and failure
of the 2024 Measure U ballot question and share
viewpoints on why the measure fell short of the
required 66.6% support level
•
Review fund
ing options for identified City
facilities to consider placing before the voters
in an upcoming election
The City Council asked that the Committee include
residents from each City Council District and include
diverse viewpoints of those who supported and
opposed Measure U.

On October 24, 2025, the City of Marina issued a
City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee Volunteer
Application. The City received 13 applications from
residents representing each council district within the city and invited all 13 applicants to serve on the Committee.

City staff decided to include all residents based on
the desire to include as many voices as possible in the discussion to better learn from those who were willing
to give of their time to the process. Applicants were
told to expect at least three meetings with each meeting lasting two hours. The following residents comprised
the Committee membership:

First Name Last Name District
Yuri Anderson 3
Andrea Baltzegar 3
Caroline Carroll 1
Patricia Clark-Gray 3
May Holland-Dungo 2
Joel Johnson 4
Parvaneh Keivanfar 4
Stephen Lee 2
Mike Moeller 3
Grace Silva-Santella 3
Michael Simmons 4
G. Jason Smith 2
Anna Tao 3
Experts who joined Committee meetings to provide
insights and answer questions for the resident
participants included:

Layne Long, City Manager, City of Marina
Tori Hannah, Finance Director, City of Marina
Doug McCoun, Fire Chief, City of Marina
Randy Hopkins, Chief of Police, City of Marina
Robert “Perl” Perlmutter, Partner, Shute, Mihaly
& Weinberger LLP (City’s Law Firm)
Ansgar Killing, RNT Architects,
(Roesling Nakamura Terada Architects)
Tyson Cline, RNT Architects,
(Roesling Nakamura Terada Architects)
All meetings were facilitated by Ryder Todd Smith,
Principal at Tripepi Smith.

The meetings were held at the Marina Library in the
Community Room. The first meeting began with a walking
tour of the City of Marina council chamber, city hall,
police/fire station and the community center building.

All meetings were posted as public meetings and open
to all, with public comment time made available to any
members of the public in attendance. The general format of the meetings involved reviewing prepared slides,
hearing from experts and encouraging conversation
among the residents on the Committee.

EXHIBIT B
5 Sites Considered by Committee

EXHIBIT B
6 Meeting Summaries
The following provides a brief summary of each meeting held by the Committee.

MEETING 1 SUMMARY — NOV. 17, 2025
5:30 P .M. Met at Marina Council Chamber
and toured City facilities.

The committee was led on a tour of the Council
Chamber, Police/Fire Stations, Community Center
and City Hall by City Manager Layne Long, Police
ChiefRandy Hopkins and Fire Chief Doug McCoun.
6:45 P .M. Reconvened at Marina Library for
discussion on key issues regarding facility needs.

Facilitator Ryder Todd Smith of Tripepi Smith provided
an overview of the Committee’s purpose and shared
a presentation about City finances, revenue sources,
General Fund expenditures and facility costs. Committee members asked questions and discussed facility needs
and standards, financial constraints and trends in property and sales tax revenues. Members also shared their
perceptions of why Measure U did not pass, noting that
outreach started too late and the proposal lacked clear plans and explanations for what facilities would be built, where they would be located and who would benefit.

MEETING 2 SUMMARY — DEC. 1, 2025
6:00 P .M. Meeting is Convened at the
Marina Library, Community Room.

Facilitator Ryder Todd Smith of Tripepi Smith provided
a series of fact statements drawn from Meeting 1 and
sought resident feedback on the statements. He then
handed the presentation over to architects from RNT to
present materials previously presented at public meetings with the City Council and to answer resident questions.

Their discussion generally focused on their evaluations of the structural integrity of existing City buildings, comparisons of current City facilities’ square footage with peer cities serving similar populations and evaluations of site locations based on four general criteria categories.

MEETING 3 SUMMARY — DEC. 15, 2025
7:15 P .M. Meeting is Convened at the
Marina Library, Community Room.

Facilitator Ryder Todd Smith of Tripepi Smith provided
a series of fact statements drawn from Meeting 2 and
sought resident feedback on the statements. He then
sought dialogue on eliminating any sites, presented three possible options for site combinations for the Committee to consider as a starting point and presented estimated facility costs and current funding gaps to build new
facilities. An attorney with Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP presented the basics of ballot measures as well as
key timelines and other options, such as a citizen initiative.

Finally, the Committee discussed general obligation bond and utility user taxes, the differences in approach, voting thresholds for approving either tax, the citizen initiative process and ballot language options for possible
measures. A rigorous discussion concluded with
agreement regarding the amount of financing needed
to build priority facilities, a preference for the City to pursue a general tax via a utility user tax with a
non-binding advisory question to accompany the
measure and a preference that the tax rate be 7%
to achieve the necessary financing for a police station, fire station and city hall/council chamber facilities.

MEETING 4 SUMMARY — DEC. 22, 2025
6:00 P .M. Meeting is Convened on Zoom.

Facilitator Ryder Todd Smith of Tripepi Smith highlighted the key areas of questions that were raised during the
document review process. This included a discussion
of the UUT tax and just how much the tax needs to be
given anecdotal evidence from Committee Members
on their observed costs for the 7% UUT. This included
discussion that all utilities (gas, electric, landline phone, cell phone, water, trash, cable tv, internet access and streaming content platforms) would be subject to the
UUT. Agreement was that the tax rate would need to be
better explained in terms of how it generated $3M a year while averaging $250/year/rate payer. The discussion
then shifted to site locations and location of the city hall on either Vince DiMaggio Park or Reservation Road. Pros and cons were shared on each, but the conclusion was to remain focused on Reservation Road as the preferred site for city hall. No changes were discussed or suggested to move the public safety facilities off the California Avenue site. There was discussion of language for an advisory
measure and the Committee’s agreement that building
an extensive community service campus at Hillcrest is a secondary priority and should not be prioritized by the City Council. For those on the call, unanimous consent was conditionally given on the report under the assumption
that the report was finalized to represent these key points.

Ryder was to follow up with all Committee Members once
he had drafted the final content and share that with all Committee Members for a final round of consent.

EXHIBIT B
7 Findings of Fact
To engage in a healthy discussion, the Committee participants should agree on basic facts. To advance this concept, the Committee reviewed facts from each meeting and came to consensus agreements on the facts to undergird the discussions as they advanced through the topic areas. The following are the facts that the Committee agreed to:

CITY HALL/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
•
City Hal
l and Council Chambers, built in 1975
and originally constructed using portable double
and triple-wide trailers, have far exceeded their
expected lives.
•
Compl
iance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act is a concern in the City Hall
and Council Chamber buildings.
•
The City Hal
l building is in such poor condition that
refurbishing the building is viewed as an inefficient
use of construction resources and dollars spent
based on architectural evaluation.
•
The Council Chamber
, while in difficult shape, could
be refurbished based on architectural evaluation
if needed, but the refurbishment would be costly.
•
The City Hal
l facility is significantly undersized
compared to industry standards and in comparison
to other cities, adjusted for the size of population
served by those other cities.
•
The of
fice space conditions, particularly in City Hall,
do not reflect the community’s values or provide
the standard of workplace Marina expects for its
public employees.
•
The Reservat
ion Road site offers minimal site
improvement requirements and is located in the
downtown area that the City has sought to revitalize
for over three decades. However, the site is currently
owned by Monterey-Salinas Transportation Agency.

PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES
•
The pol
ice/fire station located at Hillcrest is over
30 years old, having been built in 1993.
•
The Pol
ice Station parking lot is not owned by the
City and is rented on a month-to-month lease,
creating risks that the lot could quickly disappear
as a critical resource for the Police Station.
•
The pol
ice and fire parking lot is so cramped it
creates delays when exiting.
•
Cramped of
fice conditions create operational
challenges for police and fire, with both confidentiality concerns and simple task execution issues.
•
Storage for publ
ic safety equipment is quite limited.
•
The Pol
ice Station lockers are completely
occupied with no room to add more lockers.
•
The female pol
ice department facilities are
inadequate to reflect today’s modernized force.
•
The Fir
e Station bays are smaller than common
standards and are restricting the types of engines
that can be parked in the facility.
•
Seismic risks exist for t
he police and fire station, which
places at risk the very people we would need in the
case of an emergency like an earthquake. The Police
Station does not currently meet the elevated seismic
standards for public safety facilities established by the State of California.
•
T
o enhance Fire Department response times and to
adjust to city growth, the City plans to have two fire
stations located on somewhat opposite sides of town
to efficiently respond to calls across the city in line with best practices for response times.
•
For some parts of t
he community, the Fire Department
currently does not meet the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) standard of 5-minute “first
responder time for EMS, consisting of a 60-second
turnout time and a 240-second travel time.
•
Med
ical intervention within 5 minutes of a traumatic
injury or cardiac event can significantly increase
survival rates. Building a new fire station in the Cypress Knolls area along California Ave will improve response
times and fit into the long-term fire station location
strategy for the City.
•
While in good cond
ition, Marina’s police and
fire department headquarters on Hillcrest Ave is
substantially undersized and does not meet the space
benchmarks typically seen in comparable cities based
on populations served. Significant square-footage
deficits exist that impact departments’ operational
capacity. The facility is in good enough condition to
be refurbished for other uses based upon architectural
evaluation.

EXHIBIT B
8 OTHER FACILITY ITEMS
•
The Community Center facil
ity has good bones,
but the interior spaces, particularly the kitchen
and bathrooms, need significant overhauls.
•
The City operates a balanced budget but does

not have the resources to fund new facilities for
police, fire, community center, city hall and the
council chambers.

MEASURE U COMMENTS
•
In t
he opinion of some Committee members, the lack
of specifics in Measure U and divergent viewpoints
of the City Council on how to allocate Measure U funds
caused uncertainty and distrust among some voters,
persuading them to vote no on the measure.
•
In t
he opinion of some Committee members,
a perceived divide between property owners and
renters over who would shoulder the costs and
who would benefit most further weakened broad
support for Measure U.
•
Measur
e U, while supported by a strong majority
of voters, ultimately fell short of the 66.6% threshold of support, with 60% support. Other taxes, such as
general taxes like Utility Users Tax and Sales Tax require a simple 50%+1 majority vote.

FINANCIAL AND REVENUE MEASURE MATTERS
•
If t
he City narrowly focused on three facilities —
a new police station, a new fire station and a new
city hall/council chamber — the anticipated cost is
about $55 million before any land acquisition costs.
•
The City has exist
ing funding that offsets the amount
to raise with existing grants and impact fees of
$14,289,624, reducing the amount that needs
to be raised for a police station, fire station and
city hall/council chamber construction to $40,710,376.
•
Up to $6 mil
lion may be needed for land acquisition
costs, in addition to above stated $40.7M.
•
Raising nearly $50 mil
lion in bonding capacity
is needed to ensure proper funding for the
police station, fire station and city hall/council
chamber facilities.
•
A general obl
igation bond or a parcel tax are both
taxes on land and considered special taxes requiring
a two-thirds vote at 66.6% to be adopted by voters.
•
Special taxes, general obl
igation bonds and parcel
taxes, while normally subject to a 66.6% threshold for
voter approval, only require a 50%+1 majority support
if the measure is brought to the voters via the citizen initiative process. Such citizen initiative language must be established by the end of February 2026 in order
to hit a timeline to be on the November 2026 ballot.
•
A ut
ility user tax (UUT) is commonly considered
to be a general tax and requires a simple majority
or 50% plus 1 to achieve approval by voters.

However, if the spending of the UUT is narrowly
directed and restricted, it may qualify as a special
tax and thus also require a two-thirds vote of
support to be adopted.
•
Cit
ies may also place advisory measures on ballots that
are non-binding on the City Council but do provide
an opportunity for the public to express their will,
by vote, on key policy matters, including advising
on how to spend revenues raised by a ballot measure.

EXHIBIT B
9 Key Recommendations of the Committee
The Committee expressed, through voicing their thoughts, hand raising in straw votes and with final consent, support to submit the following recommendations to City Council:
•
Priorit
ize the funding and construction of three new
facilities only: a police station, fire station (with EOC) and city hall/council chambers.
•
The pr
eferred site plan is to construct a public
safety center on city-owned property off California
Ave that would contain a police station, fire station
and emergency operations center. In all site option
considerations, this was consistent.
•
For city hal
l, the preferred site was on Reservation
Road on land currently owned by Monterey-Salinas
Transit. The second preferred site was to locate a
new city hall at Vince DiMaggio Park. The Committee
generally opposed building a city hall on the current
Hillcrest Avenue campus. The Committee unanimously
agreed the Locke-Paddon Park as off limits to
constructing any facilities on it.
•
The priorit
ies for facilities should remain focused on
these essential facilities (police station, fire station, city hall and council chambers) and the City Council
is strongly encouraged to not pursue a recreation
campus at Hillcrest Avenue site at this time as has
been identified in past public presentations. That said, fixes to the Community Center building including
renovations of the kitchen and bathroom and
addressing safety issues should remain on track.
•
T o fund the construction of the facilities, the
Committee recommends pursuing a Utility Users Tax
(UUT) at 7% that qualifies as a general tax requiring
a 50% threshold to ensure there are sufficient funds
to cover all anticipated construction costs. Based
on presented data, this averaged $250 a year per
household.
•
Review of t
he UUT revenue modeling should be
done to clearly explain what residents should
expect to pay in increased taxes and what
utilities will be taxed. It is generally expected
those rates will apply to land line, cell phone,
water, Monterey One Water, waste hauler, cable
TV, internet access, and streaming services.
•
Model
ing and rate setting for the UUT rate
should be established so as to generate
approximately $3M a year in revenues at outset
to fund the necessary financing for project costs.
•
The Commit
tee recommends that an advisory measure
be simultaneously considered by voters to advise
the City Council on how to spend funds on facilities
from the funds made possible by the UUT measure, if
adopted. Such an advisory measure should emphasize:
•
Construct
ion of a fire, police and EOC facility on
California Ave to construct a public safety facility
and to improve 911 response times throughout
Marina;
•
Final select
ion and acquisition of land, if
needed, for construction of a new city hall and
council chamber facilities to improve citizen
access and improve city operational functions;
•
Af
firming that the voters reserve their right to
revoke UUT measure if stated priorities are not
adhered to.

EXHIBIT B
10 Additional Thoughts and Observations
from the Committee
The following are additional viewpoints that were shared by one or more Committee members that may further inform the City Council as it proceeds toward addressing the City’s facility needs. •
$50 mil
lion is a big number, and the City should focus
on addressing its most immediate needs for these
key facilities before it tries to take on building out
a community center campus in the Hillcrest location.
•
While ot
her facilities, such as a senior center,
a youth and sports parks are desired and needed,
the immediate priority that the Committee wanted to
focus resources on was addressing the police station,
fire station and city hall/council chamber needs.
•
Some view invest
ing in the Reservation Road location
as a way to invest in revitalizing the downtown core
of Marina — a vision that has been a part of the
City’s policies for well over a decade.
•
Monter
ey-Salinas Transit owns the Reservation Road
location that was supported by the Committee, so the
City will need to move swiftly to secure an option for
that land if it wants to provide certainty to voters that a city hall can be built on that property. Such an option will need to include the cost of the land.
•
Build
ing new facilities on new sites will help to
alleviate the logistics of staff moving, resulting
in staff only moving once, rather than moving out
of a building to a temporary building and then back
into a new building (moving twice).
•
Having a unified city council t
hat agrees on sites and
facility needs will help grow the confidence of voters
to support the measure.
•
V
ince Dimaggio Park, as a secondary option for a city
hall location, would be a more prominent location
than Reservation Road to position City Hall, helping
the building stand out in the community and sending
a message that Marina is a growing and confident city.

Some observed that the Reservation Road location
risks City Hall simply blending in amongst the strip
malls and commercial buildings in that area. The Vince
Dimaggio Park site would place City Hall alongside
the County Court and opposite the library. It would
be surrounded by prominent Cypress trees (assuming
the site plan can preserve the trees) and overlook
Locke-Paddon Park. One Committee Member noted
that adding a city hall to the location would warrant
consideration of a pedestrian bridge to the library
which would add to costs for overall site, but others
noted that such a bridge might not be warranted
if the only building on the site is City Hall and not
other community services. These comments were
generally affirmed by several Committee Members as
potential upsides to the Vince DiMaggio Park location,
but unanimous consent was agreed to prioritizing
Reservation Road.
•
It is clear t
hat the City will need to have clear
definitions on a city hall versus a civic center versus a community center. In the case of the Committee
recommendations, there is no civic center or
community center proposed as part of the $50
million in facilities. The separation of city hall/council chambers from the police station and fire station
effectively eliminates the definition of a civic center, and the scope of proposed facilities does not address
the community center facilities that remain at Hillcrest. •
Should city hal
l move to a new location as a result
of a funding measure being adopted by voters, the
City Annex building would likely open up and could
be repurposed for other needs, such as a senior
center. Additional funding for the refurbishment
and ongoing programming costs was not a part
of the scope of discussion for the Committee.
•
Any new fir
e station to be located in the northern
part of Marina is not within scope of this Report,
but concerns were noted that residents will be looking
for impact fees and new residents in northern Marina
to pay their fair share toward construction of a new
fire station when needed.

EXHIBIT B
11 Exhibit A - PowerPoint Decks from All Meetings
Welcome
Please Mingle and Be Friendly
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting| Nov 17, 2025
Thank You!
Civic Engagement is critical to an effective and safe Marina MEETING 1

EXHIBIT B
12 Building Trust
Introductions

EXHIBIT B
13 Family Man, California Resident
Ryder’s Day Job
Communications and City Consulting
Who is this Ryder guy?
Transparency of Intent
Today’s Goals
Meet your neighbors Ask questions Learn about current facilities and future facilities needs

EXHIBIT B
14 Your Neighborhoods
District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4
Caroline
Carroll
May Holland-
Dungo
Yuri
Anderson
Joel Johnson
Stephen Lee Andrea
Baltzegar
Parvaneh
Keivanfar
G. Jason
Smith
Patricia
Clark-Gray
Michael
Simmons
Mike Moeller
Grace Silva-
Santella
Anna Tao
1 3 6 3
How did we get here?
-Measure U fails to reach two-thirds
approval
-City reaffirmed resident
involvement is critical to the future
of Marina
-You applied for this committee to
provide the City with insight,
perspective and advice

EXHIBIT B
15 Marina’s Sources of Revenue FY 2025-2026
Revenue Source Budget for 2025-26 Percent
Property Tax $10,790,000 28.0%
Sales T ax $10,355,000 26.9%
Transient Occupancy
tax (TOT)
$6,490,000 16.9%
Business License Tax $1,910,000 5.0%
Other T axes $1,761,000 4.6%
Subtotal Taxes $31,306,000 81.4%
Licenses and permits $832,000 2.2%
Fines and Penalties $83,000 0.2%
Intergovernmental $488,500 1.3%
Charges for Services $4,090,654 10.6%
Use of money and
property
$1,096,600 2.8%
Other revenues $88,000 0.2%
Transfers $550,166 1.4%
Total Revenues $38,534,920 100%
28%
27%
17%
5%
5%
11%
Revenue Breakdown
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
Business License Tax
Other Taxes
Licenses & Permits
Fines & Penalties
Intergovernmental
Charges for Services
Use of Money & Property
Other Revenues
Transfer s
Marina General Fund Allocation for FY 2025-2026
Department Projected Budget for FY 2025-26 % of T otal Budget for FY Police $10,727,741 21.4%
Fire $6,096,812 12.2%
Citywide Non-Department $5,296,187 10.6%
Pu blic Wo rk s $3,169,540 6.3%
City Manager $2,767,893 5.5%
Engineering $1,836,823 3.7%
Recreation & Culture $1,692,037 3.4%
Planning $1,302,408 2.6%
Finance $1,201,758 2.4%
Building Inspection $864,993 1.7%
City Attorney $824,000 1.6%
Human Resources / Risk mgmt $599,235 1.2%
Information Technology $461,900 0.9%
Economic Development $345,364 0.7%
City Council $182,689 0.4%
Citywide Transfers Out (non-
operating)
$11,506,068 22.9%
Capital Outlay (non-operating) $1,285,000 2.6%
Total $50,160,448 100%

EXHIBIT B
16 Property and Sales Tax Trends
Estimated Cost of New Buildings and Facilities
Facility Project Costs
Partially Funded /
Funding Identified Remaining Needed Funding Notes
City Hall/Council
Chambers $16,100,000 $12,180,954 $3,919,046
Estimated $8.1 million in
Public Facility Impact Fees –
Public Facilities, and $4.1
million in projected facility
reserves
Senior Center $9,100,000 $4,421,557 $4,678,443
Estimated $3.4 million in
Public Facility Impact fees –
Parks, and $1 million grant
funding
Youth/Community
Center $3,250,000 n/a $3,250,000
Police Facility $12,750,000 n/a $12,750,000
Fire Headquarters,
EOC, Classroom $20,145,000 $2,108,670 $18,036,330
Estimated Public Facility
Impact Fees – Public Safety
Total $61,345,000
$18,711,181 $42,633,819

EXHIBIT B
17 Why Did Measure U Fail?
What are the current needs
of the City?

EXHIBIT B
18 Next Meeting Dates
-Marina Library
-Monday, Dec. 1
-6 pm
-City Council Chambers
-Monday, Dec. 15
-6 pm

EXHIBIT B
19 Welcome
to Meeting #2
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting| Dec. 1, 2025
Introductions
MEETING 2

EXHIBIT B
20 Public Comments
Agenda Public Comments
Brief Overview and Trust
Facts to Ponder
Presentation from RNT Architects
Open discussion and Next Steps

EXHIBIT B
21 Facts to Ponder Part 1
• City Hall and Council Chambers, built in 1975 and originally constructed using portable double and triple wide trailers, have far exceeded their expected lives. • Significant investments are needed in the City Hall building, but major investments in this aged-out facility makes little economic sense.
• Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act is a concern in the City Hall and Council Chamber buildings.
• The police and fire station are over 30 years old having been built in 1993. • The Police Station parking lot is not owned by the City, creating risks that the lot could quickly disappear as a critical resource for the Police Station. • Cramped office conditions create operational challenges for police and fire with both confidentiality concerns and simple task execution issues.

Building Trust

EXHIBIT B
22 Facts to Ponder Part 2
• Storage for public safety equipment is quite limited. • The Police Station lockers are completely occupied with no room to add more lockers. • The female police department facilities are inadequate to reflect today's modernized force. • The Fire Station bays are restricting the types of engines that can be parked in the facility. • To enhance Fire Department response times and to adjust to city growth, the City should have two fire stations, located on somewhat opposite sides of town to efficiently respond to calls across the city in line with best practices for response times. • Seismic risks exist for the police and fire station that place at risk the very people we would need in the case of an emergency like an earthquake. The Police Station does not currently meet the elevated seismic standards established by the State of California.

Facts to Ponder Part 3
• The police and fire parking lot is so cramped it creates delays when exiting. • The office space conditions, particularly in City Hall, do not reflect the community’s values or provide the standard of workplace Marina expects for its public employees. • The Community Center facility has good bones, but the interior spaces, particularly the kitchen and bathrooms need significant overhauls.
• The City operates a balanced budget, but does not have the resources to fund new facilities for police, fire, community center , city hall and the council chambers.
• Measure U, while supported by a strong majority of voters, ultimately fell short of the 66.6% threshold of support with 60% support. Other taxes such as general taxes like Utility Users Tax and Sales Tax require a simply 50%+1 majority vote.
• Committee Members noted the lack of specifics in Measure U and divergent viewpoints of the City Council on how to allocate Measure U funds caused uncertainty and distrust among some voters persuading them to vote no on the measure.
• Committee Members noted a perceived divide between property owners and renters over who would shoulder the costs and who would benefit most further weakened broad support for Measure U.

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 Thank you
Discussion

EXHIBIT B
32 Thank you
Next meeting is Dec. 15,
715-915 pm at the Library

EXHIBIT B
33 Meeting #3
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting | Dec. 15, 2025
Agenda
New Facts to Discuss
Scenario Options and Costs
City Attorney Presentation
Revenue Options
Sample Ballot Language
MEETING 3

EXHIBIT B
34 Facts to Agree Upon
• The City Hall building is in such poor condition that refurbishing the building is viewed as an inefficient use of construction resources and dollars spent based upon architectural evaluation. • While The Council Chamber is in difficult shape, a relatively costly refurbishment could be undertaken based upon architectural evaluation.
• The City Hall facilities are undersized compared to industry standards and in comparison to other cities adjusted for the size of population served by those other cities. • Marina’s police and fire department headquarters on Hillcrest Ave is substantially undersized and does not meet the space benchmarks typically seen in comparable cities based on populations served.

Significant square-footage deficits exist that impact departments’ operational capacity. The facility is structurally sufficient to refurbish for general public use based upon architectural evaluation. • Building a new fire station at Cypress Knolls will improve response times and fits into the long-term fire station location strategy for the City.
• The Reservation Road site offers minimal site improvement requirements and is located in the downtown area that the City has sought to revitalize for years. However, the site is currently owned by Monterey- Salinas Transportation Agency.

Site Selection - Elimination
Vince Dimaggio Park Locke-Paddon Park
Reservation Road
Hillcrest Avenue
California Avenue

EXHIBIT B
35 Site Costs
Building Site Prep &
Landscaping
New Building
Construction
Retrofit &
Renovation
Total
City Hall/Council
Chamber
$4.0M $17.5M n/a $21.5M
Police Department $2.0M $15.5M n/a $17.5M
Fire Station $4.0M $12.0M n/a $16.0M
Recreational
Campus Hillcrest
$3.5M n/a $4.0M $7.5M
Total $13.5M $45M $4M $62.5M
*Note there will also be up to $6 million in land acquisition costs *Construction costs for each option are largely the same Site Selection OptionsOption 1
California Avenue
• Fire Station
• Police Station
Reservation Road
• City Hall (built from
Ground up)
Option 2
California Avenue
• Fire Station
Reservation Road
• City Hall (built from
Ground up)
• Police Station
Option 3
California Avenue
• Police Station
• Fire Station
Hillcrest Avenue
• City Hall
*Note for Option 3
• Refurbish current public safety building
into recreation center
• Recreation center cannot be City hall
• Phasing is a challenge

EXHIBIT B
36 Estimated Facilities Costs
City Facilities Project Costs Partially Funded /
Funding Identified
Remaining Needed
City Hall/Council
Chambers
$ 21,500,000 $12,180,954
*Estimated $8.1 million in Public
Facility Impact Fees - Public
Facilities, and $4.1 million in
projected facility reserves
$9,319,046
Police Facility $17,500,000 n/a $17,500,000
Fire / EOC / Classroom 16,000,000 $2,108,670
*Estimated Public Facility
Impact Fees - Public Safety
$13,891,330
$55,000,000 $40,710,376
Senior Center $6,035,000 $1,000,000
*$ 1 million grant funding
$5,035,000
Youth / Community
Recreation Center
$7,500,000 n/a $7,500,000
$53,245,000
Ballot Measure Information

EXHIBIT B
37 City-Run Ballot Process and Timeline
August 7, 2026: Deadline to place tax measure on November ballot Council-sponsored measure may be finalized any time before Aug. 7 City may provide neutral informational materials about measure City may not campaign for or against measure
City council may endorse measure
General vs Special Tax
Special Tax
(e.g., general obligation bond;
parcel tax)
a. Requires 2/3 vote, unless via voter-
sponsored initiative
b. Funding restricted to specific
purposes set forth in ballot measure
General Tax
(e.g., Utility Users Tax)
a. Requires simple majority vote (50%
plus 1)
b. Funding must be available for any
municipal purpose
c. May be combined with advisory
measure stating voters’ preferences

EXHIBIT B
38 Citizen Initiatives
• Only requires simple majority vote (50% plus 1)
• Must qualify for ballot through petition process (signed by 10% of registered voters)
• Voter-sponsored measure should be finalized by February 28 at latest
Revenue and Tax Options
Estimated Bond
Capacity
Estimated
Annual Revenue
Cost Per
Household
$28 Million
(4% UUT rate)
$1.7 Million $12/month
($140/year)
$35 Million
(5% UUT rate)
$2.1 Million $15/month
($180/year)
$42 Million
(6% UUT rate)
$2.6 Million $18/month
($220/year)
$49 Million
(7% UUT rate)
$3.0 Million $21/month
($250/year)
Utility User Tax
Bond Size Cost per
Household
Cost per
$100,000 of
Assessed Value
$20 Million $9/month
($108/year)
$21.60
$30 Million $13.60/month
($163/year)
$32.60
$40 Million $18/month
($217/year)
$43.40
$50 Million $22.70/month
($272/year)
$54.40
$60 Million $27/month
($325/year)
$65.00
General Obligation Bond
Notes:
*General Obligation Bond is paid with property taxes
*Cost estimate median single -family home assessed value of $497,000

EXHIBIT B
39 DRAFT
DRAFT
GO Bond Measure U Ballot Language and New
Concept
2026 Sample Ballot Language
“MARINA 911 RESPONSE, ESSENTIAL
FACILITIES MEASURE. To improve 911 response
times; build comprehensive police and fire
facilities, address earthquake risks, replace city
hall, invest in Marina’s downtown; create
space for future community center, shall City
of Marina’s measure authorizing $50,000,000
in bonds at legal rates, levying on average
$54.74 annually per $100,000 of assessed
value, generating approximately $3,191,000
annually while bonds are outstanding, be
adopted, requiring public spending disclosure,
all funds spent locally?”
2024 Ballot Language
MARINA 911 EMERGENCY RESPONSE, SAFETY ,
ESSENTIAL SERVICES/ FACILITIES MEASURE. To
maintain rapid 911, fire, and emergency
response times; ensure Marina’s Fire/ Police
Departments can respond to emergencies,
maintain fire/police services, provide
fire/police stations/community center, shall
City of Marina’s measure authorizing
$50,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, levying on
average $54.74 annually per $100,000 of
assessed value, generating approximately
$3,191,000 annually while bonds are
outstanding, be adopted, requiring public
spending disclosure, all funds spent locally?”
DRAFT
DRAFT
Version 1
MARINA 911 RESPONSE, ESSENTIAL FACILITIES
MEASURE. To fund a new police/fire stations;
new city hall; essential public safety staff;
parks/recreation facilities and services; and
essential services, like neighborhood police
patrols; fighting for local water quality;
retaining/attracting local businesses, and
general community services, shall an
ordinance creating a 6% utility users’ tax,
generating approximately $3,100,000 annually
until ended by voters, with senior exemptions,
independent citizens’ oversight, annual audits,
and funding spent locally, be adopted?
Sample UUT Ballot Text for 2026 Measure
Version 2
MARINA 911 RESPONSE, ESSENTIAL FACILITIES
MEASURE. To fund new police and fire
stations, city hall/council chamber, emergency
operations/training facility; while revitalize
downtown Marina; addressing public safety
earthquake risk, supporting ADA access,
creating space for a community center , and
supporting general community services, shall
an ordinance creating a 6% utility users’ tax,
generating approximately $3,100,000 annually
until ended by voters, with senior exemptions,
independent citizens’ oversight, annual audits,
and funding spent locally, be adopted?

EXHIBIT B
40 Possible Next Steps
• Draft a report with recommendations and seek unanimous consent to the report draft
• Draft a report with recommendations and seek majority support for draft report
• Draft a report with various comments and observations but no recommendations

EXHIBIT B
41 AGENDA

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2025 5:30 P.M. City Counci l Chambers 6:15 P.M. Marina Library

MEETING
(IN-PERSON ONLY)

CITY FACILITIES CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Marina Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Ave.

Marina, California 93933
and
Marina Library
189 Seaside Circle
Marina, California 93933

1. 5:30 P.M. Meet at Marina Council Chamber – Tour City facilities

2. 6:15 P.M. Reconvene at Marina Library for discussion on key issues regarding facility needs.

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 Council Chambers Bulletin Board at 211 Hillcrest Avenue, Monterey County Library Marina Branch at 190 Seaside Circle, City Bulletin Board at the corner of Reservation Road and Del Monte Boulevard on or before 6:30 p.m., Friday, November 14, 2025.

___________________________________

ANITA SHARP, DEPUTY CITY CLERK

Exhibit B - Agendas for All Four Meetings
MEETING 1

EXHIBIT B
42 AGENDA

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2025 6:00 P.M. Marina Library

MEETING
(IN-PERSON ONLY)

CITY FACILITIES CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CFCAC)

Marina Library
189 Seaside Circle
Marina, California 93933

1. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE FLOOR: At this time any person may comment on any item which is not on the agenda. Speakers may state their name and address for the record. Action will not be taken on an item that is not on the agenda. If it requires action, it will be referred to staff and/or placed on the next agenda. CFCAC members or City staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed as permitted by Government Code Section 54954.2. In order that all interested parties have an opportunity to speak, please limit comments to a maximum of three (3) 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 CFCAC.

2. Continued discussion on key issues regarding facility needs.

CERTIFICATION

___________________________________

ANITA SHARP, DEPUTY CITY CLERK

MEETING 2

EXHIBIT B
43 AGENDA

MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2025 7:00 P .M. Marina Library

MEETING
(IN-PERSON ONLY)

CITY FACILITIES CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CFCAC)

Marina Library
189 Seaside Circle
Marina, California 93933

2. Continued discussion on key issues regarding facility needs.

CERTIFICATION

___________________________________

ANITA SHARP, DEPUTY CITY CLERK

MEETING 3

EXHIBIT B
44 Exhibit C - Other Materials Shared with Committee
City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee (CFCAC)
Volunteer Application
Return this form to:

Marina City Clerk’s Office
211 Hillcrest Ave., Marina CA 93933
[email protected]
Applications are due by 5:00 pm on November 7, 2025
The City of Marina is forming a City Facilities Citizens Advisory Committee ( CFCAC) of 9-11 community representatives to collaborate and provide guidance and feedback on plans to build new city facilities. It is critical that each person appointed to the CFCAC be willing to bring great ideas to the group while being able to listen respectfully to others. Members will be expected to stay with the Committee for the duration of the process, which is anticipated to last from early November 2025 through early-2026 and will include approximately two (2) meetings per month. This is a voluntary position - CFCAC members receive no payment for their work.

Prospective CFCAC members should be aware of the following criteria which will be used in evaluating candidates. A CFCAC member must:
• Be a City of Marina resident or property/business owner within the City of Marina. • Understand the local community, its social and cultural needs, and be willing to communicate those needs to the committee.
• Be able to work with others to reach a common goal.
• File a Form 700 Conflict of Interest

1. The City would like representation from each Council District. Please let us know in which District you reside (see map below):

2. The City would like to have a Committee that is balanced in its views regarding a future potential ballot measure. To that end, feel free to voluntarily indicate how you voted on Measure U: Did you vote: Yes or No on Measure U? If Undecided, please tell us why _____________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________

3. CFCAC meetings will take place in person in the evenings in Marina. Are you available at these times and able to commit to the entire length of the CFCAC? The first meetings will be Nov. 17, Dec. 1, and Dec. 15 with additional dates TBD. Yes No PERSONAL INFORMATION:

The following information is provided in confidence but may be used by the City of Marina City Council when making the appointment or be used by the Committee following appointment for the purposes of communicating with the appointee.

Home Address
Street: City/State: Zip:

Telephone: Mobile Ph:

Email:

Signature: Date:

EXHIBIT B
45 VOLUNTEER INFORMATION:

REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS: Based on your understanding of the Volunteer Program, will you require any special accommodations to apply and/or participate as a volunteer? Yes No If yes, what reasonable accommodations would be necessary to assist you in this area? Other than English,
in which
language(s) are you
fluent?

Speak
 Read
 Write

Speak
 Read
 Write
Specialized training/skills:

In Case of Emergency:

Whom should we notify?
Name Relationship to Applicant
Home Ph: Work Ph: Physician’s Name: Ph:

Do you have any medical history that we should be aware of in the event of an emergency? (Allergies, medications, etc.)
___________________________________________________________________________________

CITY OF MARINA

WAIVER & RELEASE OF LIABILITY

AND ASSUMPTION OF RISK AGREEMENT
For good and valuable consideration, I, for myself, my successor, heirs, assigns, executors, and administrators; (1) Agree that prior to participating I will inspect the facilities, equipment and areas to be used, and, if I believe any of them are unsafe, I will immediately advise the City of Marina. (2) Acknowledge that I fully understand that my participation may involve risk of serious injury or death, including economic losses which may result not only from my own actions, inactions, or negligence, but also from the actions, inactions, or negligence of others, the condition of the facilities, equipment, or areas where the event or activity is being conducted, the rules of play, or this type of event or activity. (3) Assume any and all risks of personal injuries to myself, including medical or hospital bills, permanent or partial disability, death, and damage to my property, caused by or arising from my participation in this event or activity. (4) Covenant not to sue or present any claim for personal injury, property damage, or wrongful death against the City of Marina, and their officers, employees, agents and volunteers from any liability, loss, damage, claim, demand or cause of action against them arising from or attributable to my participation in the e vent or activity, whether same shall arise by their negligence or otherwise. (6) Agree that photographs, pictures, slides, movies, or videos of me may be taken in connection with my participation in this event or activity without compensation from the City of Marina and consent to the use of these photographs, pictures, slides, movies, or videos for any legal purpose. (7) Warrant that I am in good health and have no physical condition that would prevent me from participation in this event or activity. This document relieves the City of Marina and others from liability for personal injury, wrongful death, and property damage caused by negligence.

I have read this document, understand that I have given up substantial rights by signing it, and sign volunta rily. _____________________________ _______________________________ Print Name Date
_____________________________
Signature

EXHIBIT B
46 1 – Councilmember Brian McCarthy
2 – Councilmember Kathy Biala
3 – Councilmember Jenny McAdams
4 – Councilmember Liesbeth Visscher
Mayor – Bruce Delgado is elected at-large

EXHIBIT B
47 Memorandum
To: City Facilities Citizen Advisory Committee Members
From: Layne Long, City Manager
Date: 11/14/2025
Re: Introductory Meeting Citizen Advisory Committee
Dear Committee Members,
Thank you for volunteering to serve on this Committee. This is a committee that we are forming at the direction from our City Council. We received thirteen (13) applications and decided to include everyone that applied on the committee. As we mentioned in the application form, we have scheduled three (3) initial meetings scheduled: November 17, December 1, and December 15. We may schedule additional meetings in 2026 depending on the outcome of these initial meetings.

For the meeting on Monday, November 17, we’ll meet initially at the City Council Chambers at 5:30 and will have a quick tour of the police and fire station, community center, city council chambers, and city hall facilities. After the tour, we’ll then drive to the community room at the library where we’ll reconvene and start our discussion on key issues regarding city facilities and on the future of the City’s finances.

All of our meetings will be facilitated by Ryder Smith, from the consulting firm of Tripepi Smith.

Attached is some initial background information previously provided to the public. We’ll have snacks and drinks available during our meeting. If you have any questions, please contact Cyrah Caburian at: [email protected]; 831-884-1211.

Thank you again for being willing to serve on this Committee.

EXHIBIT B
48
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-94

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA ORDERING

A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ELECTION, ESTABLISHING

SPECIFICATIONS, REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH OTHER ELECTIONS OCCURRING ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024, AND AUTHORIZING NECESSARY

ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH

RESOLVED, by the City Council (the “Council”) of the City Marina (the “City”), within Monterey County, California (the “County”), as follows:

WHEREAS, the City’s population has more than doubled since the City was incorporated in 1975, but still relies on the same aging and deteriorating fire stations, police station, and city facilities that were built for a much smaller population;

WHEREAS, more than 80 percent of all 9 -1-1 calls to the Marina Fire Department are medical emergencies, such as heart attacks, strokes, and car accidents, and seconds matter in a life -threatening situations, but because aging fire stations are located far from many Marina residents, response times for some areas of the City are close to 10 minutes, much slower than the 5-minute national standard;

WHEREAS, the City's aging fire and police stations (emergency response center) do not meet current earthquake safety standards, and could collapse and prevent first responders from getting to residents in a major earthquake;

WHEREAS, the current fire stations are too small to accommodate the modern technology and life-saving equipment, such as rescue equipment and a ladder truck, to keep the City safe;

WHEREAS, many essential city programs and services are delivered from deteriorating portable buildings that were installed nearly 50 years ago and were intended to be temporary, are not accessible for residents with disabilities, have mold, asbestos, leaky roofs, are not earthquake safe, and do not provide space to support local services;

WHEREAS, the City's deteriorating community center, which includes the community center, city council chambers, community rooms, recreation and City offices is not up to current earthquake, fire safety and ADA standards; yet this space is packed every day by the City's daycare, pre -school, before/ afterschool programs, and other youth, family, and senior programs; and recreation and city employees and the public;

WHEREAS, the cost to upgrade Marina’s aging facilities is beyond what the City’s current budget can support and the City Council believes that locally controlled funding from a bond measure is needed to construct a new fire station, police station, and community center;

WHEREAS, a bond measure for a fire station, police station, and community center would require strict fiscal accountability protections including public disclosure of all spending, an independent oversight committee, and annual audits;

WHEREAS, all funds from a local bond measure must stay under local control, may only be used for facilities to improve essential services in Marina and cannot be taken away by the State;

EXHIBIT B
49
Resolution No. 2024-94
Page Two

WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024, this Council adopted, by a two -thirds vote of all the members of this Council, a Resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

MARINA, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY

DEMAND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS AND MAKING FINDINGS RELATING THERETO;"

WHEREAS, in order to provide for the issuance by the City of general obligation bonds to finance the acquisition or improvement of real property to repair or replace the City’s aging fire, police station and emergency response center (as further described below and in Exhibit A, the "Projects"), it is necessary for this Council to pass a resolution ordering the submission of the proposition for incurring bonded indebtedness for such purpose to the qualified voters of the City at an election;

WHEREAS, in the judgment of the Council, it is advisable to call an election to submit to the electors of the City on the November 5, 2024 ballot the question of whether general obligation bonds of the City (the "Bonds") shall be issued and sold for the purpose of financing the Projects;

WHEREAS, by a vote of not less than two-thirds of the voters of the City voting in favor upon a proposition incurring such indebtedness (or 55% of the voters of the City voting in favor upon a proposition incurring such indebtedness in the event that Proposition 5 is approved by California voters at the November 5, 2024 election), the City is authorized to issue general obligation bonds to finance municipal improvements pursuant to the provisions of Article 1, commencing with section 43600, of Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 of the California Government Code (the "Bond Law");

WHEREAS, net proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used to finance the Projects, and all expenditures will be subject to annual independent audits and oversight;

WHEREAS, no proceeds of the sale of the Bonds shall be expended for salaries, pensions or benefits of City employees; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to section 10403 et seq. of the California Elections Code, it is appropriate for the Council to request the County Board of Supervisors to consolidate the election for the Bonds with any and all other elections to be held in the City on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 and with the state wide election to be held on that same date, and to request the County Elections Department to perform certain election services for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Call for Election. Pursuant to the Elections Code and the Bond Law, the Council hereby calls an election and submits to the electors of the City the question of whether the Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $50,000,000 shall be issued and sold in one or more series for the purpose of financing the Projects described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and paying costs and expenses incident thereto, as set forth more fully in the ballot proposition (the “Measure”) approved pursuant to Section 4 hereof. This Resolution constitutes the order of the City to the County to call such election within the boundaries of the City.

Section 2. Date of Election. The date of the election shall be November 5, 2024, and the election shall be held solely within the boundaries of the City.

EXHIBIT B
50
Resolution No. 2024-94
Page Three

Section 3. Requests to County. The Council hereby orders that the election called by this Resolution be consolidated with any and all elections also called to be held within the boundaries of the City on November 5, 2024, and hereby requests the Board of Supervisors of Monterey County to consolidate all such elections with the statewide election to be held on that same date under Elections Code sections 10400 through 10403. Pursuant to Elections Code section 10002, the Council also requests the Board of Sup ervisors of the County of Monterey to permit the Monterey County Elections Department to provide any and all services necessary for conducting an election, and agrees to pay for said services in full. The Council further authorizes and requests that the Co unty Elections Department provide all such services, including but not limited to providing notice of, conducting, and canvassing the results of the election. The Council acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in section 10418 of the Elections Code.

Section 4. Ballot Measure and Abbreviated Statement of Measure. The purpose of the election shall be for the voters in the City to vote on the Measure, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. The County Elections Department is requested to print the full text of the Measure, which commences with the heading "MEASURE" and includes all of the text thereafter in Exhibit A, in the voter information guide provided to voters for the November 5, 2024 election, with such measure designation as is assigned to the Measure.

The abbreviated form of the Measure to appear on the ballot pursuant to section 13247 of the Elections Code is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

The City Manager of the City or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to make any changes to the text of Exhibits A or B as required to conform to any requirements of the County Elections Department.

Section 5. Voter Approval Requirement. The Measure shall become effective if approved by at least 2/3 of the registered voters voting on the Measure; provided, however , that if Proposition 5 is approved by California voters at the November 5, 2024 election, then the Measure shall become effective if approved by at least 55% of the registered voters voting on the Measure.

Section 6. Aggregate Principal Amount of Bonds. The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds shall not exceed 3.5% of the assessed value of all taxable property within the City.

Section 7. Term of Bonds. The Council hereby certifies that the maximum term of each series of the Bonds shall not exceed 40 years and the maximum rate of interest on the Bonds shall not exceed 12% per annum, which interest rate does not exceed the maximum rate permitted by applicable law. The Bonds shall be payable from and secured by ad valorem taxes levied and collected in the manner prescribed by the laws of the State of California, all equally and ratably secured, without priority, by the taxing power of the City, if the Measure is approved by the requisite percentage of voters voting thereon as set forth above in Section 5.

Section 8. Transmittal of Resolution. The Council hereby authorizes and directs the Deputy City Clerk to submit a certified copy of this Resolution to the Monterey County Elections Department, as soon as possible and in no event later than eighty-eight days prior to the date set for the election, and to prepare, execute, and transmit to the County all documents necessary to carry out the purposes of this Resolution.

EXHIBIT B
51
Resolution No. 2024-94
Page Four

Section 9. Tax Rate Statement . The Tax Rate Statement as signed by the City Manager and attached hereto as Exhibit C is hereby approved, and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to deliver such Tax Rate Statement to the County Elections Department.

Section 10. Bond Projects List. The Bond Projects List set forth in the Measure lists the specific projects the City proposes to finance with proceeds of the Bonds. Listed repairs, rehabilitation projects and upgrades will be completed as needed. Each project is assumed to include its share of costs of the election and bond issuance, architectural, engineering, and similar planning costs, construction management, and a customary contingency for unforeseen design and construction costs. The final cost of each project will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, and projects are completed. In addition, certain construction funds expected from non-bond sources, including State grant funds for eligible projects, have not yet been secured. Therefore the Council cannot guarantee that the bonds will provide sufficient funds to allow completion of all listed projects.

Section 11. Accountability Requirements. The expenditure of Bond proceeds for the financing of the Projects shall be subject to strict financial accountability requirements, as set forth in the Measure, including but not limited to an annual independent financial audit to ensure that Bond proce eds are expended to finance the Projects as authorized by the voters. The City will have an annual report prepared describing the funds expended and the projects authorized. The Council shall establish and appoint a citizens' oversight committee (the "Oversight Committee"). The Oversight Committee shall annually review the expenditure of the proceeds of the bonds for the prior year and shall report to the Council whether the proceeds of the Bonds were spent in accordan ce with the purposes set forth in the ballot measure.

Section 12. No Proceeds for Salaries. No Bond proceeds shall be expended for salaries, pensions or benefits of City employees.

Section 13. Ballot Arguments. The City Council authorizes and directs the following Council member(s): Liesbeth Visscher and Kathy Biala to prepare and file a written argument in favor of the Measure and the rebuttal to the argument against the Measure (if any) pursuant to the requirements of the Elections Code and to request that other persons who are not City Council members also sign the argument, up to a maximum of five signers as authorized by Elections Code section 9283. These Council members may, but are not required to, authorize other persons to sign the rebuttal argument, pursuant to the Elections Code.

The deadline for filing primary arguments for and against the Measure is August 15, 2024. The deadline for filing any rebuttal is August 22, 2024. The location for filing of such arguments is the City Clerk's Office.

Section 14. Impartial Analysis. The City Clerk is instructed to transmit the Measure to the City Attorney along with a request that an impartial analysis be prepared for inclusion in the voter information guide provided to voters for the November 5, 2024, election. Pursuant to Elections Code section 9280, the City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis, which shall be filed with the City Clerk no later than August 15, 2024. The Council further requests that the County Elections Department print the impartial analysis in the voter information guide in accordance with Elections Code section 9280.

EXHIBIT B
52
Resolution No. 2024-94
Page Five

Section 15. General Authorization with Respect to the Bond Election . The members of the Council and the City Manager (each, an “Authorized Representative”) and their respective designees are hereby authorized and directed to do any and all things and to execute, deliver, and perform any and all agreements and documents that they deem necessary or advisable in order to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution, including but not limited to such changes to the Exhibits hereto which may be necessarily or desirable to correct or finalize such Exhibits. All actions heretofore taken by the officers and agents of the City that are in conformity with the purposes and intent of this Resolution are hereby ratified, confirmed, and approved in all respects.

Section 16. Reimbursement. The City declares its official intent to reimburse prior expenditures of the City incurred prior to the issuance and sale of the Bonds in connection with the Projects or portions thereof to be financed by the Bonds. The Council declares the City's intent to reimburse the City with the proceeds of the Bonds for the expenditures with respect to the Projects ("Expenditures") made on and after that date that is no more than 60 days prior to adoption of this Resolution. The City reasonably expects on the date of adoption of this Resolution that it will reimburse the Expenditures with the proceeds of the Bonds.

Section 17. Identification of Projects not an Approval. The identification of the Projects herein and as set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B hereto shall not be interpreted as and does not constitute an official approval of any listed project for the California Environmental Quality Act or any other purpose.

Furthermore, the listing of facilities in the description of the Project does not imply any particular prioritization among such facilities, which is to be determined by the Council.

Section 18. Effective Date. Pursuant to Government Code section 43608, this Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption by two-thirds (2/3) of all members of the City Council.

This Resolution was introduced, read, and passed on this 7th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCIL MEMEBRS: McAdams, McCarthy, Biala, Visscher NAYS, COUNCIL MEMEBRS: Delgado
ABSTAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS: None

APPROVED:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

EXHIBIT B
53
([KLELW$
3DJH

EXHIBIT A

The Monterey County Elections Department is requested to print the full text of the Measure exactly as set forth below in the voter information pamphlet to be distributed to voters:

MEASURE

MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AUTHORIZING THE OF CITY OF

MARINA TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO FINANCE THE

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FIRE AND POLICE STATION AND A COMMUNITY

CENTER, INCLUDING COMMUNITY ROOMS

FINDINGS

WHEREAS, in the judgment of the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Marina (the "City"), it is advisable to improve and enhance essential police and fire services to the community by issuing general obligation bonds that will finance the acquisition, improvement, upgrade and maintenance of fire stations, police stations, facilities and real property, including (i) facilities that support emergency lifesaving medical services and reduce 911 response times, (ii) replacing/repairing outdated stations, and constructing a new community center (collectively, the "Projects");

WHEREAS, the Council intends to issue general obligation bonds to finance the Projects and to fund certain costs in connection with the issuance of such general obligation bonds;

OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF BONDS

This measure (the "Measure") authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds (the "Bonds"), the object and purpose of which is to finance the Projects and certain costs in connection with the issuance of the Bonds.

The Projects will be completed as needed, and each is assumed to include its share of costs, including planning and construction costs. The final cost of each Project will be determined as real property is purchased, plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, or projects are completed.

Proceeds of the Bonds may be used to reimburse the City for amounts advanced from the general fund or other funds or accounts to fund Projects when such purchases are made prior to the availability of Bond proceeds.

REQUIRED APPROVAL

The Measure shall be deemed approved if approved by at least 2/3 of the registered voters voting on the proposition; provided, however, that if Proposition 5 is approved by California voters on the same date that voters of the City are voting on the proposed Bond Measure, the Measure shall be deemed to be approved if approved by at least 55% of the registered voters voting on it.

EXHIBIT B
54
([KLELW$
3DJH

ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECTS

The estimated cost of the portion of the costs of the Projects to be paid for from the Bonds is $50,000,000. The estimated cost includes legal and other fees and the cost of printing the Bonds and other costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the authorization, issuance or sale of the Bonds. The cost of the Projects includes planning and construction costs.

PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF BONDS

The aggregate principal amount of Bonds to be issued in one or more series is not to exceed $50,000,000.

MAXIMUM INTEREST RATE

The maximum rate of interest to be paid on the Bonds shall not exceed the maximum rate permitted by applicable law.

ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The following accountability measures apply to the issuance of Bonds pursuant to this Measure:

(a) The specific purpose of the Bonds is to finance the Projects;

(b) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used only for the purposes specified in this Measure, and not for any other purpose, including City employee salaries and other operating expenses. The administrative cost of executing the Projects shall not exceed 5 percent of the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds;

(d) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds shall only be spent on Projects that serve the jurisdiction of the City;

(e) The Council certifies that it has evaluated alternative funding sources for the Projects;

(f) The City Manager of the City shall file an annual report with the Council which report shall contain pertinent information regarding the amount of funds collected and expended, as well as the status of the Projects;

(g) All expenditures will be subject to oversight by an independent oversight committee, composed of individuals appointed by the Council, to confirm that Bond proceeds are expended only for the purposes described in this Measure. Members of the oversight committee shall receive educational training about bonds and fiscal oversight;

(h) The City shall conduct an annual, independent financial audit and an independent performance audit to confirm that Bond expenditures are consistent with the purposes of this Measure, until all of the Bond proceeds have been expended, and such audits shall be posted in a manner that is easily accessible to the public. Th ese annual audit s shall be submitted to the California State Auditor for review.

(i) Any entity owned or controlled by a Council member who voted on whether to place the Measure on the ballot shall be prohibited from bidding on any work funded by the Measure.

EXHIBIT B
55
([KLELW$
3DJH

IDENTIFICATION OF TAX; USE OF REVENUE

The tax imposed by this Measure is an ad valorem tax levied upon taxable real property in the City. The tax will be used to pay the principal and interest on the Bonds.

BOND PROJECT LIST

Bond funds will be used in combination with any other received State matching funds. The City will use bond funds for the following projects:

Construction of a new fire and police station to maintain rapid 9 -1-1 emergency response times, disaster and emergency response, and fire and police services.

Construction of a community center to provide safe places for children to play, delivery of city programs and services, and space for public and community meetings.

For any project involving modernization or renovation of a building or the major portion of a building, the City shall be authorized to proceed with new replacement construction if the Council determines that replacement and new construction is economically more practical considering the building’s age, condition and other relevant factors.

* * *

The listed projects will be completed as needed. Each project is assumed to include its share of furniture, equipment, architectural, engineering, and similar planning costs, program management, staff training expenses and a customary contingency, and escalation for unforeseen design and construction costs.

The allocation of bond proceeds may be affected by the City’s receipt of State matching funds and the final costs of each project. In the absence of State matching funds, which the City will aggressively pursue to reduce the City’s share of the costs of the projects, the City may not be able to complete some of the projects listed above. The budget for each project is an estimate and may be affected by factors beyond the City’s control. The final cost of each project will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded and projects are completed. Based on the final costs of each project, certain of the projects described above may be delayed or may not be completed. Demolition of existing facilities and reconstruction of facilities scheduled for repair and upgrade may occur, if the Council determines that such an approach would be more cost-effective in creating enhanced and operationally efficient campuses. Necessary site preparation/restoration and landscaping, may occur in connection wi th new construction, renovation or remodeling, including ingress and egress, removing, replacing, or installing irrigation, utility lines, trees and landscaping, redirecting fire access, and acquiring any necessary easements, licenses, or rights of way to the property.

Bond proceeds shall be expended only for the specific purposes identified herein. Proceeds of the bonds may be used to pay or reimburse the City for the cost of City staff when performing work on or necessary and incidental to the bond projects, but not for other administrator salaries.

EXHIBIT B
56
([KLELW%

EXHIBIT B

ABBREVIATED MEASURE

The Monterey County Elections Department is requested to cause the exact wording of the following abbreviation of the Measure to appear on the ballot:

MARINA 911 EMERGENCY RESPONSE, SAFETY, ESSENTIAL SERVICES/ FACILITIES MEASURE. To maintain rapid 911, fire, and emergency response times; ensure Marina’s Fire/Police Departments can respond to emergencies, maintain fire/police services, provide fire/police stations/ community center, shall City of Marina’s measure authorizing $50,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, levying on average $54.74 annually per $100,000 of assessed value, generating approximately $3,191,000 annually while bonds are outstanding, be adopted, requiring public spending disclosure, all funds spent locally?

EXHIBIT B
57

EXHIBIT C

TAX RATE STATEMENT

An election will be held in the City of Marina (the “City”) on November 5, 2024, to authorize the sale of up to $50,000,000 in bonds of the City for the specific projects listed in the Bond Project List established by the City, as described in the ballot measure (“Measure”). If the bonds are authorized, the City expects to sell the bonds in one or more series. Principal and interest on the bonds will be payable from the proceeds of tax levies made upon the taxable property in the City. The following informa tion is provided in compliance with sections 9400-9404 of the California Elections Code.

1. The best estimate from official sources of the average annual tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund that bond issue over the entire duration of the bond debt service, based on assessed valuations available at the time of filing of this statement or a projection based on experience within the same jurisdiction or other demonstrable factors is 5.474 cents per $100 of assessed valuation ($54.74 per $100,000 of assessed valuation) of all property to be taxed. The best estimate of the final fis cal year in which the tax is anticipated to be collected is 2055-56.

2. The best estimate from official sources of the highest tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund that bond issue, and an estimate of the year in which that rate will apply, based on assessed valuations available at the time of filing of this statement or a projection based on experience within the same jurisdiction or other demonstrable factors is 8.394 cents per $100 of assessed valuation ($83.94 per $100,000 of assessed valuation) of all property to be taxed. The best estimate of the year in which the highest tax rate will apply is anticipated to be 2026-27.

3. The best estimate from official sources of the total debt service, including the principal and interest, that would be required to be repaid if all the bonds are issued and sold is $98,912,943.

Voters should note that such estimated tax rates are specific to the repayment of bonds issued under this authorization and are and will be in addition to tax rates levied in connection with other bond authorizations approved or to be approved by local voters for the City or for any other overlapping public agency.

Voters should note that estimated tax rate is based on the ASSESSED VALUE of taxable property on the Monterey County’s official tax rolls, not on the property’s market value. Property owners should consult their own property tax bills to determine their pr operty’s assessed value and any applicable tax exemptions.

Attention of all voters is directed to the fact that the foregoing information is based upon the City’s projections and estimates only, which are not binding upon the City. The actual tax rates and the years in which they will apply may vary from those pre sently estimated, due to variations from these estimates in the timing of bond sales, the amount of bonds sold and market interest rates at the time of each sale, and actual assessed valuations over the term of repayment of the bonds. The dates of sale and the amount of bonds sold at any given time will be determined by the City based on need for construction funds and other factors. The actual interest rates at which the bonds will be sold will depend on the bond market at the time of each sale. Actual future assessed valuation will depend upon the amount and value of taxable property within the City as determined by the Monterey County Assessor in the annual assessment and the equalization process.

Dated: __________, 2024.

City Manager
City of Marina

EXHIBIT B
58 Process
Assessment
• Facility Capacity
• Facility Condition
• Projected program
Analysis
• Site Analysis
• Functional Analysis
• Feasibility Analysis
Concept
• Functional Suitability
• City Objectives
• Site Response
City of Marina
Community Facility
Needs Assessment
Status Report to the City Council
30 April 2024

EXHIBIT B
59 Ownership &
Availability
Site is owned by the City of Marina and
currently underutilized, no relocation of
other utilization required
Site is owned by a public institution or
entity and acquisition is possible,
relocation of current use feasible
Site is owned by a third party / private
entity, availability is not guaranteed,
current utilization needs relocation
Zoning &
Current Use
Site Zoning and/or current use does not
conflict with intended use
Zoning and/or current use deviates slightly
from intended use. Zoning Revision would
not conflict with adjacent zoning.

Zoning and/or current use deviates
significantly from intended use. Revision
would conflict with adjacent zoning.

Condition &
Topography
• vacant lot
• Site is connected to sufficient utilities
• Minimal / no grading required
• Existing structures, uninhabited
• Utilities are close and sufficient
• Moderate grading required
• Existing structures, in use
• Utilities require substantial upgrades
• Extensive grading
Access &
Parking
• Minimal/no adjustment to roadways
• Minimal/no impact on adjacent zone
• Minimal effort to establish parking
• Moderate adjustment to public roads
• Moderate impact on adjacent zone
• Moderate effort to establish parking
• Significant adjustment to public roads
• Significant impact on adjacent zone
• Significant effort to establish parking
Roesling Nakamura Terada Architects 4
Site Assessment
• Ownership & Availability: Can the City rely that this parcel is available for the intended use? • Zoning & Current Use: Would the intended use be a good fit for this site and context? • Condition & Topography: What is the level of effort to prepare this site for construction? • Access and parking: Is the site conveniently connected for its intended public use? Site Analysis - Rating Key
Assessment
Facility Capacity
• City Hall, Annex and Chamber: Current: 11,000 SF
• Public Safety (PD, FD, no EOC): Current: 14,000 SF
Facility Condition Index (Repair vs. Replacement, no expansion, no occupancy change) • City Hall: >0.50 (envelope, systems, interior)
• Annex: ~0.25 (envelope repair and upgrades, mold mitigation) • Chamber: ~0.50 (2020 study plus envelope repair)
• Public Safety: ~0.25 (ESBSSA Compliance)
Projected Program
• City Hall, Annex and Chamber:

Current / Projected Need: 25,610 SF
• Public Safety (PD, FD, no EOC): Current / Projected Need: 36,000 SF

EXHIBIT B
60 Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking
Site Analysis - Reservation Road
Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking
Site Analysis - Seaside Circle

EXHIBIT B
61 Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking
Site Analysis - Hillcrest Avenue
Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking
Site Analysis - V. DiMaggio Park

EXHIBIT B
62 Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking
Seaside Circle
Reservation Rd
Del Monte Blvd.

Hillcrest Ave
Cypress Knolls
Site Analysis - Summary
Site Analysis - Cypress Knolls
Ownership &
Availability
Zoning &
Current Use
Condition &
Topography
Access &
Parking

EXHIBIT B
63 Available
Zoning
Feasible
Access
Option Option Option
Seaside Circle Community Center Community Center
EOC/Training
Reservation Rd Community Center Community Center
EOC/Training
Community Center
EOC/Training
Police
Del Monte Blvd. Community Center Community Center
EOC
Hillcrest Ave Recreation Recreation
Community Center
Recreation
Community Center
Police
Cypress Knolls Fire Department Fire
EOC/Training
Fire
EOC/Training
Police
Functional Analysis

EXHIBIT B
64 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
City of Marina
Community Facility
Needs Assessment
Status Report to the City Council
23 July 2024
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
RNT Introduction and Scope
• RNT Architects – 40 Years of experience
• Offices throughout California (in S, M, L communities) • Master planning, facility studies, and project execution • Contracted to support Marina
• Presentation structure
• Needs Assessment
• Condition Assessment
• Recommendation

EXHIBIT B
65 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Needs Assessment - Method
• Facility Needs Questionnaire: Collect quantifiable data, such as number of offices, size of conference and storage rooms, size of vehicle fleet, etc.)
• Facility Needs In-person Interview: Collect quality aspects that are difficult to quantify such as accessibility,
adjacencies, synergies, work space quality, functionality • Facility Needs Benchmarking: Comparison with similar
communities
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Status Quo City of Marina
• One of the fastest growing communities in Monterey
County (AMBAG 2020)
• City Council
• Recognized the need to review & plan its facilities
• Explores the idea of Ballot Measure
• Hired consultants to assist in exploration
• Goal is to inform the public ahead of the ballot measure to form an educated decision

EXHIBIT B
66 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
• What is the appropriate size for a city facility?
• Every community is different, every department is unique • A metric helps to compare facility sizes based population • Comparing similar communities establishes a typical range • Reasonable range depends on building function
Facility Needs Assessment – Size Metric
sqft. per
capita
Facility Floor Area City Population
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Needs Assessment - Findings
FINDING 2024 PROGRAM STUDY:
• Space deficits across all City
Departments.
• Shortage of adequate meeting and
training rooms,
• Operational shortcomings (Police,
Fire)
SQUARE FOOTAGE DEFICIT:
• Existing Total: ~ 25,500 SF
• 2024 Study Total: ~50,000 SF
• Difference: ~24,500 SF
5,070
7,600
2,130
10,700
13,000
17,000
2,500
17,500

EXISTING
‘24 STUDY
PD Fire Chamber City Hall

EXHIBIT B
67 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment – Method
• As-built engineering documentation (if available)
• Site Observation (non-destructive examination)
• Facility evaluation and ranking of:
• Age, structure, envelope, interior, systems, ADA, site • Reuse and expansion potential
• Compare cost opinion of repair versus replacement (FCI) • Conclusion based on assessed needs & observed
condition
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
• Public Safety: Marina status quo versus typical range • Public Service: Marina status quo versus typical range Facility Needs Assessment – sqft./capita

0.8 Mean

2.4 High

0.4 Low
Marina Fire Dep.: 0.3 sqft./capita
Police Dep.: 0.22 sqft./capita

1.3 Mean

2.3 High

0.6 LowMarina City Hall: 0.5 sqft./capita
based on current population of 22,500, not considering projected growth

EXHIBIT B
68 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment – Findings
Existing City Hall
Size: 6,700 sqft.

Condition: Building at the end of
its useful lifecycle,
significant repair of
fundamental parts.

Expansion/Reuse: Structural system
offers no flexibility, no
expansion potential
Repair, Retrofit,
Remodel
$3.0M - $3.5M
Replace $650/sqft. $4.5M
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment – Findings
Existing Public Safety Complex
Size: 12,700 sqft.

Condition: Overall good condition,
for PD or FD to remain,
seismic upgrades are
required
1)
Expansion/Reuse: Structural system
offers flexibility, little
expansion potential
Repair, Retrofit,
Remodel
$1.3 - $2.0M
Replace $850/sqft. $11.0M - $13.0M
1): Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act

EXHIBIT B
69 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment – Findings
Existing City Hall Annex
Size: 4,000 sqft.

Condition: Overall good condition,
with modest envelope
repair/upgrade needed
Expansion/Reuse: Structural system
offers flexibility, lateral
expansion potential
Repair, Retrofit,
Remodel
$0.5M - $1.0M
Replace $650/sqft. $2.6M - $3.0M
PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment – Findings
Existing City Council Chamber
Size: 2,130 sqft.

Condition: Overall fair condition,
with major envelope
repair/upgrade needed
Expansion/Reuse: Structural system
offers some flexibility,
no expansion potential
Repair, Retrofit,
Remodel
$0.8M - $1.0M
Replace $750/sqft. $1.6M - $2.0M

EXHIBIT B
70 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment - Findings
Public Safety City Hall City Hall Annex Council Chamber Condition: Good Condition: Poor Condition: Good - Fair Condition: Fair - Poor not ESBSSA compliant Structure, Envelope, Int. Envelope repair/upgrade Envelope repair/upgrade Expansion/Reuse: Good Expansion/Reuse: Poor Expansion/Reuse: Good Expansion/Reuse: Fair Steel construction Modular Wood Framing CMU, steel construction Modular Wood Framing $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace

0.15 0.72 0.27 0.50
ESBSSA = Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Facility Condition Assessment - Metric
Public Safety City Hall City Hall Annex Council Chamber $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace $ Repair / $ Replace

0.15 0.72 0.27 0.50
• Facility Condition Index (FCI)compares repair vs. newly built • Helps to assess feasibility of repair
• FCI lower than 0.33: Repair is feasible
• FCI between 0.33 and 0.66: Repair might be feasible if other factors align (e.g., reuse potential, overall master plan, etc.) • FCI above 0.66: Repair unlikely to be feasible unless other factors overrule (e.g., historic preservation)

EXHIBIT B
71 PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Options to Consider
• Existing Public Safety Complex: Reuse - in current state not suitable for any Public Safety program (ESBSSA incompliance) • Existing City Hall Annex: Repair/Reuse/Sell/ Rent - not efficient (envelope, circulation) for office use
• Existing Council Chamber: Replace / Repair / Reuse
• Existing City Hall: Replace - building is at the end of its life cycle, repair is not feasible
• Fire Station/Department and Police Department: Build new, consider collocation for synergies (training, EOC?)
ESBSSA = Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act PROJECT 1020 | City of Marina FNA
RNT Architects
Thank you

EXHIBIT B
72 Exhibit D - Email Comments
from Committee Members
The following email correspondence was received by Ryder Todd Smith, facilitator for the CFCAC. With the permission of the email author, the email content is being shared with the entire Committee for transparency and to benefit the advisory process by sharing the comments, insights and questions of Committee members.

FROM MAY DUNGO
Email #1
Dear Ryder,
I am just wanting to let you know I read all the materials you provided:

Here are my comments as follows:

1. I am d
isappointed to see on Measure U all the council voted yes except for the mayor he voted No.

If we need to build something it will need 100 percent from the Dias. That means they all need to go on a close session.

2. Regar
ding the financial reports my background I am a CPA in the Philippines graduate in 1988 and passed exam and certified in 1989. I am disappointed to see the Revenue being $38 M but Expenditure is $50 M. this is negative cash flow as specified there is no money in the City of Marina.

3. W
e receive 15 percent of the total tax revenue. This is not enough. I believe we taxpayers are already paying enough taxes. Therefore, we should ask for more allocation from our tax money.

4. If we want to make t
his happen, we should all campaign for it for all the people of the City of Marina. Including the Fire Department, Police Department and all the City Employees.

5. The City Build
ing were there temporary 50 years ago. They all need to be rebuilt to a permanent structure. I recommend building where there will be more room for expansion and allow a lot of Parking. Our city will continue to grow in the next few decades.

6. Regar
ding the Police and Fire Department they need to separate, the building they are in right now is still functional but overcrowded with both departments sharing.

7. W
e can build them one by one and pay off to build the other one.

8. Whet
her we get the Bond measure again or do a different approach.

We need all be 100 percent in it.

9. Ther
e should be a slogan that says a. We Build this City b. Or Just do it Sincerely,
May Dungo

EXHIBIT B
73 Email #2
Hi Ryder,
Thank you for a very informative and successful meeting last Monday.

I think the locations have already been determined.

City Hall will be at the MST location on Reservation Ave right in front of the Post office.

I am not sure if that will also be the location for the Police Department.

The Fire Department at the Cypress Knoll area in front of the Sea Haven Development.

I am not also clear if the Police Department will also be on that location.

The way I understood at the meeting. The Police and Fire Department are not wanting to stay in their current building.

The City Hall and the Chambers current location will no longer be there since they were portables or temporary 50 years ago they will be demolished after the new site is completed.

I feel the current location for the Police and Fire is still a very sound building I wonder if it is possible for one of the departments to stay there if this is not possible then they should probably sell it and use the money as part of the building project.

One of my questions was the cost. The paper provided to us on the first meeting was an estimate to build the building. However, this does not include the land purchase price if the land does not belong to the city which I know the MST land is not owned by the city. The Cypress Knoll area belongs to the city however there will be infrastructure expenses that is not included in the price on the 1st meeting.

You are fortunate to have 2 strong opposition on Measure U campaign last year if you can get those two people to become in favor of the building project. I think strongly that we can make these projects happen.

I own homes and lands, and I know sometimes I need to sell something to fund the project I have.

Or save hard which I find very difficult. However, I do owe some mortgages, but I am only one person if I can do it. I feel like the whole city together can left their hands together and build this beautiful city we live in.

I will be looking forward to the next meeting. I appreciate your time and many efforts to help us come up with a solution.

Sincerely,
May Holland Dungo

EXHIBIT B
74 FROM GRACE SILVA-SANTELLA
Email #1
Hi Ryder,
Thank you for allowing me an opportunity to send
some questions and thoughts:
1) When I mentioned to a friend about the
Reservation Rd site for a future Government Center
they asked about the MST Transit Station on De
Forest. They wondered how many Transit Stations
does Central Marina need given MST is building a
second one on Palm and Del Monte Ave. In addition,
there will be a third large Transit Station in South
Marina.

This got me thinking about the history of the De
Forest site. Many years ago MST wanted the De
Forest site to be a Park-n-Ride location. The Marina
Planning Commission rejected the proposal. The
Planning Commission did not want a large parking
lot in the center of a future downtown. MST opted to
make the De Forest site a Transit Station.

This is not a question but an observation that
Marina, compared to other Peninsula cities, will
have an overabundance of Transit Stations. Even
with our projected 2045 population numbers Marina
far exceeds Transit Stations compared to other
Peninsula cities.

To be clear, when I write “Transit Center” I do not
mean bus stops that are found throughout Marina in
residential and commercial districts. In fact, Marina
has lost some of the small bus stops in town. In
addition, for some years Marina residents have asked
for a small shuttle system that would move residents
throughout and within our town.
2) I think the City Facilities Committee needs to have
an in-depth discussion about the Arts Village and
what community needs this building might satisfy as
we plan for the construction of new facilities and as
we anticipate costs.

Perhaps we can schedule a field trip to the building.

A few members of this committee were on a field
trip prior to the rehab work.
3) One of the needs that was mentioned in the
Measure U campaign and by elected officials is a
Senior Center. Marina has long desired a dedicated
Senior Center and has tried a number of times
for grant money. Are there any specifications for
a Marina Senior Center that were researched
comparable to the other Marina facilities we were
given the data about at the Dec. 1 meeting? Was
there a survey amongst members of the Marina
Senior Center as to what their specific needs are.

Did Marina look at other Monterey Peninsula cities
and how they have approached programing and
space for older adults and Senior Center needs:

Pacific Grove and their Meals on Wheels Community
Center; Carmel and Carmel Foundation; Monterey
and School Park Center; Seaside and Oldemeyer
Center; Salinas and Active Seniors, Inc.
4) I think we need a list of definitions.

In this past meeting there was confusion when some
committee members used the phrase “community
center” and others used the term “civic center”.

When we speak of “recreation” are we talking
about active outdoor recreation, recreation for
young children, recreation for teenagers, older adult
recreation?
5) We have not talked about Marina Teen Center. I
heard a rumour that Boys and Girls Club of Monterey
County is looking at locating at Marina Teen Center
and that there might be ongoing discussions with
MPUSD about the Los Arboles Sports Center
property.

Should we look at expanding Marina Teen Center
as opposed to continuation of Hillcrest Recreation
Center for afterschool programs? Or does the
Hillcrest Recreation Center meet the needs of a
younger age group than the Marina Teen Center.

There has been mention that the new Sports and
Aquatic Center will be membership and fee based
for users. Are there fees for participation in some
of the programming through the Marina Recreation
Department?
Thanks for letting me ask some questions.

EXHIBIT B
75 Email #2
Grace Silva-Santella
Hi Ryder,
I had hoped to have an opportunity to chat for a moment at the end of our meeting but you had a line of committee members waiting for you.

Last night I mentioned my concerns for the elaborate proposal the architects had shown for the Hillcrest site relative to recreation and that I believed that needed to be pushed back 10 or 20 years. I don’t think Layne was in the room when I brought this up to committee members which is why I made a point to share it with him when he came back and you were updating him on the group consensus.

I was a vocal opponent to Measure U. I believed there were few specifics for the $50M bond and how or where the money was to be spent. I was concerned that the vision was too grand.

It is unfortunate that a former City Council straddled our city with a financial agreement for The Dunes development that left no funds for meeting the structural fire needs of our city as it grew to the south. However, given that is the situation the council needs to be somewhat conservative in its plans.

Walking out last night I was talking with Tori and we spoke about all that the city has currently planned and funded for recreation development: extensive renovation of Gloria Jean Tate Park; The Dunes 2nd Ave Park that includes a large all-inclusive playground; the Sports and Aquatic Center buildings; Preston Park ballfields; the Master Park in the Sea Haven housing development that the council recently voted to take over the development of.

The one recreation need we are not addressing is a dedicated building for the older adult population. This is why I suggested last night that we should consider the city annex building where Planning and Building Departments are now located. Some minimal renovations to the interior could allow for meeting rooms for lectures, art projects, small scale music performances, exercise classes, etc.... In addition, Marina Senior Center could partner with Friends of the Marina Library for older adult programs in the library Community Room. This would be a temporary solution until the city can regroup after completing its many recreation projects and until the city has built a new government center.

When you write the report for Monday night, it is important for me that the committee consider a position relative to the Hillcrest site that would recommend to the council no additional development to the Hillcrest land aside from improvements to the interior of the Community Center building (kitchen and bathrooms), maintenance of the envelope of the Community Center building and demolition of the two portables once the new government center is developed and occupied. Some months back the previous Recreation Director Andrea Willer had told me there was already allocated $500,000 for the improvements to this building.

Thank you for letting me share.

EXHIBIT B
76 FROM JOEL JOHNSON
Email #1
Hi Layne and Ryder: Thank you for the architect’s
presentation on 12/1/25. Their briefing took me back
30+ years to a mandatory course all Army captains
took at FT Leavenworth, KS, where we learned many
things about being a good staff officer with a lot of
time spent on the construct of decision briefings. The
following offers thoughts and recommendations for
your consideration to incorporate into the agenda
for the 3rd CFCAC meeting on 12/15/25.

Facts slides: Might be helpful to retitle the facts
slides as facts and assumptions and differentiate
between the two on the slides. Then apply care
when declaring a bullet a fact. Most of us intuitively
know the difference between a fact and assumption
and we might more quickly achieve consensus
on a particular bullet if that bullet is declared an
assumption because people wouldn’t get caught up
debating if something is a fact or not.

Comments on the needs assessment briefing:

Although the slides were not pitched as a decision
briefing, it was clear that the briefing tried to steer the committee in a certain direction. There’s nothing
wrong with this as long as the data supports the
content. Overall, I thought the briefing was solid.
i. Excellent job on defining “Good” “Fair” and
“Poor” on the Facility Condition Assessment
Rating Key slide and “Green”, “Yellow”, “Red”
on the Site Analysis – Rating Key slide.
ii. Decision matrices are designed to compare a
manageable number of courses of action (COAs)
objectively. Items on the x axis on the “Site
Analysis – Summary” slide represent, in
decision matrix language, evaluation criteria.

Adding a weighting would lead to increased
objectivity but would require conversion from
color ratings to numerical values. For example,
“Ownership and Availability” might be valued
– and thus weighted more – than “Access &
Parking”. This would add greater complexity to
the analysis but currently, the CFCAC members
are left to infer the better COA by visualizing
green, yellow, and red circles.

I don’t recall discussion on the selection of the
evaluation criteria. Why the four: (1) Ownership and
Availability; (2) Zoning & Current Use; (3) Condition & Topography; and (4) Access & Parking? Were others
considered and not used? Does the architecture firm
use these four evaluation criteria for every city?

3. Curious if it would be beneficial to incorporate
“vision” language to the recommended
COA to further qualify our end goals.

See recommendations #4 and #5 below.

4. Towards the end of the 12/1/25 meeting, a
CFCAC member verbalized a potential COA
that appeared to receive a lot of support from
other members. That COA is summarized below
(Recommendation #3).

Recommendations:

Consider reshaping the facts into a list of facts and
assumptions and briefly show the results to the City
Facilities Citizen Advisory Committee (CFCAC)
Address the comments/questions above to the
committee for a better understanding of the needs
assessment methodology
Look to obtain committee consensus on
the following COA:

Construct a civic center at the
Reservation Rd location
Construct a Department of Public Safety (DPS) at the
Cypress Knolls location
i. Define the components of the typical city
DPS that would be housed here. See enclosures:

Department of Public Safety Described.

For sure call out the colocation of the fire
and police departments.

Construct a community center at the
Hillcrest Ave location
Discuss the concept of vision statement-like
language and whether we should weave such
language into 3a, b and c such that the
components of the recommended COA express
the values of our city.

Bring greater clarity to what we mean by
Department of Public Safety, Civic Center,
and Community Center. Reference enclosures
and look to incorporate into public messaging.

Weave content from the enclosures into 3a-c to
assist with implementing recommendation #4.

Thanks for reading this!
Joel

EXHIBIT B
77 Email #2
Hi Ryder,
Hi Ryder. Please see the rewrite below of your measure verbiage, for your consideration.

Compliments of my wife, Jaime. Feel free to circulate amongst the committee members.

Marina Public Safety and City Facilities Remediation Measure To fund new fire, police and emergency operations/training facilities to improve coordination and response times; a new city hall and council chamber to increase efficiency and comply with building codes; and general services to benefit our community, shall an ordinance creating a 7% users’ utility tax, generating approximately $3,000,000 annually until ended by voters, with exemptions for low-income residents and requirements for independent oversight by Marina residents, local spending, and annual audits, be adopted? Joel

EXHIBIT B
78 FROM G JASON SMITH
Email #1
Hi Ryder;
I’ve attached my revision of the UUT language that provides clearer motivation (?) if allowed in these few words. Clearly our Marina needs this, but there are serious concerns about its post implementation path. Boils down to what we started our first workshop….trust and competency to do the right thing.

Admittedly I had a sleepless night following session 3 (too much caffeine!). Discussions with my wife followed the same course. One concern was the feeling of death by a thousand (utility) cuts so I think what ‘utility’ services would be targeted would be important to communicate, but not sure when that gets stated.

More critically is if I understand the process, the evidence of an income stream from UUT is used to underpin of loan application by the city (where I assume project specificity would be locked in?) What happens if they are unsuccessful in getting sufficient loans for desired construction. Does that cancel the UUT or does it give councils free rain with the revenue stream. How does the UUT revenue remain separate and independent of other city projects. Trust.

Regardless thank you for your efforts! Having been a facilitator for tooo many workshops in my science career you did a great job bringing us together and making a comfortable space for all to be heard, Well Done Sir!
Jason

MARINA FIRE, PUBLIC SAFETY , CITY FACILITIES MEASURE
Dramatic growth of Marina over the past decade has outpaced the capacity of existing fire, police and city government facilities. Refurbishment of these facilities is not cost effective for this original city infrastructure. To fund their replacement shall this measure implement a 7% user utility tax to generate approximately “$3,100,000” annually to be spent locally until ended by voters and include low income, senior exemptions and independent citizens oversight, annual audits be adopted?

EXHIBIT B
January 15, 2026 Item No. 13c
Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of January 21, 2026

CITY COUNCIL TO RECEIVE AN INFORMATIONAL UPDATE AND
PHASING OPTIONS FOR THE CITY PARK AT THE DUNES.

REQUEST:

This staff report is provided as an informational update to the City Council regarding the final design of the City Park at the Dunes prior to going out to bid and an update of the cost estimates to construct the park. The presentation will also include phasing options.

BACKGROUND:

On December 16, 2025, the City Council received an update on the design for the City Park at the
Dunes, as well as updated cost estimates. The estimates exceed the current budget so Council requested the item to be brought back with options for phasing.

Previously, the City Council approved the final design for the 13.5-acre City Park at the Dunes.

Components of the park include: an all-inclusive playground, exercise & fitness court, two pickleball courts, one tennis court, multi-sport court, two sand volleyball courts, picnic and pavilion
areas, restrooms, great lawn open area, preservation of existing heritage and landmark trees, retention pond areas, memorial garden, outdoor amphitheater (seats 600), walking paths, FORTAG and bike trail connection, multiple parking areas, and a connection to the Recreation and Aquatics Center.

The park project is currently separated into two phases, with the majority of the park included in phase 1 and the amphitheater and second parking lot included in phase 2. Today’s item will consider additional phases due to funding constraints.

The landscape architect, the Wallace Group is nearing 100% completion of the final construction documents. The project is scheduled to go out to bid in late January 2026 with construction tentatively planned to start spring 2026.

One of the highlights of the City Park at the Dunes is the 34,450 square feet all-inclusive playground. The playground is unique in that it is specifically designed for people of all abilities and ages. The actual playground features and components are design ideas submitted by the comm
unity and then the actual playground will be constructed onsite by the community in a community build project. Leathers & Associates provides design services, project management and construction supervision for the community build playground project.

In April 2025, the Recreation & Cultural Services Department, in collaboration with the All- Inclusive Playground Steering Committee, the Recreation & Cultural Services Commission, and Leathers & Associates, hosted design day. This effort included school site visits, focus groups, and a large community engagement event to gather input and inspire the playground’s design.

Over 1,300 students and residents contributed ideas for the playground design. 1 On November 8, 2025, the City held a reveal day event, unveiling the 34,450 -square-foot all- inclusive playground design. More than five hundred community members attended, enjoying sensory activities, prize drawings, DJ entertainment, and hands -on creation of their own mini “playgrounds in a bottle,” while viewing the design inspired by local youth and families.

ANALYSIS
The park is included as a capital improvement project (QLP 2017) in the city’s fiscal year 2025- 26 and 2026 -27 budget. The CIP estimated the costs for completion of the total park including the all-inclusive playground would be about $22,600,000 . At this point, $10.4 million has been allocated to fund the parks construction.

The current estimate for completion of phase one is approximately $1 9.5 million, which includes approximately $2 million for the inclusive playground . This cost has increased from earlier estimates due to undergrounding a power line that goes through the park and other updated engineering, infrastructure, and grading costs. Total costs for underground infrastructure (water, sewer, storm drain, electrical, and lighting) is estimated to be approximately $4.8 million.

Staff has been working with the landscape architects for the project, the Wallace Group to look at options for sub -phasing of phase one and other value engineering options . City s taff and Wallace Group staff are prepared to present these ideas as well as other additional funding options to the Council to close the gap between the estimated construction costs for phase one and allocated funding.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Currently, $5.6 million has been funded for the project . Marina Community Partners is obligated to fund another $4.8 will when the park is ready to begin construction, bringing the total current available funds to $10.4 million.

A funding shortfall of $ 8.9 million in phase 1 needs to be addressed by either value engineering some of the components in phase 1, sub -phasing some of the components of phase one, or allocating additional funding from other sources..

EXHIBITS:

Exhibit A – Overall Site Plan
Exhibit B – PowerPoint Presentation

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________
Ismael Hernandez
Public Works Director
City of Marina

____________________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
2 DUNES PARK OVERALL SITE PLAN
01 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
9 8
10 LEGEND
1 PHASE 1 PARKING
13 PHASE 2 PARKING
14 AMPHITHEATER
15 PHASE 2 RESTROOM & CONCESSION

BUILDING
2 ADJACENT PARKING AT AQUATIC CENTER (N.A.P .)
3 FORTAG BIKE TRAIL
4 FORMAL ARRIVAL EXPERIENCE
5 SPORT COURTS
6 GREAT LAWN
7 COVERED PICNIC AREAS
8 PHASE 1 RESTROOM
9 PLAYGROUND
10 FITNESS COURT
11 BIORETENTION AREA
12 MEMORIAL GARDEN
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
1 2
3 4
55 1112
13 14
15 6 7
7 7
5 5

EXHIBIT A
3 DUNES PARK PHASE 2 SITE PLAN
02 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
LEGEND
1 PARKING
2 STAGE
3 TIERED SEATWALLS W/ ARTIFICIAL TURF
4 OVERFLOW SEATWALLS
5 UPPER VIEW TERRACE W/ DINING TABLES
7 RESTROOM & CONCESSION BUILDING
6 OVERLOOK BAR-HEIGHT TABLES
8 VEHICULAR STAGE ACCESS PATH W/ GRASS PAVERS
3 2
4 5
5 6
7 8
1 EXHIBIT A
4 DUNES PARK
03 SEATING, SCULPTURE AND SIGNAGE CONCEPTS

MATERIALS AND FURNISHINGS

FORM INSPIRATION

MATRIALS &

FURNISHINGS

AMPHITHEATER

INSPIRATION

EXHIBIT A
5 MARINA

DUNES PARK
Budget and phasing discussion

EXHIBIT B
6 Intro &
Recap
Last meeting -from City Council
• Generally positive about the park design and recent updates • Noted concerns about the schedule and overall budget
• Reluctant to provide additional funding but open to further justification • Requested a cost estimate limited to the playground and parking lot • Asked for clarification on feasibility of a volunteer-built playground • Raised potential mosquito issues near the basins
• Asked whether parking capacity is sufficient for events • Prioritizes sports courts, especially tennis
• Looks forward to project construction

EXHIBIT B
7 Objectives
• Address Council’s comments
• Choose phasing concept/park priorities
• Updates on timeline

EXHIBIT B
8 MARINA DUNES PARK: PARKING STUDY 4
46 96
17 23
12 13
144
29 Legend
Phase 1 Parking Lot & Off-site Parking
113 Spaces
48 Spaces
Street Parking
46 Spaces
Phase 2 Parking Lot
144 Spaces
Sports & Aquatic Center Parking Lot
29 Spaces
Sports & Aquatic Center Expansion
Parking Lot

TOTAL AVAILABLE PARKING AT FULL
BUILD-OUT: 380 SPACES

EXHIBIT B
9 5COST COMPARISON: RECENTLY BID PARKS WITHIN THE REGION

EXHIBIT B
10 6UTILITIES & REQUIRED INFRASTRUCTURE
Legend
Existing
Storm Drain
Sanitary Sewer
Water
Recycled Water
Dry Utilities
Storm Drain
Sanitary Sewer
Water
Recycled Water
Electrical
$4.7M
Includes:
• Underground utilities
• Detention Basins
• Parking Lots
• Required retaining walls for
tree
preservation

EXHIBIT B
11 7COST CONTINUUM

THE COST CONTINUUM
• Fewer improvements
• More phases
• Longer implementation time
• Higher design fee & longer time
• Inflated costs (3-5% per year inflation + 15% mobilization + cost of temporary improvements & removal)
• More improvements
• Fewer phases
• Shorter implementation time
• Current design fee & timeline
• Less long-term cost/ more immediate capital cost
Option 3 Option 2B Option 2A Option 1

EXHIBIT B
12 8FURNISHINGS COST CONT.

THE COST CONTINUUM

EXHIBIT B
13 9VE OPTION 1
$21.5M-$22.5M
Amenities Not Included
• Parking lot at Sand Dune Ave.
• Inclusive playground
• Main entry allée/connection to
Sports & Aquatic Center
• Central art courtyard
• Entrance plaza
• Great Lawn
• Phase one restroom
• Four group picnic areas
• National Fitness Court
• Family activity area
• Vine trellis
• Pickleball courts
• Tennis court
• Sand volleyball courts
• Multisport court
• Raised boardwalk
• Detention basins
• Dune gardens
• Signage
• Walled garden
• Memorial trails
• Multi-modal trail
Amenities Included
• Amphitheater
• Phase 2 restroom & concession
stand
Bid Alts – ($1.8M)
Future cost - $6.5M-$7.5M

EXHIBIT B
14 10VE OPTION 2A
Amenities Not Included
• Demolish, grade & hydroseed overall
site
• Parking lot at Sand Dune Ave.
• Inclusive playground
• Main entry allée/connection to Sports
& Aquatic Center
• Central art courtyard
• Entrance plaza
• Great Lawn
• Phase one restroom
• Four group picnic areas
• National Fitness Court
• Family activity area
• Pickleball courts
• Tennis court
• Detention basins
• Dune gardens
• Multi-modal trail
Amenities Included
• Vine trellis
• Sand volleyball courts
• Multisport court
• Signage
• Walled garden
• Memorial trails
• Raised boardwalk
• Amphitheater
• Phase 2 restroom & concession
stand
$18.5M-$19.5M
Bid Alts – ($800k)
Future cost - $15M-$16M

EXHIBIT B
15 11VE OPTION 2B
Amenities Not Included
• Demolish, grade & hydroseed overall
site
• Parking lot at Sand Dune Ave.
• Inclusive playground
• Main entry allée/connection to Sports
& Aquatic Center
• Central art courtyard
• Entrance plaza
• Great Lawn
• Phase one restroom
• Three group picnic areas
• National Fitness Court
• Family activity area
• Detention basins
• Dune gardens
• Multi-modal trail
Amenities Included
• Pickleball courts
• Tennis court
• Vine trellis
• Sand volleyball courts
• Multisport court
• Signage
• Walled garden
• Memorial trails
• Raised boardwalk
• Amphitheater
• Phase 2 restroom & concession
stand
$17M-$18M
Bid Alts – ($600k)
Future cost - $15.5M-$16.5M

EXHIBIT B
16 12VE OPTION 3
Amenities Not Included
• Demolish, grade & hydroseed overall
site
• Parking lot at Sand Dune Ave.
• Inclusive playground
• Entrance plaza
• Phase one restroom
• One group picnic areas
• National Fitness Court
• Family activity area
• Detention basins
• Multi-modal trail
Amenities Included
• Central art courtyard
• Main entry allée/connection to Sports
& Aquatic Center
• Pickleball courts
• Tennis court
• Vine trellis
• Great Lawn
• Sand volleyball courts
• Multisport court
• Signage
• Walled garden
• Dune gardens
• Memorial trails
• Raised boardwalk
• Amphitheater
• Phase 2 restroom & concession
stand
$12.5M-$13.5M
Bid Alts – ($350k)
Future cost - $22M-$23M

EXHIBIT B
17 13VE OPTIONS BAR GRAPH

EXHIBIT B
18 14COST CONTINUUM TO CLOSE (REPEAT)

EXHIBIT B
19

Marina City CouncilJanuary 21, 2026

Marina City Council
January 21, 2026